Pendley to be nominated to head BLM

In all seriousness, he may bring more O&G, mineral, timber extraction, etc to our land. I support this as I believe the pendulum has swung too far for environmental concerns.

I don't support him however due to his outspoken interests for Federal land transfer to States.

I believe a good BLM must scale for our U.S. domestic extraction interests vs the notion, "I love my electric car but not from my backyard. Keep this foreign, I want to fight wars to keep my electric / hybrid / gas car operational."
Thanks for the response.
 
In all seriousness, he may bring more O&G, mineral, timber extraction, etc to our land. I support this as I believe the pendulum has swung too far for environmental concerns.

I don't support him however due to his outspoken interests for Federal land transfer to States.

I believe a good BLM must scale for our U.S. domestic extraction interests vs the notion, "I love my electric car but not from my backyard. Keep this foreign, I want to fight wars to keep my electric / hybrid / gas car operational."
Can't speak for O&G or mineral, but I can address the notion that the pendulum has swung too far on timber extraction. I worked for Plumcreek for 27 years, and managed sawmills for about half that time. The real truth about why timber extraction has been limited on public land is that they were overcutting it for decades. The much bigger problem was that the timber companies, Plumcreek being the largest in the US, harvested their own land as fast as they could. It's all about corporate greed, making as much money today as possible, and no thoughts about the future. Plumcreek used to have 6 sawmills and 2 plywood plants in the region, but they ran as many crews as possible, so they could covert their logs to cash as quickly as possible, then ran out of logs and shut down most of their mills. They did not care at all about all the people who worked for them that they left unemployed.

So when Plumcreek got through raping the forest, they weren't going to wait 50 years for the trees to grow back (remember they wanted cash tomorrow, not in 50 years), so they made deals with TNC for land that Plumcreek had no use for.

Since the Plumcreek/Weyerhaeuser land is usually in a checkerboard pattern mixed with national forest land, it's a good thing that the National forest cut back on harvest, otherwise we would have huge areas with nothing but tiny trees and no cover for wildlife. So in effect the the big timber companies kind of tied the forest service's hands on timber harvest, then when they chewed through their own logs they complained about the forest service harvest levels. I figure it's kind of like going on a week long camping trip with another person, and you both brought along the same amount of food, but the other guy ate all his food the first day and spent the rest of the week complaining to you about not sharing your food with him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Irishman , I respect your comment.
Instead of hashing this subject again, here's a recent thread that shared various HT member opinions on the subject you shared.
Not saying your content is off topic, rather, instead of rehashing recent responses to your more, in-depth opinion, I can see this thread regarding Pendley's nomination turn into another timber specific thread.
My comment was a simple response to Trail's open Q about what Pendley, "might" offer. - Cheers.

 
Even bringing up timber resource in a thread about Pendley and the BLM is laughable.

Not that there isn't a tiny bit of timber value on BLM land, but its largely insignificant on a vast, vast majority of BLM lands across the interior west.

There isn't enough volume in most states to support even a single mom and pop sawmill off the timber assets found on BLM land.

Also, I agree with Irishman, that is exactly what happened, private industry took the get rich quick, rape and run mentality to its timber. Completely within their rights to liquidate timber assets for short term profit...and in fairness they never hid that fact. The employee's of the mills were told to not expect a job long-term, I remember having that discussion with my Dad who worked at Bonner for the last 10 years it existed. In fact, the mill actually ran a few more years than projected. Dad stayed and worked an extra year or so longer than he needed to for retirement, because it became apparent to everyone with a firing brain cell or two, that the mill wouldn't last long. His gamble was to stay on and collect a severance package if offered rather than retire. In other words, do the exact same thing any good corporation would do, milk every last penny out of the company, including the severance package.

That said, what a lot of the employee's wanted to hear was that the ASQ's on NF lands would increase enough to save the mills...wasn't about to happen, everyone knew it except those wearing rose colored glasses.

The fact is, trees grow too slowly in Montana to sustain the accelerated harvest that went on in the 80's-early 2000's...just the way it is.
 
@Irishman , I respect your comment.
Instead of hashing this subject again, here's a recent thread that shared various HT member opinions on the subject you shared.
Not saying your content is off topic, rather, instead of rehashing recent responses to your more, in-depth opinion, I can see this thread regarding Pendley's nomination turn into another timber specific thread.
My comment was a simple response to Trail's open Q about what Pendley, "might" offer. - Cheers.

Thanks, I hadn't read the other thread.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,561
Messages
2,025,125
Members
36,228
Latest member
hudsocd
Back
Top