New Forest Service policies take a big step backward
fotoware at jps.net
Thu Apr 18 20:36:49 EST 2002
Daniel B. Wheeler <dwheeler at ipns.com> wrote in message
news:6dafee1b.0204180900.18245420 at posting.google.com...
> From The Oregonian, Apr. 16, 2002, p B7 (Editorial)
> New Forest Service policies take a big step backward
> Stepping up old-growth logging doesn't serve forests; don't abandon
> Northwest Forest Plan
> By Gifford Pinchot III
I think we shouldn't abandon the plan either but, if I remember correctly,
the Northwest Forest Plan was a "compromise" that all parties agreed to.
Most certainly, the preservationists won that battle, knowing that the USFS
had very few valid survey protocols for many of the plants and animals
agreed to on the lists. The USFS tried to procede anyway and got bogged down
into gridlock again. I, personally, don't agree with the "treatments"
prescribed and have laid out cutting units for one of those projects. I
could possibly agree that half the overstory be left only if other more
sensitive areas are protected. Something like the old "sanitation" type
treatments (including saving proper amounts of hard and soft snags, Daniel
<G>) should be used in order to satisfy the volumes quotas so cherished by
burros and Forest Supervisors and supposedly guaranteed by the NWFP. I would
prefer to open up most areas to very limited management, where realistic
quotas can be met, impacts can be easily limited and eco-systems can be
restored (including old clearcuts).
However, I have been humbled by working out here in Arkahoma. My extensive
western experience has little value so far in understanding these
eastern/southern forests. The Northwest certainly has differences as well
and I could be blowing diesel smoke out my ass.
Larry Harrell Fotoware
New version of "Virtual Yosemite"!! Downloadable demo available at
Check out my web site at http://www.lhfotoware.com New pages!!!
More information about the Ag-forst