Leave Bigfoot alone!! ..We did for the spotted-owl!
Posted on 05/06/2005 10:26:00 PM PDT by Coleus
The Bush administration, in one of its biggest environmental decisions, moved yesterday to open nearly one-third of all remote national forest lands to road building, logging and other commercial ventures.
The 58.5 million acres involved, mainly in Alaska and in western states, had been put off limits to development by President Bill Clinton eight days before he left office in January 2001.
In Virginia, 394,000 acres are affected in the Jefferson and George Washington national forests.
Under existing local forest management plans, about 34.3 million acres of these pristine woodlands nationally could be opened to road construction. That would be the first step in allowing logging, mining and other industry and wider recreational uses. New management plans have to be written for the other 24.2 million acres before road building can commence.
Governors have 18 months to submit petitions to the U.S. Forest Service to challenge either the old plans to stop development, or to call for new plans to allow it.
Environmentalists said the new rule would let the administration rewrite the forest management plans to lift restrictions against development on most of the forest land.
"Yesterday, nearly 60 million acres of national forests were protected, and today as a result of deliberate action by the administration they are not," said Robert Vandermark, director of the Heritage Forests Campaign, run by a coalition of environment groups. "The Bush administration plan is a 'leave no tree behind' policy that paves the way for increased logging, drilling and mining in some of our last wild areas."
Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said in announcing the rule that his agency "is committed to working closely with the nation's governors to meet the needs of our local communities while protecting and restoring the health and natural beauty of our national forests."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
There is sense in what ou say.
But based on my experience with the government, I wouldn't rely on it to make certain of much more than it collects whetver revenue it can reap from this to fill its insatiable craving for ever more dollars.
Proper logging and grazing practises can result in imptoved forest lands. The key here is "proper".
As for mining, aside from closely monitored oil or gas removal, I'd be very skeptical.
My point is National Parkland and forests are the common property of every American. The Federal Government is merely the steward of that property, and the ultimate result of any grazing or logging permitted should be to improve that common resource, not to feather the pockets of politicians, loggers, or cattle ranchers.
Yabba dabba du!!!!! Timberrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!
The latest book by Jarek Diamond painted a pretty grim picture of mining practices in the US. The negative externalities now being dealt with by the taxpayers (the mining companies are bankrupt or were allowed to close down and distribute their assets elsewhere through government incompetence), are simply huge. Count me very skeptical too when it comes to mining. Only very deep pockets should even be considered, and yes, very closely monitored. Bill Gates, where are you?
"They cut down trees so you do not have to live in a cave."
This has nothing to do with Marxism. I believe in free enterprise. Let them buy land, manage their own forests, cut their own timber and sell it for a profit.
Sucking off the pubnlic tit by running their operations with public property is a form of public welfare.
Controlled logging of forests can improve forage for deer and other game animals and improve the resource. Uncontrolled harvesting of timber is raping public property.
Knowing the gubmint they will permit wholesale clear cutting of forests.
I would tend to agree with your worries. Yeah, I'm one of those enviromental wack jobs. I became one after witnessing the wholesale rape of the North Maine Woods by the timber companies.
OK. Not National PARK, but National FOREST.
There is a difference. One is to be preserved, the other to be used.
Timber (in the form of trees) is a resource with a finite lifespan and an ideal age at harvest. Beyond this, it is just so much fuel for a fire, but not a useable resource.
Part of the increase in housing costs came from increased lumber prices when huge tracts were closed to logging to save spotted owls, iirc.
Why run a deficit when that timber is at prime age to harvest? Let the gubmint pick up some bucks so I won't have to pay them in out of my pocket.
National parks should be restricted to hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, wildlife preservation and use by ALL citizens, not just selected private interests.
Try hunting in the park some time. National Forest, yes, National Park, a Felony.
"Part of the increase in housing costs came from increased lumber prices when huge tracts were closed to logging to save spotted owls, iirc.
Why run a deficit when that timber is at prime age to harvest? Let the gubmint pick up some bucks so I won't have to pay them in out of my pocket."
So I guess we can expect the price of housing to come down. And I suppose our tax bill will be reduced.
As you can tell, I simply don't trust the government when money is involved. Never did.
Sorry about confounding the terms "forest" and "Parks"
This is good news! First, trees are a renewable resource. Second, most of these areas are so remote that even the tree huggers can't get to them. Third, there would still be over a million acres of "protected land" (aka unproductive fireboxes) left sitting there. That's a lot of land. To put that in perspective: every man, woman, and child in America could claim a 1/2 acre lot of "protected land" for themselves and there'd still be land to spare.
Hold on a minute everyone . . .
I've been reading a couple articles about this. What it appears is happening is that the Bush Administration is simply leaving the control of the use of these national forests up to the states in which they are located. This could potentially lead to an opening of these forests to industry, but it is really all up to the states.
Zulu, your initial post on this thread, brought back to mind one of my favorite jokes:
A scruffy, unshaven, underfed , backwoods looking individual is standing at the defense table with his public defender in a Florida court of of law, waiting for the judge to enter to begin the trial
for which he is charged and pleading guilty with killing a Florida panther. Seated in the front row of the courtroom are his equally shabbily dressed and undernourished wife, and their four small children. All talking suddenly stops and everyone rises as the bailiff announces to the courtroom the arrival of the judge who is to preside over the trial. The judge tells the courtroom to be seated as he sits and begins the trial by reading the charges of the defendant to the now totally quiet court.
The judge begins;" Sir you are in this court of law today charged with the criminal offense of killing a Florida panther, which is a felony in this great state. I have carefully reviewed your past criminal history, of which you have none, and have also found out that the small monthly checks that you do receive for being physically handicaped, and no longer able to to be gainfully employed, is barely enough to sustain you and your family in the simple backwoods lifestyle that you have by nessesity have had to endure for the past decade.
"Since this is your first ever offense, I am not going to give you any jail time for this crime, but I am going to fine you for it, and small monthly payments will be taken out of your monthly check, untill the fine is totally paid.
Now before I send you to the clerk to finish your paperwork concerning this, is there anything you would like to say to this court?"
The frail man rises to his feet and replies "Yes I do your Honor. I did not kill this animal for fun or sport, I killed this animal to survive. The meat from this animal sustained my wife and family for over two weeks, and after the hide was sufficienly tanned, it was made in to small articles of clothing for my four children. I did not waste this animal your Honor"
With hardly a dry eye in the courtroom, the scruffy gentleman returns to his seat. The judge replies " I believe you, but my verdict still stands. This trial is adjoured, and you can follow the bailiff to the clerks office to finish the legal paperwork, but before you do, would you please approach the bench?"
The defendant nods in the affirmative, and makes his way to the judge's bench. The judge pushes his courtroom microphone
out of sounds reach, leans over his bench, and softly but inquisitively inquires;" I'd like to ask you one question before you depart. What in the world does a Florida Panther taste like?"
The shabbily dressed gentleman raises his right hand to his scruffy beard and begins to rub it in deep thoght as he ponders the judge's question, and then after a few seconds, gives the judge his reply.
"Well your Honor, that's kind of difficult question to answer you see, because it's kind of a toss-up between a bald eagle and a manatee........."
That IS funny.
Thanks...I'm glad you liked it, and thanks for your reply.
Is Bigfoot is missing his left leg? Looks like he has ample breast.
Didn't Clinton put an area with the highest amount of clean burning coal off limits by naming it a national park or treasure? And the only other large source of this type of coal was somewhere outside of the USA, meaning we would have to start buying this coal from foreign countries.
Is this true? I would say it makes his an ass but he was one before then
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.