More
information . . .
From: Clarice Ryan
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 9:48 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: "Conflict in our National Forests" related to Tester
Bill
Not acknowledged here is the fact
that the US Forest Service is not content with simply controlling
privately held forest
lands, but also all
agricultural private lands. Witness the "Partnerships to Conserve Open
Space in Rural America: FS-861 publication and the National Grasslands brochure
both showing USDA Forest Service insignia. Also refer to official Farm and Ranch Lands
Protection Program Title 440-519, August 2006.
I will reconfirm what I have
highlighted in red in the below articles. Yesterday I attended the
first day of a 2-day Public Land and Resources Law Review of the Public Land
Law Conference at UM in Missoula. The theme was Redefining
Wilderness, Landscape, Law and Policy. The program featured almost
exclusively the top people in the environmental movement: Mt. Wilderness
Assn, National Wildlife Federation, Northern Rockies Rockies Regional Center,
Earth Justice and National Wilderness Training Center. The entire thrust
was support of the Sen.Tester bill, S 1470, Jobs and Recreation
(WILDERNESS). They are committed and determined to get that
through. The Clinton Roadless
Rule and Landscape
Scale Operation all-lands approach was mentioned frequently
including legislation designed to accomplish it. The collaborative
process and partnership, stewardship program approaches were
eulogized throughout. Due to other committeemen's I
missed today's sessions featuring wilderness and landscape protection on
tribal lands and impacts of climate change on western landscapes.
None of this is simple
philosophizing. These people are motivated and determined to make it
all happen. We
best pay attention to all of it. Clarice
From: Norman MacLeod
To: various
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:47 PM
Subject: FW: "Conflict in our National
Forests"
Schramek is a retired forester who lives in Port Townsend,
WA. Worked for the U.S. Forest Service from 1953 until he retired in
1985. His original message, accompanying the two jpg attachments, is
below my comments on the Vilsack piece.
I’ve located and attached a full transcript (with my
highlighting) of Secretary Vilseck’s August 14 remarks. They
indicate not only a willingness, but a policy for the USDA, through the Forest
Service and NRCS, to become increasingly involved with the management of
private forest lands.
“.
. . the Forest Service must not be viewed solely as an agency concerned only
with the fate of our national forests but must instead acknowledge for its work
in protecting and maintaining all of America's forests, including state,
tribal, and private ones. Our shared vision must adopt an all-lands approach, requiring close
collaboration with the NRCS and its work on America’s private working lands.”
There are several priorities ahead of the mixed use philosophy
once espoused for the Forest Service.
“I've
asked Chief Tidwell to develop
a new planning rule to ensure management and restoration of our national
forest with the goal and vision of protecting our water, climate, and wildlife
while also creating economic opportunity.”
Roadless areas are back with a vengeance.
“Just
last week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s
decision reinstating the 2001 Clinton roadless rule. I view this is as a very,
very positive development, yet the Forest Service is still subjected to a court
injunction from a Wyoming district court judge in the tenth circuit in joining
the Forest Service from implementing the 2001 rule. Let me be clear. We will
seek to lift that injunction in light of the ninth circuit’s decision.
And if the courts remain
conflicted, or it's not possible to protect roadless areas through the courts,
we will initiate a new rule making process to do so.”
And what do you think happens where private property is
concerned?
“Now,
the threats facing our forests do not recognize property boundaries. So in
developing a shared vision around forests, we must also be willing to look across property
boundaries. In other words, we must operate a landscape scale operation by taking an all-lands approach.”
See that one coming, did you? Here we have a departmental
secretary who believes that it is good news that:
“
. . . conservation groups, forest industry, and government agencies are increasingly willing to
unite to address the common threat of the potential loss of forest lands on
private land.” (At the Law meeting I pointed out
that absolutely no mention had been made about urgency of saving our
forests from insect infestation and and critical loss of timber
and wildlife from fire. They were all about getting more land for
'WILDERNESS". Also short-term promise of jobs and recreation in
bill title was only a deceptive means to achieving their agenda. cr)
Not too much about what happens when the private landowner
isn’t all that interested in a government agency and a raft of
conservation groups hovering about and telling him or her how to address that
“threat”. That would likely be because the agency knows best
. . .
“We
must dramatically accelerate the scale and pace of forest stewardship here on
both public and private lands . . . On private land, we must move
more quickly to protect our forest landscapes before they no
longer can function to support watershed health, biodiversity, conservation,
and viable wood markets.”
There’s no shortage of candidate saviors on your doorstep
if you are a private property owner.
From: ROBERT W DOROTHY E SCHRAMEK
[mailto:rschramek2@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 12:51 PM
To:
Subject: "Conflict in our National Forests"
Dear all friends neighbors and
family;
I want to announce the
recent web page for my book "Conflict in our National Forests"
that was produced by my publisher, Xlibris.com. You can find it by
going to www.conflictinournationalforests.com .
To show that the contents of
the book are still pertinent and timely, I am sending as
attachments two commentaries from leaders in forestry in our
nation. The first is a commentary in the Journal of Forestry,
written by Michael T. Goergen, CEO of the Society of American
Foresters. It outlines his belief that our National Forests, along
with all managed forest lands, need to be available to help produce
renewable energy to help alleviate the energy crisis in our country. He does
a creditable job in justifying the need for our Nation to
make this effort a high priority.
The second is an article in the
Forestry Source, a news letter produced by the SAF that gives selected
excerpts from a speech by US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack in
Seattle That outlined the Obama administration's vision for our
National Forests.
He makes it clear that Obama is
committed to renew the Clinton Roadless area rule and to make it a permanent ban on
the nearly 60 Million acres of National Forest Land. He
also makes it clear that he feels that the national
government needs "look across property boundaries in solving this
perceived problem. While he does not make clear
how this is to be done, it bodes ill to the privately owned forests in our
country that there
will be more rules regulations and pressure to do what the Federal
Government thinks appropriate.
There is no reference to what
Foresters, and industry leaders have said and the total lack of agreement
about the locking up of almost 1/3 of our National Forests
based on feelings and emotional appeal rather
than cold hard facts and science.
It is clear that the pendulum
of political pressure is rapidly moving to the far left in forest
management as well as in all other matters. We need to remind our public
servants that the people and the best science should be consulted on such
decisions.