« Scientists Condemn White House | Main | Fixing Payments to Counties »
March 03, 2004
Industry Spokesman warns of too many trees!
Jack Hedlund, executive director for the Allegheny Forest Alliance (AFA) is at it again -- warning the public that, yes, there are trees in the forest. The following is his letter to the editor that appeared in the Oil City Derrick on March 2:
At a recent meeting with Allegheny National Forest leadership, much time was spent attempting to legitimize reasons why the July windthrow clean-up would be stretched over three years and would be limited in scope.An astute and concerned professional forester raised his hand and asked whether any attempt would be made to determine the value lost by these management decisions. Most in attendance agreed it was a legitimate question that deserved a creditable response.
Given the sea of red ink in which our government is swimming, you would think every effort would be made in all quarters of the government, including the United States Forest Service, to pay down the deficit. But, the windthrow issue is another case in point where federal bureaucracy prevents an expeditious response and politicians exhibit indifference toward the situation as well as potential solutions.
Perhaps even more glaring is the inventory situation. The ANF is currently overstocked with mature trees (close to 60 percent) desperately needing attention if for no other reason than sustainability and forest health. In addition, this national forest, unlike nearly all others in the system, is capable of turning a profit each and every year through appropriate management.
It is painfully clear the bureaucratic system from top down and the politicians from both sides of the aisle would rather tax or go further into debt than ambitiously seek ways to use the resources at their disposal to correct the problem.
Posted by Ryan at March 3, 2004 03:52 PM
Comments
Just wondering how you can be "overstocked" in a national forest? Maybe I missed a beat. Isn't a forest supposed to have trees?
And how is he using the term "sustainability" and "forest health". Doesn't he know that the forest got along without him or me for a thousand years or so? Why is the situation "desperate" now?
Posted by: David Hiebert at March 21, 2004 06:47 AM
The situation is dire, at least for Mr. Hedlund and those who think as he does, because there is, as they keep mentioning in the papers, $50 million worth of black cherry just lying there going to waste!
Except it isn't going to waste, ecologically. Obviously there is an abundance of evidence that shows the value of coarse woody debris to the forest ecosystem, but people like Mr. Hedlund simply do not care.
Posted by: Ryan Talbott at March 22, 2004 05:43 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)