« Painter Run Bid Notice Up | Main | 20 Nobel Laureates and One Political Hack »
April 02, 2004
Ignoring Empirical Evidence
OK, if you haven't heard by now District Court Judge William Standish issued a final decision in the East Side litigation ruling against ADP on 9 of 10 counts, and in our favor on one count. His decision essentially adopted the most recent Recommendation from Magistrate Sensenich as law. This is disappointing given how much of a complete reversal the Magistrate's recent Recommendation was from her original Recommendation which ruled in our favor on 7 of 10 claims.
Although we're disappointed that the Court would rule against us on so many claims, the count we prevailed on is significant. In that finding, the Court ruled that even-aged management (logging methods that emphasize clearcutting in the end) could not be used on wet soils or in riparian areas because it violated the Allegheny National Forest management plan. This will protect hundreds of acres every year from here on out.
And then there are these inane comments from our US Congressman John Peterson:
PETERSON SUPPORTS ALLEGHENY NATIONAL FOREST DECISION -- In a recent decision, the U.S. District Court of Western Pennsylvania ruled in favor of the U.S. Forest Service in a lawsuit filed by the Allegheny Defense Project to stop the East Side Project. According to Peterson, "While it has been a long time coming, this decision is a victory not only for our communities who depend on jobs and timber revenues, but for the Allegheny National Forest which will benefit from having professional stewards actively working to reduce the spread of disease, improve wildlife diversity, and promote a healthy, sustainable forest for our children and grandchildren to enjoy."
His entire commentary is full of claims and inuendo not backed up by the facts. For example, his claim that logging in the Allegheny National Forest is essential to "our communities who depend on jobs and timber revenues" is completely bizarre. While our communities obviously rely on jobs the research conducted by independent economists have shown that commercial logging in the Allegeny National Forest has no relationship to job production in our communities. If anything commercial logging has negative repercussions for our leading industries in recreation and tourism.
Just as ridiculous is Peterson's claim that "...the Allegheny National Forest which will benefit from having professional stewards actively working to reduce the spread of disease, improve wildlife diversity, and promote a healthy, sustainable forest for our children and grandchildren to enjoy." There is nothing in the East Side project that would "reduce the spread of disease" (in fact salvage logging of American beech will most likely exacerbate the distribution of non-native pests and increasing densities of black cherry will make the forest more susceptible to disease - a fact the Magistrate acknowledges). The notion that the East Side project will "improve wildlife diversity" is contradictory to the factual record. And Peterson's final claim that it would "promote a healthy, sustainable forest for our children and grandchildren to enjoy" is simply empty rhetoric with no basis in reality.
Peterson's empty, fact-less rhetoric does nothing to further the issues the our communities face in resolving problems in current Allegheny National Forest management.
Posted by jkleissler at April 2, 2004 06:43 PM
Comments
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.)