The Hellbender Chronicles

« ADP Challenges Black Cherry Tree Farming | Main | Killing With Herbicides »

May 21, 2004

Parsing Words

Sometimes you have to wonder. Such as these comments from timber industry mouthpiece Jack Hedlund in today's Bradford Era. I'm often tempted to break down the absurdity of his comments so why not today.

Hedlund said the appeal is a dead issue; the groups already lost on the same claims.

"They have their own ideas that harvesting timber is abhorrent. They work with no room for negotiation -- they work from a stance of no cut," Hedlund said.

So, apparently we have to give Mr. Hedlund a basic course in how the Courts work. When you lose on an issue - you appeal. When you win - you don't appeal. Get it?

The second part to his quote is beyond ridiculous. This is the same Jack Hedlund that once complained because the US Fish & Wildlife Service wanted to increase buffers around Bald Eagle nests by 100 feet. And he is chastising us for not "compromising"? Obviously he thinks that anything short of full access to all public and private lands for the timber industry (the largest landowners in the area) is an unacceptable compromise. Whatever.

Hedlund also said the group's appeal shouldn't have too much of an effect on the actions of the Forest Service at this time because the Forest Service is essentially starting over on the East Side project.

He said the forest here is not a national park, but a national forest, and if there was no cutting, it would be a national park.

"It's frustrating," he said. "We spent three years in district court. It was researched and now we will be going to the 3rd circuit to trudge through it again. The taxpayers are not benefiting from it, the lawyers are. This is costing the taxpayers a bundle of money."

I'll be addressing the status of East Side tomorrow. OK, lets play that what the Allegheny National Forest is NOT game. Its not a National Preserve. Its not a National Park. Its not a National Wildlife Refuge. Its not the National Strategic Petroleum Reserve (so why all those oil & gas wells anyway?). What else isn't it?

The East Side lawsuit doesn't allege violations under the National Park Management Act - it alleges violations under the National Forest Management Act. What part of this doesn't the timber industry understand? Apparently the part that says that National Forests are supposed to be managed as tree farms because they aren't National Parks. Huh? Then how are Bureau of Land Management Lands supposed to be managed?

Posted by jkleissler at May 21, 2004 12:18 AM

Comments

Post a comment