My feelings are, that if the salvage is going to take place and we have
to accept that, then any encouragement we might provide for ensuring that
watershed values are protected, unroaded areas are not entered, prompt
reforestation on good timber-growing sites takes place, and guides in
place to consider noncommodity resources like leaving large snags are
adhered to, then I can live with it.I also feel that some common sense
and cooperation between the various professionals within and among the
agencies and some enlightened administration,which seems to be happening
to some better degree than in the past, precludes the need for
any modification of the environmental laws. I have thought all along
that it is not the laws themselves that are in need of revision,
but rather that the people who interpret them and develop rules for the
Federal Register and who apply them out on the land in a wide variety of
ways are ultimately responsible for much of the confusion,perceived
or otherwise.
In short, any efforts to gut environmental laws using the excuse to hurry
up salvage logging activities are motivated by other reasons than what is
being stated. I am on a panel Wednesday night to present a 10 minute
view, along with three foresters and Chenoweth's aide. I would
appreciate any comments any of you have about what I have presented
above, in an effort to be as effective as possible in this situation. I
believe this will be among the first times, if not the first, that anyone
except the foresters around here have been given a chance to be heard in a
public forum on this subject in this college. cheers, jimpeek