greghinemeyer Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 cnn reported that bush has the brilliant idea of using logging companies for the purpose of thinning the forests of weeds and undergrowth. since when did the loggers become neighborhood yard crews. watch out for your forests because the government certainly isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Speaking of GWB, the jackass in chief will be staying in PDX tonight, apparently at the Hilton inside a 6-block visitor-free radius. Right-minded individuals ought to head down to the barricades and let the resident know how we feel. The Doctor, at least, plans to head downtown and see what there is to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 WTF are you talking about? GW has his finger on the pulse of Oregon's timber issues and Gale Norton will spare us from the constant threat of the doug fir weed! Texans are well-known for their adept forest land management policies. Â I can't wait until he leaves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 You mean Portland, or the White House? either way, I agree... the sooner the better. Â I'm looking out my window at the Hilton right now... no barricades in sight yet. Let's invite shrub across the river to the rock gym and sandbag him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Regardless, the Forest Service under previous administration was prevented from performing clearing operations that would remove excessive fuel from forest areas. Potentially, this has led to some of the fires we have seen in the past 6-8 years. Controlled thinning sounds like a responsible MANAGEMENT of this resource. Why don't you wait to see the fine points of this plan before the kneejerk reaction? Â Just a thought. Â Greg W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambone Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Greg W: Regardless, the Forest Service under previous administration was prevented from performing clearing operations that would remove excessive fuel from forest areas. Potentially, this has led to some of the fires we have seen in the past 6-8 years. Controlled thinning sounds like a responsible MANAGEMENT of this resource. Why don't you wait to see the fine points of this plan before the kneejerk reaction? Â Just a thought. Â Greg W Clinton passed a bill that gave so many millions towards the clean up of forest litter around Lake Tahoe, and general maintnence ofthe basin and Lake. Don't know all the details, but it was a big deal down there a few years back, and is still going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 I have it on good knowledge that, especially in Oregon, crews were prevented from clearing potential fuel from forests in recent past where this had been common management practice in the past. Removal of potential fuel (i.e., dead, down, etc.) will obviously have a direct affect on size and movement of future fires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gapertimmy Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 <troll> whats wrong with selected logging (thinning) in 3rd/4th generation timber stands? </troll> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 If removal of fuel is a good idea from a forest management perspective, fine.... but the proposed involvement of the timber industry makes it sound a bit like the fox guarding the henhouse. And why am I reminded of the "salvage rider," which was also pitched as something that was needed for forest management, but also (thanks to timber industry lobbying) happened to exempt a lot of controversial timber sales from all federal environmental laws. You'll recall that the salvage rider was signed by slick Willie, so this is not a purely partisan rant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick_Sharpless Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Problem is last time we had "salvage logging" and "fire preventative" thinning the Forest Service wrote the timber sales to require cutting out a lot of brush, dead wood and small growth, and "oh by the way" you can take out so many bf of larger trees, and build a couple of roads. The stated reason, which probably has a little truth, is that the FS wants to reduce the cost of the thining project by letting the contractor take some sawtimber. Of course, you could pay more and leave the more mature timber, too. Â And if the camel's nose (logging) gets into the tent (forest), well, there are probably more than a few people in the current USDA who think that's just fine. Â There might be some reason to be suspicious of those in the current FS who say they just need to do a little intelligent thinning. Â And no, I don't support ending all logging. BUt on public land???????????/ Â Flame suit is on . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Ah, the administration's intent on lessening restrictions on logging is their desire to minimize environmental group's ability to influence government's changes to environmental rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Considering the USFS misspending of intended fire prevention funds in California, damn right I'll have a kneejerk rxn to this news! I think we are all also aware of the salvage logging games that have been played in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 What about the little that live under logs and in fallen trees?? Â SAVE A FROM HOMELESSNESS! STOP THE THINNING! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick_Sharpless Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 The little eat my food and chew my gear. On second thought, clearcut their houses! Slash and BURN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 ahh matt i do see your point. but correctly or incorrectly spelling ones name is a respect things. me misspelling my words is my personal fervor whilst tpying away.....certain i should double check or triple check my posts, and i do sometimes. but even though it may seem like i do not work, i do and put most of my higher/complex thinking into that.......no one pays me spray on cc.com, whereas the boss man expects it to be perfect.... Â sorry for being petty....but....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 no worries... but since eriK and mattp raised the topic of spelling, it's tuCSon. So is the bean-fest still happening down there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Sounds like I'm the only one that gets paid for posting at cc.com. Erik, see me for details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greghinemeyer Posted August 22, 2002 Author Share Posted August 22, 2002 24 -7 i am surprised that you can't smell it from up north. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greghinemeyer Posted August 22, 2002 Author Share Posted August 22, 2002 i don't think any of you guys have jobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Roger: amen, erik. This is why anyone who gives a damn should write John McCain a letter and tell him what a freakin' hero he is for fighting so long and hard (like ten years) for campaign finance reform, and finally winning. The fact that a majority of the house and senate finally voted to slow the flow of lobbyist $$$ into their own pockets is nothing short of amazing. Obviously, this doesn't completely solve the problem, but it's a significant first step. As a dem, I don't agree with McCain on a lot of issues, but you've got to give him some credit on this one. Â uhhh... oh yeah, trad rules! Wow, looks like they hooked another sucker. CFR is bullshit and an affront to 1st Amendment rights (freedom of speech, freedom to seek redress of greivances). It's called incumbent protection. As a member of the largest and most effective lobbying group in the country I feel good that I have someone in Washington addressing my representatives regarding my interests. Get involved if you don't like it. The Access Fund is a lobbying group and a lot of people on this site sing their praises; sounds pretty hypocritical. Put your money where your mouth is, support the lobbying group of your choice. All you tree-huggers decry the timber lobby yet you praise the Sierra Club or Friends of the Earth when they "win" a little victory. The governmental experiment that is the United States is unique in that we CAN directly affect the issues - contact your Reps & Senators, vote them out, give money to the lobby of your choice. Â I agree that the Republicans and Demos are both power-hungry whores; politicians, not statesmen. Â Whew, my fingers are tired. Â For those of you that missed it: E-R-I-K Â Greg W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greghinemeyer Posted August 22, 2002 Author Share Posted August 22, 2002 i agree with most of what you say gregw but i have trouble putting my money in the hands of dishonest people. there must be another way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Greg Hine., there is another way, but it involves exercising ones second amendment rights! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greghinemeyer Posted August 22, 2002 Author Share Posted August 22, 2002 all we are saying is give peace a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg_W Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 quote: Originally posted by greghinemeyer: i agree with most of what you say gregw but i have trouble putting my money in the hands of dishonest people. there must be another way How do you know they are dishonest? I said support a lobby group that supports your beliefs, one you do some research on. There are dishonest/shady lobbiest out there but, like anything, that is probably the exception. Honest lobbyists don't make the evening news. Â DFA - You are right in your thinking that that is why we have a 2nd Amendment, but things have to get a lot more extreme to resort to that. Â Greg W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 I kind of agree GregW, but for different reasons. I think the current campaign finance reform sucks because its so full of loopholes as to be useless. I don't think the American democratic ideal is really "one dollar, one vote," but that's what we've got. Groups like the NRA and Sierra Club are just attempts to pool the individual dollars to make a voice that gets listened to. I agree its a bad thing when incumbents get greased rails to reelection, I wish more politicians had to justify their actions and take a stand, not do the mealy mouthed "what do you want me to say?" public relations dance they mostly do. Anyway, its mostly useless spray to bitch about it on this site, time to do another round of pesky letters to my representatives, eh? Â Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.