On 12/1/95, David South writes: > Dear Brent: > > I believe we have a problem with terminology. When I said that 17% of the USFS > lands are designated as Wilderness Areas, this was a narrow definition of > Wilderness Areas. For example, only areas like the 179,655 acre Kalimiopsis > Wilderness Area are included in this figure. As far as I know, there are no > logging roads in the Kalimiopsis Wilderness Area and therefore how can > logging companies be using the sufficiency rider to log in this "official" > Wilderness Area? (As far as I know, no helicopters are being used to > extract logs from the Kalimiopsis). There are 153 miles of hiking trails in > the area so verification of any logging in the Kalimiopsis Wilderness Area > should be relatively easy. Elevations within this wilderness range from > 2,000 to 4,600 feet. You are correct that the Kalmiopsis is a roadless area, however, with the passing of the salvage rider, there is now intense interest on behalf of timber companies to build roads into these areas under the guise of salvage logging, so that once the rider has expired, they can claim the area is no longer roadless, and should thus become a part of the matrix.(previous attmepts to log the Kalmiopsis have been turned back by the courts for the sole reason that it remains a roadless area) > However, many also call wilderness areas any old-growth forests outside > "official" Wilderness Areas. One estimate is there are nearly 5 million > acres of old growth on public lands in western Washington and Oregon. I > understand about 2.9 million acres of old growth (58%) on public lands have > been categorized as unavailable for harvest. I assume your concern with > logging occurs on part of the 42% which are not in "official" Wilderness > areas. Even areas that were designated as Late Successinal Reserves (LSRs) under option 9, are now being logged due to the salvage rider. Sugarloaf was placed in an LSR, and indentified as a "key watershed are," yet it was a 318 exemption, and thus it was logged. While I'm on the topic of Sugarloaf, I'd like to give credit where credit is due in terms of thetype of logging that occured there. It is true that riparian buffers where allowed, it is true that there was little road-building. It is an example of logging can be performed in a eco-sensitive manner. However, in 1983, is was originally proposed as a 560 acre old-growth clearcut, and had not the "environmental extremeists" drug the Forest service kicking and screaming through the legal system for the past 12 years, Sugarloaf would still have been a clearcut. A mere 10 miles from Sugarloaf is the China Left sale, a 540 acre old-growth clearcut that also contains trees that are 300-800 years old. The sale has been awarded, (another section 318 sale) and logging should begin any day now. This madness must, and will, stop. Bret Diamond Oregon, USA diam9018@tao.sosc.osshe.edu
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0