Redford in campaign to boost wilderness [Robert Redford greenie alert]

Salt Lake Tribune ^ | 4/2/2004 | Brent Israelsen

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Utah's Sundance Kid has joined more than 100 notable Americans in a campaign to celebrate the nation's wild treasures.

Robert Redford on Wednesday helped launch "Americans for Wilderness," a group commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Wilderness Preservation Act.

The Oscar-winning director and actor said the act -- which President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law Sept. 3, 1964 -- was a bipartisan effort to recognize that some places "are so powerful we use them to identify the best of ourselves."

To date, more than 105 million acres of public lands, mostly within national forests, have been set aside as wilderness, which prohibits development and mechanized access. That figure represents about 5 percent of U.S. land, although just 2 percent of the lower 48 states enjoys wilderness protection.

Environmentalists are working to protect millions of acres more, including 9 million acres in southern Utah. "We should be protecting these areas for future generations," said Redford, who lives in Provo Canyon.

Americans for Wilderness is a committee of the Campaign for American Wilderness, a Washington, D.C.-based interest group headed by Mike Matz, the former director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Members of the committee plan to stump for wilderness from now until the Sept. 3 anniversary date, which will be observed with a big celebration in Washington.

Joining Redford on the committee are musicians Emmylou Harris and Don Henley; actors Christopher Reeve, Ted Danson, Morgan Freeman and Laura Dern, and author Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

The campaign also includes numerous business leaders, scientists and former public servants, such as investment banker Theodore Roosevelt IV; Black Diamond CEO Peter Metcalf, of Salt Lake City; and former presidents Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford.

[stuartcr]

That is not a quote from me....I didn't say what you have in italics.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Preserving the wilderness is not what this is about, that is only the cover story. This is about a bunch of Hollywood near-billionaires and people who are politically connected having exlusive access to the wildernesses and locking everybody else out. Do you know what "no mechanical access" means? That means you ain't getting in there unless you own a helicopter or can afford to rent one for a few hundred dollars an hour. The average person can't do this.

I'll believe Robert Redford when he admits to a fit of guilt that leads him to remove Sundance ski resort, replant the trees that were cut down, and allows it to only be wilderness. Robert Redford is real credible when he owns Sundance resort and has a house in Provo Canyon. He's as guilty as anybody for cutting down trees, developing wilderness land, and encroaching on the critters. But when Hollywood demands conservation and reducing use of resources, they mean the little people like us. Liberal "principles" apply to everybody else, not them.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Most of us are conservationists. Redford is a preservationist.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!!

[Guillermo]

So I guess if one isn't for the same policies Redford is for, then one wants to destroy all "wilderness."

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Redford is the origional "I've got mine," elitist. There are dozens more like him in the Sierra Club.

[stuartcr]

I don't believe I said anything like that.

[Utah Girl]

You beat me to posting this article. I'm tired of Bob. I boycott all things Sundance.

[Citizen Soldier]

Want a good laugh? About 10 yrs ago, my husband and I went to Park City to ski. One day we drove up to Sundance and looked around. They showed a movie every night and they were ALL movies starring Redford!

[Issaquahking]

I love wilderness, but I hate it when a bunch of socialist morons think they can be arm chair quarterbacks for mother nature. Robert Redford is a buffoon when it comes down to real nuts and bolts managing of wilderness, it should be managed by those who derive they're living from natural resources. That would be farmers, ranchers, loggers, miners, and others who actually live with nature, derive their income from, and have a vested concern in the way in which we manage nature to the fullest possible benefit to all. For a common sense approach see how the farmers of the of the Klamath do it by clicking here. or there are a lot of links on my "profile page". Ask to be on farmfriend's ping list. I think you'll be surprised at the whole truth.

[marsh2]

A lot of that proposed new Wilderness surrounds the communities in my district. We already have an enormous amount of land adjacent to these areas "preserved" from multiple use and human management. You can image the fire danger. In addition, communities with 70% unemployment are surrounded by choked overgrown forests that they are not allowed to touch.

You have to hike or go on horseback into these areas, This leaves out enjoyment by the disabled or most older folks. The folks who hike don't usually expend a great deal of money in the towns, so wilderness is no booster for the local economy. What does happen is that hundreds of Mexican cartel marijuana growers set up operation in the Wilderness.

Don't tell me that folks should not have encroached on wildland. These communities have been there for 150 years or more.

[Issaquahking]

www.abqjournal.com/news/state/157976nm03-28-04.htm

 

Sunday, March 28, 2004

Grazing Restrictions Widespread

By Rene Romo
Journal Southern Bureau
    LAS CRUCES— Rancher Kit Laney, who sits behind bars while the Forest Service rounds up his cattle in an overgrazed portion of the Gila National Forest, has come to personify the local conflict over private property rights and grazing on public lands.
    But Laney and his ex-wife and ongoing partner Sherry Farr are not the only area ranchers who have had to cope with pressures to reduce grazing in drought-stricken forests.
    Across the region, drought, environmental considerations and in some cases lawsuits, have led to sharp reductions in the amount of grazing on national forests.
    The Catron County Commission last week issued a pro-Laney news release saying that county ranchers had lost grazing rights for more than 25,000 head of cattle over the previous decade, a reduction that cost the county millions of dollars in revenues.
    Although Forest Service officials disputed the county's estimates, the agency's own figures showed the Forest Service reduced the number of cattle authorized to graze in the Gila National Forest by one-third from 1994 to 2003— a loss of 8,602 head of cattle.
    The ceiling on the amount of grazing allowed for each allotment is dictated by a grazing permit, but the Forest Service each year can set lower limits on cattle numbers depending on local conditions.
    Drought has precipitated reductions of cattle herds in other public lands as well.
    In the Cibola National Forest, the herds authorized to graze amount to about 52 percent of the maximum numbers on permits.
    "It's not going to be any great revelation to anyone that we are in a drought, and most people have made adjustments, and for the most part voluntary adjustments," said Bill Britton, range, wildlife and watershed program manager for the Cibola National Forest.
    In northern New Mexico's Carson National Forest, authorized grazing of cattle and sheep is at 51 percent of the maximum amounts that permits would allow with healthy amounts of forage.
    In the Sacramento District of the Lincoln National Forest, cattle are running at 51 percent of permitted numbers, said range and watershed staffer Rick Newmon.
    "Ever since we got into this extended drought period, we've been going down due to either lack of forage production or lack of stock water, or both," Newmon said. "It's an extended drought. The longer you get into it, the longer it takes to get out of it."
   
Hardship in Arizona
    Range conditions, and the impact on herds in national forests, have been even worse across the border in Arizona. In the Tonto National Forest, which stretches across 3 million acres, cattle grazing has been cut by 94 percent of maximum permitted levels since 1996. Only about 2,740 cattle now graze across the vast forest, said Eddie Alford, the Tonto's group leader for biological resources.
    "Most grazing permittees, when they got into a predicament where they lacked water or forage, they basically took cattle off themselves, and they haven't restocked yet, because there hasn't been regrowth through the drought," Alford said.
    In the Tonto, Alford said, the majority of ranchers pulled their cattle off the forest on their own initiative, but some "had to be persuaded to take their cattle off." Perhaps 10 percent of ranchers filed administrative appeals objecting to the reductions imposed by the Forest Service, Alford said.
    "That small percentage is still very unhappy about having to take cattle off," Alford said, though he said no lawsuits were filed against the Forest Service in an attempt to assert grazing rights.
    Last year, the Forest Service asked ranchers to remove all the cattle from five allotments out of the Gila National Forest's 138 allotments. One of the permittees chose to move his cattle to private land, and the Forest Service was able to move the cattle from the other four allotments to other, unused areas where the livestock could graze, regional Forest Service spokesman Jim Payne said.
    Laney's neighbor Christie Forester said the Forest Service reduced the number of cattle she could run on her South Fork allotment from 236 head in 1992 to 212 last year. "You depend on a certain number of head to make your payments, and you need every one of them," Forester said. "It's a cut in my paycheck, the way I look at it."
    Gila range staff officer Steve Libby, who was helping oversee the impoundment of nearly 300 of Laney's cattle over the past two weeks, expressed sympathy to the ranching community having to contend with drought and heightened environmental concerns.
    "Our small and medium-sized ranchers are just breaking even. If these ranch operators paid themselves the salary that their work honestly deserves, they'd be losing money," Libby said. "For our small and medium ranchers, ranching is a way of life. It's a culture, it's an absolute love to do that kind of work."
   
Sympathy for Laney
    According to Forest Service officials, Laney represents the exceptional case of a rancher defying a Forest Service directive, in addition to a federal court order, to remove his cattle from federal land.
    Still, his case has elicited plenty of sympathy from other ranchers who are feeling his pain. A benefit barbecue and dance for the Diamond Bar Ranch was held at Uncle Bill's Bar in Reserve on Saturday.
    "People are pretty upset about what they (Forest Service officials) are doing and how they are going about it— their bully attitude," said rancher Rufus Choate, a member of the Catron County Commission.
    Laney was indicted last week on eight federal charges, including five counts of assaulting and interfering with federal officers or employees, stemming from his March 14 arrest for allegedly trying to tear down a pen holding his impounded cattle. A federal magistrate judge so far has twice refused to release Laney on bond, saying he could be a threat to the cowboys rounding up his cattle.
    Catron County Sheriff Cliff Snyder voiced the mixed emotions some local people have about Laney's arrest.
    "There are some people who think the Forest Service shouldn't have arrested him. There are other people who think Kit should have stayed out of the way, he shouldn't have put himself in a position to get arrested," Snyder said.
    However, he added, "There are a lot of people upset that the federal government has assumed so much power over people."
    The case appears to have highlighted polarized viewpoints about ranching on public lands.
    Several ranchers said they didn't want to comment on the case because they feared the reaction of Forest Service managers.
    One Gila National Forest rancher, who asked to remain anonymous, said of Laney's case, "We could all be in that situation."
    While Forest Service officials consistently blamed the region's ongoing drought for necessitating cuts in grazing, Catron County Commission Chairman Ed Wehrheim put the onus on aggressive environmentalists who have pressured the Forest Service to strictly manage resources.
    "I feel like the environmental community wants all the cattle off public lands, and they are just doing it in steps," Wehrheim said.
    Meanwhile, Tom Lustig, attorney for the National Wildlife Federation in Boulder, Colo., said Laney was waging a misguided fight for grazing rights that he claims derive from his water rights. Laney's claims already have been rejected by federal judges, including a panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
    And, according to Lustig, far from being a champion for beleaguered livestock owners, Laney is only worsening the dialogue between the Forest Service and ranchers.
    "What (Laney is) doing to ranchers is the same thing that environmental terrorists do to me," Lustig said, "... they give us (environmentalists) a bad name."

 

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material  herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed  a  prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and  educational purposes only. For more information go to:
 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml




----------------
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by McAfee VirusScan
Installed September 7, 2003 - Updated March 29, 2004

Trying????? Don't be stupid! Kit Laney and his family is in the fight for their life because of big government and "the greenies", and the hell with the individual who got out and took a chance on doing something for America. Socialist elitists are not trying anything other than the fabric of this great nation!

stuartcr are you sure your in the right forum? I beg of sir to read some of the articles in FR about where America is with private property rights, and act like a conservative.

Nunya,farmfriend...you were only pinged because tis article I've reprinted will be of great interest.

[farmfriend]

See post #34

Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!

[sauropod]

Take a look at a map that shows the amount of land under Federal control. It's over 40% of the country and growing.

"Public land" my ass...

[sauropod]

The USFS, NPS, BLM, USF&WS cannot maintain the land they already control.

There should be a test of some kind before new parcels are added to what Godgov already controls.

[Carry_Okie]

Preserving wilderness is a physical impossibility. Nature is a dynamic and adaptive system. It is subject to enormous perturbations both sudden and gradual. To assume that it should be as it "always has been" is to take a subjective, romantic, and casual impression derived over a few years of a horrendously complex system and attempt to force it to comply with that vision. Humans have always had an enormous impact on nature and operated as a part of that system. To remove human influence on the assumption that would be beneficial to do so may be the most destructive thing we have ever done to nature, particularly when most habitat is under attack by introduced species and subject to changes in boundary conditions (such as the fertilization effect of carbon dioxide).

[isasis]

Didn't you see what the greenies did with Calif and Colorado last year? You want to give them more land to do what with? Keep out you and me and anything else that may want to use the land. No hunting, no fishing, no camping, no hiking, no picnicing, no swimming, no breathing of the air etc etc etc. Any questions? Robert Redford has got to be stopped.