Basically, not a tree can be removed(or disturbed) for whatever reason on land run by the Forest Service without public comment over a time frame involving 135 days. Congress had nothing to do with it. A federal judge in California and environdemented groups have decided that trees shall never be disturbed by man.
To: crazyhorse691
Lemme guess, a Clinton Appointee...
2 posted on
09/30/2005 2:28:47 PM PDT by
el_texicano
(Liberals, Socialist, DemocRATS, all touchy, feely, mind numbed robots)
To: crazyhorse691
Morons. The thinning of smaller trees will make the rest healthier. Building roads into the forests will enable firefighters to get there to fight the fires that start every summer.
The environmental wackos actually prefer seeing thousands of acres burn to having the forests sensibly managed. Idiots.
To: crazyhorse691
Thugs and Villains the following: USDA, USFS, USConserv. Dept.
4 posted on
09/30/2005 2:33:07 PM PDT by
Mrs. Shawnlaw
(Rock beats scissors. Don't run with rocks. NRA)
To: crazyhorse691
The 13 suspended logging projects in the region were relatively small, and about half were to reduce fire hazards. The rest included salvaging timber killed by insects or other causes, said Rex Holloway, a Forest Service spokesman. Five involved thinning timber without commercial value. This statement contradicts itself. What the hell do they think dead trees, killed by insects or other causes, are except a fire hazard? If they still have useful wood left in them then I guess it is evil to log them!
5 posted on
09/30/2005 2:33:29 PM PDT by
calex59
To: crazyhorse691
In 2004 and 2005, over 11 MILLION acres burned in Alaska. Why is this better than thinning the forests?
6 posted on
09/30/2005 2:33:38 PM PDT by
thackney
(life is fragile, handle with prayer)
To: crazyhorse691
Just one time when these forests in Oregon catch fire let them burn ~ quit wasting my tax dollars on them ~ and keep FEMA out of there because they might help these crazoids escape the flames!
11 posted on
09/30/2005 3:18:53 PM PDT by
muawiyah
(/ hey coach do I gotta' put in that "/sarcasm " thing again? How'bout a double sarcasm for this one)
To: crazyhorse691; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp
Environmental attorneys wanted Singleton to suspend all projects authorized under the now-invalid Bush rules since they were issued in 2003. But the judge did not, saying it would "plunge the Forest Service headlong into a crippling morass of confusion." As if the agency was currently being run as a well oiled machine.
Sarcasm aside, Congress created the USFS, and congress is responsible for screwing it up with endless rules and regulations.
13 posted on
09/30/2005 3:57:43 PM PDT by
forester
(An economy that is overburdened by government eventually results in collapse)
To: crazyhorse691
What upsets me the most is the roadless forest initiative, the fire fighters can't get in there to save the trees. The enviornmentals would rather the trees burn than have them thinned. Nobody talks about the thousands of animals that have died in these fires, and I bet some of them are the spotted owl!!
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson