April 16, 2010
It is very interesting that environmentalists (give me a break) and loggers have agreed to a plan for management of four of our National Forests. The trick to all this "planning" is going to be the actual completion of an environmental review (NEPA) and the production of a Decision Document that is implementable. Call me a cynic, but whenever radical groups like the Center for Biological Diversity have been involved in deciding what is best for the rest of us implementation of a project is thwarted or litigated unless it is what the Center for Biological Diversity demands. The Grand Canyon Trust isn't much better. The Forest Service is required by law to submit its proposed activities to the public for review and comment so the best Decision can be reached. The article reads "The key to the plan lies in the agreement between the timber industry and environmentalists that promises to avoid the snarl of lawsuits and protests that have all but paralyzed forest policy for the past decade — both in Arizona and nationally." Where does it state that the "environmentalists" won't appeal or sue to stop a final Forest Service Decision if it is not exactly what they want? Be prepared, the lawsuits and protests will go on, it's how they make their money - suing the American taxpayer.
In response to:
Environmentalists and loggers agree on a plan to thin 50,000 acres
Environmentalists and loggers have agreed on a groundbreaking plan to use a reinvented timber industry to restore forest health by thinning 750,000 acres of dangerously overgrown central Arizona forests.