|
|
|
MailTribune.com
  • LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

  • The MT asks environmentalists for reason and agreement dealing with the Forest Service on timber harvest and forest health. However, the Tribune's uninformed opinion of history and issues surrounding the upper Rogue allows idealistic, simple-minded solutions.
    • email print
  • The MT asks environmentalists for reason and agreement dealing with the Forest Service on timber harvest and forest health. However, the Tribune's uninformed opinion of history and issues surrounding the upper Rogue allows idealistic, simple-minded solutions.
    Around 1996 the Prospect district ranger signed an agreement with the Headwaters environmental group asserting the district would prove compliance with soil standards and guidelines in the Upper Rogue. The timber shop was outraged because it was fully aware many areas were over the threshold for soil compaction. In 1997 the Forest Service hired me to measure past impacts and determine compliance. Many areas were over the threshold of tolerance for soil impacts. At that time, the Bybee timber sale was a controversial, tabled project headed for the scrap bin. Logging the boundary of Crater Lake was unpopular back then, too.
    Now the Forest Service has dusted off the old and once tabled Bybee. But expecting less controversy today is unreasonable. One thing we may agree on is that many of the projects the agency, including Prospect Ranger District, has proposed in the past decade were collaborative and moved forward without controversy. Collaboration, not reverting to the battles of the past, is the best path forward. — Derek Volkart, Talent
Reader Reaction
      • calendar