[Vision2020] Phil and Floodwood

[Jim Meyer]

Phil,
If you look specifically at the St. Joe Forest, during the period of the 
last 30 years, your gross generalization "For every acre of State 
management failure you can cite, I can list ten acres of Forest Service 
mismanagement." is absolutely wrong and makes me doubt the veracity of 
other statements of "fact" that you often make.

The facts are that much of the Idaho state managed lands in the areas 
surrounding the St Joe Forest area were clearcutted to the extent of 
including entire drainages or halves of drainages--thousands of acres. 
There was no effort to limit the size of clear cuts in order to minimize 
erosion, very little effort to maintain riparian zones, very little 
effort to leave islands of habitat for game. In sum the land was 
decimated. Floodwood is a prime example.

In contrast, the Forest Service during most of that period, limited 
clearcuts to mostly 40 acres in more recent times to perhaps 100 acres 
earlier in the period. They carefully replanted, carefully controlled 
slash., managed some fairly large areas for game, was acutely aware of 
riparian zones and overall did a fairly good job compared to the 
decimation obvious on State managed lands. You need to do a little more 
research.

Jim Meyer

>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 02:30:22 -0800
>From: "Phil Nisbet" <pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] HR 3855
>To: msolomon at moscow.com
>Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Message-ID: <BAY108-F23F532CC2538FD4E650106EA230 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
>Mark
>
>For every acre of State management failure you can cite, I can list ten 
>acres of Forest Service mismanagement.  Trashing either agency seems like a 
>waste of time to me.
>
>I am not suggesting as some did in the days gone by that we turn all Forest 
>and BLM land over to state management, I am suggesting that some of the 
>Federal lands should be transfered to State ownership to allow us to have 
>better education funding.
>
>Hey, tell you what, earmark the resulting funds for purchase of lands East 
>of the Mississippi and let them get representation of that ecosystem type 
>into the National Inventory.  Because if having National ownership is so 
>very important, than the folks who want to preserve nature back easst should 
>be ready and willing to give up some of their tax base to what should be a 
>National goal rather than simply one shoulder by people here.
>
>Phil
>
>
>  
>
>>From: Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com>
>>To: "Phil Nisbet" <pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com>, mushroom at moscow.com
>>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] HR 3855
>>Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 22:15:27 -0800
>>
>>Phil,
>>
>>Here's a link to a satellite image of the Floodwood State "Forest", fifty 
>>scant air miles from Moscow. Forest is in quotes because as is seen in the 
>>image: there are no trees. And don't even think about trying the line "the 
>>trees are regenerating/replanting and just aren't visible yet". A tree farm 
>>is not a forest.
>>
>>Oh yeah.. the ground just to the west that has also been hammered is 
>>Potlatch land. All used to be part of the public domain.
>>
>>http://maps.google.com/?t=h&ll=46.916503,-115.922241&spn=0.118428,0.225563&t=h
>>
>>This next link is a closeup of the remains of the "Land Board State Park" 
>>in the middle of the Floodwood. Once a sanctuary of ancient cedars it is 
>>now a doomed island in a clearcut sea.
>>
>>http://maps.google.com/?t=h&ll=46.902255,-115.899067&spn=0.007404,0.014098&t=h
>>
>>Mark Solomon
>>
>>At 7:49 PM -0800 1/7/06, Phil Nisbet wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Don
>>>
>>>Can you sing?  I am thinking of a Ren and Stimpy tune that my boys taught 
>>>me.
>>>
>>>The IDL has managed less than 10% of the public lands in the state of 
>>>Idaho and you make the BS claim that IDL is responsible for the most 
>>>egerious errors in Land Management?   Care to back up your claim with 
>>>anything other than hot air?
>>>
>>>Phil Nisbet
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>From: Don Coombs <mushroom at moscow.com>
>>>>Reply-To: mushroom at moscow.com
>>>>To: "'Moscow Vision 2020'" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] HR 3855
>>>>Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2006 15:25:45 -0800
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Tom Hansen wrote:
>>>> I am all in favor of keeping public lands public.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Once these forest lands are auctioned off to private interests, a mortal
>>>>>person's imagination will not even be able to conceive the size of the 
>>>>>next
>>>>>WalMart Super Center in Idaho.
>>>>>
>>>>>I strongly support Idaho BLM acquiring these lands.  The lands will 
>>>>>remain
>>>>>environmentally managed and Idaho realizes revenue in the process.
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>I assume you mean IDL (Idaho Department of Lands) rather than Idaho BLM. 
>>>>(The Bureau of Land Management is, of course, a federal agency.)
>>>>
>>>>Under IDL, the lands will not exactly be environmentally managed. The 
>>>>state consitution requires IDL to manage with only timber revenue in 
>>>>mind, and yes, that revenue does go to schools. But there is a huge 
>>>>difference between managing for multi-use (including recreation) and just 
>>>>cutting everything cuttable.
>>>>
>>>>Some of the most egregious land management in the past century is a 
>>>>result of IDL decisions.
>>>>
>>>>Don Coombs
>>>>
>>>>_____________________________________________________
>>>>        
>>>>