[Vision2020] Phil and Floodwood

Sun Jan 8 09:40:51 PST 2006

Jim

Every been in SE Idaho?  Do you have any idea of the number of acres clear 
cut there?

There was not a heck of a hill of beans difference between IDL management 
techniques and USFS techniques for a whole lot of years.  The USFS simply 
had more land and a bigger budget to get the cut out.

Since the days of timber beasting have dried up, the USFS has changed.  IDL 
is also in the process of changing.

So I am saying clearly, that its unfair to beat up IDL or USFS for the past. 
  There is a changing of the guard going on in Forestry at both State and 
Federal levels.  I simply hate seeing the current drop of managers, guys who 
work very hard on a lot more than just getting the cut out, get beaten up 
for the sins of the guys who they are supplanting.

Phil Nisbet

PS, ask Mark how many acres in the Targhee were leveled in the old days and 
compare that to your Floodwood example.  I think that more than amply 
supplies the evidence of what I was talking about.

>From: Jim Meyer <m1e2y3e4 at moscow.com>
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] Phil and Floodwood
>Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 09:15:05 -0800
>
>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
>>>>>
>>>>>_____________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net   
>                              mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/