[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
E-M:/ STUPAK TRIES TO EXPORT MICHIGAN TIMBER MANDATE TO FEDERAL FORESTS!!
- Subject: E-M:/ STUPAK TRIES TO EXPORT MICHIGAN TIMBER MANDATE TO FEDERAL FORESTS!!
- From: "Anne Woiwode" <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 18:35:31 -0500
- Delivered-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-To: email@example.com
- List-Name: Enviro-Mich
- Reply-To: "Anne Woiwode" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Enviro-Mich message from "Anne Woiwode" <email@example.com>
We know just how stupid it is to have an arbitrary minimum mandated timber
cutting level on any forests, especially public forests -- Congressman Bart
Stupak seems to have bought the same bad arguments that compelled Michigan's
legislators to pass mandates here. Don't allow the best managed public
forests in Michigan, the National Forests, to suffer the same fate as
Michigan's badly abused State Forests -- keep wildlife and the environment
in the management of all Natioanl Forests, and tell Michigan congressional
members to speak AGAINST the Stupak amendment!! AW
THE VOTE IS EXPECTED ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE ON THURSDAY, OCT 4th -- CALL
PROTECT NATIONAL FORESTS – OPPOSE THE STUPAK AMENDMENT TO FARM BILL
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) is expected to offer an amendment to HR 2646, the
Farm Security Act of 2001, that would force the US Forest Service to produce
more timber sales on each National Forest regardless of environmental or
market conditions. Each National Forest has an "allowable sale quantity" of
timber that they can offer each year. This level is set as a high limit but
in years past the Forest Service has used the allowable sale quantity as a
timber target. This results in more damaging logging in old growth stands,
roadless areas and other sensitive forest areas. The Stupak Amendment would
require the Forest Service to plan more timber sales to meet this artificial
The planning of any timber sale should, at the very least, be based on
ecological conditions and scientific information, not on a directive by
Congress to produce a specific amount of timber. The Forest Service should
be restoring damaged forest areas, not spending more resources on
taxpayer-subsidized commercial logging.
Reasons to OPPOSE the Stupak Amendment:
- The Forest Service would be forced to waste agency time and resources
planning timber sales to meet artificial timber targets. Because these
sales would not be based on sound science, but on a legislated directive,
they would likely not be in compliance with basic environmental laws.
- Commercial logging on the National Forests damages fish and wildlife
habitat, water quality and recreation opportunities. Logging amounts to only
2% of all jobs created by the National Forests. A mandated increase in
logging would cause more harm to the qualities and values that Americans
most desire from their forests and diminish economic benefits produced by
recreation and fish and wildlife habitat.
- There are 440,000 miles of roads on the National Forest System and the
Forest Service can only maintain 18% of the road system. The Forest Service
has a $8.4 BILLION maintenance backlog on the existing road system. An
increase in new logging road construction will waste money and slow needed
- The Forest Service loses taxpayer money on commercial logging. According
to a GAO report, the Forest Service lost $2 BILLION between 1992-97 alone.
Increasing money-losing timber sales does not help taxpayers or the forests.
More commercial logging will force the Forest Service to divert funds from
recreation, fish and wildlife management and other popular programs that are
- Lumber and paper costs are based on global market conditions. A mandate
to produce taxpayer-subsidized timber from National Forests would add to an
oversupply on the market and unfairly compete with private landowners.
National Forests provide less than 3% of the nation’s timber supply and
commercial logging on National Forests is not needed to provide America’s
lumber and paper.
Please call your Representative TODAY through the Capitol Hill switchboard
at (202) 224-3121 and urge him/her to OPPOSE the Stupak Amendment! Vote
expected on Oct. 4.
For more information call Sean Cosgrove, Sierra Club National Forest Policy
Specialist, at (202) 547-1141.
ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at
Postings to: firstname.lastname@example.org For info, send email to
email@example.com with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich"