by Norm Crocker
Osage Group Conservation Chair, ExComm
There are certain pronouncements that, when uttered, instill simultaneous feelings of fear, anxiety, apprehension, and delirious laughter. One of these pronouncements is, “Hello, I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.” Reducing this from a macro to a micro level, we have the US Forest Service declaring that “trees need to be cut, both for government profit and for wildlife management.” Of course, we all realize that the first pronouncement, although based in reality, is a witticism; however, the second is one we hear all too often as a reason offered by the Forest Service for their ravaging of public lands. Not only do they persist in using these ridiculous and unproven generic arguments but they do not follow their own criteria for logging.
On a pleasant warm and sunny Thursday, June 29, 2000, several members of the Osage Group and Missouri Heartwood, accompanied by members of the media, journeyed to the Cedar Creek Ranger District of the Mark Twain National Forest. Our purpose was to tour the impending 156 acre Folsom timber sale and, through the media, make the public aware of our concerns. The Folsom sale, which is expected to generate at least $35,000, is the second of three timber sales that will include approximately 526 acres when completed. The first, the Brook sale, brought in $55,000. With a little extrapolation based on past and current figures, the total 526 acre sale should generate around $136,000. My, my, isn’t that an impressive figure! Compare this relatively meager amount to the intrinsic value of our forests that provide us with clean air, clean water, ancient forests, wilderness, wildlife habitat, biodiversity, and the much needed solitude that feeds our spiritual renewal.
From our parking area it was a short ten minute hike over slightly undulating pastureland to reach the area. Having to climb over a couple of gates made the hike a little challenging for the television camerapersons. In fact, one of the young ladies carrying a heavy and cumbersome video camera was actually wearing heels, which no doubt made the short hike an extreme sport for her. The superlative definition of not wanting to be in someone else’s shoes.
A short presentation was given to the media which focused not only on the complete disregard the Forest Service displayed for the public’s disapproval of the logging following an open comment period, but also on the Forest Service’s lack of adherence to their own guidelines.
Prior to the marking of the trees a certified silviculturist prescribed marking guidelines for the Folsom sale that were verbalized to the marking crew; however, they seem to have been conveniently ignored in some instances. We saw marked trees right next to a creek although guidelines state that trees within 25 feet from the centerline of major drainage areas are not to be cut. We saw shagbark hickory trees over nine inches in diameter marked although guidelines state that these trees should not be cut because the endangered Indiana bat sleeps under the loose bark of these trees. And the list goes on.
There seems to be an escape clause in these guidelines that is used whenever it is convenient, which seems to be most of the time. According to the Forest Service, the guidelines are to be followed “to the maximum extent possible and logistically practical.” How is that for ambiguity? When interviewed the day after our visit to the site, environmentally friendly reporters from the Columbia newspapers interviewed Carol Trokey, a forester for the Cedar Creek Ranger District. When questioned about the lack of adherence to their own guidelines, Trokey stated, “The guidelines are applied whenever possible and practical.” More ambiguity! Furthermore, she admitted that most of the letters received as a result of soliciting public comment were against logging the Cedar Creek District; however, she noted, “We’re not the National Park Service…We considered the public comment, but we have a mandate to provide products.”
This episode is just one more paragraph in the book of reasons why logging must be stopped in America’s National Forests. It is incumbent upon us to do everything in our power to help pass the National Forest Protection and Restoration Act.