community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Allegheny Defense Project releases report on future of national forest
by Andy Mulkerin
Thursday, May. 29, 2003 at 12:33 PM
andybot@indypgh.org (email address validated)
The Allegheny Defense Project today released a report on the state of the Allegheny National Forest and recommendations for its future.
The Allegheny Defense Project has proposed a new vision for the Allegeny National Forest in Northwestern PA, issuing a white paper report today reccommending specific changes in land use in the only National Forest in Pennsylvania.
The report, called "Allegheny Wild! A Citizen's Alternative for the Allegheny National Forest," asserts that the role of the federal government in the forest has shifted away from conservation and toward resource extraction. The result, according to the ADP, is a loss of biodiversity and sustainability.
According to the ADP, over 90 percent of the ANF is open to logging, and among national forests, Allegheny has the highest rate of private gas and oil rights ownership. This is a result of a slow downward spiral that the Forest Service has descended since the original dedication of the first National Forests, which were to be kept free of logging, mining, and grazing.
The forest was created in 1923 under mandate of President Calvin Coolidge. It comprises wilderness lands in Elk, Forest, McKean and Warren counties and stands at over 500,000 acres, according to the Forest Service. It includes several waterways and fisheries and many trails.
It also hosts the Kane Experimental Forest, a research facility run by the Forest Sciences Laboratory.
In addition to recreation and research, though, the forest is host to a great deal of logging. Many hardwoods are abundant in the area, especially black cherry, which is valuable on the market. According to the Forest Service, in 2001, 13.7 million board feet of wood was sold from the forest.
There are also about 6,000 oil and gas wells working in the ANF right now, using about 5,000 acres of the forest.
The ANF is currently undergoing Forest Plan Revision, which means that the Forest Service is taking public comment. In August, public workshops will be held to discuss the direction of the forest.
The ADP is looking to mobilize citizens around their plan for the forest,as outlined in the "Allegheny Wild!" paper. The plan eliminates logging in the forest, as has been done in the Caribbean National Forest. It also phases out oil and gas well drilling over a course of 30 years. It recommends the allotment of 45,000 more acres of wilderness land in the forest.
The "Allegheny Wild!" report can be found at
http://www.alleghenydefense.org/alleghenywild/paper.htm
More information on the ANF can be found at
http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/allegheny/
More information on the ADP can be found at
http://www.alleghenydefense.org
Logging is Good
by Prodigal Yunzer
Monday, Jun. 02, 2003 at 10:17 AM
The forest that we live in the midst of needs to be logged. Socialists and druids think that dicotyledenous flora somehow takes on a sacredness after it exists for more than 40 years, but a tree is a CROP. Every dwelling you inhabit is made from forest products. People who oppose all logging are entitled to their opinion, but that opinion has little voice any longer. The left are much more entertaining now that they are completely out of power, because my money will not be used to advance their idiocy or religious superstitions. Most eco-weenies never get more than 1/8 of a mile from the road, but they know all about the forests.
pseudeo-intelectuals make me sick
by Fuck the Yunzer
Wednesday, Jun. 04, 2003 at 12:57 PM
Instead your money now goes to fund Bush's religious superstitions. If a tree is just a crop, a right wing redneck is just a fucking target.
Prodigal Target
by Prodigal Yunzer
Wednesday, Jun. 04, 2003 at 2:17 PM
Mixed use of America's forests, managed by scientists who work for the government, has been under attack since the 1970s. The GOP total control of government means that the big haired lawyers who get elected to Congress will no longer manage the forests directly based on the whims of pressure groups. The House was deciding what diameter tree should be logged during Clinton years, for example. The pressure groups who despise any business bigger than a two chair body piercing parlor are irrelevant and disenfranchised now that their votes do not count. So bring it on, pal. I've been waiting for the Hippy Intifada for a long time. Better not give me any warning though, you won't like how it ends up.
Trees are NOT Crops
by Wolverine
Friday, Jun. 06, 2003 at 4:25 PM
Yunzer is full of shit.
First, the forest does not "need" to be logged any more than you need to be killed. The American forests were in their best condition over 500 years ago, before assholes like Yunzer came here and destroyed the environment for profit after stealing it from the native people, mostly by committing genocide.
Furthermore, trees are not crops unless they're grown on tree farms. Webster's dictionary defines crops as, "a plant or animal or plant or animal product that can be grown and harvested extensively for profit or subsistence." By that definition, people are also crops, inlcuding you, Yunzer, so maybe we should harvest you! This is an immoral and anti-spiritual way of looking at life, as if it all exists just to serve the economic and other needs of humans, which it does not. Humans have no business killing anything they don't eat, and killing for any other reason should be treated as murder.
Second, every dwelling is NOT made from forest products (adobe, etc.) nor need it be. If intolerant jerks wouldn't have fallen for the industry bullshit, we could be using hemp for houses instead of killing trees and destroying ecosystems.
Third, most real environmentalists go hiking, backpacking, and/or rafting, and get far more than 1/8 mile from a road, all of which we'd just as soon abolish, along with the rest of industrial society. Of course, real enviros only make up at most 5% of the U.S population, so Yunzer might be referring to yuppie enviros who are as much a part of the problem as anyone else.
Fourth, mixed ABUSE of American forests has not been managed by scientists -- who are generally ignored by government bureaucrats who run agencies like the Forest Disservice -- but by the industries that profit from killing trees and otherwise destroying ecosystems, and that paid campaign contributions to elect their lackey politicians who allow this killing and destruction.
Furthermore, even if those scientists did manage the forests, things would only be marginally better, because mainstream western science is anti-environmentally based on reductionist thinking and is anti-spiritual and immoral. A good rule of thumb is, if you're not eating it, don't kill it.
Finally, Yunzer, you should realize that most radical enviros that I know are not hippies, but rednecks and traditional Native Americans who could probably kick your ass. Don't assume that just because hippies get all the headlines that they're the only ones who care about the Earth. Native Americans and other indigenous people held what are now called radical environmental views millenia before hippies were born.
SCARY REDNECK TREE HUGGERS
by Prodigal Yunzer
Saturday, Jun. 07, 2003 at 11:00 AM
First, I'm a lover not a fighter. I don't argue with people unless I'm getting paid. Secondly, the indians ran off this forest that you presume to live in ( and I bet its not in an adobe hut either) in the 18th century, and there weren't any cowboys chasing them either. Like I said before, if you want to consider trees as sacred life, and want to watch a redneck who agrees with you kick my ass, then thats fine with me, but why should I respect your religious superstitions with my tax dollars? The trees belong to me just as much as they do you. And why would such a root tough live off the land spiritual zen master need anyone to fight his battles for him? See you at the Black and Green. Maybe we can go for a walk in the woods see who gets lost first.
Re: SCARY REDNECK TREE HUGGERS
by caller
Saturday, Jun. 07, 2003 at 11:35 PM
I don't argue with people unless I'm getting paid.
You getting paid now, po po?
Besides, what good is your home if the forests are all gone
and you can't breathe because the air isn't getting purified
or when the mudslide comes rumbling down the mountain?
NAME ONE FOREST
by Prodigal Yunzer
Sunday, Jun. 08, 2003 at 2:33 PM
That was clear cut logged to "all gone" status? Not in this country you can't. Look around the Middle East and Haiti and yes, they cut down all the trees there. Here, you can't build a 4 store mini mall without planting a mini forest. How dare the fuckwit use a dictionary definition to sass me! Hasn't he ever seen a dictionary, just about the thickest book you could imagine, full of dead trees? My point is, mixed use of forests mean we cut down some trees, and do not treat the trees as our spiritual equals. People who live in wood framed houses built by big business developers in the middle of the Appalachian forest should not throw sticks at someone who advocates the reasonable approach that allows them the comfort they wallow in as they criticize me.
Nice Work Eco Weenies
by Prodigal Yunzer
Thursday, Jun. 26, 2003 at 11:07 AM
Eight years of forestry mismanagement by non-scientific Luddite tree worshippers have allowed over $100,000,000 of Arizona real estate to burn up in a conflagration that would not have happened under rational management. People= we're here to stay, and we arent going to move away from the trees to spare their holy Ent.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)