loggingI’m beginning to find a whole new attraction to cold and rainy days. When the weather is inclement the loggers don’t work, and the forest is allowed one more day of existence.

This situation also bought me enough time to come up with a camcorder. Time is of the essence, and the delay of even a week or two would spell a lost opportunity to document the logging taking place right next to us.

All logging is unattractive. Over the last thirty eight years, I’ve been observing forest management practices, and it’s always a painful sight.

However under the old management system, that existed from the first managed timber sales in the sixties until 2004, the seventeen percent new growth cut rate was a selective cut, and the forest recovered quickly.

Then along came the new plan, instituted single-handedly by former governor Daniels.

What was once valued and protected by both republicans and democrats, for almost a century, became fodder for the bottom line.

When the spokespeople for the IDNR tell you “we’ve always cut trees” this is true. But what they are in fact doing, is skillfully leading Hoosiers down the garden path.

This is also part of the new plan.

It’s well understood in government circles that the overwhelming majority of Hoosiers are in favor of no logging in state forests. So it’s vital to the plan not to be forth coming or honest in their descriptions.

Actually, the success of the plan is dependent on keeping the public uninformed.

This is where the camcorder comes in.

The state can lie all they want. And they most certainly will. They stand in front of the cameras with big grins on their faces as they spin their false tales of proper management based on science.

But no one will be smiling when these images of the new plan are made public. The comparison between the old management system and the new plan will become completely obvious.

The IDNR publicly states the new plan is based on science. The problem with these assertions are, they’re simply not true.

The foresters and silviculturists working for the IDNR received the same education. Around here they all went to the same school, and many of them studied under the same professors.

If it was simply a matter of science there would be a general agreement, and this is not the case.

No less than James M. Ridenour, former director of the National Park Service, former director of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, and currently professor emeritus at the I. U. school of Public Health, completely disagrees with the new plan and has stated so publicly.

As I mentioned he has the same education as the current managers of the IDNR, only he has a lot more experience.

The science didn’t change, the emphasis on the bottom line changed.

I run the risk of become annoying to my friends and readers when I constantly harp on this topic, but I tell you truly, if we don’t act now, it will be too late.

Let’s not allow this to happen.



Start typing and press Enter to search