Source Notes
Title:
The Status of Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
Summary: On June 27, 2002, nine members of Congress have open discussion on the status of the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
Congresses discussion on the Roadless Area Conservation Rule.
Institutional.
What is it?
Government document.
Published by the United States government on June, 27, 2002.
No author listed.
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/ag/hag10717.000/hag10717_0f.htm
Accessed:
February, 5, 2009.
Support:
Bob Goodlatte, a representative in the commonwealth of Virginia.
Theodor Roosevelt, 26th president of the United States of America.
Eva M. Clayton, a representative in congress from the state of North Carolina.
John Thune, a representative in congress from the state of South Dakota.
Mark Rey, under secretary, Natural Resource and Environment, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
David Smith, President of Society of American Foresters.
Ron Christensen, Chairman, Public Land Steering Committee, National Association of Counties.
Dick Scar, owner of Trailhead Outfitters.
Craig Gehrke, Regional director of The Wilderness Society.
Richard W. Pombo, Representative of California.
The document directly quotes the nine members of congress that spoke during a hearing on Roadless Area Conservation Rule in 2002. Bob Goodlatte, a representative in the commonwealth of Virginia, opens discussion with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt: “The Nation behaves well when it treats its natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.” The philosophy of Roosevelt, one which implemented the modern national forest system in use today, saw national forest conservation as a fundamental responsibility to future generations. To conclude his introductory comment, Goodlatte focuses on the current state of the system: “As I look at the national forests across the west going up in flames today, I am saddened by the thought that 100 years ago Teddy Roosevelt spoke about our responsibility to leave the land in better condition than we found it for the next generation. It is time to end the rhetoric swirling around the roadless debate of protection versus destruction and wilderness versus timber. It is time we discuss this issue in its entirety, and that is the issue of forest health.”
Eva M. Clayton, a representative in congress from the state of North Carolina, continues discussion by citing religious doctrine in relationship to the duty of the American people to preserve national forests. Psalms 24 and Leviticus: “And God has declared that the totality of creation is very good. We are tenants called to till and to keep the garden.” Clayton and the Christian Environment Council speak in favor of the Roadless Rule.
John Thune, a representative in congress from the state of South Dakota is one of 49 other members that sent a letter to President Bush in opposition to the rule. Thune lists his concerns pertaining to the rule. First, the Clinton-era decision did not include the input from local forest managers; rather it was based on the findings of a small group of environmentalist. Thune states: “the Clinton administration ignored the efforts made by local officials and concerned citizens and instead decided that it should impose a one-size-fits-all roadless policy”. Secondly, the roadless rule would negatively effect millions of acres of national forest land. Thune cites bug infestation and wild fire as two of his primary concerns. Third, the rule harms sportsman by denying them access to public land.
Mark Rey, with Natural Resource and Environment and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, begins his discussion with the exact specifications of the rule. Rey reviews a number of lawsuits against the rule: “At present, there are a sufficient number of judges reviewing the roadless rule to fill out the lineup card of a major league baseball team, with several judges left over. Five of these lawsuits have been filed by States Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming, and two other States, Colorado and Montana, have submitted filings in the Idaho litigation”. Rey then suggests the protection of 1.4 million acres of wilderness in Chugach National Forest to Congress.
David Smith, President of the Society of American Foresters, strongly agrees with the roadless rule. There is general agreement among all conservation organization that this rule is vital to national forest conservation. Smith then remarks on the legal cases against the rule and how to remedy them: “One, establish national standards to guide roadless area conservation; two, require Forest Service line officers to apply those standards through the forest planning process; number three, eliminate national application of the rule; four, require Forest Service line officers to make decisions about roadless areas at the local level with adequate State and public involvement processes; and five, require compliance with all environmental laws”.
Dick Scar, the owner of Trailhead Outfitters, also speaks in favor of the rule. He gives examples from his state where the income of tourism for roadless areas brought more income than logging, and mining, and other resources extraction industries. In reference to these industries, Scar states: “In fact, personal income from these types of jobs makes up less than one percent of total personal income in our county . In 1996, out-of-State hunters and anglers spent $2.8 million in our county, which has fewer than 17,000 residents.” After considering the tourist profit of national forests, Scar list the other important aspects of national forest: “Large areas of unfragmented habitat help many wildlife species to survive, promoting biodiversity.” These areas also produce clear water watershed, providing clean water to countless communities. To conclude, Scar states “But, given the many economic benefits of roadless areas on public land, it is not all about economics; it is about maintaining our position as a great Nation, a great civilization. It is about leaving a large, great legacy for future generations. People cannot create natural environments; they can only alter, damage, or destroy them.”
Audience & Agenda:
Commdocs.house.gov reaches approximately 22,664 monthly people while attracting a slightly female biased group of individuals. The website is funded by the U.S. government and provides documents from past Congressional hearings.
Usefulness:
This source provides me with a firm government document that logically and throughly questions the merits of the roadless rule. The source can be very valuable in terms of direct quotations. The quote from Teddy Roosevelt as presented by Mr. Goodlatte (“The Nation behaves well when it treats its natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.”) would be an excellent opening statement for my project. Also, the document provides arguments from Pombo and Smith against the rule. Overall, the source provides me with the logic of two arguments: one for the rule, the other against it. The document also raises a question: What is the current climate of discussion for the rule now the Obama administration is in office?
Works cited:
www.quantcast.com
www.commdocs.house.gov/committees/ag/hag10717.000/hag10717_0f.htm
March 13, 2009 at 9:10 am |
[...] as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value” (“The Status of Roadless Area Conservation Rule.”). Roosevelt implemented the National Forest System over 100 years ago, since then land protection [...]