Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Eugene weekly. (Eugene, Oregon) 1993-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 2, 2003)
TO THE EDITOR incontrovertible proof of administration involvement. And I agree with Mr. Corn: It’s implausible that the Bushites organized the attack; they simply don’t have the resources, nor could they keep that secret for long. What is plausible is that they let it happen. That would involve very few players. Why is it worth addressing? Because proof would be the surest and quickest way to bring down this dangerous administration; but also, and even more important, because the evidence, if reported, helps emphasize their untrustworthiness. At best, they have the choice between gross negligence and malice. That is what the American voters need to hear. So, please do your homework and write another article, on the facts of the issue. Check out the websites on the “Deception Dollar.” Ask Robinowitz to defend his posi- tion. I wager he can practically write the arti- cle for you, granted that you should address the evidence critically. That’s what we need; we’re counting on you. Do you expect The Register-Guard to do it? Charles Newlin Corvallis GOING, GOING … Since Europeans arrived here a few hun- dred years ago, 97 percent of native and old growth forests have been destroyed. The ma- jority of the remaining 3 percent (or so), is on public land, mostly national forests, and yet this is still being aggressively logged. If you care about what’s happening in our backyard and around the state, visit the web- site www. cascadiasummer.com and click on Smokey the Bear. Or call the forest service employees responsible for “auctioning off” our forests: Rick Scott, Middle Fork Ranger District (782-2283 or 782-5320), Monty Wilson, Blue River (McKenzie) Ranger District (822-7203). Let them know how you feel about log- ging the remaining old growth and native forests; tell them there is plenty to be har- vested from the second growth “tree farms.” Kim Garrison Eugene BOZIEVICH’S STAND LCC board member Jay Bozievich was on the local news from the steps of the State Capitol recently advocating for the anti-in- come tax surcharge initiative put forth by Kevin Mannix and the Republican Party. This is at a time when the college is facing a projected $6.2 million deficit for the 2003/2004 academic year. If the bipartisan measure is repealed, the impact of fewer class offerings and substantially higher tuition will be devastating for students wishing to com- plete their educational goals. I assume board members should have the well-being of the college as their primary ob- jective. Certainly, reliable funding is a prior- ity. I believe Mr. Bozievich’s position is in- compatible with the LCC educational mis- sion and his obligation as a board member to secure the funding necessary to ensure a vi- able future for the college. Public funding for education made it possible for Mr. Bozievich to obtain a college degree and we ought to provide the same opportunity for future gen- erations of Oregonians. Pat Reilly Eugene LIEBERMAN AS HAWK After reading the accounts of the first Democratic presidential debate, I was ap- palled to see a Democrat taking a position to the right of President Bush on military (and, really, by extension, economic) policy. To make sure that I understood Sen. Lieberman’s views, I checked the facts on his website. Sadly, the reports were accurate: he does, in fact, speak of sending additional troops to Iraq. FIELD OF STUMPS I read with interest James Johnston’s (8/28) article “Fire Season.” I appreciate EW tak- ing on an issue that is both national in scope and local in impact. Johnston’s article ably at- tempts to take on, in a limited space, a problem about which I suspect he could have writ- ten volumes. I wonder, had his byline not been followed by a note indicating that Johnston is an “en- vironmental activist,” if letters such as that of Cynthia Orlando’s in last week’s EW would have been as virulent in tone and personal in attack. I didn’t think that Johnston “demo- nized” the Forest Service, although there was a strong, and quite valid, indictment of a mis- guided, counterproductive and fiscally irresponsible fire management policy. I take strong exception to Orlando’s claim that lawsuits and court cases have tied the Forest Service’s hands and prevented them from forest management practices that reduce fuel buildup and the risk of catastrophic fire. I dare her to name one fuel reduction project on the Willamette National Forest that’s been held up by litigation. There are few, if any, genuine fuel reduction projects being done on the Willamette. The management of this for- est is focused on the old-growth clearcutting business, and old-growth clearcutting is what has (thankfully) been held up by lawsuits. Clearcutting stands of nearly 7-foot diameter old-growth Douglas fir, as happened in the recent Berry Patch timber sale, is a far cry from thinning brush and small trees. Ironically, it is these larger trees that are fire-resistant. The most inaccurate part of Orlando’s critique was the bold claim that the USFS clearcut only 80 acres of forest in 2002. Drive up FS Road 1817 (about five miles from the Clark Fire) to the Berry Patch timber sale and you’ll see what forest “management” on the Willamette looks like: a field of stumps that used to be a 500-year-old forest. This sale clearcut 50 acres of old growth in 2002. Or check out the Rhody timber sale east of Lowell (40 acres of old-growth clearcuts in 2002). These two examples in the Middle Fork Ranger District alone are 90 acres of clearcut and do not even begin to reflect the total number of acres that were clearcut in Oregon in 2002. All told, there are more than 500 acres of old- growth clearcuts planned on the Willamette National Forest within 20 miles of the Clark fire. Twenty acres of old growth on the Straw Devil timber sale were clearcut just a month ago. And this is just one ranger district of 155 national forests. Camilla Mortensen Eugene OCTOBER 2, 2003 5
