Kathleen has a unique message for many markets.

Federal Forests Need Private Insight

Now — that's a headline that comes much closer to the mark! Certainly a lot closer then the one on Charles Levendosky's article on September 6 entitled "Even privately owned forests need federal oversight". If I hadn't known better, I would have sworn that I was about to read an excerpt from Hitler's Mein Kampf. In fairness to Mr. Levendosky, however, he was merely supporting many of the ideas put forth by the National Research Council. This independent body of the National Academy of Sciences was formed in 1916 to support national security and welfare of the nation. Under this Administration, perhaps this Council's mission has come to take on a far more socialistic interpretation of those words.

We've been free far too long, however, when it comes to a point where we champion giving away private property rights, and endorse the concept that government knows best. Spend 15 minutes watching the latest economic and social news from Russia and you will understand why government does not know best. That part of the global village ain't doin' so good!

First let's examine the concept that the federal government's track record of land stewardship should be followed. Shall we start with the road moratorium, and go from there to the $40 million dollar backlog in maintenance to get private lands on the same level as public lands now under its control. Watersheds would be next on the list. All we've heard from Mike Dombeck since his confirmation as Chief is that there isn't a watershed around that hasn't been impaired by past USFS mismanagement. So — we can look forward to no roads, no road maintenance and impaired watersheds as a result of federal oversight.

Weeds! Now they do really well under federal oversight! Just look at the infestations of Dalmatian toadflax, Leafy spurge and Spotted knapweed on our national forests. Private lands will certainly be improved when we take on that standard for rangeland utilization!

Human resource utilization! The federal government has been soliciting and encouraging volunteer help for a number of projects. This is necessary, per the U. S. Forest Service and National Park Service because they do not have the budget to carry out needed repairs and upkeep. So, would private landowners get to use these same volunteers on their forested landscapes? All done in the name of the greater common good you understand.

Imagine federal forest management on private land. Currently, that's the only way to see forest management on federal lands- via imagination! Anyway, private landowners, being the politically incorrect people they are, have dared to hold to proven scientific methods to manage their resources. Federal oversight of private lands would, however, replace the private landowners' approach of plow, plant and harvest cycles with the Scorched Earth Policy. This gets better all the time!

While on the subject of fire — let's revisit Mr. Levondosky's perfect example of a homeowner not having the right to burn down his house. He contends that it is a public safety issue not a private property issue. Federal forests have become just that-catastrophic public safety hazards to the American public and to other natural resources. Federal oversight allows for the destruction of millions of acres of forests, destruction of watersheds, elimination of wildlife and its habitat and a death wish for visiting recreationists. Communities surrounding these federal tinderboxes have all experienced the health and safety hazards of forest fires.

The examples used above are intended to point out the absurd, not to disparage all federal agencies' past performances. Promotion of federal oversight of privately owned forests by the very people who consistently hammer the federal government for poor performance of their stewardship is absurd. Where is the credibility of such a suggestion? No where!

Private property rights and the role of the private citizen in America, however, are at even greater risk with such a suggestion. As a Nation matures the role of the private citizen should have greater impact not less. To embrace public policy that reduces and marginalises the private citizen is to repeat the mistakes of history.

Much could be learned by the federal government from the successes and excesses of private industry-past and present. What would be lost with federal oversight of private forest landscapes would be the realities of proven performance, profit and productivity that private insight brings to sustainable forest resource utilization. Simply put, Big Brother does not know what's best!

Permission granted to reprint in full or part with full credit given to author.