Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Sierra Club e-mail!

Recommended Posts

Does anyone think the Sierra club will see the humor in my e-mail?

From: "John Haro" <john@misearch.com>

To: environmental911@sierraclub.org

Date: 07/04/02 14:51:31

Subject: Important article, must read!


Greens Go Up in Smoke

Will sensible forest policies rise from the ashes?

Fires continue to roar through the West, aided by drought and allegedly in

some cases by arson. But as the damage stretches into a million acres and

billions of dollars, other culprits are coming in focus--especially the

high-powered environmental groups that have dominated U.S. forest policy


at least a decade.

"The policies that are coming from the East Coast, that are coming from


environmentalists, that say we don't need to log, we don't need to thin


forests are absolutely ridiculous," Arizona Governor Jane Dee Hull said

recently. "Nobody on the East Coast knows how to manage these fires and I

for one have had it."

Her frustration is shared by many Westerners, who have now seen far too

closely the consequences of environmentalist policy. If there's been any

benefit to these awful fires, it's the education they're providing to

suburban voters. Their anger is spilling over into this year's election

campaigns, and is causing the greens to deny their own handiwork. As

Colorado Governor Bill Owens told us recently regarding the need for more

forest management: "The debate is largely over."

What the fires have exposed is just how extreme even today's "mainstream"

environmental activists have become. Once upon a time the Sierra Club and

Wilderness Society were concerned with the wise human stewardship of


resources and wilderness. But in recent decades a view has taken hold


these groups that often sees human beings as the scourge of pristine



This no-human philosophy lies behind the Big Green litigation and lobbying

that opposed the very thinning and road-building that would clean up


to protect them from fire. The result is that this fire year is now


up as the worst on record: Some 2.7 million acres have already burned,

nearly three times the average acreage for this time of year.

All of this has put the leading environmental groups, accustomed to a free

media ride, on the defensive for the first time in decades. The Sierra

Club's Carl Pope has called any criticism a "disturbing display of cynical

politics," which is of course a way of changing the subject. Governor


by the way, is term limited and not running for re-election.

But for the most part, the Big Green groups have been retreating faster


the Italian Africacorps. After these columns recently pointed out

the "Fires

Are Good" headline on the National Wildlife Federation Web site, we went

back to the site for another look, but the words had ysteriously

disappeared. The Sierra Club, which used to praise the uses of fire, now


a "guide" for homeowners to protect themselves from fire.

But none of this absolves the groups from their previous agitation. Only

last summer, for instance, residents of the Black Hills in South Dakota


with the U.S. Forest Service to discuss protecting their homes from fire.

The contribution at the time from Brad Brademeyer, a local Sierra Club

official, was that "If [people]don't want to live with the forest or be


the forest, then they should move."

Then there's the "science" the groups continue to ply on their Web sites


justify opposition to forest management. The Sierra Club says that "the


real environmental damage associated with forest fires comes from human

attempts to extinguish and prevent them." The Center for Biological

Diversity and the National Forest Protection Alliance inform us,

counter-intuitively to say the least, that logging is responsible for the

fires. And the National Wildlife Federation says that "In fact, many


and plants not only survive, but thrive, after fire." They don't manage to

explain how

thinning "destroys habitat," while burning it down in its entirety makes

animals "thrive."

Clinton-era Forest Chief Mike Dombeck recently sent us a letter objecting


our editorial on this subject, but in the process he made our very point.

His letter said forest management would lead to "intensely managed

industrial forest plantations," as if this was the only alternative to

catastrophic fire. Mr. Dombeck spent his time at the Forest Service

insisting he was a moderate, but his letter shows otherwise.

Even worse are the continuing appeals and litigation. Environmental groups

swamp the Forest Service and other agencies with appeals and lawsuits each

year, in an attempt to block even modest cleanup efforts. Readers can


the Forest Service site to see for


Last week, Mark Rey, Undersecretary of Natural Resources and Environment


the Agriculture Department, requested that the Forest Service conduct a

detailed report of the environmental groups' role in big fires. It will


not just at the legal appeals, but also at the money and time the Service

spends attempting to guard its plans from legal action in the first place.

Based on their track record, the people who should pay for that study are

the environmental groups that created the problem."


Let me know what size T-shirt to send you!, :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I could use at lest ten xl size shirts. This crap never ceases to amaze me, It's unfortunate that so much wilderness had to be destroyed by fire for people to finally realize that Local policy makers know what's best for our forests! If the policy makers ever left their offices and went out side maybe they too could truly appreciate the great outdoors, and see that it shuld be available for all people to enjoy :) Can somebody give me an amen? DAMN :D:D:D:D

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just sent an email to Daniel Patterson at Center for Biological Diversity telling him what I think of their policies. I sent one a week ago to Paul Spitler at California Wilderness Coalition. These two are bosom buddies. They sit around and dream up new litigation schemes they can perpetrate on the American Public by way of suing our BLM every time they don't accede to the demands of the radical socialist leftist environmentalist agenda clowns.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

Sign in to follow this