Subject: Salvage logging
Date: Jul 10 08:49:32 1995
From: Don Baccus - donb at Rational.COM


US Representative Peter DeFazio had an editorial piece this morning
in the Oregonian.

He flat out told Clinton to veto the recissions bill due to the
salvage logging rider. "It is about time that the President found
his moral compass and kept it pointed in one direction", he stated
(paraphrased from memory).

He pointed out details that haven't been well publicized: that
entering roadless areas is allowed, logging along wild and scenic
rivers is allowed, that slope restrictions will not be enforced
(I'm sure that many of you know that not only are very steep
slopes prone to greater erosion, but replanting success rate
is often much lower), that sales under "Option 9" will be
insulated from legal challenge (thus, if data gathered during
implementation of the plan shows it's not working, conservationists
will be unable to challenge individual sales in court).

Trust the administration to use this power with care? He says he'd
trust no administration with this much power over timber issues.

Excellent piece from a Representative whose own moral compass
has been known to waver from time to time. I especially applaud
him because as a Representative he'll be up for election next time
(unlike Senators, who can duck and cover for up to six years depending
on their last campaign) in a district that contains a large number of
timber industry voters as well as Eugene and U of O.

It is especially important because both the Administration and
the Republican Congressional leadership have been representing
the Northwest as being universally in favor of this approach.

What's the word from Washingtonians? Is there a single Washington
Representative who's taken such a stand?

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <donb at rational.com>