3 ms·
I think a lot of people here are conflating the Forest Service with the Park Service. The Park Service is one of the most successful, most universally beloved g
by EA-3167 2y ago
I think a lot of people here are conflating the Forest Service with the Park Service. The Park Service is one of the most successful, most universally beloved government agencies we've ever had, they run the national parks and are a boon to lovers of the outdoors.
The Forest Service has one of the most checkered pasts you can imagine, they're in many ways the opposite of what people imagine when they hear the name.
To quote Bill Bryson:
> “In fact, mostly what the Forest Service does is build roads. I am not kidding. There are 378,000 miles of roads in America’s national forests. That may seem a meaningless figure, but look at it this way—it is eight times the total mileage of America’s interstate highway system. It is the largest road system in the world in the control of a single body. The Forest Service has the second highest number of road engineers of any government institution on the planet. To say that these guys like to build roads barely hints at their level of dedication. Show them a stand of trees anywhere and they will regard it thoughtfully for a long while, and say at last, “You know, we could put a road here.” It is the avowed aim of the U.S. Forest Service to construct 580,000 miles of additional forest road by the middle of the next century. The reason the Forest Service builds these roads, quite apart from the deep pleasure of doing noisy things in the woods with big yellow machines, is to allow private timber companies to get to previously inaccessible stands of trees. Of the Forest Service’s 150 million acres of loggable land, about two-thirds is held in store for the future. The remaining one-third—49 million acres, or an area roughly twice the size of Ohio—is available for logging. It allows huge swathes of land to be clear-cut, including (to take one recent but heartbreaking example) 209 acres of thousand-year-old redwoods in Oregon’s Umpqua National Forest.”
That is the USFS. The guys who help loggers. The fools who so often mismanaged forest management based on Victorian ideas about "the woods". These are the geniuses who kill off fish in large waterways with rotenone.
A lot of what Trump is doing is highly questionable or outright terrible, but I don't shed a tear for this agency, and you shouldn't either. The wilds would be better without them.
- insane_dreamer 2y agoThat is a gross mischaracterization of what the USFS does.
- EA-3167 2y agoThere's really nothing to say when someone's response boils down to, "No" and it's hard to argue that you're adding anything to the discussion here. What did I "mischaracterize" exactly? What was incorrect or what did I miss that makes you say that? Is the USFS not failing to protect old growth? Have their policies around controlled burns not been criticized for decades as antiquated? Do they not poison rivers to "control undesirable fish species"? Or by contrast, what are they doing that you think excuses their shortcomings?
- insane_dreamer 2y agoYes, the criticisms of some of their policies and shortcomings are warranted. But you weren't discussing those. Instead, you characterized the USFS as primarily engaged in building roads and logging/deforestation. That is what I objected to. Yes, logging is part of what they manage -- to ensure that it's done in a sustainable and proper manner (without which, corporations would just take it all, especially if the federal lands were privatized). Now whether they are too cozy with the logging industry in some states, that may be the case -- but that's a regulatory/policy question, not at all solved by cutting the USFS.
- HDThoreaun 2y agoHow are people supposed to access the national forests if there aren’t roads? I’d rather loggers do their thing deep in the forest so the areas that are popular can continue to be wild. We all know logging isn’t going to stop anytime soon