The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1947-12-26
sCo-operative Sustained Yields"

cooperative OuSLdIncQ IIcIQS
Elsewhere this The Voice. printing ette
from Mr. P d. Hanson regional forester which discusses
detail the issues involved in the proposed cooperative
ment by the Forest Service with the Ne Lumber
covering the timber of the Kootena forest In hi
discussion want to be clearly understood that we
not damnng the Forest Service We consider of the
most effective of federal guarding the peoples
interests in of the greatest of the nations natural
That this is recognized by exploiting private interests clearly
evident the drastic reduction of appropriations by the
dictionary 8Oth Congress which to marked degree must affect
its operations in the public's interests.
The letter appears indicate that he
assuming that The Voice and the of the czeny
which opposing this cooperative plan
with the Nei Lumber thereby opposing the
tanned forest yield program provided for IN Public Law No.
273 Let make stand clear this by quoting the
preston of E. j. Wedner, speaking for the
Troy and expressing the attitude not only of The Voice. but
believe of all opposing the Forest ServceNeis
Lumber company plan. Mr.. Weidner says:
eve way opposed to the Sustained Yield law
feel that has long been neglected by Forest Service officials
who have always had the to sell national forest timber
sustained yield basis Mr.. Weidner speaks from know
edge and experience he had supervision of timber
the Kootena National Forest 35 years ago.
Mr. Hanson will be noted his letter. admits
recognizes proposed "co-operative
agreement with the Neils Lumber company will give
nopoy of the timber the Kooena To be
he that the Forest Service (proposaD will include
considerable control the exercise of that monopoly This
may good Service submit
that controls monopoly power agencies
cannot be effective This clearly amply demonstrated
in many phases of national life today.
The proposed cooperative by the Forest Service
with the Neils Lumber for go Under its
provisions the Forest Service and the Nels company will Joint
y construct 1t admitted that while these will
to great extent be constructed with public funds the Ne
will have practical control of them This easily
that sporsmen and will be excluded from the
because Of fire hazards to the Neil property
other that the declare Moreover the
operative plan states that the number of
should be substantially reduced because the deer tend nure
the seeding ponderOsa 1t makes wonder how be-
fore the advent of these tremendous forests of ponderosa
pine developed when the wild life existed without restrictions
numbers Those like hunt and fish, see one of the
few remaining bountfu their sport disappearing
this proposed agreement is carried out
The praccaby and desirabi of these long term
ments challenged another basis extremely
doubtful that the officials of the Forest Service despite their
technical knowledge also gifted with prescenc coming
events How they foresee the degree of ui
cation which will prevail go from what kinds of
wood will then be rated of highest value Indeed neither
Forest Service officials else tell what demand
there will be for forest products less than half that time distant
in the face of scientific progress
If the Nei Lumber interested cooperation
with the Forest Service why does not enlist it's
regulation of practices its present private holdings the
Kootena forest? Of it clearly apparent that the
private profit the timber the
atuousy argue that Neis primarily
the preservation of sustained yield the
public. Within certain limits they doubt
such preservation but primarily because possible continuity
of profitable operation
Should anyone claim that the Nes company is
voted the preservation of the timber for the
good then the operations of this Michigan
Minnesota should be scrutnzed Did con-
for the future of the timber lands those
before to Montana? Or do the
realize that they cannot
of this last great domain because there else