Officials Praise Plan to Increase Logging in Sierra

The proposal for changes in what is known as the Sierra Nevada Framework were presented Friday to more than 200 people crowded into an exhibit hall at the Sonora Fairgrounds. The forum's speakers clearly supported the proposal, but the presence of representatives from a handful of conservation groups made for a few provocative exchanges.

The presenters included Mark Rey, undersecretary for natural resources at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Rey sharply criticized lawsuits, which he said have postponed forest-thinning projects, and called such judicial reviews "insane."

Another speaker, Thomas M. Bonnicksen, a professor of forest science at Texas A & M University, ridiculed the conservation community's interest in old-growth trees, calling that focus a "trend" and "a fashion statement."

This was the final public meeting before the plan's comment period ends Sept. 12. If the framework is amended as expected, the changes could be implemented by this fall.

The revised Sierra plan would allow three times as much logging as currently permitted and would permit removal of trees as much as 30 inches in diameter from the 11 federal forests in the Sierra Nevada system.

The U.S. Forest Service has argued that the changes would reduce fire danger, a particular concern for communities such as Sonora, poised at the forest's edge. Officials said the proposal would save taxpayers' money, create jobs and generate revenue in depressed rural areas.

Rep. George P. Radanovich (R-Mariposa) said he supports the plan but advocates cutting trees of even larger diameter.

"Keep pushing for the removal of the larger trees," he told the audience. "Man's intrusion in the forest in the proper way can be good for the environment."

Regional Forester Jack Blackwell said the plan will allow timber companies to harvest large, commercially viable trees and use the proceeds, in part, to pay for the removal of small trees and brush that have little market value but are highly flammable.

Conservation groups attacked the plan as a blueprint for the wholesale logging of national forests that targets many of the largest, most fire-resistant trees, which provide shelter for wildlife.