To: Mike Jackson & the Quincy Library
Fr: Steve Evans
Re:- On-going discussions
Once again, work commitments; prevent me from making the three hour trek to Quincy in attend the August 30 meeting of the Quincy Library Group. I have been keeping in touch with several members of the group, particularly Mike Yost and Linda Blum. I have also reviewed Linda's notes of the July 22 and August 9 meetings.
At this time, I must state unequivocally that I cannot endorse the Quincy library Group proposal as currently written, although I strongly endorse the on-going discussions. I never authorized use of my name on the original document in the first place, although I told Mike Jackson that I agreed with using the Conservationist Alternative land bases for the Lassen and Plumas National Forests in the discussion process.
My primary concern is the sheer size of this proposed "adaptive management strategy." Although the timber industry may be comfortable with conducting an experiment on more than a million acres of public land, I am not. The ability of Friends of the Plumas Wilderness or virtually any conservation group I know of to adequately monitor this experiment is questionable.
I strongly recommend that the physical focus of this discussion be narrowed to smaller, more manageable areas, perhaps directly adjacent to the timber dependent communities cited in the proposal.
Secondarily, I am concerned about the lack of agreement on permanent protection for roadless areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. I think it is a mistake to spend considerable time and political capital to negotiate for only temporary protection of these areas.
Finally, I must reiterate the need for decisions based on science, not economics or politics. Although the CASPO scientists have evidently been included in the discussions, there is a disturbing trend in the minutes towards political expediency when they are not present.
Although I cannot endorse the proposal as written, I encourage you to continue discussions.