Copyright 2000 eMediaMillWorks, Inc.
(f/k/a Federal
Document Clearing House, Inc.)
Federal Document Clearing House
Congressional Testimony
August 12, 2000, Saturday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 1254 words
COMMITTEE:
HOUSE resources
SUBCOMMITTEE: FORESTS
AND FOREST HEALTH
HEADLINE: TESTIMONY FOREST SERVICE
ACCESS POLICIES
TESTIMONY-BY: JERRY WILLIAMS
BODY:
Jerry Williams 531 Windamere Terrace Hot
Springs, AR 71913 Ouachita/Ozark Watch League August 10, 2000 US House of
Representatives Committee on Resources Subcommittee on Forests & Forest
Health Washington, DC 20515 RE: Access to Arkansas National Forests Dear
Subcommittee Members: My name is Jerry Williams, and my testimony is provided
for the Ouachita/Ozark Watch League (OWL). OWL is a coalition of about 60
organizations and 350 individuals who are concerned with management of the
national forests in Arkansas and across the country. Today's hearing is being
held to specifically address concerns of access to Arkansas' national forests,
but seems to be aimed primarily at concerns over President Clinton's
Roadless Area Conservation Plan. We hope to show you that
access to national forests in Arkansas and across the nation is not threatened
by the President's Roadless Plan. The Forest Service developed
a draft Environmental Impact Statement to assess this proposal. Important issues
and points which are taken from Forest Service documents, the
Roadless Plan Preferred Alternative: (1) - will not result in
closing of existing roads; - will not prohibit timber harvesting on inventoried
roadless areas; - will not change existing access for
recreational opportunities; - will not affect existing rights of access held by
landowners; - will not prevent maintenance of existing roads in inventoried
roadless areas; - will not designate new wilderness areas; -
will not prevent the Forest Service from fighting fires. They can even build
roads in an emergency to protect the public from fire; and - will not eliminate
the Forest Service's ability to create early successional wildlife habitat.
Furthermore, the Roadless Plan preferred alternative does not
propose any roadless area protection in the Ouachita National
Forest and only proposes 22,000 acres for roadless area
protection in the Ozark National Forest. (2) Considering these facts about the
Roadless Plan, we do not see any reason for concern about
access to national forests in Arkansas. The Ouachita and Ozark National Forests
in Arkansas are very heavily roaded so public access is not a real concern. For
example, if a person were to be in the heart of the largest unroaded area in the
Ouachita or Ozark National Forest a passable road would be within 1 or 2 miles
at the most. Access to our public lands in Arkansas is not a problem! The areas
in Arkansas that remain as essentially roadless are that way
because they are rugged and steep and likely have poor timber. The sensible
thing to do is not to construct roads in these areas and destroy their special
characteristics. This will not hinder public access to national forest lands in
Arkansas. We respectfully request that your subcommittee support the President's
Roadless Plan and direct the Forest Service to give serious
consideration to additional protection requested by commenters across the
country. Sincerely, Jerry Williams Ouachita/Ozark Watch League (1)
Roadless Area Conservation, USDA, Forest Service, FS-670, May
2000 (2) Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2, May 2000
LOAD-DATE: September 6, 2000, Wednesday
