Public Lands Policy

The U.S. Forest Service Wants to Fine You $1,000 for Taking Pictures in the Forest

|

When Pete Grannis' DEC did this in 2010, the environmentalists embraced it as the good thing ... And NY State didn't just do this for wilderness but ALL state land in their regulations.

"6 NYCCR 190 Section ee. On State lands, no person shall sponsor, conduct or participate in: advertising, weddings, commercial film making activities or film making activities that exclude other public use of the area, and other similar events, except under permit from the department."

http://www.dec.ny.gov/regs/4081.html#12996

Then again, Manhattan liberal politicians care about the environment more then the US Forest Service. They have Central Park, after all, and a very polluted part of the Hudson River. The US Forest Service, in contrast is run by Tom Tidwell, who has spent his career working on forest management issues.

the economics of open space

|

I think this article points out a false dichotomy. There can be a sustainable harvest of forest products while preserving the forest.

Not every piece of public land needs wilderness protection. Indeed, much public land does not fit the criteria for wilderness -- old growth forest, undeveloped, untrammeled by man.

Most public land can be used for forest products, oil and gas production, and other economic uses -- while providing forest and watershed protection and public recreation. Managed forests often provide a better habitat for many game species and offer great ability for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, and other activities.

The National Forest and State Forest systems -- which generally are not wilderness but still forever in the public trust -- often get ignored by the various environmental groups, but they are an important portion of our protected lands.

As Gifford Pinchot once said, "where conflicting interests must be reconciled, the question shall always be answered from the standpoint of the greatest good of the greatest number in the long run."