No headline

Included in the May 15 primary election is an advisory vote on the proposed Scotchman Peaks Wilderness. Knowing there is plus and minus on everything, we have been sorting through the facts to make our best decision.

As with all USFS land, existing federal law guides management activities. Various multiple uses are considered throughout the forest. Wilderness is one of these possible uses. Scotchman Peaks is not considered part of the suitable timber base and not included in timber harvest forecasts. It has been essentially managed as a wilderness for many years. Consequently, formal designation would not change timber outputs in any way. Activities such as hunting, hiking and camping would still be allowed with little restriction. At 15,000 acres on a forest of over 2 million acres, this is a relatively small (less than 1 percent) part of the whole. Habitat for several plant and animal species would be provided which will help the USFS achieve management goals required of them over the entire Panhandle Forest.

We need active management on much of the forest to supply our needs. There are also benefits to having some areas left undeveloped. Forest laws require the USFS provide for both these options when planning management. This proposal would help them achieve that with a relatively small change of forest designation ­ and no decrease to our current product outputs. That seems reasonable and we support the wilderness proposal.

DOUG and

MINDI BRADETICH

Sagle