High Sierra Topix

I would like to solicit comment on the current Presidential administration, and your opinion on it's Stewardship of our wild, public lands, and it's use of "Sound Science."

Now, as my deceased Father in Law used to say, "I'm gonna hide and watch!"

If you are going to hide and watch, I am not going to fan the flames. And, trust me, if I put in my two cents worth, it would definitely fan the flames.

[quote="JM21760"]...and it's use of "Sound Science." [quote]



"Public lands cannot be managed by science alone. Social, political, and economic factors must be considered." -- Jack Thomas, former Chief of the Forest Service.

Any land management plan must meet certain tests. If it fails any one the plan will fail. First, the plan must be scientifically sound. It must be able to achieve the stated goals. Second it must be feasible and not require impossible feats and technologies that do not exist, nor mutually exclusive goals. Third it must be economically sound. On public lands non-commodity values may be used in the economic analyses, but the final benefits must still outweigh the costs. And last, and especially most important on public lands, it must have popular support of local government and local stakeholders. Without their support even the best plan, no matter how well funded or legally mandated, will fail.

The Sierra Nevada Conservation Framework as originally written did not meet three, arguably all four, of the criteria.

Oh boy, someone get the fire extinguisher!

OK Mountaineer, I'll come out of hiding. I want to see you pour a little Coleman fuel on the subject. I'll be here.