[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 76 (Wednesday, May 21, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1036-E1037]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                HEALTHY FORESTS RESTORATION ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. ANNA G. ESHOO

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 20, 2003

  Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, this bill isn't about wildfire prevention. 
Fire prevention is being used as an excuse for allowing massive 
commercial logging in our national forests.
  Although its proponents say otherwise, the bill allows more than just 
``thinning'' of small trees and brush that are at risk of burning. It 
allows logging of the largest, most fire-resistant trees which are 
found in areas of the forest that are the least likely to burn.
  Timber companies want special access to these commercial-grade trees 
and the isolated sections of forest where they flourish. Under the 
pretext of ``fire prevention,'' this bill rewards the industry with 
that access.

[[Page E1037]]

  When this proposal was unveiled by the White House last summer, James 
Connaughton, the Chairman of President Bush's Council on Environmental 
Quality, gave the only frank description of the plan to come from the 
Administration. He said:

       ``[T]he best place to get commercial grade timber is in the 
     context of these thinning projects. So why not go there? And 
     that's really what this [initiative] is about.''

  So the ``thinning'' is simply a Trojan horse to allow massive 
commercial logging in our forests.
  If we're serious about stopping the destructive fires that destroy 
homes and threaten lives, we need to focus on the borders between 
forests and populated areas. Clearcutting in isolated areas of our 
forests, as the bill allows, will not protect lives or property. The 
slash created by clearcutting undermines forest health and increases 
the risk of damaging wildfires.
  The Miller Substitute focuses on where the greatest threat exists . . 
. the border between forests and population centers. At the same time, 
it preserves our ecologically valuable old growth forests. If wildfire 
prevention is the goal, then the Miller Substitute is the best way to 
get there. We need to defeat this bill and adopt the Miller substitute.

                          ____________________