[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 13, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S334-S335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     WHITE MOUNTAIN LAND MANAGEMENT

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise today to speak briefly about the 
White Mountain National Forest and the U.S. Forest Service's efforts to 
manage these lands for the benefit of all Granite Staters. In 
particular, I wanted to extend my appreciation and support for the 
agency's commitment to implementing its 2005 management plan for the 
forest, including the Mill Brook timber harvesting proposal.
  It goes without saying that the White Mountain National Forest is a 
special place for all New Hampshire residents. Drawing millions of 
visitors each year, these lands have long appealed to those who enjoy 
the outdoors, while also providing natural resources that support 
communities across the State. Through balanced, multiple-use management 
policies, I remain confident that the White Mountain National Forest 
will remain one of the crown jewels of the National Forest System for 
generations to come.
  As such, I was pleased when, in 2005, the U.S. Forest Service 
released its new management plan for the White Mountain National 
Forest. Striking a delicate compromise among stakeholders, it was 
overwhelmingly supported in New Hampshire and established a consensus-
based blueprint for how this natural resource will be managed. I 
applauded all of the hard work and public outreach that the Forest 
Service put into this plan and was pleased to coauthor legislation that 
implemented its wilderness recommendations. Signed into law in December 
2006, the New England Wilderness Act designated nearly 35,000 acres of 
new wilderness in the Forest and strengthened our nation's commitment 
to land conservation.
  The 2005 management plan also included timber harvesting, which is 
critical for both regional economic activity and wildlife diversity 
purposes. The timber industry is one of the largest manufacturing 
industries in New Hampshire, supporting well paying jobs and local 
communities, especially in the north country. Carefully managed timber 
harvesting can also play an important role in maintaining habitats that 
are critical for certain types of wildlife.
  Fully consistent with the 2005 plan and its timber harvesting 
guidelines, the Forest Service has proposed logging projects which have 
been subject to environmental review, are limited in scope, and have 
the support of well respected groups across the spectrum such as the 
Society for Protection of New Hampshire Forests, Appalachian Mountain 
Club, the National Audubon Society, the New Hampshire Timberland 
Owners, and the North Country Council. Two of these proposals, the 
Batchelder Brook and Than Brook Resource Management Projects, have been 
unsuccessfully challenged by certain environmental groups such as the 
Sierra Club that do not represent the view of most Granite Staters. 
Even though they seemed fine with the 2005 management plan when it was 
released, these groups now want to undo it via lawsuits and other 
challenges that use up taxpayer resources and stymie economic activity 
in New Hampshire. Fortunately, the courts have so far ruled in favor of 
the Forest Service and have allowed these two timber harvesting 
projects to proceed. With each ruling against these challenges, it has 
been my hope, as well as the hope of many others in our State, that all 
parties would now act in good faith and respect the 2005 management 
plan's timber harvesting guidelines.
  Unfortunately, this has not been the case, and it is why I am once 
more speaking on the Senate floor about the White Mountain National 
Forest. Once again, we now have the Sierra Club and its allies trying 
to tie up yet another important timber harvesting proposal, the Mill 
Brook project. This project, which consists of around 1,000 acres, is 
wholly consistent with the plan's timber harvesting guidelines. It is 
also supported by a large number of well respected environmental groups 
and the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. But this is apparently 
not enough. Recycling some of the same legal arguments that have proven 
unsuccessful in the past, the Sierra Club and its friends are trying to 
thwart the good intentions and popular support of the 2005 plan, 
choosing the path of antagonism over the spirit of compromise.
  Now of course, I recognize that it is within these groups' rights to 
file an administrative appeal and try to hold things up. And I also 
recognize that such tactics may appeal to their partisan supporters. 
That being said, I also feel that these groups' actions are meant to 
undermine the longstanding consensus approach that New Hampshire has 
taken to environmental protection and the management of the

[[Page S335]]

White Mountain National Forest specifically. During these challenging 
times, I also find it hard to understand why some groups are trying to 
thwart the Mill Brook proposal when their previous attempts to block 
similar projects have not succeeded, especially when timber harvesting 
in this area will provide an economic boost for the Granite State.
  As I have said in the past, the White Mountain National Forest can 
and should be accessible to a wide variety of uses, including timber 
harvesting. While I certainly agree that the Forest Service must follow 
the law and carry out certain environmental reviews, I also believe 
that this administrative appeal runs counter to New Hampshire's 
interests. I therefore hope that this appeal process is resolved as 
soon as possible and that we can all support the Forest Service's 
management of the White Mountain National Forest, including the Mill 
Brook project.

                          ____________________