| OCR Text |
Show c. - in failing to get the Forest Service represented on the C.U.P. mitigation team until just the past few months. -.in failing to develop mitigation criteria which is acceptable" to the agency losing the resources - not mitigation the BuRec. will try to obtain funds for under its- terms. - in failing to demand a fisheries or aquatic ecologist detailed exclusively to the Uintas to protect its stream values. The Forest Service has only this year obtained fisheries biologists assigned to many Forests. (Plenty of timber staff.) - in failing to work through interagency efforts (Forest Service, Fish S Game, Fish 6 Wildlife Service) at agreement on adequate stream flows until right now - and this is being done unofficially under my pushing-the whole C.U.P. issue. For years, the BuRec. has taken advantage of the divisiveness of the three agencies in refusing to deal with any! Each agency has its own study methodologies - and doesn't agree with those used by the other. Meanwhile the streams go down the drain! * The whole issue of mitigation is a game that has been played by the BurRec. Criteria has never been developed. See discussion following. These situations are the only ones I know about. What is only too apparent is the region wide failure of the Forest Service itself, to comprehend the value of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife and recreational resources Is has in this Rocky Mountain region. They are unique and irreplaceable.* (Wait 'til we get to the BLM!) It is a failure to appreciate what these resources mean economically and esthetically to the public and to try to protect their habitat management. The Forest Service in the region works against wilderness classification by informing State Fish £ Game staffs that wilderness designation^of areas will preclude necessary wildlife management practices. J"It makes professional research within proposed wilderness areas, extremely difficult to carry out. (Taylor Ranch Wilderness Study area, River of No Return Wilderness, Idaho) The name of the game in Region IV, U.S.Forest Service, is to knuckle under to consumptive development of timber, mineral and water resources- whatever the costs to other resources ;•• to consult with the States as to their economic needs as a prime determinant' in management decisions; and to sustairT"interbureaucratic manipulation of all public resources* While we are trying to deal with the Bureau of Reclamation and its overriding dominance - the Forest Service, itself, has promoted this dominance in failing to fight for its own responsibilities. Most recent publications on management of wildlife in wilderness are not being jointly explored by the Forest Service and the State Fish 8 Game. Research on management of wildlife in wilderness conditions is not being forwarded by the Forest Service. John Mumma, Director Wildlife Management, Region TV,^has now replaced a Range man. He is trying to upgrade wildlife staffs, funds and management. But what good is this if the direction of thinking of the Regional Forester is not radically changed! |
