P.O. Box 1071
Knoxville, TN 37901
December 1, 1999
Dear Ms. Zimmerman:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Cherokee National Management plan. The Kentucky-Tennessee Society of the Society of American Foresters (KTSAF) represents over 400 professional foresters and natural resource managers in Kentucky and Tennessee whose mission is to advance the science, education, technology and practice of forestry to ensure the continued health and use of forest ecosystems to benefit society. We are the professional scientific and educational association representing the profession of forestry.
Our concern with Alternative 1 of the proposed management plan is two-fold: (1) the elimination of high quality forest products as an emphasis area and (2) the arbitrary setting aside of 4 percent of the forest in early successional habitat.
Forest products is one of the multiple-uses of the forest established in the National Forest Management Act of 1976. Forest harvests are designed to incorporate multiple stewardship objectives, including insect and disease prevention and control, wildlife habitat management, fuels treatment and construction or maintenance of roads needed for longer term access. The present Cherokee plan allocates more than 50 percent of the forest in wilderness areas, inaccessible areas or scenic areas where timber harvesting is prohibited. A further decrease in the amount of land available for vegetation management is unacceptable for the continued health and prosperity of the forest. National forests should be the model for demonstrating how forests should be managed for multiple values, including timber products, wildlife, recreation, water, and scenic values. Forest management including timber is not only compatible with good ecosystem management, it is one of the most effective tools available to insure the sustainability of healthy ecosystems.
KTSAF – Cherokee Plan Response Page 2
Dec. 1, 1999
The 4 percent of the area allocated to early successional habitat also seems out of balance for the long-term health of the forest. We ask how this percentage was arrived at and the reasoning. The current plan allocates 10 to 15 percent in early successional habitat. Biodiversity of both plants and animals will suffer without more early successional habitat. The forest needs a full range of ages and species to insure biodiversity and sustainability. Otherwise, these goals also could be compromised.
Lastly, we are concerned about the rural economies of communities adjacent to the forest. How has the forest benefited the communities of Benton, Etowah, Greeneville, Mountain City and Elizabethton in recent years? Our opinion is that the service industry associated with tourism does not provide the economic development and the year around, higher paying jobs with benefits that forest industry can provide. The Cherokee National Forest should insure that a stable sustainable supply of timber is available to these areas. The proposed Alternative 1 does not.
We appreciate this opportunity to comment on the proposed management plan. We look forward to a continuing dialogue in the planning process for the best management of the Cherokee National Forest.
Sincerely,
Wayne K. Clatterbuck
Policy Chair
Kentucky-Tennessee Society of American Foresters