Thread: Bush Admin. Wants to sell off NC Pisgah Forest Land

Being the nature lover I am, this is just very upsetting to me! This land is NATIONAL FOREST LAND that is supposed to be protected from development. I think NC citizens are going to be really pi**ed about this. I found out about this last night for the first time while visiting friends in Cherokee, NC. I think these a**holes are going to try to make room for more housing developments.
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs. ... 20327/1001

For sale: National forest land
Bush administration proposes selling tracts in N.C., 33 other states
by Doug Abrahms, STAFF WRITER
published February 12, 2006 6:00 am
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration said Friday it wants to sell thousands of acres of federal forest land to aid rural schools, but critics say the plan is an unprecedented auction of public lands.

Advertisement
The Forest Service is considering selling 300,000 acres of land in North Carolina and 33 other states, although the final amount will run about 175,000 acres, said Mark Rey, Agriculture Department undersecretary.

The agency expects to raise $800 million over five years with the sale.

"The parcels ... are isolated, expensive to manage and no longer meeting national Forest Service needs," he said. "We'll revise the list one more time before transmitting it to Congress."

In North Carolina, the Forest Service proposed selling 9,828 acres. That breaks down to 3,835 acres in the Nantahala National Forest; 2,780 acres in the Pisgah National Forest; 2,317 in the Uwharrie National Forest; and 895 acres in the Croatan National Forest, the Southern Environmental Law Center in Chapel Hill said. Land parcels range in size from less than an acre to 561 acres.

North Carolina's four national forests cover 1.25 million acres.

Terry Seyden, spokesman for North Carolina's national forests, could not be reached for comment Friday.

Christopher Joyell, campaign coordinator for the Asheville-based Southern Appalachian Biodiversity Project, said he had few details about the proposal. But he said it seemed to be another step in the Bush administration's effort to move public lands into private hands.

"We've just seen a trend of commercialization of public lands," he said.

Conservationists and some Democratic lawmakers called the sale unprecedented and said the federal government was auctioning off public lands to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Nationally, many of the tracts are in Tahoe, Sequoia, Bridger-Teton and other well-known national forests.

"In my view, selling public lands to pay down the deficit would be a short-sighted, ill-advised and irresponsible shift in federal land management policy," said Sen. Jeff Bingaman, the top Democrat on the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee. "Our public lands are a legacy for future generations. We shouldn't liquidate that legacy."

The Forest Service plans on reviewing the plan for 30 days before sending it to Congress, which could approve, modify or reject it.

The proceeds from the land sales would fund a federal program that provides money to rural counties for schools and roads. Previously, that money came from the general treasury and timber sales, which have fallen off in recent years.

The majority of payments go to Oregon, Washington state and California although communities and counties in 34 states receive some money.

Joyell said his environmental organization believes a balance can be struck to aid rural areas.

"Public lands provide a valuable reservoir of biodiversity. We consider people to be part of that biodiversity," he said.

Rey said many of the tracts lie outside federal forest boundaries and in some cases are surrounded by private land owners. The agency put information on its Web site about the tracts to be auctioned off to make it an open process, he said.

He also noted the Forest Service purchases at least 100,000 acres a year from conservation funds and that will offset the agency's land sales in two years.

The Bureau of Land Management has sold land around Las Vegas and used the money to buy other environmentally sensitive properties in Nevada, said Nicole Anzia of the Wilderness Society, a conservation group. And last year the Forest Service sold off a small amount of land, she said.

"But this sale of forest service land is unprecedented," she said. "I just don't think the American public will go along."

Staff writer Ellyn Ferguson contributed to this report.

Over the past 25 years, they have sold chunks of the Croatan as well. And it wouldn't bother me nearly as much if these vast chunks of forest land weren't going to wind up somehow giving illegal aliens more places to live in our land. Regardless of who buys the forest land, and it will probably be major developers building housing tracts if it is any ways like it has been in Carteret, Craven and Jones counties, there will be land or houses vacated as a result. When people start shuffling around, illegals get a toehold.

If you go on e-Bay and look at land for sale you will see hundreds of acres in West TX, AZ, NM and CA. Much of that land sits on the border and much of that land is being bought up by-- guess who?

Conservationists and some Democratic lawmakers called the sale unprecedented and said the federal government was auctioning off public lands to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

It would not surprise me a bit if this is true

JuniusJnr, I think they may be making more room for the millons of illegals jumping our borders. My husband is a carpenter and works nearly every day in the mountains of Wautaga County, NC. There are so many expensive homes(I'm talking millon dollar homes) being built there right now and the owners are driving long distances to get to work, moving out of the towns and cities(where the illegals are invading so heavily). My grandfather owned over 300 acres in Wautaga County and sold the land for $50 an acre back in the 1940's. Back then, the rugged terrain made the land almost useless. Today, the same land he owned, now sells lots at $250,000 plus dollars each! So, we know who is buying these houses and lots, the wealthy! They are gonna get away from the MS-13 gangs and the illegal invaders, even at that price, and live in a house hanging off the side of a mountain. Yes, I'm afraid they are making room for invaders

RR, I'm familiar with the area. I have a son, a sister, and a nephew up in that "neck of the woods." From what I can gather, there are even illegals wandering up that way trying to take advantage of the homeless shelters and soup kitchens now. Are they taking construction jobs? I know that they are taking jobs as framing carpenters, laborers, roofers, etc. down east. I guess they got tired of shelling oysters and clams and moved on to bigger and better things

Yep, Junius. It's mostly illegals who are building these new houses in the mountains. Illegals have taken most of the construction jobs here, for sure. There are alot working on the tree farms, too!

From Asheboro (Randolph Co), NC

http://www.courier-tribune.com/articles ... ws/gn1.txt

Forest land sell plan draws fire

By Mary Anderson -- Staff Writer, The Courier-Tribune
Posted: 03/11/06 - 10:56:42 pm CST

ASHEBORO — The president’s proposal to sell parcels of national forests and public lands to benefit rural schools has met with resounding opposition from across the country, especially in North Carolina.

The proposal — aimed at continuing Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act funding for another five years — hits close to home in Randolph and Montgomery counties.

In the two counties, over 2,300 acres of the Uwharrie National Forest have been identified for sale by the Bureau of Land Management.

In the Uwharrie Forest, one plot of 117 acres in Davidson County would be up for sale, eight parcels in Randolph County totaling 827.6 acres and 22 parcels totaling 1,372.5 acres in Montgomery County.

“People I have talked to are absolutely astounded that the federal government wants to sell off forest land when we are working our butts off at the state level to gather more green space,” said N.C. Rep. Pryor Gibson (D-District 29). “No one I have spoken to thinks this is a good idea.”

In 2000, the N.C. Legislature passed legislation calling for protection and preservation of an additional one million acres of open space within 10 years, including forest land.

N.C. Sen. Jerry Tillman (R-District 16) said he doesn’t like the idea.

“This is a short-term, short-sighted solution to a long term problem. If we sell this land, it’s gone forever and our national forests are treasures to be preserved,” Tillman said

Dr. David Jones, director of the N.C. Zoo in Randolph County, told The Charlotte Observer, “It just goes against what common sense tells you needs to happen. Instead of selling off land, they need to be stitching it up.”
Several parcels marked for sale are in the pristine watershed and rare plant communities on Little River and along the Birkhead Mountains Wilderness area. One tract is across the road from the N.C. Zoo.

Montgomery County officials heard about the proposal at a joint governmental meeting in February and unanimously expressed their opposition to selling any part of the Uwharrie National Forest.

In a letter to Congressman Robin Hayes, Montgomery County manager Lance Metzler wrote: “The Uwharrie National Forest is this region’s biggest attraction. We have lost many textile and hosiery industries to cheaper production abroad. Our revenue basis has been literally ripped apart. We depend on our tourism and the only tourist attraction we have is the lakes and the national forest.”

Local rangers and general store owners near the forest trailheads and campgrounds report that 10,000 visitors is about average for a weekend.

Rep. Hayes wrote the USDA Forest Service in a public comment. In his letter, Hayes passed along the local worry about the negative impact the sale could have on the county.

“The Uwharrie National Forest is a key component for economic development in the region and many of the localities depend on tourism that is thriving due to the pristine forest,” Hayes wrote.

Hayes also wrote President Bush reiterating that the forest is a “vital component for economic development” and stating his opposition to cutting almost five percent of the Uwharrie National Forest, the largest proportion of acreage of any forest in the state.

The 15,000 acres earmarked for sale in the Uwharrie, Croatan, Pisgah and Nantahala National Forests takes more forestland from North Carolina than any other Southeastern state.

USDA officials have not given any criteria for choosing the parcels to sell. The Federal Register on Feb. 28 says the parcels generally meet the criteria traditionally used by the Forest Service to identify lands suitable for sale or exchange — parcels that are not contiguous to the forest system or because of their location, size or configuration are not efficient to manage. The Register also says that many of the identified parcels have not been inventoried for natural or cultural resources.

Conservationists point out that large sections, such as the hundred-plus acre tracts in Randolph County, are necessary for wildlife habitat away from the thousands of people in the forest proper. Also, the scattered parcels have traditionally been used by the Forest Service to trade for land contiguous to the national forests.

Thomas Sheriff of Asheboro helped cut and mark many of the trails in the Uwharrie Forest, back in his really-active hiking days, he said. Sheriff said he would like to see the forest preserved and protected as much as possible.

“I wish the people in Randolph and Montgomery counties truly understood what a resource we have here — the very large growth trees in the Birkheads, the panoramic views from mountain tops. The beauty of this forest is just remarkable.”

Mike Chisholm, an avid hiker from Asheboro, said he is against the sale, not only in North Carolina, but nationwide.

“The forest has some of the last mountaintop land in the country. We have developed a lot of mountain tops, and as the saying goes, they aren’t making any more. We can’t afford to lose acreage,” Chisholm said. “We should be buying more land to consolidate the forest lands.”

Opposition has come from Democrats, Republicans, environmentalists, outdoor recreation clubs, campers, conservationists and everyday people. Politicians from the Western states, which stand to benefit most, have spoken against selling off public lands. California Rep. George Miller said the idea to sell off national forests to fund rural schools “is just ludicrous in a nation this wealthy.”

Colorado Rep. Mark Udall said the proposal was “like selling your homestead to pay your credit cards.”

David Carr, public lands director for the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), said selling off America’s natural heritage is not the way to fund government services and would set a dangerous precedent for years to come.

“We need to be adding to the public-land base in the South, not holding a bake sale on bits and pieces of our limited national forests for short-term budget needs. By most measures, we’re the fastest growing region in the country. Sprawl development is getting worse, while demand for backcountry recreation is increasing.” Carr said

According to an analysis by SELC, the proposal is skewed against the South. Only about 10 percent of the proceeds would go toward rural schools in the South and Midwest, the two regions where more than a third of the sales of 300,000-plus acres would occur,

More than a quarter of the $800 million the administration plans to raise by selling national forest land would benefit rural schools in Washington and Oregon, though just 6 percent of the sales would occur in those forest-rich states.

An example from the SELC analysis: North Carolina has a total of 1.25 million acres of national forest. Oregon has a total of 15.55 million acres. Both states have about 10,000 acres proposed for sale. Under the funding formula currently used, North Carolina would get $1 million and Oregon would get almost $163 million.

There has been some scattered support for the land sale. Bob Scott of Columbia, S.C. and president of the S.C. Forestry Association, wrote in The Myrtle Beach, S.C., Sun Times, that the sale “represents a prudent use of our resources.”

In a press release from the USDA, Agriculture Forestry Subcommittee chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) sponsor of the bill to extend the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 1999, said, “By shoring up federal payments to rural forest communities, this legislation restores our government’s commitment to education in rural forest communities.”

Goodlatte said this money will come to the school districts with no strings attached and local schools could decide how to spend it.

“This philosophy of federal support coupled with local decision-making should be a model for the Congress as we work to improve education in our country,” Goodlatte said.

Contact staff writer Mary Anderson at 626-6116 or email her at.

thanks for that article, had_enuf. i sent some emails earlier tonight to my representives asking them what their views are on this subject.

What would President Bush care about this for....he has his nature area protected in Crawford, Tx..

Nature is only reserved for those who can afford it; they deserve it and the rest of US can live in a concrete managerie and BE QUIET.

sooooooo true, legal!!!!!!!!!!!!