Below is a copy of the Friends' letter to U.S. Senate candidate Norm Coleman, urging him to reverse his position and oppose logging trees felled during the 1999 blowdown in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
October 1, 2002
Mr. Norm Coleman
Coleman for U.S. Senate
1410 Energy Park Drive #11
Energy Park Plaza
St. Paul, MN 55108
Dear Mr. Coleman:
On behalf of the board and staff of the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, I urge you to reverse your position and oppose removal of trees felled by the 1999 blowdown in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW).
While the Friends commends you for opposing snowmobiles, more motor boats, and general logging in the wilderness, your support for logging trees felled in the blowdown is troubling and confusing.
During a September 19 visit to Ely, you said "in Minnesota, we're blessed with incredible resources and we should be able to sustain them for generations to come . . ." Our organization agrees with this view. Unfortunately, your support for temporary logging of the blowdown in the wilderness will not "sustain" this resource for future generations. Rather, the BWCAW will become marred with logging roads, stump-dotted ridges, and truck and chainsaw noise.
The Friends' opposition to logging of the blowdown is rooted in preserving the alluring features of the wilderness: peace and quiet. The Boundary Waters is a unique destination where 200,000 people annually escape the noise and chaos of their lives. To introduce chainsaws, trucks, and other equipment would discourage visitors from returning to the area's pristine lakes.
Moreover, there is no entity asking to remove this timber. The logging industry is not calling for removal of the trees in the BWCAW, stating after the blowdown that accessing fallen trees in the wilderness is treacherous and expensive and that the now rotten wood is of little market value. The financial gains of logging in the wilderness would be meager and fail to offset the revenue lost from canoeists, bird watchers, anglers, hunters, and cross-country skiers who are offended by the resulting noise and permanently take their hobbies and check books elsewhere.
While you assert that logging of the blowdown is necessary to reduce the fire hazard in the Boundary Waters, better solutions exist. The best way to protect homes and communities on the edge of the wilderness from fire is to clear brush and small trees (those with diameters of less than three inches) within a one-third mile radius of any structure. This practice prevents fires from engulfing homes and requires considerably less time and money. In addition, the U.S. Forest Service is already conducting prescribed burns in the wilderness, which will significantly reduce fire risk on 75,000 acres.
I hope you will consider these arguments and promptly issue a statement opposing logging of blowdown areas in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
Sincerely,
/s/
Sean Wherley
Policy and Education Coordinator