In my effort to follow, and hopefully help keep a lousy bill from becoming a lousy law, I decided I'd try to find out who were actually friends of the outdoors. House bill 2006 would stop all clear cutting on state lands, eliminating a valuable management tool, and I have a hard time believing that any conservation organization would be in favor of it. To be in favor of such a measure would be turning a blind eye to science, management practices, and the needs of many species dependent on early growth successional forest. Surely the Mass Audubon would not support such a thing. Well, it seems Mass Audubon may be a wolf in sheep's clothing. Here is the e-mail I sent them:
I am writing to request a statement on Mass Audubon's Position
concerning Mass bill H2006, An Act Prohibitting Clear Cutting In State
Forests And Parks. I would imagine Mass Audubon would be reluctant to support a bill that would take away a management tool from those tasked with managing and balancing our forests, especially when it would affect such a large variety of vertebrate. It is my position that some amount of clear cutting is essential to create the early growth successional forest needed to have a balanced healthy forest. I do not advocate whole sale clear cutting, but believe management cuts are nessecary to ensure species dependent on early growth successional forests do not decline.
Thank you for taking time out of your busy day to endulge my request. I look forward to your reply.
Here is their reply:
Dear Mr. Rich,
Thank you for your inquiry regarding House Bill 2006, An Act Prohibiting Clear Cutting in State Forests and Parks. Around 6,000 bills are filed each session and only a handful become law. Mass Audubon has not taken a formal position on this bill, but we have fully articulated our thoughts and recommendations regarding forestry practices on state lands in the attached position statement and letter to the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Both have been shared with the environment committee which heard HB2006 and other forestry bills. The letter to DFW discusses in detail the issue you raise below regarding habitat management. The bill is not consistent with our position and we do not support this legislation.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Heidi Ricci, Senior Policy Analyst, or Jen Ryan, our legislative director, are also available to discuss further. They are copied on this email.
President, Mass Audubon
Here is one of the links Mass Audubon supplied:
I was unable to find paste the other link, but it says essentially the same thing.
Unfortunately, though Mass Audubon states they do not support the bill, reading their position statements, and many of their other advocacy positions, it seems as though they are really not big fans of any forestry, and are more concerned with preservation than conservation.
They can be reached through their website: