Can’t See the Bush Policy for the Forests

I was baffled by President Bush’s proposal to prevent forest fires by cutting down trees in fire-prone areas (“Bush to Seek Wider Power on Forest-Thinning Plan,” Aug. 22). Isn’t that like shooting someone in the heart to prevent a heart attack? My husband is a firefighter. He and his colleagues are capable of putting out fires if they need to. They don’t need people chopping down trees to prevent forest fires any more than they need people chopping down houses to prevent house fires. They just need people to show some common sense. With this current administration, that’s what we all need.

Joyce Stenberg

Irvine

*

At every opportunity the Bush administration has rolled back environmental protections in favor of big business. The president’s forest-thinning program is more of the same. Brush and small trees in the forest do need to be cleared, especially in areas where human life and property may be threatened. But the only reason to allow the cutting of fire-resistant old growth is to open the door to runaway logging in areas now protected.

Bush’s and Interior Secretary Gale Norton’s degradation of long-agreed-on environmental rules can’t possibly be what the majority of voters wanted when he was selected president and probably offends many who voted for him as well. There are plenty of reasons to choose from, but the Republican assault on the environment should be reason enough for voters to oppose his shortsighted policies.

Neil Reichline

Sherman Oaks