MORATORIUM NOT NEEDED ON TIMBER-CUTTING ISSUE

The Shawnee National Forest in Southern Illinois is a place of great natural beauty. It is also a place of uncommon and ongoing contention. Groups concerned with the environment have chosen the forest as a place to make their stand against timber cutting. Their objections are reasonable opposition up to the point where laws have been broken. Now, U.S. Rep. Glenn Poshard has called for a one-year moratorium on timber cutting in the forest. Absent general procrastination, we believe this call adds nothing to the debate and serves no real purpose.

Timber-cutting efforts in Shawnee National Forest are being directed by a Missouri firm, East Perry Lumber Co. of Frohna. This company has shown itself to be a responsible steward of natural resources. We emphasize that last word. Critical to the understanding of this issue is the fact that timber is a renewable resource; mankind can use this resource and, through proper management, replenish it for future generations. Trees stood and survived on this planet long before special interest groups developed to speak about their best interest; in other words, trees are more durable than arguments being presented in their behalf.

Understand too that the forest in Southern Illinois, despite the outrage being expressed, is not being leveled. Logging will take place on less than 200 acres of forest land; there are 267,000 acres in Shawnee National Forest. The methods used for cutting have the approval of the National Forest Service. Even if East Perry Lumber had a track record of violating timber land (it does not), the microscope-like attention focused on this tract would make it impossible for the company to deviate from approved cutting methods. Contrast that accountability with the no-holds-barred tactics of those protesting the cutting.

Poshard says he favors a moratorium of one year so the environmental and economic "soundness" of timber harvesting can be debated. Our view is that the issue has been debated, has been adjudicated in federal court and that a suspension of logging would not resolve the misgivings of protestors, who want no trees cut now or ever.

We do not doubt the sincerity of environmental groups protesting in Shawnee National Forest, though we might question the zeal with which they approach their efforts. We do not accuse Rep. Poshard of cynicism for indulging these groups, for he is unfailingly forthright in defending the best interests of his district. We differ with his view, however, that a moratorium would have a more fruitful outcome. The delay would only prolong the furor.