company caught illegaly cutting trees from national forest

[Jim]

Company fined for cutting trees in national forest
Thursday, September 18, 2003 Posted: 7:14 PM EDT (2314 GMT)

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/09/18/logging.settlement.ap/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Story Tools



COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) -- Officials of Plum Creek Timber Co. have
agreed to pay nearly $66,000 in restitution and a $1,000 fine for
allegedly illegally cutting millions of board feet of timber on the
Clearwater National Forest.

"We take this very seriously," said Tom Ray, the company's Northwest
Region general manager. "We have made changes in our system to prevent
this from happening again."




The Seattle, Washington-based company was cited last month with nearly
a dozen misdemeanor logging and other violations. It negotiated a plea
bargain under which it pleaded no contest to two charges of cutting or
damaging trees on federal land.

The Forest Service claimed that between June 2000 and October 2002,
independent loggers hired by Plum Creek strayed across property lines
and cut more than 1,100 trees -- nearly 88 million board feet -- on
Clearwater National Forest land adjacent to corporate land.

Regional Forester Kathleen McAllister said the agreement not only
compensates taxpayers for the timber but means "Plum Creek will change
its procedures and take the necessary steps to not cross property
lines."

A separate civil suit is pending against Plum Creek to recover the $12
million the federal government spent in 2000 to fight wildfires
allegedly started on Plum Creek land before spreading to federal land.

The company has maintained that its employees were not involved in
starting the fires.

But Doug Gochnour at the Clearwater National Forest said both the
company and the loggers it had hired are named in the suit.

"Somebody should pay because the public shouldn't," Gochnour said.

Investigators say the 275-acre Bear Camp fire started when a skidding
cable rubbing against rocks sent sparks into dry underbrush and the
4,800-acre Crooked fire ignited when a skyline hoist engine used to
pull logs up a slope spewed hot exhaust into a slash pile.

[Eric Lee Green]

In article >, Jim ruminated:
> COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) -- Officials of Plum Creek Timber Co. have
> agreed to pay nearly $66,000 in restitution and a $1,000 fine for
> allegedly illegally cutting millions of board feet of timber on the
> Clearwater National Forest.
....
> The Forest Service claimed that between June 2000 and October 2002,
> independent loggers hired by Plum Creek strayed across property lines
> and cut more than 1,100 trees -- nearly 88 million board feet -- on
> Clearwater National Forest land adjacent to corporate land.

Oh boy, given that this "fine" is less than half of what those trees
were worth on the open market, I'm sure that this is going to make
this company reluctant to sneak onto National Forest lands in the
future.

Yeah right.

--
Eric Lee Green


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Cranston Bellweather]

Most large companies incorporate such fines/penalties into their yearly
budgets . . . it's part of the game, and not surprising at all.


"Jim" > wrote in message
om...
> Company fined for cutting trees in national forest
> Thursday, September 18, 2003 Posted: 7:14 PM EDT (2314 GMT)
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/09/18/logging.settlement.ap/
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>
> Story Tools
>
>
>
> COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) -- Officials of Plum Creek Timber Co. have
> agreed to pay nearly $66,000 in restitution and a $1,000 fine for
> allegedly illegally cutting millions of board feet of timber on the
> Clearwater National Forest.
>
> "We take this very seriously," said Tom Ray, the company's Northwest
> Region general manager. "We have made changes in our system to prevent
> this from happening again."
>
>
>
>
> The Seattle, Washington-based company was cited last month with nearly
> a dozen misdemeanor logging and other violations. It negotiated a plea
> bargain under which it pleaded no contest to two charges of cutting or
> damaging trees on federal land.
>
> The Forest Service claimed that between June 2000 and October 2002,
> independent loggers hired by Plum Creek strayed across property lines
> and cut more than 1,100 trees -- nearly 88 million board feet -- on
> Clearwater National Forest land adjacent to corporate land.
>
> Regional Forester Kathleen McAllister said the agreement not only
> compensates taxpayers for the timber but means "Plum Creek will change
> its procedures and take the necessary steps to not cross property
> lines."
>
> A separate civil suit is pending against Plum Creek to recover the $12
> million the federal government spent in 2000 to fight wildfires
> allegedly started on Plum Creek land before spreading to federal land.
>
> The company has maintained that its employees were not involved in
> starting the fires.
>
> But Doug Gochnour at the Clearwater National Forest said both the
> company and the loggers it had hired are named in the suit.
>
> "Somebody should pay because the public shouldn't," Gochnour said.
>
> Investigators say the 275-acre Bear Camp fire started when a skidding
> cable rubbing against rocks sent sparks into dry underbrush and the
> 4,800-acre Crooked fire ignited when a skyline hoist engine used to
> pull logs up a slope spewed hot exhaust into a slash pile.

[Elliot Richmond]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:56:44 GMT, Tom > wrote:

>
>Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
>alt.law-enforcement.

Whining and griping is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it
to alt.stupid.jerk.

Elliot Richmond
Freelance Science Writer and Editor

[Svend Tang-Petersen]

Tom wrote:

> Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
> alt.law-enforcement.
>
> --
> Tom

Well, but the actions committed by companies and individuals which has
an effect on me being able to
find places to go persue my outdoor activities do have my interest.

The fines are amazingly small for something like this so whats going to
stop them for continuing ? The current administration ?

--

[Elliot Richmond]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:44:35 -0700, Svend Tang-Petersen
> wrote:

>Tom wrote:
>
>> Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
>> alt.law-enforcement.
>>
>> --
>> Tom
>
>Well, but the actions committed by companies and individuals which has
>an effect on me being able to
>find places to go persue my outdoor activities do have my interest.
>
>The fines are amazingly small for something like this so whats going to
>stop them for continuing ? The current administration ?

It is useless to reason with Tom. He is single-minded in pursuit of
his chosen vocation of self-appointed net nanny. The irony of the fact
that he has never posted anything on topic continually escapes him.

Elliot Richmond
Freelance Science Writer and Editor

[Svend Tang-Petersen]

Well, the good thing about all this is that he cant really prevent anyone
from posting in the first place.

Elliot Richmond wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:44:35 -0700, Svend Tang-Petersen
> > wrote:
>
> >Tom wrote:
> >
> >> Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
> >> alt.law-enforcement.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tom
> >
> >Well, but the actions committed by companies and individuals which has
> >an effect on me being able to
> >find places to go persue my outdoor activities do have my interest.
> >
> >The fines are amazingly small for something like this so whats going to
> >stop them for continuing ? The current administration ?
>
> It is useless to reason with Tom. He is single-minded in pursuit of
> his chosen vocation of self-appointed net nanny. The irony of the fact
> that he has never posted anything on topic continually escapes him.
>
> Elliot Richmond
> Freelance Science Writer and Editor

--

Svend

************************************************** *****************
Svend Tang-Petersen, MSc Email:
SGI Pager:
1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy Phone: (+1) 650 933 3618
Mountain View
California 94043
USA
************************************************** *****************

[Gary S.]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:01:05 GMT, Elliot Richmond
> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:44:35 -0700, Svend Tang-Petersen
> wrote:
>
>>Tom wrote:
>>
>>> Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
>>> alt.law-enforcement.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>
>>Well, but the actions committed by companies and individuals which has
>>an effect on me being able to
>>find places to go persue my outdoor activities do have my interest.
>>
>>The fines are amazingly small for something like this so whats going to
>>stop them for continuing ? The current administration ?
>
>It is useless to reason with Tom. He is single-minded in pursuit of
>his chosen vocation of self-appointed net nanny. The irony of the fact
>that he has never posted anything on topic continually escapes him.
>
Tom is very particular in who he tries to censor. It is not topics,
but people he doesn't like or agree with.

He especially goes after one side of the political-type posts, which
is far more political and off-topic than any of them.

Totalitarians, from the left and from the right, despise open
discussions.

And, he tries to hide by changing his address to foil filters, and
thinking he hides his posts from Google.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

[Frank Looper]

"Gary S." <Idontwantspam@net> wrote in message
...

> And, he tries to hide by changing his address to foil filters, and
> thinking he hides his posts from Google.

And that's his secong most frustrating habit (Citizen's arrest, citezen's
arrest! You posted off-topic! I'm gonna get you TOSed!)

> Happy trails,
> Gary (net.yogi.bear)

Frank

[[email protected]]

Precisely why there is an ELF, Earth First! and a direction action
network. The Feds pat the perps on the back, enabling and encouraging
their behaivor. Someone has to put a stop to it.

On 22 Sep 2003 23:15:51 -0700, (Jim) wrote:

>Company fined for cutting trees in national forest
>Thursday, September 18, 2003 Posted: 7:14 PM EDT (2314 GMT)
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Southwest/09/18/logging.settlement.ap/
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

In article >,
Tom > wrote:

>Law enforcement is not an outdoor recreational activity. Take it to
>alt.law-enforcement.

Do you really think you can do anything about what they want to
post here? Hint: you can't.