Wildlife not in USFS charters

The US Forest Service was established to provide a perpetual supply of timber and wood products for the people of the United States, for buildings and construction and other purposes related to the USE of timber. No other purposes.

Yet, today, the preferred alternative to virtually all activities on the US Forests is "wildlife management and enhancement". Where is that in the founding charters?

Consider a forest with a million acres of timber that could be harvested (of various ages, so not all at once, of course).

At $2,500 per acre stumpage value that is @ $2.5 BILLION dollars of timber being, respectively, allowed to rot from disease and/or insect infestations, burned in wildfires, AND utterly risked as destroyed in out of control "prescribed burns" (ie, what used to be called CONTROLLED burns.

The one depicted in my attached image was "for elk habitat improvement", started in September and still not "controlled" or "dead out" (as is required of EVERYONE of non-government status around here).

It is time for you three delegates to each "congress" of the united States in America to do something more substantial than speak to such an issue for votes or campaign contributions. Please do so.

The tail is wagging the dog.

CONGRESS makes the laws. NOT the agencies. Not the UN. Not the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation or Duck Unlimited or the Sierra Club...

The fire depicted here was partially funded by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and DNRC (from what I was told by an anonymous source), and skirted (apparently) lawsuits in order to allow it - or are lawsuits not allowed for "prescriptions"? It is also discussed at length in this week's Sanders County Ledger, and the USFS makes it sound like the air quality we have today and for the past 10 days was "normal" - we were experiencing quite a dramatic shift to CLEAN air when the arsons rushed out within two days of the lifting of the fire restrictions placed on us "civilians". Why is the USFS allowed to commit arson, while if we do so - even on private land - we are subject to fines?

How is that "all legislative power herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States"? There is NOTHING in there about transferring law-making powers to NGOs and federal agencies. NOTHING.

Please look into this and other similar unlawful actions that seem to be the norm rather than the exception. Thank you for considering my comments. I remain, sincerely,

Jim Greaves

Thompson Falls MT