Editor’s note: This caught my eye, out of a Pennsylvania newspaper. Note especially the article’s final paragraph, which offers a perspective on SRS I don’t think I’ve heard before — namely that it was the feds who were provided with some time to reform via SRS:
“Secure Rural Schools was never intended to be a long-term solution to the fact that the policies of the federal government are crippling the communities that house our national forests,” Hetrick said. “Instead, it was meant to provide time for the federal government to seek solutions to the problems being caused by their policies, which has not happened.”
KANE — Claims made at last month’s McKean County Commissioners meeting by Bill Belitskus of Lantz Corners about the U.S. Forest Service’s Secure Rural Schools program as a higher yield alternative to the 25 percent payments municipalities receive through the 1908 Good Neighbor Compact caused a ruckus in area forestry circles, but were those’ claims unfounded?
At last month’s meeting, Belitskus stated Hamlin Township lost $230,000 by selecting to receive 25 percent payments instead of choosing Secure Rural Schools. He claimed Forest County received $1.3 million by opting for Secure Rural Schools — the approximate same amount Elk, McKean and Warren counties had combined using the 25 percent payments.