Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Oppose
SB592
To the Editor:
This is in response to the John Marocchi letter Dec. 25 concerning SB592. He would have you support a new state lavM^bverride local control over forestry activities and make forestry regulation uniform. Further he feels that county governments should regulate only for public health and safety and not for visual impact. Wow! Upside-down or inside-out?
1. Visual impact is what distinguishes Rappahannock County from all others east of the mountains.
2. He shows a blatent contempt for the very values that keep and attract folks here.
3. Democracy begins at the local level. We have lost many freedoms by elevating lawmaking to the state or federal levels. (USSR ?)
4. Visual impact is properly our local responsiability. General Assembly members from Fairfax or Virginia Beach should not determine our future.
5. Forestry practices in Rappahannock are not regulated locally. Best management practices are merely encouraged rather than required.
6. Rappahannock may well consider restricting timber harvest to mature trees rather than clear-cutting on our highly visible slopes.
7. SB592 is for developers who want to clear-cut and call it agricultural production. Ask Sen. Miller and Del. Katzen to vote against SB592.
PHIL IRWIN
Flint Hill
91.8%