I thought this article provided a succinct overview of the state of salvage logging in California. I was curious about what kind of a logging project the Center for Biological Diversity and local environmental groups were supporting.
Table 11 in the ROD shows that the tribal alternative they supported would harvest about 2000 acres. The selected alternative would log three times that. Why did the Forest Service pick the latter over the former?
“As shown in Table 12 (sic), there is considerable overlap between the Karuk Alternative and the Selected Alternative;”
Did the FS miss the obvious point here? That the magnitude of the project is the problem because it would affect water quality and salmon runs? (Or is this what “pound sand” means?)
It was also interesting to read the earlier letter from the Karuk Tribe chairman that describes the tribal interest in prescribed fires. I wonder if the Forest Service has considered managing the historic tribal lands for “production of acorns, wild game, medicinal plants and basketry materials,” among its multiple uses.