Conservation groups initiate legal action over trespass livestock grazing in Valles Caldera National Preserve

About 100 private cattle have been chronically trespassing into Valles Caldera National Preserve in the Jemez Mountains of northern New Mexico for years.

For years, cattle have illegally entered the Valles Caldera National Preserve from neighboring U.S. Forest Service grazing allotments, damaging riparian areas and important wildlife habitat. As one public lands advocate points out below, “Livestock trampling riparian areas of these protected lands has gone on far too long with federal land managers doing too little to stop it.”

Seems like this is example of a “hot potato” being passed between the National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service. This week, conservation groups—including the organization I work for—initiated legal action over trespass livestock grazing in Valles Caldera National Preserve. Below is the press release and link to the notice of intent to sue.

SANTA FENEW MEXICO—WildEarth Guardians, Western Watersheds Project, and Caldera Action today filed a notice of intent to sue the National Park Service over Endangered Species Act violations related to illegal livestock grazing in the Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) in the Jemez Mountains of northern New Mexico.

The Valles Caldera was set aside as a National Preserve to protect its unique ecosystems, headwaters, and thriving elk herds. For years, cattle have illegally entered the VCNP from neighboring Forest Service grazing allotments, causing damage to streams, riparian areas, and important wildlife habitat. Despite public outcry from a spectrum of public land users, the Park Service has failed to address the issue.

In his October 2021 confirmation hearing, Park Service Director Charles “Chuck” Sams III promised New Mexico’s Senior Senator Martin Heinrich; “I am committed to figuring a way to ensure that there are no trespass issues.” So far, this promise has gone unfulfilled as over 100 cattle have been documented in the VCNP meadows for most of the past summer.

“I feel a deep sense of betrayal” said Madeleine Carey, Southwest Conservation Manager for WildEarth Guardians. “We were promised this persistent issue would be dealt with and if anything, things have gotten worse. No one from the Park Service has responded to our emails about the cows this summer.”

Even the New Mexico Livestock Board agrees the issue needs attention. In June 2019, NMLB passed a unanimous motion to hold a meeting with the Park Service to develop a solution. Still, the issue of trespass persists. As recently as October 8th, dozens of cattle were spotted in the Valle San Antonio and Valle Toledo, an area closed to cattle grazing under NPS regulations.

“We worked for years with others to get the Valles Caldera into the National Park System because the Park Service has the highest standards of land protection of any federal agency,” said Tom Ribe, Executive Director of Caldera Action, a nonprofit focused on the Jemez Mountains. “We trusted they would protect the Caldera from all sorts of possible damage. They closed the majority of the Preserve to cattle grazing but then looked the other way while cows flooded in across vandalized and damaged fences. We have no idea why the management doesn’t respond to this blatant trespass. It is not consistent with Park Service policies.”

At the beginning of the grazing season in May, volunteers documented the condition of the northern boundary fence between National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service lands. Much of the boundary fence was laying on the ground, cut, or otherwise rendered inoperable. Though the National Park Service has replaced miles of fence, vandalism, tree-falls, and aging fencing continue to allow cattle trespass.

By federal contract, U.S. Forest Service permitted ranchers are not allowed to graze outside of their specific grazing leases. The Forest Service does not enforce the terms of these contracts when the cattle trespass on National Park System lands.

“Livestock trampling riparian areas of these protected lands has gone on far too long with federal land managers doing too little to stop it,” said Cyndi Tuell, Arizona and New Mexico director of Western Watersheds Project. Livestock entering the VCNP have been documented by the Park Service and Forest Service since at least 2017. “It’s frustrating that the Park Service is breaking its promise to New Mexicans to protect the natural resources in Valles Caldera and has let this situation fester for more than five years. Species on the brink of extinction like the Jemez Mountain salamander need swift action, not agency foot-dragging.”

Photos for media use are available here.

The Greater Gila teaches us that worlds are sometimes forged in flame

The Greater Gila, born in fire. Photo by Leia Barnett/WildEarth Guardians.

[This is a guest post by Leia Barnett, WildEarth Guardians’ Greater Gila New Mexico Advocate.]

There is a collection of poetry by Indonesian American poet Cynthia Dewi Oka titled Fire is Not a Country. I stumble across it while searching for poems about fire. I search for poems about fire because I’ve just been to the Greater Gila where, in all its dynamic unfolding, fire most certainly is a country, is Gila country. I want words that express such a force, lines to describe the wild paradox of destruction and regeneration that come in a fire-affected landscape. Alas, Dewi Oka does not explore such natural regimes; hers are wrenching descriptions of migration, familial love and obligation, political repression, and resistance. And while each human drama could be woven into a metaphor for the processes of the natural world, I’d rather not reach so far. I think the country of fire possesses lessons that apply to life in a different way.

Go to the Greater Gila and you will come away with fire in your eyes, fire in your heart. There is nowhere you can venture within the forest that does not bear the scars of fire. It is the breath and the wind and the soil of the landscape. It is the hand that shapes the tree and the river and the grass. Fire and its aftermath pervade even the loneliest mountain top, the darkest drainage, the rocky outcropping where the she-wolf dens, the mesa top where a bevy of Montezuma quail bed down. You cannot turn away from it. But in your forced witnessing, you discover something magic.

In her poem The Fire, Katie Ford writes:

When a human is asked about a particular fire,
she comes close:
then it is too hot,
so she turns her face–

and that’s when the forest of her bearable life appears,
Always on the other side of the fire.

In the forests of the Greater Gila, I think about what ecologists call disturbance events, the drivers of ecological dynamics that, when taken cumulatively, dictate biodiversity by influencing important structures and processes on the landscape. Like forests, we humans, both individually and as a collective, experience our own disturbance events: the birth of a child, the death of a loved one, political revolutions, wars, pandemics. And similarly, those events are often the drivers of transformative change. But when the fire is too hot, the change too painful, we also often turn our face and look to the forest of our “bearable life,” where our experience takes a more recognizable shape.

Yet our turning away does not smother the fire. It is the same irrational response as a child putting her hands over her face to hide from the monster right in front of her. The hillsides above Willow Creek are devoid of trees save a smattering of charred trunks. I feel exposed and discomfited in their presence. But when I resist the urge to turn my face, when I slow down and look and listen, a different story unveils itself, one of life in a different form. More species of grasses than I can give count to, various leguminous bushes, bugs, birds, and beetles. I think, “Perhaps this is the bearable life, the one that perdures and even thrives in the aftermath of the burn.”

In the Gila, I wonder, what does fire ask of us? Over the summer, we experienced the two largest wildfires in state history burning simultaneously. We grieved and wrung our hands and wondered if our forests would ever be the same. But the thing is, our ideas of sameness are fallacies we’ve created in service of some familiar “bearable life.” The discomfort of the disturbance and uncertainty of the world has led us to fabricate a form of stasis that doesn’t suit a resilient self, a resilient ecosystem, a resilient planet. In our quest for control, we’ve perpetuated stagnation, not to mention genocide, theft, and violent disposession. The Greater Gila teaches us that worlds are sometimes forged in flame. That change often requires us to look at the landscape through a new lens. That life is more resilient than perhaps we give her credit for, and therefore, by design, we are too.

Ford concludes:

You will not know all about the fire
simply because you asked.
When she speaks of the forest
this is what she is teaching you,

you who thought you were her master.

I do not know all about the fire simply because I asked. But I make a promise to the forest to listen when she speaks. And to disclaim the myth of mastery. This is what she is teaching us.

The Greater Gila teaches us that worlds are sometimes forged in flame. Photo by Leia Barnett/WildEarth Guardians.

Leia Barnett is the Greater Gila New Mexico Advocate for WildEarth Guardians

Petition urges Forest Service to mandate carnivore coexistence measures in its grazing program

WildEarth Guardians has submitted an Administration Procedures Act petition for rulemaking to create a national framework for management of conflicts between livestock and native carnivores on National Forest System lands. Below is the press release with additional information, including a link to the actual APA petition.

 

WildEarth Guardians to Forest Service: Stop allowing killing of tens of thousands of native carnivores

Petition urges U.S. Forest Service to fulfill its legal obligation to mandate carnivore coexistence measures in its grazing program, saving wolves, bears, and other carnivores from slaughter

MISSOULA, MONTANA—WildEarth Guardians has called on the U.S. Forest Service to incorporate wildlife-livestock conflict mitigation measures into its grazing program on over 70 million acres to protect native carnivores from death due to conflicts with privately owned livestock on public lands.

Retaliatory killing of carnivores in response to livestock conflicts—including the mere presence of a carnivore in the vicinity of livestock—is a leading cause of death for species including wolves, grizzly bears, and coyotes. WildEarth Guardians filed a petition to fundamentally change that paradigm, protecting native carnivores’ inherent right to exist on federal public lands.

The Forest Service is legally obligated to mitigate the threat that livestock grazing poses to native carnivores. Currently, however, the Forest Service permits taxpayer-subsidized livestock grazing on 74-million acres of land that it manages—including in prime wildlife habitat—without any binding, enforceable conflict reduction measures in place. When conflicts ensue, carnivores die. The federal government kills tens of thousands of native carnivores every year, killing over 68,000 in 2021 alone, many in response to reported or suspected livestock-carnivore conflicts, and many others are killed preemptively before conflicts occur. And the federal government slaughter figures tell only a portion of the story. In national forests across the American West, state entities and hired contractors are also brought in to kill wolves and other carnivores in response to livestock conflicts.

“The Forest Service has both the legal authority and responsibility to create a proactive, science-based national grazing management framework that prevents these conflicts,” said Lizzy Pennock, carnivore coexistence advocate at WildEarth Guardians. “The agency should take this opportunity to prioritize carnivore coexistence with livestock instead of continuing to rely on its outdated grazing program, which too often results in the retaliatory shooting, poisoning, and strangling of carnivores in their native habitats.”

Wolf-livestock conflicts in Washington State provide an example of how this plays out on the ground. The Forest Service permits livestock grazing in most of the densely forested, rugged terrain that comprises the Colville National Forest. Conflicts between livestock and wolves occur here year after year, and yet the Forest Service has not made any changes to its livestock management to accommodate gray wolves expanding into their historic territory. Over 90% of wolves killed statewide in Washington between 2012 and early 2021 were killed in response to claims of predations on privately owned livestock permitted by the Forest Service in the Colville National Forest.

“For far too long, the Forest Service has simply thrown up its hands and said ‘not it’ when it came to accepting responsibility for the obliteration of wolf packs on federally-managed public land,” said Lindsay Larris, wildlife program director at WildEarth Guardians. “The Forest Service is responsible for creating this problem on the land it manages by issuing grazing permits, yet somehow the agency also claims it has no power in setting regulations for how to manage conflicts between native species and invasive livestock. This rationale defies both the law and basic principles of logic.”

The petition urges the Forest Service to modify its grazing program to incorporate specific, science-backed measures to prevent and mitigate livestock-carnivore conflicts and to stop the carnivore killing that follows, including:

• Creating a minimum one-mile buffer zone between livestock/livestock attractants and known wolf den and rendezvous sites;

• Prohibiting the turnout of young lambs, calves under 200 pounds in weight, and sick or injured livestock, to minimize predation potential; and

• Limiting grazing to open, defensible spaces and prohibiting livestock from grazing unattended by human range riders in remote, heavily treed areas.

A large and growing body of science shows both that non-lethal measures are more effective than killing wildlife for reducing conflict and that the majority of the American public supports the use of non-lethal conflict reduction measures instead of cruel and unnecessary killing.

New scientific study identifies ambitious network of protected areas

Today, a group of prominent scientists—including the former Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service—released a new scientific study “envisioning a bold and science-based rewilding of publicly owned federal lands in the American West.”

Their “rewilding call is grounded in ecological science and is necessary regardless of changing political winds. Our objective is to follow up on President Biden’s vision to conserve, connect, and restore by identifying a large reserve network in the American West suitable for rewilding two keystone species, the gray wolf (Canis lupus) and the North American beaver (Castor canadensis).”

Below is a press release conservation groups issued hailing the scientists’ western rewilding blueprint.

UPDATE: 30+ pages of supplemental material in support of the scientific study is also available here.

HAILEY, IDAHO—Conservationists today hailed a new scientific study that identifies an ambitious network of protected areas, with wolf and beaver restoration as a centerpiece, as a sound strategy for restoring native ecosystems and wildlife diversity on western public lands. The benefits of this proposal would contribute significantly to stream restoration and help mitigate drought, wildfires, and climate change. The study uses scientific modeling to identify  eleven large-scale reserves, then identified connectivity habitats to allow the dispersal of native species among the Western Rewilding Network.

“This scientific blueprint for large landscape conservation, and its focus on retiring public land livestock operations and restoring wolves and beavers is a major call to action for policymakers in Congress and the administration,” said Erik Molvar, a wildlife biologist and Executive Director of Western Watersheds Project. “The ecological success of Yellowstone National Park shows that this combination restores biodiversity, and replicating this success across the West is an enterprise well worth our collective efforts.”

Of the 92 threatened and endangered species encompassed by the proposed rewilding network, the scientists analyzed U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service findings finding  that commercial uses of public lands were major contributors to species endangerment. Livestock grazing is the most common threat, imperiling 48% of the species, followed by mining (22%), logging (18%), and oil and gas drilling (11%).

“Rewilding can bring us real wolf recovery in the West – it’s no longer a pipe dream,” said Kristen Boyles, managing attorney at Earthjustice. “Climate change adds even more stress to wild places, and scientific visions like this show us a path toward rebuilding our natural heritage.”

Changing the management in the proposed reserve network will enable restoration of  these essential ecosystems including, importantly, drought mitigation. Specifically, the recommendations call for retiring  livestock grazing allotments, and restoring gray wolf and beaver populations.

“History has shown us that, over time, rewilding efforts, protection, and restraint can restore wounded landscapes,” said Maggie Howell, Executive Director of Wolf Conservation Center. “Letting beavers and wolves do their essential work is an effective way to unleash nature’s self-healing powers to reestablish vital ecological processes and make the land and its creatures resilient in a time of climatological stress.”

The study cites the restoration of streams and riparian systems, amelioration of altered fire regimes, and climate mitigation through increased carbon storage as collateral benefits of implementing the reserve design and its recommended protections. Aspen woodlands, which support an elevated diversity of native species – but are presently in decline – would be a key beneficiary of the plan.

“This study makes it crystal clear that it’s time to fully invite nature back to America’s public lands,” said Randi Spivak, Public Lands Program Director for the Center for Biological Diversity.  “If we are to succeed in conserving 30% of the nation’s lands and waters by 2030, the recommendations by these authors are necessary steps to saving life on earth”

The paper’s authors justified the prescription of significant changes in land and wildlife management in the reserves because “we believe that ultra ambitious action is required.” They cited drought, changing temperatures, massive fires, and biodiversity loss as key ecological crises facing western ecosystems.

The scientists consider this network a natural complement to a Sagebrush Sea conservation proposal, and found that the two networks, if fully implemented, could protect a combined 22% of western states. If strongly protected, these lands could be counted toward the 30% by 2030 goal articulated by the Biden administration under their ‘America the Beautiful’ initiative.

“This paper is a roadmap for the Biden administration to turn aspirational words about protecting 30% of U.S. land and water by 2030 into meaningful action,” said Sarah McMillan, Senior Adviser at WildEarth Guardians. “The colliding extinction crisis and the climate emergency demand bold action. With logging, mining, oil and gas drilling, and livestock grazing remaining a significant threat to federal public lands, we must stop this endless resource exploitation and start conserving, reconnecting, and restoring at a landscape scale. The ecological and economic benefits of the rewilding plan presented in this paper would be significant, and would accumulate over time, as riparian areas, clean water, and biodiversity are restored and climate change is mitigated through increased carbon storage.”

Santa Fe County Commission resolution about Santa Fe National Forest fuel treatment projects

A reader of The Smokey Wire wrote me the other day to point out that the Santa Fe, New Mexico County Commission unanimously passed the resolution below concerning the Santa Fe Mountains Project and fuels treatment projects in the Santa Fe National Forest in general.

According to TSW reader, in addition to urging the completion of an EIS for the Santa Fe Mountains Landscape Resiliency Project, the resolution recommends the utilization of a broad range of current science into project planning and analysis, and to consider alternatives to the current project plan.

For more information, folks may want to check out this article in Wildfire Today titled “County Commissioners urge USFS to conduct EIS on 50,000-acre fuel treatment project in New Mexico.”

THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SANTA FE COUNTY

RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – _______

Introduced by:
Commissioner Anna Hansen and Commissioner Anna T. Hamilton

A RESOLUTION URGING THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE (USFS) TO PREPARE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT ON THE SANTA FE MOUNTAINS LANDSCAPE RESILIENCY PROJECT; TO REQUEST NEW RISK, COSTS, AND BENEFITS ASSESSMENT OF USFS FOREST FUELS TREATMENTS ON THE SANTA FE NATIONAL FOREST INCLUDING THEIR RISK TO NEW MEXICO HEALTH, WATER SUPPLIES AND ECONOMIES; TO PUBLICLY ASSESS USE OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS UNDER ACCELERATING CLIMATE CHANGE; AND TO REQUEST THAT THE USFS CEASE INTENTIONAL BURNS IN SANTA FE COUNTY UNTIL THESE PUBLIC REVIEWS

WHEREAS, the Santa Fe National Forest (SFNF), United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS), issued a draft Decision Notice (DN) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) based on analysis in an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Santa Fe Mountains Landscape Resiliency Project (SFMLRP) to conduct extensive ground disturbing activities in forests east of Santa Fe in March 2022; and

WHEREAS, The DN and FONSI for the Project selected Alternative 2 which calls for cutting and intentional burning of vegetation on 38,680 acres across a 50,566-acre project area over the next 10 to 15 years (all areas would be treated multiple times); and

WHEREAS, this area and the entire SFNF provide recreation and outdoor enjoyment to more than 100,000 Santa Fe County residents and thousands of visitors each year and is home to the Santa Fe Ski Basin, Hyde Memorial State Park, portions of the Pecos Wilderness and Tesuque and Nambe Pueblos, extensive inventoried roadless areas and high value habitat for breeding birds and other wildlife; and

WHEREAS, the Santa Fe County Board of County Commissioners (Board)
passed Resolution No. 2019-53, on April 4, 2019, encouraging the USFS to conduct a comprehensive and objective analysis for the SFMLRP; provide effective notice to the public including presentations in downtown Santa Fe, NM; and incorporate a broad range of forest and fire ecology research before taking any action; and

WHEREAS, the Board passed Resolution No. 2010-110 on June 29, 2010, in support of Wilderness designation for Inventoried Roadless Areas adjacent to the Pecos Wilderness that will be impacted by the SFMLRP and other SFNF projects; and

page1image3339747824

WHEREAS, National Environment Policy Act (NEPA), often described as the United States Magna Carta for the environment, helps public officials make decisions based on comprehensively understanding environmental consequences before actions are taken and mandating, to the fullest extent possible, citizen involvement in such decisions; and

WHEREAS, NEPA requires analysis of the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the SFMLRP on a variety of resources, including the risks of intentional burning on national forest lands bordering private property and impacts to air quality and public health, threatened and endangered species, inventoried roadless areas, water quality, soils, vegetation and wildlife; and

WHEREAS, on May 10, 2022, the Chief of the USFS (Chief) called for a review of the Hermit’s Peak Fire (Chief’s Review) which was a consequence of the escaped Las Dispensas intentional burn on the Pecos/Las Vegas Ranger District of the Santa Fe National Forest; and

WHEREAS, the Hermit’s Peak/Calf Canyon Fire has destroyed at least 400 homes, forced up to 18,000 people to evacuate their properties, cost more than $248 million in firefighting expenses and burned more than 341,000 acres; and

WHEREAS, the Chief’s Review found that megadrought and climate disruption are presenting unforeseen challenges to the planning and executing of intentional burns; and

WHEREAS, USFS will undertake thousands of acres of intentional burns per year similarly endangering Santa Fe County this fall, adjacent to densely populated areas, without substantive changes to their (flawed) methods, use of personnel, or strategy for climate change; and

WHEREAS, neither the Chief’s Review, nor other communications, analysis, or strategies by the USFS on the SFNF, specifically re-evaluates the viability of SFNF projects and plan of forest treatments given extreme drought and accelerating climate change; and

WHEREAS, the growth of grasses and other fine fuels following fuel reduction activities, together with debris generated by fireline construction, contributes to increased fire risk; and

WHEREAS, unacceptable risks are taken by personnel conducting planned burns because they are pressured to “accomplish the mission”; and

WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is appropriate because the EA for the SFMLRP did not disclose or analyze the significant impacts to resources of an escaped intentional burn resulting from global heating and increased fine fuels produced by management and bureaucratic pressure to meet targets; and

WHEREAS, the risks and impacts of escaped intentional burns were not identified in the EA for the SFMLRP or other SFNF projects, although the issue was raised in public comments.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners of Santa Fe County hereby:

  1. Encourages the USFS to prepare a comprehensive EIS for the SFMLRP that would in every respect engage the public, respond to a full and fair discussion of significant environmental impacts, examine alternatives, including preserving forests in their natural condition, and document unavoidable adverse effects prior to commencing any action.
  2. Urges the USFS to investigate tactical and strategic alternatives to large-scale fuel reductions, both to restore the forest and to address wildfire risk, including costs and benefits of all current treatments and alternatives. Specifically, we request that additional experts in regenerative agroforestry, indigenous and historical approaches be consulted, with public access to presentations, and that additional science and community approaches be sought through public meetings.
  3. Requests that the USFS use an EIS or additional tools, agencies, or monies to investigate, analyze and disclose to the public, the risks of an escaped intentional burn, specifically under pervasive conditions of drought and climate-change, in comparison to the risk of alternative approaches and plans.
  4. Requests that the USFS re-evaluate the recent scientific literature on combined fire/heating/climate change impacts on high-altitude forests in their risk calculations for intentional burning, including critical parameters that now best predict forest mortality and regeneration failure, such as vapor pressure deficit, soil dryness, and maximum soil temperature, and implement new required metrics on both forest condition and in assessing conditions for intentional burning.
  5. Requests the USFS use an EIS and additional tools to assess the impacts of USFS forest fuels’ treatments on the ecosystems comprising the SFNF, including future catastrophic loss of tree regeneration and ecosystem integrity, and the risk of those treatments to New Mexico citizens, water supplies, and economies.
  6. Requests the USFS cease all prescribed burns on the SFMLRP area until the greater understanding and concomitant risk reduction provided by these reviews is in place.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of County Commissioners of Santa Fe County requests that the County Manager forward this Resolution to the United States Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development Xochitl Torres Small, U.S. Secretary of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management Director, the U.S. Forest Service National Director, New Mexico’s Senators and Representatives in Congress, the New Mexico Governor, and State Senators and Representatives in the New Mexico Legislature representing Santa Fe County and Counties in the Sangre de Cristo Mountain Range (The Santa Fe National Forest).

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED ON THIS 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2022.

THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SANTA FE COUNTY

By: ___________________________ Anna T. Hamilton, Chair

Conservation groups sue Forest Service for evading analysis and disclosure of commercial thinning projects’ environmental impacts

There have been plenty of discussions and debates about the U.S. Forest Service’s use of categorical exclusions—an agency regulation exempting certain projects from the usual NEPA public disclosure and appeal requirements—on this blog since its inception. Therefore this press release about a new legal challenge may be of interest to folks. -mk

MEDFORD, OREGON—Today, conservation organizations WildEarth Guardians and Oregon Wild filed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Forest Service’s misuse of an agency regulation to evade its obligation to analyze and disclose the environmental impacts of three projects on the Fremont-Winema National Forest in southcentral Oregon. The organizations allege the Forest Service violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when it failed to analyze the impacts of commercial thinning across thousands of acres of national forest as part of the South Warner, Bear Wallow, and Baby Bear logging projects. The organizations are represented by Crag Law Center.

To duck its obligation to analyze the impacts of the projects’ extensive commercial logging, the Forest Service relied on a categorical exclusion—an agency regulation exempting certain projects from the usual NEPA public disclosure and appeal requirements. CEs are reserved for small, low-impact, routine activities like replacing a culvert or rebuilding a section of trail. Here, the Forest Service relied on CE-6, a categorical exclusion for “timber stand and wildlife habitat improvement” activities, such as thinning or brush control to improve growth or to reduce fire hazard, and prescribed burning. Though the agency adopted CE-6 in 1992, until 2018 it had never used the categorical exclusion to bypass environmental analyses for projects that included commercial logging.

“The Forest Service is misleading the public as to what these projects entail. Commercial thinning is logging—trees with marketable value are cut and removed from the forest to be sold on the market—which requires heavy equipment and roads that can disturb soils, cause erosion into streams, destroy or degrade habitat, and release stored carbon,” said Chris Krupp of WildEarth Guardians. “Over the past few years the Forest Service has taken to re-labeling logging projects as timber stand or habitat improvement projects with a commercial thinning component, in order to avoid having to analyze, and inform the public about, the impacts of public lands logging that the law requires.”

The three projects being challenged indicate the agency’s intention to increasingly rely on CE-6, regardless of the scale and scope of commercial thinning employed. The South Warner project authorizes 16,000 acres of commercial thinning (25 square miles), Bear Wallow 10,000 acres (15+ square miles), and Baby Bear 3,000 acres (4+ square miles).

”Logging our National Forests has complex effects on the environment, and should be carefully planned. For 50 years Congress has required federal agencies to disclose environmental impacts and involve the public in decision-making that affects the environment. The Forest Service cannot unilaterally carve out a giant loophole to avoid this important public process.” said Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild.

The lawsuit further alleges the Forest Service has never determined that commercial thinning—much less commercial thinning of the scale and scope authorized by the three projects here—does not cause significant environmental impacts. Such a determination is necessary if projects that include commercial thinning are to be categorically excluded from NEPA’s mandate to disclose the environmental impacts of an agency proposal through either an assessment or more comprehensive impact statement.

“Categorical exclusions basically represent a bargain between the Forest Service and the public,” said Oliver Stiefel of Crag Law Center. “Before adopting a new CE, the Forest Service must prove that the environmental impacts of a set of activities will be insignificant. In exchange, when the Forest Service later proposes a project that fits within the CE, it may dispense with the detailed analysis and disclosure of environmental impacts otherwise required. The Forest Service here hasn’t lived up to its end of the bargain—relying on a CE for 29,000 acres of logging is unprecedented.”

A copy of the complaint is available here: https://pdf.wildearthguardians.org/support_docs/CE6-Oregon-Complaint.pdf

Report: Federal logging projects put 10 climate-saving forests on chopping block

Old multistory forest slated for phased clearcut within logging unit 72 of the Black Ram timber sale on the Kootenai National Forest in Montana. Photo by Yaak Valley Forest Council.

 

Report: Federal logging projects put 10 climate-saving forests on chopping block

Trees in Kootenai National Forest included on list of 10 threatened forests that help fight climate change

MISSOULA, MONTANA—Federal agencies are targeting mature and old-growth forests for logging despite these trees’ extraordinary ability to curb climate change and President Biden’s directive to preserve them, according to a new report spotlighting the 10 worst logging projects in federal forests across the country.

In the report released today, Worth More Standing, the Climate Forests coalition details federal logging proposals targeting nearly a quarter of a million acres of old-growth and mature forests overseen by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. The report outlines “a pervasive pattern of federal forest mismanagement that routinely sidesteps science to turn carbon-storing giants into lumber” and calls on the Biden administration to pass a permanent rule to protect these big old trees.

“The best way to protect these carbon-storing giants is to let them grow, but our federal agencies keep turning them into lumber,” said Randi Spivak, public lands director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Biden administration can help curb climate change by permanently protecting mature and old growth trees. It takes centuries to make up for the carbon lost when these trees are chopped down and we don’t have that kind of time.”

The threatened forests are in Montana, North Carolina, Vermont, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Wyoming, Arizona, California, and Oregon.

In northwest Montana, the U.S. Forest Service’s Black Ram project will allow nearly 4,000 acres of the Kootenai National Forest to be commercially logged, including clearcutting more than 1,700 acres and logging hundreds of acres of centuries-old trees. These rare, old forests are champions of carbon storage, which reduces harms from climate change. Conservation groups sued to challenge the logging and road building project on June 30, 2022.

“The U.S. Forest Service is racing to eradicate ancient primary forests on our public lands in direct opposition to President Biden’s proclamation to protect old and mature forests as an effective means of battling climate change” said Rick Bass, chair of the Yaak Valley Forest Council. “Primary old forests in the proposed Black Ram project on the Kootenai National Forest can store up to 1,900 metric tons of biomass per hectare. The Forest Service is committing climate treason in broad daylight, racing to cut the last old forests in the backcountry—logging in the wet swamps, the one place fire doesn’t go. It’s climate madness disguised as greed.”

“This report demonstrates that logging remains a critical threat to mature and old-growth forests,” said Adam Rissien, ReWilding Manager with WildEarth Guardians. “The urgent need for meaningful protections could not be more evident and until then we will continue to challenge the Forest Service when the agency seeks to decimate habitat important for imperiled species such as grizzly bears and Canada lynx.”

Mature and old-growth forests hold enormous amounts of carbon. Preserving old-growth and mature forests is a meaningful, cost-effective measure the Biden administration can take immediately to mitigate climate change. Biden issued an Earth Day executive order directing an inventory of old forests and policies to protect them.

“Without a federal rule in place to restrict logging of these critical forest tracts, these mature and old-growth trees could be lost, along with the opportunity to make significant progress toward addressing climate change,” said Blaine Miller-McFeeley, Senior Legislative Representative at Earthjustice.

Also today, more than 125 groups sent a letter to the U.S. Agriculture and Interior departments requesting an immediate start to a rulemaking process to ensure permanent protections for mature and old-growth trees and forests across federal lands, while allowing for necessary measures to reduce wildfire risk. Large, older trees are more resistant to wildfires and studies show logging them doesn’t reduce the risk of climate change-driven fires.

“This report highlights what we have—but also what we stand to lose,” said Alex Craven, senior campaign representative at the Sierra Club. “Our old and mature growths are a natural climate solution, and we must protect these trees if we wish to tackle the intersecting climate and biodiversity crises.”

Scientists have pointed to forest preservation as one of the most effective ways to remove carbon from the atmosphere. U.S. federal forests sequester 35 million metric tons of carbon annually, a number that could rise steadily with new conservation measures.

Protecting older forests also safeguards clean water, clean air, wildlife habitat, biodiversity and recreational opportunities.

The full report is available here: https://www.climate-forests.org/worth-more-standing

Conservation groups file legal challenge to restore protections for wildlife, water, and large trees in Eastern Oregon and Washington

Here’s a press release about a lawsuit just filed on an issue that has been discussed and debated here on this blog for a number of years now. If you have any specific questions about the lawsuit, a copy of the complaint is linked below. The press release also lists email addresses and phone numbers for the groups involved, as well as the attorney. People are encouraged to reach out to them directly. However, in keeping with the spirit of this blog, some people are welcome to continue attacking me for posting a press release or offering up a bunch of conspiracy theories about why environmental groups want to protect larger trees on public lands (and we can pretend that environmental groups haven’t been trying to do that for many decades). Thanks. – mk

Pendleton, Oregon—Six conservation groups filed a lawsuit today challenging a Trump-era rule change that allows logging of mature and old growth forests on no less than 7 million acres across Eastern Oregon and Washington. The coalition filed its suit over the Forest Service’s decision to eliminate a provision of the Eastside Screens that prohibited the logging of trees larger than 21” in diameter.

The Eastside Screens were initially put in place by the Forest Service to protect remaining habitat for old-growth-dependent wildlife; certain species were in rapid decline after decades of logging of the biggest trees in Eastern Oregon and Washington’s national forests. For more than 20 years, the Screens reined in the removal of large trees and prevented unnecessary conflict on many logging projects.

However, in the final days of the Trump administration, the Forest Service removed the long-standing protection for at least 11,000 square miles of national forest in Eastern Oregon and Southeast Washington despite overwhelming evidence that large trees play a critical role in maintaining biodiversity and mitigating climate change. The amendment has been criticized for being a politically-motivated action that circumvented public and tribal involvement and ignored an established and growing body of science that contradicts the decision.

The complaint alleges that the decision violated the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and National Forest Management Act (NFMA). The groups also notified the agency of their intent to enforce Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for fish and wildlife that depend on older forests.

“It’s no surprise the Trump administration ignored the science when it pushed this rule change through on its way out the door. Cutting down the remaining big trees harms salmon, steelhead, and bull trout by removing shade and forest cover that keeps rivers and streams cool,” explained Chris Krupp with WildEarth Guardians.

While the decision to eliminate the prohibition on logging trees larger than 21” in diameter was made with little attention to the effects on fish and wildlife that rely on these forests, it also curtailed public involvement in the rulemaking process; it ignored the opinion of over 115 independent scientists, former agency leadership, and dozens of conservation, climate, Indigenous, and other organizations.

“Large trees play a critical role in supporting biodiversity, clean water, and native fish. It is important to retain all remaining large trees as they are scarce on the landscape after a century of high-grade timber harvests that targeted large, old trees,” said Amy Stuart with the Great Old Broads for Wilderness.

A recent scientific study found that the biggest and oldest trees covered by the rule make up only 3% of regional forests in the Pacific Northwest yet store 42% of forest carbon. They also provide critical habitat for wildlife, keep water clean and cold, are resilient to wildfire, and are at the core of cultural values.

“The Forest Service violated its legal duty to protect wildlife and forest health when it removed protections for our biggest, fire-resistant trees. Now that these trees are being logged across six national forests, we are asking the court to halt this tragedy,” said Rory Isbell with Central Oregon LandWatch.

In addition, President Biden recently issued Executive Order (EO 14072, April 22), which aims to “conserve America’s mature and old-growth forests on Federal lands” as a part of a science-based approach to reduce wildfire risk and combat the climate and biodiversity crisis.

“We are facing a climate and biodiversity crisis, but the Forest Service continues to move in exactly the wrong direction. We are asking the Biden administration to take action consistent with its recent Executive Order and restore bedrock protections for mature and old growth forests on our public land,” said Rob Klavins, public lands advocate for Oregon Wild based in rural Wallowa County.

The groups ask that the current administration restore protections for large trees in our national forests to support wildlife, clean water, and carbon storage on public lands. They also ask Senators Wyden and Merkley to support mature and old growth protections in the State of Oregon.

Greater Hells Canyon Council, Oregon Wild, Central Oregon LandWatch, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, WildEarth Guardians, and the Sierra Club are represented by Crag Law Center attorneys Meriel Darzen and Oliver Stiefel.

For more information, see the FAQs; for maps and photos, see the Press Folder.

Connection between January 6 U.S. Capitol Insurrection and western livestock industry extremists

From PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility):

Our friends at Western Watersheds Project make an important observation about the connection between the January 6th insurrectionists and the small but vocal and violent groups associated with western livestock industry extremists. These extreme groups continue to mobilize against public lands and conservation efforts. Fortunately, the vast majority of Americans, including those out west, support public lands and the agencies that manage our public lands.

On June 3, 1924 the U.S. Forest Service did something quite remarkable

Aerial view of the Gila Wilderness and Gila River in New Mexico. Photo by Adriel Heisey.

The following guest post was written by WildEarth Guardians’ John Horning. – mk

I once looked at a map showing the United States at night. Lights lit up the coasts and our massive cities across the hinterlands. Though my eyes were attracted to the energy of the lights, they eventually settled on the blank spots on the map.

One of those large, blank spots was the Greater Gila of southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona, which is home to some of the last, best, wild—but still largely unprotected—public lands in the continental United States.

It’s also home to the Gila Wilderness—America’s first designated wilderness.

We celebrate the Greater Gila on this day because 98 years ago, on June 3, 1924 the U.S. Forest Service did something quite remarkable. Based on ancient and emerging wisdom at the time, it chose to exercise restraint and allow wild country to be wild.

We chose to celebrate the Gila and its looming centennial by creating an anthology of essays that capture why the Greater Gila is so loved and so deserving of even stronger protection. First & Wildest: The Gila Wilderness at 100 has been a great collaboration between Guardians, Torrey House Press, our editor Elizabeth Hightower Allen, and the many inspired writers who love the Gila.

I encourage you to order a copy of the book right here. And as a bonus, Torrey House Press is generously donating 20% of all book sales to WildEarth Guardians through June 10. Just use promo code “WILD” at checkout. Need more inspiration? Watch this film trailer that captures the spirit of the book.

If the Greater Gila is to endure, and life as we know it is to survive the compounding climate and biodiversity crises, we must continue to think boldly, celebrate wildly, and collaborate deeply.

If you love the Greater Gila—or want to fall in love with the Greater Gila for the first time—please buy the book and then join Guardians’ campaign to protect all that we love.

John Horning is the executive director of WildEarth Guardians. He writes from Santa Fe.