Forest Planning: Opening Pandora’s Box?

Surprise, surprise.. forest plans don’t please anyone.. because people disagree about things. or perhaps.. everything. This reminds me of one Region 2 Forest Supervisor who did not want to get engaged in forest planning. He felt the funding never covers the real costs, plus it’s like reopening discussions on everything about a forest.. so that …

Continue reading ‘Forest Planning: Opening Pandora’s Box?’ »

Historic Range, Natural Range and the Planning Rule

Well, when I posted the book club piece on Chapter 4 here on NCFP, I had the comments go to the Book Club blog here as usual. However, Jon Haber had a thoughtful comment there about the current Planning Rule that I thought deserved its own thread on this blog. So if you want to …

Continue reading ‘Historic Range, Natural Range and the Planning Rule’ »

Swan View Coalition Shares Perspective on Collaboration

(The following two columns are guest posts from Keith Hammer with the Swan View Coalition in Kalispell, Montana. Feel free to make comments below, but if you have any specific questions regarding the Swan View Coalition’s perspective on collaboration, please contact Swan View Coalition directly. Thank you. – mk) Swan View Coalition on Collaboration By …

Continue reading ‘Swan View Coalition Shares Perspective on Collaboration’ »

Planning Rule Committee Meeting- August 2013

Sounds like all will be able to participate via conference call or webinar. Here’s the link to the story. The National Advisory Committee for Implementation of the National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule has scheduled a three-day meeting for late August. The U.S. Forest Service announced the meeting on Thursday, Aug. 1. You can …

Continue reading ‘Planning Rule Committee Meeting- August 2013’ »

True Nature: Revising Ideas On What is Pristine and Wild

I thought this was interesting, as it came across my screen right after our discussions of “ecological integrity” in the new planning rule. My hypothesis is that every twenty years or so the same “truths” are rediscovered..because the shifting and fragmenting nature of disciplines leaves scientists unfamiliar with previous thought on the same topic. So …

Continue reading ‘True Nature: Revising Ideas On What is Pristine and Wild’ »

“Sustainable Recreation”: USDA /Forest Service Bites the Hand that Feeds Them?

First, let’s go back to the Mike Dombeck quote I cited previously from this article in Forest History: The most enduring and powerful maxim of business is that “money flows to things people want.” People want their cultural heritage protected, clean air and water, healthy forests and rangelands, good hunting and fishing, sustainable supplies of …

Continue reading ‘“Sustainable Recreation”: USDA /Forest Service Bites the Hand that Feeds Them?’ »

The Incredible World of Sustainability Definitions in Planning Rules

I want to talk about “Sustainable Recreation” in the planning directives. But first we need to lay the groundwork, so we need to go back to the Rule. Clearly everything has to be (plans must promote) sustainable, as in every rule since the 2000. Sustainability is defined in the 2012 Rule as: Sustainability. The capability …

Continue reading ‘The Incredible World of Sustainability Definitions in Planning Rules’ »

Potential for Collapse of Forest Ecosystems

A guest post from Kevin Matthews: A substantial body of science shows a general pattern, that when the ecological integrity of a natural ecosystem is degraded, its response curve is non-linear. The state that occurs when the response curve becomes non-linear, such that small additional impacts result in large losses of ecosystem integrity, is sometimes …

Continue reading ‘Potential for Collapse of Forest Ecosystems’ »

Warning: Fuzzy Concept in Regulation- “Ecological Integrity”- IV- After the “AND”

Fortunately for everyone this will be my last post on the concept of “Ecological Integrity”as described in the NFMA Rule. Perhaps unfortunately, not my last post on the planning directives. Other guest posts on the directives are welcome. Wading through the directives was a lonely business, and thanks much to the others on this blog …

Continue reading ‘Warning: Fuzzy Concept in Regulation- “Ecological Integrity”- IV- After the “AND”’ »

Planning Rule Directives Comments- New 15 Day Comment Period

I picked this up from the Teton Valley news here. If you thought the 400 pages or more of directives were too daunting to review (and who didn’t, really?), you can now get pointed in a direction to check out certain parts, by the other comments in the reading room here… I tried to check …

Continue reading ‘Planning Rule Directives Comments- New 15 Day Comment Period’ »