Thanks to Sue Britting for bringing this to our attention. Below are links to the information presented at the public meeting with regard to the large landscape NEPA project currently being initiated on the Stanislaus and Sierra National Forests.
Their argument seems to be that they want to work towards NRV, and based on historic conditions and acres burned, that will take doing more than they currently are doing. They have this interesting table in their briefing paper (attached below). Note that the total acreage of both forests is approximately 2,200,000 acres (not sure that is exactly the right denominator to use) so treating 20K acres per year, as they are currently doing, would be about 1 percent. Please feel free to check my math. Based on this table, their desire is to treat 10% of the Yellow Pine Mixed Conifer, but that 100K per year would be about 5%/year of the acres on the two forests. I agree with others the this is perhaps overly ambitious personnel and funding-wise, but I also don’t see that it hurts to be ready NEPA-wise for some unknown increased level of activities and to be able to take advantage of opportunities as they occur.
Please check out all the NRV documentation, maps and photos in the Powerpoint 2019-0711_MOTOR_M2K_JUL 11 Presentation_V5revised. The 2019-0702_MOTORwithinM2K_Project_Brief describes the idea and the process. The BP also has links to other landscape-scale NEPA projects.
One suggestion for discussing this.. doing things differently is not necessarily a highly valued trait in Forest Service culture. I can’t remember who said something like “organizational antibodies to change attack new ideas, and suck the life out of them until they are dried up husks and blow away”. In my own experience, it can be hard on employees to be asked to devote their attention to something new, that isn’t “the way we’ve always done it”, and might not work out. So let’s try to assume the best about their intentions, and not give these human beings any unnecessary grief.