Thanks to Nick Smith for many of the below news items!
1. NPR Agrees With Us-Smokey’s Message is More Important Than Ever
The longest-running public service announcement in the U.S. turns 80 years old today.
Its message is simple and one you’ve heard many times before: “Only you can prevent wildfires.” Smokey Bear, the beloved park ranger hat-wearing black bear who utters these famous words has undergone a complicated evolution.
And his birthday comes as fires rage in California, Colorado and other Western states. On average, some 70,000 wildfires have been documented every year in the U.S. since 1983, according to data from the National Interagency Fire Center.
Human-caused climate change has made these fires more intense and dangerous, but it isn’t the only factor: Federal data and various independent studies show that around 80% of all wildfires in the country are caused by humans, making Smokey’s message more relevant than ever.
So we’re taking a look back at how Smokey Bear’s mission came to be and how effective his messaging has been.
2. Professionals in the Middle: Wolf Reintro Colorado
Forest Service and BLM folks are not the only ones put in the middle of ideas coming from elsewhere, and relationships with people on the ground who don’t get a say (or do via national elections or ballot initiatives, so not much of a say).
From the Vail Daily News, an interesting, comprehensive and non-paywalled story on how stress fueled by wolf reintroduction weight drags on state wildlife employees.
Davis pushed back on the idea that his agency isn’t forthright.
“What does transparency mean to the people that are saying that word?” he said. “If you talk to some ranchers, transparency means I want to know exactly where the wolves are in the moment that you’re talking to me.”
He emphasized the importance of security for the wolves’ and employees’ safety and added that he believes the agency is improving its openness overall.
I don’t understand the “wolves’ and employees'” safety part of this. It sounds like “we can’t tell you because you might do something illegal” but conceivably if someone actually did something illegal..they would be punished. So what about the law-abiding people? They don’t get to know, I guess.
Local employees are also tasked with investigating suspected wolf attack cases and ruling whether a rancher will get any compensation. That added wolf work not only adds to the strain with ranchers, it also constrains the time employees have for their other duties.
“It dominates my time,” Black said.
Davis said the best way to improve conditions for Parks and Wildlife employees is to make sure their workloads don’t continue to increase.
Parks and Wildlife, which is an enterprise agency that must fund itself almost entirely through fees, has only hired two additional employees in the northwest region to help with depredation investigations since reintroduction, according to a spokesperson for the agency.
The agency has to get approval from elected officials in the General Assembly to hire more.
Until that happens, the more than 40 wildlife employees in the northwest region will have to continue balancing their new workload and added stress with preserving rancher relationships — something Davis said is vital for “the agency’s entire mission.”
“There are definitely some pressures there on our local staff to maintain those relationships,” he said. “There is no way we will ever be successful in perpetuating wildlife in the absence of that cooperation.”
3. New Mexicans and Las Dispenses prescribed burn.
This is an op-ed, and so we don’t know about the “gossip network”; those inclined could check social media.
Urban bias red flags have been obvious throughout the HPCC Fire disaster and the ongoing struggle for restitution. Decisions to ignite the Las Dispensas prescribed burn were made in Washington and Santa Fe, ignoring the wisdom of local people who knew it was the wrong time of year to burn. Social media response to announcements of that planned burn included strong and wide-spread requests—begging actually—not to ignite that fire.
As a long-time volunteer firefighter, I have access to the “gossip network” among firefighters. I have heard allegorical accounts that burn crew members on scene expressed their fear of lighting that fire. The decision to burn did not rest in the hands of those on scene. It appears that U.S. Forest Service assumed that the knowledge of those reading statistics at a desk superseded those who could see, smell, and feel the realities on the ground.
4. Professionals in the Middle- in Tactical Gear?
Apparently criminal charges were filed against a rancher and his wife and FS Law Enforcement turned up.
In a letter to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds called the indictments for theft of government property served — by United States Forest Service Special Agent Travis Lunders while unannounced, armed, and in full tactical gear — on Charles and Heather Maude of Caputa, S.D., an overzealous prosecution of a ranching family. National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Vice President of Government Affairs Ethan Lane said the inappropriate behavior of USFS employees in South Dakota isn’t new.
The Fencepost story talks about a fenceline dispute. Certainly the outlets that are covering this are likely to take the ranchers’ side.. has anyone seen the FS side of this story?
5. Biomass plant to help reduce wildfire risk in Yuba County.
6. Washington State’s Wildfire Strategy
From Hilary Franz’s newletter (my bold).
We are seeing a surge in wildfire activity across the state. Last week, Governor Inslee issued an emergency proclamation to ease aviation fuel transportation, and crews at every level of government are working to contain these fires and keep our lands and communities safe. A couple of weeks ago, I asked for and received air assistance from the Washington National Guard to bolster our ability to fight these fires from the air.
The west is burning right now, and the PNW is bearing the brunt. But thanks to the investments we’ve made in aircraft and staff, and a focus on initial attack, Washington has been less impacted than our neighbors to the south in Oregon. Our strategies are working, and I am incredibly proud of the strides we’ve made in recent years — transforming our state’s wildfire response and making us a national leader in the process.
I want to thank those crews for all of their work and remind all Washingtonians to be safe, ready, and considerate during this difficult time. A few weeks ago, I issued a statewide burn ban on all state lands, and I’m urging all of you – don’t be the spark this summer.
Our crews are working hard, but our resources are stretched right now. Please do your part to protect and support our firefighters, our forests, and our communities.
**************
From “only you” to “don’t be a spark”, 80 years of solid achievement. Happy Birthday, Smokey!
Carved from the Great Sioux Nation, the Buffalo Gap and Fort Pierre National Grasslands in South Dakota are managed from a US Forest Service office in Nebraska.
The Forest Service detected fraud and a grand jury indicted members of the South Dakota Farm Bureau. USA v. Maude, et al was brought by the US Attorney for the District of South Dakota and is being heard by US Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann, a Trump era appointee. If convicted the defendants face $250,000 in fines and ten years in federal prison.
On 20 June, Charles and Heather Maude of Caputa, South Dakota were charged with crimes against the United States after they “knowingly stole, purloined and converted” land on two allotments within the Buffalo Gap National Grassland. Charles is represented by an attorney employed by the Federal Public Defender’s Office and Heather is charged with two counts and is being represented by private attorneys.
Maude Hog and Cattle has been providing product to Wall Meats which is heavily subsidized by the USDA. Charles Maude has received nearly $300,000 in ag subsidies since 1995.
Livestock grazing isn’t a right; it’s a privilege and it’s ruining public ground throughout the American West. Some 58% of grazing permits on federal land in critical habitat go without review. White Republican welfare ranchers are, of course, howling government overreach but also wail when eminent domain is applied for the public good.
“The Fencepost story talks about a fenceline dispute. Certainly the outlets that are covering this are likely to take the ranchers’ side.. has anyone seen the FS side of this story?”
Not the FS side, but this article provides a more “balanced” presentation.
https://www.thefencepost.com/news/capitol-hill-weighs-in-on-sd-ranch-federal-grassland-boundary-row/
Here is the important parts: “Beginning at a time unknown, but no later than December 2020 … did knowingly steal, purloin and convert to their own use National Grasslands managed by the United States Department of Agriculture … namely, approximately 25 acres of National Grasslands for cultivation and approximately 25 acres of National Grasslands for grazing cattle, having a value in excess of $1,000, and did aid and abet each other, all in violation of (U.S. law).”
The fence in question and the management practices the indictment alleges are theft have been in place for generations.”
The trespass and theft of government property was reported by a hunter that was hunting on the National Grassland and noticed that the landowner had POSTED as NO TRESPASSING the public land.
I don’t know how many readers are familiar with this Montana company: https://www.onxmaps.com/.
They sell land ownership maps statewide, based on annual updates from local county tax records. The data sets are loaded into GPS units. There is little question about theft and trespass of public lands since the GPS and annual updates clearly show trespass.
Close to my vacation home, Weyerhauser purchased Longview-Fiber property and promptly posted No Trespassing signs, everywhere!!! Including several properties where the Forest Service installed gates limiting motorized traffic. On one property, the Forest Service gate is on Washington State DNR property. The Forest Service PAID DNR $600 for a public easement.
AND Weyerhauser posted it as private property.
Not sure how to post pictures on this site. I do understand that Weyerhauser hires lots of foresters from a low quality University. But really folks, every time I laid out a private timber sale I ran the property lines….FIRST.
The amount of theft and illegal posting of public land is rampant and in most cases little is done by the agencies. I have to applaud the local LEO for protecting public access to THE PUBLICS LAND.
When I worked for BLM in north Idaho I was given the assignment to “solve” the timber trespass issue on the resource area. It didn’t take long, before people were calling ME to report trespass on BLM managed lands or confessions to previous timber theft.
There is a bill in Congress to require the public agencies to inventory and list the easements purchased by the land management agencies. That needs to be passed, before those records disappear. Once those are included in the onX database, all hell will break loose and deservedly so.
Thanks for the link, Vladimir! It’s true that there’s a great deal of illegal posting going on. On the other hand, as to trespass, I’ve seen cases where land exchanges occurred where folks had built structures on FS land. As opposed to criminal charges. Seems like mostly people talk it and work something out, or process via a civil suit (which, granted, might not be a high priority for DOJ). There may be two different issues.. “denying access” via signage or fencing? or the actual value of the purloined grass 25 acres of grass. The criminal action here is grass theft. In the other case that I’m aware of, the FS could have charged the person for rental of the property and arrested them, but chose to deal with it by exchanging land instead. Now the difference could be that the ranchers were aware of the correct survey, and the other cases the landowners were not (how would anyone know for sure what people are or aren’t aware of?). And as far as I know, Lands folks are totally overworked, so there’s that.
Innocent trespass is one thing.
Knowingly posting public land as private is totally another. I hunt a lot of isolated parcels of BLM and DNR lands in Washington state. At least, once every year I run into illegal posting of property or public roads.
I have little patience with that. We simply need to pass a law that if you post a NO TRESPASSING sign your name or corporate name needs to be on the sign to be valid. AND there should be significant penalties for illegal posting.
I have run into extended conversations with the folks that post public land. Without fail, EVERY TIME they threaten to call the Sheriff and when I offer my phone to make the call the tone of the conversation changes. Suddenly, it switches to ALL THEIR PROBLEMS with unruly public and that I SHOULD at least ask permission from them prior to hunting public land!!!
My first day on the job with BLM I was riding with a forestry tech when we ran into a nice gate on a BLM road. He calmly walked out of the truck, hooked up the winch and ripped the gate out of the ground and wrote a short note NOT to gate the road again. I thought we would hear about this later, but silence from the landowner.
Land management agencies tolerate this behavior and it has led to a epidemic of posting of public lands in the west.
It is way past time to end it.
#3 – “Decisions to ignite the Las Dispensas prescribed burn were made in Washington and Santa Fe, ignoring the wisdom of local people who knew it was the wrong time of year to burn… The decision to burn did not rest in the hands of those on scene.”
This doesn’t seem right. I could understand that approval of the plan would be needed from higher levels, but the plan should have initially been prepared at the local level. Then, even if the plan was approved by higher levels, the decision to execute it (or not) should be made locally based on circumstances known only locally at the time of planned ignition (without any kind of real-time pressure from above). Am I wrong?
I don’t know, Jon. I would thank that would be how it works. However, there is a long unique history of the national forests and New Mexico which might play into any mistrust.
So……local thoughts and feelings and knowledge should trump any higher level input, which is akin to outside input, akin to non-local groups funded by national-level funds trying to tell a local level group(s) with the best knowledge what to do?
How do you plan that on paper?
I’m not sure I’m tracking you, but the formal process for most decisions gives everyone anywhere an opportunity for input (with forest planning and projects, maybe two bites of the apple). When all of that is done (including any lawsuits), implementation is not normally a public process (granted, fire decision-making has quirks that I may not be familiar with). I wouldn’t say it’s done this way because of some presumption that local knowledge is always “the best knowledge what to do.”
I agree, Jon, the decision to burn or not burn on the day the Las Dispensas prescribed burn was ignited was made locally, but the pressure to meet targets is real and may have impacted that decision.
I believe this report was previously posted on TSW: https://lessons.wildfire.gov/incident/gallinas-las-dispensas-prescribed-fire-declared-wildfire-review-2022
Here’s a paragraph in the lessons learned ..
“Competing obligations limit the ability of the workforce to prioritize and focus on prescribed fire projects. Increasing agency goals for prescribed fire treatments and, in this case, expectations from the forest, district and the Burn Boss to begin catching-up after 2 years of delays due to government shutdowns, a global pandemic, and Mexican Spotted Owl regulations have led to unrealistic expectations. These expectations, coupled with the opportunity to implement during a narrow window when the crew was available, smoke
dispersion was good and the prescribed fire area was forecasted to be in prescription, led to acceptance of unforeseen risk. “
That’s helpful and makes sense. I don’t think it translates into “The decision to burn did not rest in the hands of those on scene.” They just had to factor in the “expectations” of others. But maybe that’s splitting hairs ….