Matthew Koehler

Essentially, the U.S. Forest Service has told the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to go jump in a lake.

The Star Tribune has the story.

According to CNN:

California utility Pacific Gas and Electric Company has agreed to plead guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of unlawfully starting the Camp Fire, according to court documents filed Monday.

The article opened with:

The following was written by Gary Milner and posted as a comment to a previous blog post titled “Good” and “Bad” Recreation: The Bitterroot National Forest. Gary’s comment provides so much additional context and information that it warrants its own post. – mk

I’ve been involved with the climbing controversy on the Bitterroot National Forest from early on. For me it would not matter if the damage I’ve seen is coming from climbers, backpackers, birders, or mt. bikers. It’s the damage on the ground that matters. Early on when Dan Ritter was the ranger on the Stevensville District the idea of coming together to develop a Leave No Trace (LNT) climbing brochure was hatched. It seemed like an easy way forward for all parties. Unfortunately, the Missoula based climbers would not participate, even after repeated attempts to get them at the table by Julie King, then BNF supervisor. Locals and BNF employees met many times developing that brochure. Most of the verbiage in that brochure comes straight from Access Fund literature. Before its final version, Julie King, ran it by the Access Fund and they approved. Why Missoula area climbers would not support developing a LNT brochure is still a mystery to me. I encourage folks to go to the BNF website, click on recreation, click on climbing and click on “Bitterroot National Forest Rock Climbing Brochure”.

Climbing is a legitimate, appropriate sport on public lands. However, what has happened in Mill Creek is not a good example of how an area should be developed. It seems there was no knowledge that the canyon contains golden eagle nests, is home to peregrines, is an important range for mountain goats, or that it is MA6 – recommended Wilderness. I don’t believe those considerations occurred to them at the time nor was any of the public involved in the process. There appears to be a bolted route within 25 feet of a golden eagle nest. If those developing the area would have consulted with FS biologists, and other specialists to determine what was appropriate, a well thought out climbing area could have been developed that provided access to climbers and protected plants and animals who need these areas just to survive. Following the Access Fund’s own guidelines and LNT principals, in my opinion, could have prevented what has become a very contentious issue.

What has saddened me the most is what appears to be the attitude from some climbers. Resisting rules or regulations seems to be the fall back, even though some rules and guidelines could protect wildlife, avoid user conflicts, and promote sustainable, ethical climbing on the forest. Self-policing simply was not working. The photos that Matthew Koehler posted are just some of the photos taken over the years, there are many more. Regarding the comment of planting dead birds and planting trash, if evidence of that can be presented, I would appreciate seeing it. I was with the party that found the dead golden eagle and I’ve seen enough trash there to fill several backpacks. I know none of the folks I’ve worked with over the years have planted trash or dead birds. Cole Lawrence, if you could let me know what evidence you have that these were planted, I would appreciate it. I’ve heard that bolts have been damaged, but not seen that personally. Although I believe the area is too densely bolted (on average one route about every 13 ft.), I disapprove of any action that could damage a bolt; that’s simply not the way to move forward and cannot be condoned.

Federal, State, and local agencies all over the country have rules and management plans for climbing; it’s very common and the accepted norm. The BNF should not be different. It’s not about banning climbing, demonizing the sport, or excluding user groups as some are saying here. It’s about impacts and developing an enforceable plan that protects wildlife/habitat and promotes long-term ethical climbing on the Bitterroot.

Vertical Times, the AF’s magazine in the Spring of 2013 issue stated; “The “Golden Era’ of bolting totally under the radar is coming to an end”. That issue has some good information. I hope in the next few months all interested parties can come together to identify issues and find enforceable solutions. Wildlands are getting smaller and recreation is growing. All of us, including myself should be working to find ways to lessen and eliminate our impacts. If it means finding alternative locations we should. The plants and animals who need theses areas don’t have that luxury.

– Gary Milner

March 11, 2020 press release from plaintiff groups:

JUNEAU, Alaska― A federal judge today rejected the Trump administration’s enormous commercial timber harvest and road-building plan for Prince of Wales Island in the Tongass National Forest of southeast Alaska.

The judge ruled that the project’s approval violated the National Environmental Policy Act, which sets standards for public engagement on federal projects that will alter the environment, and the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which requires federal agencies to evaluate how federal use of public lands will affect subsistence uses and needs.

The court found that the U.S. Forest Service “presented local communities with vague, hypothetical, and over-inclusive representations of the Project’s effects over a 15-year period.” It’s not yet clear whether the Forest Service will have to abandon the project entirely because the judge has not yet decided on a legal remedy.

The Forest Service greenlighted a sweeping 15-year logging scheme over a 1.8-million-acre project area across Prince of Wales and surrounding islands in America’s largest and wildest national forest. It would have been the largest timber sale on any national forest in 30 years, allowing for 164 miles of new road construction and the logging of enough trees to equal a forest three times the size of Manhattan.

More than half the logging would have targeted centuries-old trees ― old-growth forests that absorb the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change.

Eight conservation organizations, represented by the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice, challenged the logging plan on the grounds that, among other claims, it had violated the National Environmental Policy Act, which gives people a say in government actions that will affect their communities.

Prince of Wales Island is prized for its subsistence hunting and fishing opportunities, yet the Forest Service failed to provide detailed information about where logging would occur. This made it impossible for subsistence hunters, local residents and others who care about the wildlife and forests of Prince of Wales Island to meaningfully weigh in on the plan.

Plaintiffs in this case include the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Alaska Rainforest Defenders, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Alaska Wilderness League, Natural Resources Defense Council, National Audubon Society and Center for Biological Diversity. Prince of Wales residents, attorneys and plaintiffs released the following statements in reaction to the ruling:

“What the court has cut short is flagrant attempts by the Forest Service to trample not only the remaining old-growth forest on Southeast Alaska’s most heavily-logged major island, but also NEPA, which is America’s bedrock law for protecting the environment from contrived decision-making,” said Larry Edwards of the regional organization Alaska Rainforest Defenders.

“The Prince of Wales project would’ve been the largest logging project that we have seen anywhere in our national forests in decades, and it would have destroyed thousands of acres of irreplaceable old-growth forest in the Tongass National Forest,” said Kristen Miller, conservation director at Alaska Wilderness League. “Today’s ruling is a win for Southeast Alaska’s billion-dollar fishing and tourism industries, and a reminder as the Trump administration tries to significantly weaken the National Environmental Policy Act of the critical role NEPA plays in allowing the public to meaningfully weigh in on issues impacting their public lands.”

“Protecting the Tongass from old-growth clearcuts shouldn’t feel like a guessing game where Alaskans are left in the dark about whether the clear cuts will be on their traditional lands, in their favorite hunting spot, or in the middle of a stunning Alaskan viewpoint,” said Meredith Trainor, executive director of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council. “Today’s court decision upholds the rights of Southeast Alaskans to weigh in on where logging happens not once our lands are changed forever. We’re grateful the law continues to stand strong and tall, like our old-growth trees, today.”

“This is a victory for wildlife, for our precious public forest lands, and for the rule of law,” said Patrick Lavin, Alaska policy advisor for Defenders of Wildlife. “This decision protects thousands of acres of high quality fish and wildlife habitat and the sustainable industries that rely on it. It also upholds the public’s right to basic information about proposed uses of our national forests, and the impacts of those uses on our shared public resources.”

“The magnificent, ancient forests of the Tongass just got a reprieve from the chain saws,” said Randi Spivak, public lands director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We’re thrilled the court agreed that the Trump administration broke the law when it approved cutting thousands of acres of old-growth trees. It’s critical to protect our remaining old-growth forests to have any chance of stopping the extinction crisis and slowing climate change.”

“This ruling is a win for old-growth trees, wolves, and other species on Prince of Wales Island,” said Earthjustice attorney Tom Waldo. “Today subsistence hunters who were shut out of a decision-making process that would have caused even greater restrictions for them can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that a massive industrial logging operation isn’t imminent in the forested areas they know and rely upon.”

“This is a huge win for wildlife, climate and all people’s voices on the most biologically diverse and vulnerable island on the Tongass National Forest, said Natalie Dawson, executive director of Audubon Alaska. “This ruling protects ancient forests that are crucial to mitigating climate change impacts in Alaska and across the globe.”

Below is a press release that serves as a follow-up to a post from January 2017 titled, “Court slams Forest Service wilderness decision.”

Court Affirms Key Rulings to Prevent Further Illegal Helicopter Intrusions in Premiere Idaho Wilderness Area

SAN FRANCISCO, Ca. – Today a federal appeals court affirmed key rulings imposed by an Idaho judge to prevent the U.S. Forest Service from again illegally authorizing the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) to conduct helicopter-assisted wildlife-collaring operations in the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness.

Today’s ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction that prevents the Forest Service from considering wildlife data gathered from radio collars illegally installed on 60 elk in 2016 because the Forest Service approved IDFG helicopter operations in violation of two environmental laws. The ruling also upheld a requirement that the Forest Service must delay implementation of any permits for future helicopter operations in the wilderness for 30 days in order to allow time for public challenges.

“Today’s decision upholds key requirements that protect the public’s interest in maintaining the wilderness as a wild area—not a helicopter landing zone,” said Earthjustice attorney Tim Preso.

In 2016, the Forest Service allowed IDFG to conduct 120 helicopter landings in the River of No Return to capture and place radio telemetry collars on wild elk. IDFG also captured and radio collared four wolves during these operations—an unauthorized action that was not permitted by the Forest Service, but that threatened to advance IDFG’s plans to undertake widespread wolf killing in the wilderness by providing locational information on the collared wolves.

Idaho District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled these actions unlawful in 2017 because the Wilderness Act prohibits the use of motorized vehicles including helicopters and requires preservation of natural conditions in wilderness areas, and the National Environmental Policy Act requires thorough environmental analysis of these types of actions on federal lands.

The helicopter operations that were illegally permitted by the Forest Service are part of IDFG’s broader program to inflate elk numbers above natural levels within the wilderness by eliminating wolf packs that prey on the elk. IDFG’s existing elk and predator management plans call for exterminating 60 percent of the wolf population in the heart of the River of No Return to provide more elk for hunters and commercial outfitters in an area that receives some of the lightest hunting use in the state.

Earthjustice represented Wilderness Watch, Friends of the Clearwater, and Western Watersheds Project in challenging the Forest Service’s decision.

“This is an important victory for one of the wildest Wildernesses in the lower 48,” said Wilderness Watch staff attorney Dana Johnson. “It sends an important message that intensive, helicopter-assisted manipulations of wildlife to appease the objectives of state managers will not go unchecked.”

Gary Macfarlane with Friends of the Clearwater said, “The 9th Circuit court recognized the importance of Wilderness and that the Forest Service was wrong to allow motorized use to approve routine wildlife management in the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness. We can only hope that, in the future, both the Forest Service and Idaho Department of Fish and Game will honor Wilderness and its important attributes.”

“The court appropriately reminded the Forest Service that it must protect wilderness on public lands, including from state wildlife agencies seeking access to wild places and important habitats,” said Greta Anderson, deputy director of Western Watersheds Project.

The Oregon GOP’s Favorite Anti-Environment Group Is Awash in Racism and Violent Threats

Timber Unity is linked to neofascist and militia organizations—and once again, it’s gotten its way via a legislative walkout.

By Rebecca Leber and Ali Breland

Read the full story in Mother Jones

Here’s yesterday’s press release from the plaintiff groups.

DENVER— A federal appeals court today ruled that the U.S. Forest Service illegally approved a loophole allowing the coal industry to despoil unroaded National Forest lands in western Colorado. The decision gives new hope for the protection of Colorado’s North Fork Valley and for the climate.

“The Trump administration can’t sacrifice public lands at the expense of our climate,” said Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians’ climate and energy program director.  “Today’s ruling is another win for the American public over the dirty coal industry and their climate-denying cronies in the federal government.”

“The Forest Service failed to provide a logically coherent explanation for its decision to eliminate the Pilot Knob Alternative,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit wrote.  The court held the Forest Service illegally refused to protect  4,900 acres in the Gunnison National Forest’s Pilot Knob roadless area when it reopened nearly 20,000 acres to coal leasing and mining.

“The Forest Service can no longer ignore the climate and wildlife benefits of keeping Pilot Knob’s roadless forest free from coal mining,” said Matt Reed, public lands director for High Country Conservation Advocates. “Pilot Knob is an irreplaceable treasure, providing winter range for deer and bald eagles, severe winter range for elk, and historic and potential future habitat for the threatened Gunnison sage grouse. It is the last place we should be tearing up for coal mining.”

Conservation groups sued in December 2017 to protect these pristine wildlands and force the agencies to look at alternatives to minimize climate pollution.

“Colorado roadless areas are a treasure we all share. The U.S. Forest Service long ago decided that these areas needed protection,” said Peter Hart, staff attorney at Wilderness Workshop. “Nonetheless, when the agency implemented the Colorado Roadless Rule, it exempted thousands of acres of pristine roadless lands outside of Paonia from protection to allow for coal mining. Today’s decision vacates that exception and it will, hopefully, ensure that North Fork Roadless Areas, including spectacular Pilot Knob, are properly protected for generations to come.”

“This is a big victory for Colorado’s wildlife and wild places,” said Allison Melton, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Trump officials have been ruthlessly sacrificing our national forests and beautiful wilderness at the behest of polluters. Now they must do their jobs and consider an alternative that would protect important wildlife habitat. It’s encouraging to see the court stand up for bald eagles, mountain lions, mule deer and sage grouse.”

Located in the West Elk Mountains just east of the town of Paonia, the West Elk mine is the single-largest industrial source of methane pollution in Colorado. In 2017 it released more than 440,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide, equal to the annual emissions from more than 98,000 cars.

“While the Trump administration attempts to put our most treasured places in Colorado into the hands of corporate polluters, this victory undermines their blatant disregard for protecting our planet,” said Emily Gedeon, acting director of the Sierra Club’s Colorado chapter. “These are our public lands, and we’re proud to fight for them.”

“This is a victory for the remarkable wild forests of the North Fork Valley,” said Robin Cooley, the Earthjustice attorney who argued the case on behalf of the conservation groups. “The court reversed the Forest Service’s decision to carve out an exception to Colorado’s roadless area protections in order to pave the way for expansion of a dirty and destructive coal mine. As a result of the ruling, the Forest Service must go back to the drawing board and consider whether to protect more of the Valley’s irreplaceable roadless forests.”

In November a federal court in Colorado ruled for conservation groups in a related case and blocked expansion of the West Elk coal mine. The judge ordered the Trump administration to consider limiting methane emissions and address potential harm to water and fish.

The following article was written by Marc Heller, E&E News reporter. It includes perspective from Smokey Wire contributor Andy Stahl, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics.

The Forest Service is looking to shift research away from wildlife in national forests and toward wildfire management, according to budget documents.

In its proposed spending plan for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, the service said it intends to eliminate research funding for fish and wildlife and close a research station in California. Staff would be reduced, although researchers would be given the opportunity to relocate within the Forest Service.

The wildlife and fish research totals $22 million this year.

“The proposed budget requires difficult decisions about what research stations and programs would continue to operate,” the Department of Agriculture said in a memo to staff, detailing the planned budget rollout. The administration presented the fiscal 2021 budget proposal to Congress on Monday.

“Making these decisions will allow the Forest Service to focus its resources on its highest priority science activities,” USDA said. “These highest priority science activities are those which make the greatest contribution to the agency’s land management responsibilities.”

In the memo, obtained by E&E News, the department told staff the proposal doesn’t mean the Forest Service is turning away from science and research, but rather that it’s realigning its research priorities to reflect the relative importance of wildfire and forest health. The proposal also would eliminate funding for research related to recreation, saving $9 million.

The forest inventory and analysis budget would climb 2%. The service would also invest more than $12.5 million to strengthen the link between research and wildfire suppression operations, the department said.

“The Forest Service will continue to be a national leader in conducting applied science to inform forest management and improve forest conditions,” USDA said.

Cutting research is likely to raise objections in Congress, particularly from Democrats who view the Trump administration as hostile to science. The department appeared to anticipate that line of inquiry, posing in a question-and-answer section of the memo: “This budget is yet another example of this Administration’s war on science. How can you justify this huge cut to research and say that you will still have enough capacity for a viable research program that will support the management of the Nation’s forests?”

The department’s answer, in part: “Selecting priority research areas on which to focus resources is essential to maintaining the quality of the Forest Service’s research enterprise and represents the agency’s commitment to producing high-quality, impactful science.”

Research on wildlife and fish directly affects Forest Service decisions on land use, including logging that has impacts on wildlife, said Chad Hanson, a forest biologist with the John Muir Project in California who is opposed to logging on federal land.

The research has sometimes been at odds with timber industry priorities, said Andy Stahl, executive director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics.

“Fish and wildlife research reformed Forest Service logging. But for the work of a generation of Forest Service fish and wildlife scientists, old-growth forests would all be stumps today,” Stahl said.

Other potential points of contention are the proposed closure of the Pacific Southwest Research Station in Albany, Calif., and the International Institute of Tropical Forestry in Puerto Rico. The research station in California is the smallest of the Forest Service’s five research and development stations and can be merged with the Pacific Northwest Research Station, the department said.

USDA said the proposal would cut 287 staff years, although the proposal didn’t say how many researchers would be affected. Scientists working on forest inventory and analysis, for instance, would be kept on at other facilities, the department said.

In the budget justification document presented to Congress, USDA said, “These closures would require the use of reduction in force authority, voluntary early retirement authority and voluntary separation incentive authority.”

What IF this was by design and part of the Trump administration’s plans from the beginning? I mean, what IF?

For Immediate Release: Tuesday, February 18, 2020
Contact: Peter Jenkins (202) 265-4189

Special Assistant a No-Show; Two-Thirds of Top Slots Vacant or Acting

Washington, DC — The hallways of the National Park Service Headquarters now open onto empty offices or those filled on a temporary basis. At the same time, a senior official has gone AWOL according to a new complaint filed with the Department of the Interior’s Inspector General (IG) by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

Two-thirds of the top NPS slots lack a permanent official — an unprecedented leadership vacuum. While the Trump White House is notably reluctant to submit nominations for Senate confirmation across the Executive agencies, many senior NPS vacancies are for positions that do not require Senate confirmation. Besides having neither a confirmed Park Service Director nor a nominee for that key job, currently –

• Ten of 15 Deputy, Assistant, and Associate NPS Director slots are entirely vacant or temporarily filled by an “acting” appointee;

• Several Superintendent positions at major parks, such as Grand Canyon, Yosemite, and Grand Teton, also are filled by “actings” on an interim basis; and

• P. Daniel Smith, who was brought out of retirement in 2018 and given an NPS Deputy slot in which he “exercised the authority of the Director,” then was moved out of that slot last summer to serve as a teleworking special assistant, but he apparently has not been seen at NPS Headquarters since.

“The Park Service is suffering from a multi-billion-dollar maintenance deficit and it can ill afford high-salary ghost employees,” stated PEER Executive Director Tim Whitehouse. “Keeping so many leadership slots unfilled by permanent jobholders hobbles management and means that major decisions affecting our national parks are increasingly made by political appointees in the Interior Secretary’s office.”

The PEER complaint asks the IG to determine the whereabouts of Smith. He draws a top salary as a Special Assistant to the Director, but there is no confirmed or acting Director. One of the ironies involving P. Daniel Smith is that he appears to be in violation of a restrictive telework policy that was adopted under his aegis when he was still in NPS Headquarters.

###

See NPS’s 2/3rds leadership vacancies

Vacant, Director
David Vela, Deputy Director, exercising the authority of the Director
Lena McDowall, Deputy Director, Management and Administration
Shawn Benge, Acting Deputy Director, Operations
Vacant, Deputy Director, Congressional and External Relations
Chris Powell, Chief of Staff
Shane Compton, Associate Director, Chief Information Office
Vacant, Assistant Director, Communications
Joy Beasley, Acting Associate Director, Cultural Resources, Partnerships and Science
Tom Medema, Acting Associate Director, Interpretation, Education, and Volunteers
Charles Laudner, Assistant Director, Legislative and Congressional Affairs
Ray Sauvajot, Associate Director, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science
Mike Caldwell, Acting Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities, and Lands
Reggie Chapple, Acting Assistant Director, Partnerships and Civic Engagement
Marlon Taubenheim, Acting Associate Director, Workforce and Inclusion
Vacant, Associate Director, Business Services
Louis Rowe, Acting Associate Director, Visitor and Resource Protection

Read PEER’s complaint on Smith filed with Interior IG

Look at checkered history of Danny Smith

From Science Daily.

Summary: New research reveals that even simultaneous bark beetle outbreaks are not a death sentence to the state’s beloved forests. The study found that high-elevation forests in the southern Rocky Mountains actually have a good chance of recovery, even after overlapping outbreaks with different kinds of beetles. One thing that is slowing their recovery down: Foraging elk and deer.

Two words, and a tiny little creature, strike fear in the hearts of many Colorado outdoor enthusiasts: bark beetle. But new research from University of Colorado Boulder reveals that even simultaneous bark beetle outbreaks are not a death sentence to the state’s beloved forests.

The study, published this month in the journal Ecology, found that high-elevation forests in the southern Rocky Mountains actually have a good chance of recovery, even after overlapping outbreaks with different kinds of beetles. One thing that is slowing their recovery down: Foraging elk and deer.

“This is actually a bright point, at least for the next several decades,” said Robert Andrus, lead author of the study and recent PhD graduate in physical geography. “Even though we had multiple bark beetle outbreaks, we found that 86 percent of the stands of trees that we surveyed are currently on a trajectory for recovery.”

Between 2005 and 2017, a severe outbreak of spruce bark beetles swept through more than 741,000 acres of high-elevation forest in the southern Rocky Mountains near Wolf Creek Pass — killing more than 90 percent of Engelmann spruce trees in many stands. At the same time, the western balsam bark beetle infested subalpine fir trees across almost 124,000 acres within the same area.

If you go skiing in Colorado, you’re usually in a high-elevation, Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir forest, said Andrus.

The researchers wanted to know if these overlapping events, caused by two different types of bark beetles, would limit the ability of the forest to recover. So they measured more than 14,000 trees in 105 stands in the eastern San Juan Mountains, tallying the surviving species and the number of deaths. They had expected that the combined effects of two bark beetle outbreaks would prevent forest recovery, but they found that the forests were quite resilient.

That’s an important contrast from what happens following a severe fire, which can cause forests to convert to grasslands, according to previous research by Thomas Veblen, coauthor of the study and Distinguished Professor of Geography.

“It’s important that we perform these sorts of studies, because we need different management responses depending on the forest type and the kind of disturbance,” said Veblen.

They also found that greater tree species diversity prior to the bark beetle outbreaks was a key component of resilient forests.

Tens of millions of acres across the Western United States and North America have been affected in the past two decades, and Colorado has not been spared. A severe mountain pine beetle outbreak began in 1996, easily visible along I-70 and in Rocky Mountain National Park. Since 2000, more than 1.8 million acres of Engelmann spruce statewide have been affected by spruce beetles in high-elevation forests.

With continued warming there will come a time where conditions caused by climate change exceed the forests’ ability to recover, said Veblen.

Impacts of Ungulates

The study is the first to consider the effects of two different types of beetles that affect two different dominant tree species, as well as the effects of browsing elk and deer in the same area.

Bark beetles prefer bigger, mature trees with thicker bark, which offer more nutrients and better protection in the wintertime. They typically leave the younger, juvenile trees alone — allowing the next generation to recover and repopulate the forest.

But while in the field, researchers noticed many smaller trees were being munched on by elk and deer. Known as “ungulates,” these animals like to nibble the top of young trees, which can stunt the trees’ vertical growth. They found more than half of the tops of all smaller trees had been browsed.

That doesn’t mean that those trees are going to die — ungulates are just more likely to slow the rate of forest recovery.

Avid Colorado skiers and mountaineers looking forward to typical, green forests, however, will have to be patient.

“We don’t expect full forest recovery for decades,” said Andrus.

Story Source: Materials provided by University of Colorado at Boulder. Original written by Kelsey Simpkins. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference: Robert A. Andrus, Sarah J. Hart, Thomas T. Veblen. Forest recovery following synchronous outbreaks of spruce and western balsam bark beetle is slowed by ungulate browsing. Ecology, 2020; DOI: 10.1002/ecy.2998