Black Hills Resilient Landscapes (BHRL) Project

Received this press release today — see below. The Norbeck Society objects primarily to overstory removal, which it sees as “a threat to the long-term sustainability of the timber industry in the Black Hills.”

This is a very large project to be carried out over 10 years. From the draft RoD: “Combined, all of these defined areas total approximately 676,600 acres. Because each activity will occur on a fraction of its defined area acres, and because more than one activity will occur in some areas, the total area where activities will actually occur is estimated at 400,900 acres. This includes approximately 298,900 acres of mechanized activities.”

Includes 185,210 acres of overstory removal.

“Overstory removal harvest is a substantial component of my decision. This treatment method will release young stands from competition with older, overstory pine and reduce stocking levels in overstocked stands. Based on the analysis in the FEIS (pages 58, 60-63, 65), I believe this activity contributes significantly to meeting the purpose and need for this project. Overstory removal treatments will increase the acreage of early succession, younger pine across the project area.”

And: “Among planned activities, overstory removal and patch clearcut will result in the greatest change from existing visual conditions. Because harvest units will be designed in accordance with Forest Plan guidelines, they will appear different from the existing condition but similar to natural forest openings or young stands. The resulting appearance will not be out of character for the area.”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Norbeck Society

P.O. Box 9730

Rapid City, SD 57709

For Immediate Release 

New Proposal Kills Timber Industry by Logging Black Hills to Death 

RAPID CITY (May 22, 2018) — The Black Hills Resilient Landscapes (BHRL) Project that is on the brink of approval by the Black Hills National Forest is a threat to the long-term sustainability of the timber industry in the Black Hills.  Further, the plan threatens ecosystems needed to support diverse habitats for wildlife, the associated regional tourism industry, and the high quality of life enjoyed by area residents.  The proposal also decreases resilience to wildfire and insect infestation in the Black Hills and focuses its efforts on areas that are currently at low risk to insect infestation and wildfire.

For many years, those concerned with widespread logging in the Black Hills have been dismissed by the timber industry as radicals who oppose all forms of thinning.  This is an untrue and unfair description of the concerns shared here.

The current proposal, and the annual timber harvest levels for which it opens the door, kills the long-term viability of the local timber industry with overly aggressive commercial logging on more than 185,000 acres. The timber harvest method proposed for these acres is “overstory removal,” which when implemented will look a lot more like clearcutting than the thinning that has traditionally been used in the Black Hills. Many of these stands proposed for cutting were heavily thinned in the last 10 years. The objective of the heavy thinning was to lower the risk from mountain pine beetle and wildfire. Now, the Forest Service is proposing to cut them again.

To implement the massive harvest, the plan also calls for more than 3000 miles of road work which will further divide and damage forest ecology.  According to required public disclosures, the Forest Service states that the project will cause an increase in noxious weed infestations which they will not have the means to control.

The Forest Service is required by law to manage the National Forest for sustainability — to manage for the “long-term sustained yield” of the timber supply. This simply means that they cannot cut more trees/wood on an annual basis than what grows every year. This is basic forestry that is taught at every Forestry school in the country. Yet, the Forest Service cannot assure us that they are managing the National Forest for long-term sustained yield. It is not addressed in the BHRL project document.

The annual, allowable timber harvest for the Black Hills National Forest was developed in 1997 as part of the current Forest Plan for managing the Forest. Since that time, there have been many, significant impacts to the Forest and its timber inventory, such as large wildfires (Jasper Fire and others) and an extensive mountain pine beetle infestation. Common sense tells one that with these impacts the annual timber harvest should be lowered to a sustainable level. However, the Forest Service continues to harvest as many trees as it has for the past decade even after the mountain pine beetle infestation officially ended in 2016. They have offered no assurance that there will be any reduction in annual harvesting levels with the BHRL project.

If the BHRL project is fully implemented at the current levels of timber harvest, local saw mills could close in the next few years due to a significant reduction in the number of trees left to harvest. This could mean losing all of the 1400 timber industry jobs rather than keeping some to manage a smaller, more appropriate timber program. If the timber industry is shut down completely, it would leave the Black Hills National Forest without an important tool to effectively manage the forest in the future.

The currently planned annual harvests violate standards for a sustained yield. The annual net growth of the forest has been in negative territory for the past decade. (Net growth is simply the total growth minus losses due to timber harvest, insects, and fire.) Yet, those backing this plan, including the timber industry, are advocating for short-term profits for the few over the long-term viability of a healthy timber industry and a sustainable multi-use forest.

In truth, the heavy commercial logging treatments in the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes plan do very little to support the claim of reducing risk of insect infestation and catastrophic wildfire in the Black Hills.  Forest managers have many other tools including prescribed burning and non-commercial thinning to maintain resiliency to wildfire and insect infestation in our forests.  The benefits of these types of tools are high and their use is needed now more than ever to move the Forest to a resilient status. The number of acres set for prescribed burning in this plan should be increased and should be the focus of the BHRL project.  Large fires are weather and climate driven, and the Forest that people depend on needs to be prepared.  Note that the largest fire in Black Hills History, the Jasper Fire of 2000, burned over 83,000 acres through one of the most heavily logged areas of the Hills. The Black Hills Resilient Landscapes project as proposed will also increase the number of large slash piles that can contribute to the spread of catastrophic wildfire, as noted by Dr. Darren Clabo the state fire meteorologist in his analysis of the recent Legion Lake fire (53,000 acres) of December, 2017. (Rapid City Journal, April 21, 2018)

The Norbeck Society will be attending an Objection Resolution Meeting on Friday, May 25, 2018 when objection issues and suggested remedies will be discussed. The meeting is arranged by the Deputy Regional Forester for the Rocky Mountain Region.

Members of the press or public may wish to see the official objections of the Norbeck Society and read about the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project

Media Contact:

on behalf of Robert Burns, Norbeck Society President,

Mary Zimmerman

605-342-2552

USFS Applicants For Forest Restoration Program Panel – Southwestern Region

FYI, folks….

 

Forest Service Seeks Applicants For Forest Restoration Program Panel

 

The Southwestern Region of the Forest Service is seeking applicants for membership on the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program Technical Advisory Panel.  This 12 to15 member panel will evaluate proposals for federal grant funding to conduct forest restoration treatments on public land and utilize small diameter trees.  Panel applications are due to the Forest Service by July 18, 2018.

The panel includes: a New Mexico natural resources official; at least two representatives from federal land management agencies; at least one tribal and/or pueblo representative; at least two independent scientists experienced in forest ecosystem restoration; and equal representation from conservation, local communities, and commodity interests.  The Forest Service is currently seeking applications to represent commodity interests, local communities, tribal and pueblo interests, federal land management agencies, and independent scientists.

The Technical Advisory Panel will review project proposals for: wildfire threat reduction; ecosystem restoration, including non-native tree species reduction; reestablishment of historic fire regimes; reforestation; small diameter tree use; and the creation of forest-related local employment.  The grant proposals must include a broad and diverse group of stakeholders and may occur on federal, tribal, state, county, or municipal forest land.

Meetings will be held one to two times per year in Albuquerque.   Selected panel members will not receive compensation, however, they may be reimbursed for travel and per diem costs.  Panel selection procedures and meetings will be conducted under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

Walter Dunn is the Designated Federal Officer and will serve as the point of contact for information on the nomination process as well as for the Technical Advisory Panel.  His phone number is 505-842-3425.

Application materials and other information on the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program can be found on the program website at http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/r3/cfrp .

Completed application packets should be sent to the following address by July 18, 2018:

 

Walter Dunn

Cooperative and International Forestry

USDA Forest Service

333 Broadway SE

Albuquerque, NM 87102

Fax (505) 842-3165

Email: [email protected]

Background Information on Collaborative Forest Restoration Program:

Title VI of Public Law 106-393 creates a mechanism for local community collaboration with federal land managers by establishing a cooperative forest restoration program in New Mexico.   The law provides cost-share grants to stakeholders for experimental forest restoration projects to be designed through a collaborative process (the Collaborative Forest Restoration Program).

Projects can occur on federal, tribal, state, county, or municipal land and must address specified objectives.  These objectives include wildfire threat reduction; ecosystem restoration, including non-native tree species reduction; reestablishment of historic fire regimes; reforestation, including preservation of old trees; small diameter tree use enhancement; creation of forest-related local employment; and stakeholder diversity.

The law also provides that a review panel be formed to evaluate proposals for funding.  The Secretary of Agriculture chartered this panel under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.  Panel nominees will be evaluated based on their familiarity with forest management issues in New Mexico, including:

  • experience working with the government planning processes,
  • knowledge and understanding of the various cultures and communities in New Mexico,
  • ability to actively participate in diverse team settings;
  • demonstrated skill in working toward mutually beneficial solutions to complex issues,
  • respect and credibility in local communities; commitment to attending Panel meetings, and
  • their contribution to the balance and diversity of the Panel.

Equal opportunity practices, in line with USDA policies, shall be followed in all membership appointments to the Panel.  To ensure that the recommendation of the Panel have taken into account the needs of the diverse groups served by the Department, membership shall include, to the extent practicable, individuals with demonstrated ability to represent minorities, women, and persons with disabilities.

Thank you,

Walter

USDA USFS

Walter Dunn, Program Manager
Collaborative Forest Restoration/Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes

Forest Service

Cooperative & International Forestry, Southwestern Region

p: 505-842-3425
c: 505-301-1291
f: 505-842-3165
[email protected]

333 Broadway Blvd., SE
Albuquerque, NM 87102
www.fs.fed.us
TwitterFacebook

Caring for the land and serving people

Lone Rock Timber Receives Threat

From the News-Review, Roseburg, OR:

Lone Rock Timber Management Company has asked the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office for additional patrols in response to a threat made against the company by conservationists, according to the sheriff’s call logs.

The call, made just before 6 p.m. Thursday, said a group of conservationists are upset that Lone Rock is logging in the Susan Creek area, land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and are threatening to burn Lone Rock “to the ground.”

Lone Rock requests extra police presence in wake of threats

Doesn’t mention the name of the group.

[ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BELOW, POSTED BY MK]

Posted on Facebook on May 7, 2018 by Francis Eatherington:

“Yesterday we hiked into the BLM forest that Lone Rock Timber had threatened to cut down for a new road, and we found it just cut down. Very sad. All the big trees were horizontal on the ground. We counted the rings on some stumps and found them to be 400 years old. On the hike in we went past LRT’s 19-acre plantation they had just cut and yarded, and we could see about an acre of tiny trees they had left to cut at the top of their unit. Even though it was clearcut 40-years ago, this time LRT insisted they had to cut this 70’-wide road through BLM land to get a mechanical harvester into that little acre they had left. They couldn’t cut it manually like they did before. This is an obvious scam by Lone Rock – they will get far more timber from our public old growth forest then they will access from their land. Not only are the old-growth trees gone, a new road bulldozed across this ancient forest will be a horrible scar, spreading it’s edge-effect far into the remaining old growth forest.”

Posted on Facebook on May 7, 2018 by Doug Heiken:

“The reason that Lone Rock Timber gave for needing access through this stand of ancient trees, was they needed to get a mechanical harvester (tree killing robot) into the area so they could log a stand of small trees on their own land. However, before the road even got built Lone Rock was able to log all but about 1 acre of their land. Which means these ancient trees fell just so they could bring their robot in to fell an acre of second growth. This is SO wrong! I smell a scam. The timber industry is to blame and BLM is complicit.”

[ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BELOW, POSTED BY SF]

Here seens a fair-minded piece that looks at (and talks to) both sides (and explains the O&C rights of way). But be careful, as there are a couple of interesting stories and you only get five free ones.

In this case they claim that BLM has embarked on a ‘back-room deal with Lone Rock Timber to log ancient forests,’ when the truth of the matter is that Lone Rock Timber has the legal right under our reciprocal right-of-way agreement with the BLM to construct the road to gain access to our property,” Luther said, adding some of the trees in the posted photos are outside of the proposed logging area.

If I lived in the area, I would be tempted to go see for myself (and share the photos here).

Greenwire: “Feds plan major logging boost in W.Va.”

Lest we forget that not all National Forests are in the western US….

The Forest Service will more than double the timber cut on the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia in the next two years, reflecting the agency’s push to pull more wood from forests it considers underused.

“The Monongahela is really stepping up,” interim Forest Service Chief Vicki Christiansen told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee last week.

At 919,000 acres, the Monongahela — sometimes referred to as “the Mon” — is twice as big as the Allegheny National Forest in neighboring Pennsylvania yet produces a small fraction of the timber.

In fiscal 2017, the Forest Service reported that $958,000 worth of timber was cut on the Monongahela, compared with $5.8 million worth on the Allegheny.

SW Oregon Douglas Fire Study

New study from Oregon State. From the press release:

Researchers in the College of Forestry at Oregon State University used satellite imagery and local data to analyze the factors driving differences of severity in the fire, which burned about 50,000 acres north of Grants Pass. Located in the Klamath Mountains ecoregion, the area is dominated by Douglas fir, ponderosa pine and white fir and is a mix of private and federal ownership and state-owned O&C (Oregon & California Railroad) lands.
While daily weather was the most significant driver of fire severity, the researchers found that other factors such as ownership, forest age and topography were also critical. Intensively managed private forestlands tended to burn with greater severity than older state and federal forests. The findings are important because they point to the need for collaboration among landowners, both public and private, to reduce the wildfire risk across the region. 
Some caveats: This was one fire in a unique region. The fires started in older federal forests and wind drove them across property lines.
And as the authors note, “There is strong scientific agreement that fire suppression has increased the probability of high severity fire in many fire-prone landscapes (Miller et al. 2009, Calkin et al. 2015, Reilly et al. 2017), and thinning as well as the reintroduction of fire as an ecosystem process are critical to reducing fire severity and promoting ecosystem resilience and adaptive capacity (Agee and Skinner 2005, Raymond and Peterson 2005, Earles et al. 2014, Krofcheck et al. 2017).”

 

Farm Bill Update

An email update from the Forest Resources Association….

Yesterday, the House Agriculture Committee released its long-awaited Farm Bill draft titled the Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018. The bill is 641 pages and we continue to review its many titles and provisions, but wanted to flag a few areas in which FRA has worked on and will continue to support.

Timber Innovation Act: Research provisions of the Timber Innovation Act were included in the House’s version of the Farm Bill. The legislation directs USDA to conduct performance-driven research and development, education, and technical assistance for the purpose of facilitating the use of innovative wood products (mass timber/tall wood buildings) in wood building construction in the United States.

Federal Forest Management Reform: Following up on several favorable federal forest management reforms included in the recently enacted omnibus spending bill, the House Farm Bill would create several new authorities for the Forest Service to conduct forest management projects on federal lands. Expressly, the bill authorizes a number of new “categorical exclusions” from National Environmental Protection Act or NEPA reviews that will make initiating and completing needed project work easier.

These new CEs are designed to:

§  Expedite salvage operations in response to catastrophic events

§  Meet forest plan goals for early successional forests

§  Manage “hazard trees”

§  Improve or restore National Forest System lands or reduce the risk of wildfire.

§  Forest restoration

§  Infrastructure-related forest management activities.

§  Managing insect and disease infestation.

Community Wood Energy Program (CWEP): The legislation significantly increases the authorization for this program to $25 million to fund grants for installing wood heating systems that run on sawmill residuals—sawdust that is converted to pellets and/or woodchips. In addition to funding wood heating installations, the bill would also provide grants to innovative wood products facilities—those manufacturing cross laminated timber for tall wood buildings or other cutting edge technologies using wood or lignin. This program is viewed as one policy mechanism that could be used to address the sawmill residuals issue that has become a challenge in recent months.

A markup of this legislation is scheduled for April 18 in the House Agriculture Committee.

Calif. Forests: “an unnatural 300 to 500 trees an acre”

Mike Archer listed this article in today’s Wildfire News Of The Day email: “California fights wildfires aggressively—but prevention takes a back seat.”

A 19th-century California forest would have held fewer than 50 trees an acre. Today the state’s forests have grown to an unnatural 300 to 500 trees an acre, or more. That doesn’t count the 2 million drought-stressed trees a month lost to bark beetles that have killed entire stands.” [emphasis mine]

Mentions the Little Hoover Commission report, “Fire on the Mountain: Rethinking Forest Management in the Sierra Nevada.”

FYI, to subscribe to the Wildfire News Of The Day list, contact Archer at [email protected].

USFS Planning Workshop Video

Here’s a link to video that Nick Smith included in today’s Healthy Forests, Healthy Communities News Round Up email. In the video, Chris French, Director of Ecosystem Management Coordination, gives a presentation on NEPA reform at the Environmental Analysis and Decision Making Workshop in Phoenix, Arizona. French gives examples of the time and money the USFS spends on various planning documents and looks at documents for similar projects from other agencies — BLM, BIA. Nick’s link is an ~8 minute portion of the full video, nearly an hour, which is here. I haven’t had time to watch the whole thing. The 8-minute excerpt is worth a look.

“Long-time” forest supervisor

I noted this article in an Oregon newspaper, “Siuslaw National Forest supervisor moving on”. States that “The longtime head of the Siuslaw National Forest is leaving next month to take a promotion, the U.S. Forest Service announced on Thursday.

Long-time?

Jerry Ingersoll, who has been forest supervisor on the Siuslaw since March 2010, has been tapped to become the deputy regional forester for the agency’s Alaska Region.

Eight years doesn’t seem like a long time, but for the USFS maybe it is.