O&C Bill Progress

Here’s an article from Environment & Energy Daily on negotiations over the O&C bill. Our fellow blogger Andy Stahl is quoted.

 

Wyden staffers huddle with DeFazio, BLM to fine-tune O&C bill

Phil Taylor, E&E reporter
Published: Friday, June 6, 2014

A proposal to more than double logging levels in western Oregon while protecting old-growth trees, wilderness and rivers is moving closer to markup, according to bill sponsor Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

Wyden’s staff met yesterday in Portland with Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and representatives of the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to discuss Wyden’s S. 1784, a bill to resolve decades of conflicts on the O&C lands.

“We feel very strongly about making sure we can have this effort, this joint product, ready for markup when [Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Mary] Landrieu (D-La.) holds the next markup,” Wyden told reporters yesterday. “I think it will be soon, but we will be ready.”

Wyden spokesman Keith Chu said yesterday’s meeting was “part of the learning and information-gathering process” and that it only involved congressional and agency staff.

“Senator Wyden wanted to hear from the agency officials on the ground who would be responsible for implementing the bill,” Chu said.

Brent Lawrence, a FWS spokesman in Portland, said the meeting was part of “an important ongoing dialogue on conservation and habitat management” and that Fish and Wildlife strives to educate lawmakers about the agency’s “responsibilities and limitations.”

Both Wyden and DeFazio have introduced their own proposals to increase timber harvests on the roughly 2.5 million acres of BLM-managed O&C lands, an effort aimed at providing financial security to the western Oregon counties that historically depended on logging for revenue and jobs.

Wyden’s bill calls for accelerating “ecological forestry,” which allows patches of clearcuts and is backed by key forest scientists and the Obama administration. It would also provide for streamlined National Environmental Policy Act reviews and some exceptions to wildlife surveying protocols in the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, among other provisions.

DeFazio’s bill — Title III of H.R. 1526 — would allow a state-appointed board to manage about half of the O&C lands under mostly state laws. It would presumably allow much faster environmental reviews and less litigation.

Both bills contain similar provisions to designate wilderness, preserve free-flowing rivers and safeguard old-growth trees.

Neither proposal has garnered broad support from the environmental community, though counties and the logging industry have rallied around DeFazio’s proposal, which passed the House last fall. Wyden’s bill has drawn cautious praise from moderate environmental groups and timber officials and some county officials.

“Congressman DeFazio has been very constructive,” Wyden said. “The delegation is united that we have to get the harvest up in a sustainable manner. We need to protect our treasures. I think the delegation has come very close at having a product that will reflect that we’ve come together.”

DeFazio this week told E&E Daily that he was scheduled to make brief remarks at the beginning of yesterday’s meeting, but it is unclear what specifically was discussed.

“I am still working with Senator Wyden to finalize a balanced plan that can pass both the Republican-controlled House and the Democratically-controlled Senate so it can be signed into law,” DeFazio said in an email to constituents Monday. “While there has been a lot of noise surrounding this issue from both sides, this legislation is still a work in progress and I am confident that we can continue working with all stakeholders to finalize a plan that protects our conservation values and provides financial certainty for vital public services.”

Observers said they believe that Wyden and DeFazio are working to reconcile their bills.

Andy Stahl, executive director of the Eugene, Ore.-based Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, said it’s unlikely any bill to increase O&C logging will pass unless it has the support of both Wyden, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, and DeFazio, who is the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee. The bill must also “pass the laugh test” of both the environmental community and O&C counties, he said.

That’s no easy task in Oregon, a flashpoint in the Pacific Northwest timber wars.

But county governments have been left financially depleted following the closure of timber mills and the recent reduction in annual federal payments from the Secure Rural Schools program, which is again expired. Wyden and DeFazio are under enormous pressure to find a solution.

Getting floor time in the Senate for an Oregon-centric problem will also be a challenge, Stahl said. It’s plausible that Wyden would seek to attach O&C legislation to a must-pass bill such as an extension of SRS. Such a bill would garner support outside of Oregon and must go through the Finance Committee.

The Obama administration took no position on Wyden’s bill during a hearing in February, though it did recommend changes to bolster NEPA reviews and endangered species protections. The administration expressed major concerns over DeFazio’s bill and threatened to veto the larger, mostly GOP logging package in which it was bundled.

Reporter Nick Juliano contributed.

USFS National Advisory Committee meeting in Missoula

“Committee in Missoula helps Forest Service make plans for public lands,” The Missoulian today.

To explain how to get inside the U.S. Forest Service’s planning process, the agency has turned to a roomful of outsiders.

“This is participatory democracy at its finest,” said Ray Vaughan, a co-chairman of the Forest Service’s National Advisory Committee meeting in Missoula this week. “In the old style, the Forest Service figured out what it wanted to do and then asked everybody to comment. If you didn’t know about the comment period, you missed out. Now it’s more of an ongoing, organic, adaptive-management kind of process.”

Full text is here.

List of committee members is here.

The committee is writing a “citizen’s guide” that explains the National Forest planning process.

Battle of Op-Eds in Montana

A war of words between Bruce Farling, executive director of Montana Trout Unlimited, and Mike Garrity is executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies….

Ochenski spouts alarmist nonsense on Farm Bill matter
by BRUCE FARLING

Right on cue, when Gov. Steve Bullock recommended using tools in the new federal Farm Bill that might result in some logging, Missoulian columnist George Ochenski and the usual tiny clique representing pretend “institutes,” “councils” and “alliances” began sanctimoniously lecturing Montanans on how awful this was. They claim a secret cabal conspired to deliberately exclude public concerns in order to produce environmental catastrophe.

Nonsense.

Trout Unlimited’s mission appears to favor logging
by MIKE GARRITY

Trout Unlimited’s Bruce Farling had an opinion piece in the May 7 Missoulian that promoted logging, but other than writing “Trout Unlimited,” didn’t use the words trout, fish or clean water, which are all of the things Trout Unlimited claims they work to protect.

Unfortunately, Trout Unlimited, like a lot of big environmental groups, has decided their job is now to promote more clearcutting of Montana’s pristine watersheds instead of protecting these same aquatic ecosystems for native fish.

 

DellaSala on Fire

Just received this press release from Dominick DellaSala’s Geos Institute. The presentation is here. I agree with DellaSalla that fire is a vital element of forest ecosystems, but do not support his call to “allow more large fire to burn unimpeded” in the back country. If such large fires are needed, would he support starting them to obtain the ecological benefits he assigns them? The public, as well as many land managers, would be dubious, to say the least about letting nature take its course in this way, whether ignitions are natural or not.

One of the photos listed comes with this caption: “2013 Rim Fire in California’s Sierra Nevada produced an ecologically beneficial mosaic of fire severities.” So more Rim Fires are in order?

Active Wildfire Season in Western U.S. Offers Many Ecological Benefits, According to Geos Institute
ASHLAND, Ore., May 13, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Fire scientists are releasing a new synthesis of the ecological benefits of large wildfires, including those that kill most vegetation in fire-adapted forests, grasslands, and shrub lands of the western U.S.
These benefits are described in a Prezi presentation, “Fireside Chat: Lessons from Fire Ecology and Post-fire Landscapes,” which can be viewed at:
http://www.geosinstitute.org/banking-on-forests/public-forests/1139-fireside-chat.html
The online Fireside Chat presents the latest science on wildfire’s ecosystem benefits, with (a) nine key findings, (b) information on the landscape impacts from climate change, post-fire logging, and fire suppression, and (c) ways to help homeowners prepare for fires.
It also includes links to fire videos and contact information for wildfire researchers.
Its purpose is to serve as an information tool for the press, decision makers, and land managers interested in the ecosystem benefits of large fires, which have been under-appreciated.
Dominick DellaSala, Chief Scientist of Geos Institute, stated “Contrary to popular belief, most large wildfires are not catastrophes of nature, as many plant and wildlife species depend on them to restore habitat in short supply and to replenish soil nutrients.”
DellaSala continued, “We can co-exist with wildfires by thinning vegetation nearest to homes and in fire-prone tree plantations, and by allowing large fires to burn unimpeded in the backcountry under safe conditions.”
According to the National Interagency Fire Center (www.nifc.gov), California, southern Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, southern Alaska, and Oregon could experience large fires this year, given the dry conditions. However dry, fire-adapted regions generally have experienced substantially less fires, compared to historical times, due to ongoing fire suppression.
Suppression costs in some years have approached $5 billion on public lands, with limited effects on slowing large fires that are mostly driven by weather events. The Forest Service already has signaled that it is likely to run out of wildfire suppression funds long before the end of the fire season.
Related CounterPunch article on the ecological benefits of large wildfires:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/30/why-large-fires-are-an-ecological-necessity/
Contact:
Dominick A. DellaSala, Ph.D., President and Chief Scientist
Geos Institute
541.482.4459 x302 (office); 541.621.7223 (cell)
Email
www.geosinstitute.org

 

More on Montana Lands Designated as Restoration Priorities

Interesting op-ed by by Julia Altemus, Exec. VP of the Montana Wood Products Association (Don’t be fooled by false claims about Bullock’s forest priorities) and comments on it, including a long one by our fellow NCFP blogger, Matt Koehler. The op-ed is in response to an April 16 article, “Conservation groups criticize governor over forest restoration,” and comments on it.

Protest of Jazz Timber Sale

I had the pleasure of observing a protest of the Mt. Hood National Forest’s Jazz timber sale yesterday at the S.O. in Sandy, Oregon. Photo here. The group Bark organized the protest. Maybe 50 people were there (the USFS folks locked the S.O. doors and stayed inside). Bark’s video is here. For “street theater” they brought in a small wading pool, added water, let some kids splash in it, and then dumped in a few buckets of soil to illustrate how the local streams would look after the harvesting (the kids loved playing in the mud). A young woman in a salmon costume writhed in simulated pain and then “died.”

Portland TV station KGW covered the event; its video had a reporter at the protest and “on location” at a river a mile from the sale.

The sale is to be a thinning of old harvest units. USFS documents here, including Bark’s lawsuit and the district court’s decision in favor of the USFS. The decision notice describes the sale: “The Forest proposes a thinning project of approximately 2,053 acres of plantations ranging in age from 30 to 60 years old. The average tree size in plantations is 12 inches diameter. Variable density thinning is proposed to remove the smaller trees while creating skips and gaps.”

(Skips and gaps — a phrase used (coined?) by Jerry Franklin and Norm Johnson in describing t heir “ecological forestry.”)

Bark’s main concerns are that the USFS would recommission 12 miles of decommissioned roads, leading to potential erosion. The group’s leader conceded that 9 acres in the sale area are suitable for logging. Bark announced that it will file an appeal with the 9th Circuit.

My take: The stands need thinning. The agency plans to take great care around streams. This is about as benign as logging gets.

Six et al paper on MPB Treatments, with Responses

Three related documents for study and discussion: A paper from the journal Forests, a response to the paper also published in Forests, and a white paper by a group of USFS Forest Health Protection folks.

Management for Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak Suppression: Does Relevant Science Support Current Policy?” by Diana L. Six, Eric Biber, and Elisabeth Long, Forests 2014, 5, 103-133.

Abstract: While the use of timber harvests is generally accepted as an effective approach
to controlling bark beetles during outbreaks, in reality there has been a dearth of monitoring
to assess outcomes, and failures are often not reported. Additionally, few studies have
focused on how these treatments affect forest structure and function over the long term, or
our forests’ ability to adapt to climate change. Despite this, there is a widespread belief in
the policy arena that timber harvesting is an effective and necessary tool to address beetle
infestations. That belief has led to numerous proposals for, and enactment of, significant
changes in federal environmental laws to encourage more timber harvests for beetle
control. In this review, we use mountain pine beetle as an exemplar to critically evaluate
the state of science behind the use of timber harvest treatments for bark beetle suppression
during outbreaks. It is our hope that this review will stimulate research to fill important
gaps and to help guide the development of policy and management firmly based in science,
and thus, more likely to aid in forest conservation, reduce financial waste, and bolster
public trust in public agency decision-making and practice.

A Comment on Six et al by Christopher J. Fettig, Kenneth E. Gibson, A. Steven Munson, and Jose F. Negrón, Forests 2014, 5, 822-826.

Effectiveness of Direct and Indirect Mountain Pine Beetle Control Treatments as Implemented by the USDA Forest Service,” a White Paper in response to Six et al by 28 technical editors and contributors, all with USFS Forest Health Protection.

Rim fire salvage logging wins support?

Modesto Bee article today: Rim fire salvage logging wins support.

“Several environmental groups pledged Tuesday to support the salvage logging proposed for parts of the Rim fire area.

“They joined timber industry and other leaders in Tuolumne County in a letter urging the U.S. Forest Service to approve the logging, which is proposed for about a tenth of the 257,314-acre fire zone.

“The letter was from a coalition called Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions, which was working on forest issues even before last year’s fire charred parts of the Stanislaus National Forest, Yosemite National Park and private land.”

Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/2014/04/22/3304927/rim-fire-salvage-logging-wins.html#storylink=cpy

Nothing about this on Yosemite Stanislaus Solutions, which is a CFLRP group.

“Among the signers are the Tuolumne County Farm Bureau, American Forest Resource Council, Tuolumne County Alliance for Resources and Environment, Central Sierra Aududon Society, Tuolumne Group of the Sierra Club, Tuolumne River Trust, California Forestry Association, Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk Indians and an off-road motorcycle club named Merced Dirt Riders.”

GAO Report on NEPA Analyses

The GAO has released a report, “National Environmental Policy Act: Little Information Exists on NEPA Analyses.” Lots to digest! Here are three items, for example, that may be of interest:

* “… the Forest Service reported that 78 percent of its 14,574 NEPA analyses from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2012 were CEs, 20 percent were EAs, and 2 percent were EISs.”

* “… the Forest Service reported that its 501 EAs in fiscal year 2012 took an average of about 18 months to complete.”

* “The little governmentwide information that is available on CEs shows that they generally take less time to complete than EAs. DOE does not track completion times for CEs, but agency officials stated that they usually take 1 or 2 days. Similarly, officials at Interior’s Office of Surface Mining reported that CEs take approximately 2 days to complete. In contrast, Forest Service took an average of 177 days to complete CEs in fiscal year 2012, shorter than its average of 565 days for EAs, according to agency documents.”

More comments on the report are welcome.