21st Century Problems

This is how we “love wilderness to death?”

by

I couldn’t ignore these two stories showing up the same day (but I didn’t look for a photo).

Deschutes and Willamette National Forests (OR) proposes limiting wilderness users:  “Wilderness rangers reported coming across unburied human feces more than 1,000 times.”

White River National Forest (CO) proposes limiting overnight camping in wilderness:  “During the 2016 summer season, Jerman added, Wilderness Rangers encountered 273 incidences of unburied human waste in the Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness.”

Not my area of expertise, but does raise some management policy questions.  Maybe the permit should require completion of some training.

Planning for pipelines – not

by

A Draft Record of Decision document released by the United States Forest Service would allow 11 exceptions to the Jefferson National Forest Plan and adopt an amendment that allows old growth forests, rare species and wetlands to be destroyed by the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline.

The Draft Record of Decision (ROD)  states that “the proposed plan amendment is needed…because the MVP Project cannot meet several Forest Plan Standards…to protect soil, water, riparian, old growth, recreational and visual resources.” (ROD, pg. 4)

The ROD refers to Executive Order 13766 recently issued by President Trump that directs the USFS to “expedite, in a manner consistent with the law, environmental reviews and approvals for all infrastructure projects that are a high priority for the Nation, such as …pipelines.”

Time for the energy development battles to move to court?   This article mentions two potential litigation risks.  The Forest did not consider any pipeline alternatives that would be consistent with the forest plan.  It also adopts plan amendments that were not included in the DEIS (arguably these are new decisions that were never scoped).  It could also test the amendment procedures under the 2012 Planning Rule.

Federal lands and transitional economies

by

Headwaters Economics has released this update to a report discussed at length here last year:

 “Rural counties in the West with more federal lands performed better on average than their peers with less federal lands in four key economic measures.”

“This update of research from last year finds that from the early 1970s to the early 2010s, population, employment, and personal income on average all grew significantly faster—two times faster or more—in western rural counties with the highest share of federal lands compared to counties with the lowest share of federal lands. Per capita income growth was slightly higher in counties with more federal land.”

An article on “transitional communities” adds:

“Rural decline is a large and complex issue that appears to be accelerating. According to the Pew Charitable Trust, during the period between 1994–2010, 38.4 percent of U.S. rural counties lost population; since 2010, over two-thirds of rural counties lost population.  This level of decline has far-reaching national and international implications for food and energy production, tourism, and national culture and identity.”

Putting them together, it looks like public lands can be an important asset for minimizing or avoiding rural decline, if communities can get their act together to embrace this potential and plan for it.

“Particularly in declining communities where long-established residents remember the charm of life in simpler times, residents can have considerable resistance to change. This connection and preservation of the past, while a rural virtue, can impede its adaptation into the future. Resistance to any proposed solution that “hasn’t been done before” simply impedes innovation or positive transition.”

Fracking on the Wayne protested

by

This would be the first approval of fracking on this national forest, and it required a supplemental information review of the impacts of fracking, because that was not addressed in the 2006 forest plan.  I was curious about how the analysis would address the potential for earthquakes, based on what has been happening in Oklahoma.

The BLM’s analysis didn’t say much:  “Increased seismic activity has recently been a concern of the public following a number of low magnitude earthquakes centered on the Youngstown area. These earthquakes were within a mile of the Northstar 1 well, a Class II deep injection well…  In response to these seismic events and the possible linkage to the injection well the ODNR is pursuing reforms to the injection well program, including restrictions on injecting fluids in the Cambrian or Precambrian rock, requirements for testing and monitoring of pressures and injection rates and the installation of an automatic shutoff system, among other reforms (ODNR 2012).”

Talking about what the state might do is not exactly a disclosure of the environmental impacts.  The BLM concluded, “No additional analysis or protective measures are needed at the Forest Plan level, since the RFDS (Reasonably Foreseeable Development Scenario) discussed the common methods of waste disposal and this was used as the basis of the effects analysis conducted in the EIS.”

Some of the locals are not happy about the planned leases.

Should the Forest Service intervene on the side of environmental groups?

by

“Public interest groups filed a lawsuit Thursday, Sept. 15, challenging the city of Highland’s approval of the high-density Harmony development. The development sits at the confluence of Mill Creek and the Santa Ana River and is directly adjacent to San Bernardino National Forest lands and will bring more than 3,600 houses to 1,657 acres of land acquired by Orange County Flood Control in the Seven Oaks Dam project that are currently home to numerous endangered species, rare habitats, wetlands and crucial wildlife connectivity corridors, according to the suit.”

“The lawsuit was brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, San Bernardino Valley Audubon Society and the Greenspot Residents Association, who are represented by the law firm Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger. It argues the city of Highland’s City Council’s August approval of the project violates the California Environmental Quality Act.”

It sounds like potentially illegal local government actions could adversely affect national forest resources.  Shouldn’t the Forest Service be trying to protect those resources?  (Not to mention what this would add to fire management costs.)

http://www.highlandnews.net/news/political/lawsuit-challenges-high-density-harmony-housing-development/article_f36e5c3e-7cfd-11e6-845e-2bf853763e42.html

“Patriot” attack on public lands (and its users and employees)

by

Some members of Congress are trying to shine a spotlight on the threat to public land from armed militias.  They point out the direct threats, but also link them to the attempts to transfer federal lands to states:

“Anti-government extremists didn’t always direct their ire at public-lands agencies. That changed, in part, because a group of Western congressmen, state legislators and county sheriffs built their careers by advocating the transfer of millions of acres of federal land to states or counties, even though no state or county had ever owned the land in question or could afford to manage it now.”

They cite, in particular, a letter from 32 former employees of federal land management agencies (including three former Forest Service chiefs), which lists ten threats to public lands from anti-government extremism.

 

National forests on the campaign trail (or Hillary on the stump)

by

“Hillary Clinton’s Plan for Conservation and Collaborative Stewardship of America’s Great Outdoors”

Hillary Clinton believes that restoring and protecting the health of America’s forests requires managing them for the full scope of benefits they provide. Clinton will work with the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to set clear management goals that not only recognize the value of forests and public lands for sustainable timber, but for the carbon they absorb, the wildlife habitat they furnish, and the recreation opportunities and clean drinking water they supply. Clinton will build on the success of the Roadless Rule by working to protect and restore old growth and large landscapes that are essential to the health of fish and wildlife. Recognizing that climate change is increasing the dangers and costs of large wildfires in many areas, Clinton will also work to reform the wildfire budget to ensure that firefighters, states, and communities have the resources they need to fight fires every year, and to end the damaging practice of transferring resources away from initiatives that help reduce fire risk and restore the health of forests.

In recent years, special interest groups have been supporting efforts to dispose of or sell off America’s public lands, which would privatize national forests, national monuments, and even national parks. Clinton strongly opposes these proposals to sell off America’s natural heritage. She will fight to protect the rights of our children and grandchildren to explore the lands and waters that define us as a nation.

Clinton will set a goal of unlocking access to at least 2 million acres of currently inaccessible public lands by the end of her first term – halving the amount of public land that is currently off-limits – by pursuing voluntary conservation partnerships with private landowners and state governments to establish new access points, trails, and easements to open public access to public lands.

Clinton will expand energy production on public lands and waters ten-fold within ten years of taking office, while reforming federal fossil fuel leasing.  Through smarter planning, public input, and careful decisions, the federal government should be directing developers – whether for renewable energy projects or mineral extraction – to areas with the fewest potential environmental costs, while clearly identifying those special places that should be safeguarded for future generations.

Clinton will advance a joint Department of Interior/Department of Agriculture program to commercialize biomass energy opportunities associated with sound forest management and agricultural practices

Clinton will ask the Small Business Administration (SBA) to dedicate a portion of SBA loans to entrepreneurs seeking to launch small businesses in the outdoor industry as well as existing business owners in gateway communities.

Trump’s alternative anyone?

Helping realtors think about climate change

by

Previous posts have discussed how where we choose to live contributes to the effects of climate change, both by promoting carbon lifestyles and building in locations at risk.  The Missoula Organization of Realtors hosted a conference on the effects of climate change on their industry.  This is a step in the right direction.  Missing from the presentation though were the perspectives on urban interface living from local government planners and public land managers.

Creating the Next Generation of National Forest Plans

by

I was going to call it “A New Century of Forest Planning,” but it looked like that was taken.  For those of you who were attracted to this blog by its original title, you may find this article useful.

Thanks to the Bolle Center for publishing it.  It seems appropriate that one of the students whom Dr. Bolle mentored in the early 70s can use the institution honoring him to critique the state of the law and policies he helped inspire – and hopefully continue his role of bringing attention to public lands management controversies.