Speaking of the Timber Wars, I received this in the mail from Andy Kerr this morning.
It’s part 2 of what he thinks needs to be changed in the NWFP. Kerr talks about his views and looks at the recommendations of The Making of a Northwest Forest Plan and The World’s Largest Ecosystem Management Plan: The Northwest Forest Plan After a Quarter-Century. I’m sure you NW-ers will find something to discuss.
1. I was kind of surprised that Westsiders felt like they knew what was best for dry forests. I’m not sure about this..
It’s still stand-density reduction, whether the trees being removed are dead or alive. As Jerry and Norm have told me many times, if a dry-forest stand burns before it is treated (thinned), the best course is to leave the larger trees that would have been left and take the smaller trees that would have been removed in a restoration treatment had the stand not burned.
2. The NWFP was just the beginning, folks want the same thing on private lands (now why wouldn’t people invest in private timberlands?)
The NWFP should call for terrestrial habitat restoration on nonfederal lands as well—better yet, to reconvert private timberlands to public forestlands.
3. At least the recommendations cited here, seem related to past views of ecological stability vs. dynamism, and only incorporate climate change in ways that support what they thought 30 years ago.
(NJG) UTILIZE TREATMENTS, INCLUDING THINNING AND BURNING, TO RESTORE OLD DRY FORESTS TO APPROXIMATIONS OF THEIR HISTORICAL STATES
(AK) Amen, with a however. Burning must always occur, either as the only treatment or the follow-up treatment after scientifically sound thinning.
Some folks here are concerned that burning can be more dangerous due to climate change-induced factors of heat and drought. Others model and say the trees are all going to die in the next 50 years. When and how do we consider climate change impacts?
4. If AGW is real then lots of species will move around and may be more successful than the natives. If that happens should we/can we afford to kill them all off? Is the NSO in some kind of sacred category or how many species will we do this for?
CONSERVING THE NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL
(NJG) • KILL BARRED OWLS TO PROTECT NORTHERN SPOTTED OWLS ON AT LEAST A PORTION OF THE SPOTTED OWL’S RANGE.
(AK) Amen and hallelujah. See my Public Lands Blog post entitled “B. Owl v. N. S. Owl.” ”[A]t least a portion should, praise be, “all” of the spotted owl’s range.
5. And always, wolves are moving back so…end livestock grazing and reduce road densities. And yet somehow their ranges are expanding without ending livestock grazing, or timber harvesting, or reducing road densities.
Gray wolves are returning to the NWFP area and need to be made more welcome. Wolf-friendly measures include equitably ending livestock grazing and reducing road densities.
With the FACA committee, I suppose that this is only the beginning of these discussions.