A commentary in the form of an article in High Country News:

Will the Northwest Forest Plan come undone?
The Forest Service and BLM embark on revising the iconic plan and may allow more logging.

Excerpt:

“On a March evening in Portland, Oregon, Forest Service officials met with about 150 members of the public for a “listening session” as the agency begins the process of crafting a replacement for the plan. It expects to finish that work by 2019.

“Many of those in attendance at the Portland session were members of the environmental group Bark, which insists that the current plan is allowing too many trees to be cut down, especially near rivers. Conspicuously absent from the meeting were the timber workers. The scene was a major contrast to the 1993 Clinton summit, when workers protested the loss of timber jobs by loudly rolling big log trucks through downtown Portland.”

Too many trees to be cut down, especially near rivers? Where? I haven’t seen any trees cut along rivers on USFS ground in a long time.

I agree that the USFS ought to hold listening sessions in rural areas, rather than near airports in Portland, Redding, and Seattle.

Thanks, HCN! Here’s the link. My favorite is the last sentence..

Citing budgetary shortfalls, federal agencies announced Wednesday that they had auctioned off naming rights to over 100 million acres of public lands, effective immediately.

In a joint press release, the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service said that hundreds of iconic parcels will now bear the monikers of major corporations. “We’re pleased to collaborate with our private partners in stewarding our nation’s public lands,” states the release. “It gives us great pleasure to know that future generations of Americans will be able to raft down the Grand PepsiCo Canyon, hike across the Anheuser-Busch Badlands, and gaze upon the transcendent peaks of North Cascades Presented by Citibank.”
A photo illustration shows the Nike swoosh engraved on Half Dome in Yosemite National Park.
Photo Illustration by Brooke Warren, Photo by Daniel Parks/CC Flickr

The naming rights sale comes on the heels of fiscal struggles for federal land agencies. The National Park Service’s budget has been cut by $190 million compared to four years ago, and its maintenance backlog has ballooned to over $11 billion. Meanwhile, the Forest Service’s backlog is almost $5 billion, and over 40 percent of the agency’s budget goes toward fighting increasingly frequent and intense wildfires, leaving little money for other purposes.

“Our budgetary situation is approaching a state of crisis,” said Forest Service spokesman Alice Offerman. “Which is why we’re so excited about Valero Valles Caldera and Kinder Morgan Kootenai.” Adds the release: “This new source of revenue will allow us to undertake essential management activities such as trails maintenance, scientific research, and the purchase of military-grade weapons for standoffs with heavily armed Bundy acolytes.”

Not only did corporations purchase naming rights to entire tracts of land, they were also able to buy rights to individual landscape features. In Utah, the graceful curve of weathered sandstone that adorns state license plates will hereafter be known as McDonald’s Delicate Golden Arch. Further north, tourists in America’s first national park will be treated to the reliable eruptions of the Levitra Old Faithful geyser.

Ben Goldfarb April 1, 2015 Web Exclusive

This article, “Federal Land Management Not a Good Deal for Americans,” has a link to a study that comes to that conclusion.

“The states examined in this study earn an average of $14.51 for every dollar spent on state trust land management. The U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management generate only 73 cents in return for every dollar spent on federal land management.”

This court decision bars the BLM from proceeding with a pilot project designed to demonstrate the “ecological forestry” described by Norm Johnson and Jerry Franklin. The court decision is here. From Greenwire today:

BLM can’t use ‘ecoforestry’ in Ore. woods — judge

Salvage logging has been a topic of some discussion here. This study validates what is, in my opinion, common knowledge.

U.S. Forest Service | Pacific Northwest Research Station
News & Information

Contact: David W. Peterson, (509) 664-1727, [email protected]

Media assistance: Yasmeen Sands, (503) 808-2137, [email protected]

Post-fire logging can reduce fuels for up to 40 years in regenerating forests, new study finds

Woody fuels reduced even when fuel reduction was not primary management objective

WENATCHEE, Wash. March 11, 2015. Harvesting fire-killed trees is an effective way to reduce woody fuels for up to four decades following wildfire in dry coniferous forests, a U.S. Forest Service study has found.

The retrospective analysis, among the first to measure the long-term effects of post-fire logging on forest fuels, is published in the journal Forest Ecology and Management.

“Large wildfires can leave behind thousands of acres of fire-killed trees that eventually become fuel for future fires. In the past, post-fire logging has been conducted primarily to recover economic value from those fire-killed trees,” said David W. Peterson, a Wenatchee-based research ecologist with the Pacific Northwest Research Station who led the study.

The study shows that post-fire logging also provides a tangible long-term fuel reduction benefit, giving forest managers another tool for managing woody fuels in dry forest landscapes.

“In comparing logged and unlogged stands, we found that logged stands had higher fuels than unlogged stands, on average, during the first five years after fire and logging, but then had lower fuels from seven to forty years after fire, with the greatest differences being found for large-diameter woody fuels,” Peterson said. “This study provides a sound scientific basis for forest managers to consider fuels management goals along with recovery of economic value and wildlife habitat concerns when deciding when and where to propose post-fire logging.”

The researchers’ analysis revealed that, in unlogged stands, surface woody fuel levels were low shortly after wildfire, peaked 10 to 20 years after wildfire, and then declined gradually out to 39 years past the wildfire. In logged stands, small- and medium-diameter fuels reached their highest levels shortly after the wildfire and then declined in subsequent years, but larger-diameter fuels changed relatively little over the entire time range.

Peterson and his co-authors sampled woody fuels on 255 coniferous forest stands that were killed by wildfires in eastern Washington and Oregon—the region’s most fire-prone areas—between 1970 and 2007. Their sample included 96 stands that were logged after wildfire and 159 that were not, an approach that allowed the researchers to test the effects of post-fire logging on forest fuels. The researchers accounted for pre-fire stand differences by measuring standing and fallen dead trees and stumps in each stand. They did not consider the effects of post-fire logging on sediment, wildlife habitat, or aesthetics.

The Pacific Northwest Research Station—headquartered in Portland, Ore.—generates and communicates scientific knowledge that helps people make informed choices about natural resources and the environment. The station has 11 laboratories and centers located in Alaska, Washington, and Oregon and about 300 employees. Learn more online at http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw.

# # #

Folks, I’ve been working on an essay about US Forest Service roads that are in need of repairs and maintenance, and how a modest increase in timber sales could pay for such work. Indeed, such work is much needed, at least on the forests I’ve visited recently. The photo below is my son, Stewart (6-foot-7) next to a pothole on a heavily used USFS road on the Mt. Hood NF. This is not a new pothole. Someone, maybe an agency person, maybe a member of the public, painted white brackets on the pavement as a warning — as the previously painted warning had faded. So this pothole is years old. It is by no means the largest pothole I’ve encountered on paved roads here. Recreation on the Mt. Hood NF is huge, but some of the roads that serve those visitors are in poor shape.

According to the fy2016 budget justification, “The FY 2016 President’s Budget proposes $154,262,000 for the Roads program, a decrease of $13,832,000 from the FY 2015 Enacted level.” The 2014 enacted level was $166 million. It seems unlikely that an increase in funding will come from Congress.

The essay will be for The Forestry Source in the next few months.  I’d like to hear about the situation on the National Forest(s) you visit. Is the forest in question is doing a good job with its limited road funding dollars? What do you think of the idea of establishing a “roads trust fund” on each forest and setting annual harvest targets for the fund? Or is there a better way to provide an adequate level of road-maintenance funding? If you’d like to pass along your comments for the article, send them to me at [email protected], and let me know if it is OK to publish them. Same with photos: pictures of potholes and other maintenance needs — or roads in good repair — are welcome. I’d like to hear from folks inside and outside of the agency.

Steve Wilent
Editor, The Forestry Source
The Society of American Foresters (www.eforester.org)

Here’s an topic worth discussing: “Critical Ecosystem In Danger, California’s Primary Water Supply at Risk.”

“Today the Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC), in partnership with the United States Forest Service (USFS), announced the launch of the Sierra Nevada Watershed Improvement Program (WIP). The WIP is a coordinated, integrated, collaborative program to restore the health of California’s primary watershed through increased investment and needed policy changes.”

Sounds grand, but the need to harvest timber to accomplish those goals will gum up the works. Or will it?

Good thing the Washington Post’s Fact-Checker doesn’t check many of the claims on this site, right? In reality, this article about Senator Tester’s “whoppers” could just as easily be a FACT CHECK on the entire Montana political, media and environmental establishment, which also repeat variations of these same lies and untruths, and have for years. I’m especially interested to see what the Montana News Media does with this fact-based information, obtained directly from the US Forest Service. – mk

Montana senator twice gets his facts wrong on timber sales and litigation
By Glenn Kessler February 25
http://wapo.st/18kUG33

“Unfortunately, every logging sale in Montana right now is under litigation. Every one of them.”

– Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), interview with Montana Public Radio, Feb. 18, 2015

“Nearly half of the awarded timber volume in Fiscal Year 2014 is currently under litigation.”

– revised statement issued by Tester’s staff, Feb. 19, 2015

Our inbox started flowing with e-mails from outraged residents of Montana shortly after Montana Public Radio ran an interview in which Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)  asserted that “every logging sale” in the state was “under litigation.” The complaints also reached the radio station, as within a day, Tester’s staff offered a revised statement that focused on “volume” rather than sales. Marnee Banks, his spokeswoman, apologized for the original statement, but Tester himself made no comment.

But when we asked Tester’s staff for evidence to back up the revised statement, they simply directed us to the U.S. Forest Service, rather than explain the data themselves. It’s taken a few days to unravel the numbers, but this is a case of apples and oranges, with a few limes thrown in.

What’s the actual effect of litigation on logging in Montana?

The Facts

Logging on federal lands is an important part of Montana’s economy, with the Forest Service having the complex role of seeking to keep the forests healthy while also keeping the state’s mills running. Meanwhile, environment groups in the region are active in making sure the agency does not violate key laws, such as the Endangered Species Act.

Thus, there is an inherent tension. Even so, in 2014, the Forest Service’s Northern Region which includes Montana, met its timber harvest goal for the first time in over 14 years. The region harvested 280 million board feet — enough to build nearly 10,000 homes.

The Forest Service also recognizes the important role of environmental groups who challenge some of its decisions. “Things should be litigated that need to be litigated,” said Heather Noel, a Forest Service spokeswoman. “If there is something the Forest Service has missed, it is very healthy. We absolutely should be tested on that.”

But, despite Tester’s protestations, there is relatively little litigation involving timber sales — and even when there is, it generally does not halt logging operations.

First of all, let’s examine Tester’s claim about every logging sale. According to Tom Martin, a Forest Service deputy director for renewable resource management, there are 97 timber sales under contract in Montana’s national forests. Of that number, just 14 have active litigation, so about 14 percent. But only four of the sales are enjoined by a court from any logging.

These four sales are the Miller West Fisher timber sale in Kootenai National Forest, two Glacier Loon sales (Swan Flats Stewardship and Lunar Kraft Stewardship) in Flathead National Forest and Meadow Creek in Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest. We might question the inclusion of Meadow Creek on this list because Forest Service records show the agency itself pulled the decision without explanation. In the Flathead case, the Forest Service choose to appeal rather than accept a court decision ruling against it, thus extending the delays itself.

In any case, even if one accepts the Forest Service’s definition of enjoined sales, just 4 percent of the timber sales cannot be logged because of litigation.

Meanwhile, there are problems with Tester’s revised statement. In that case, he tried to change the subject by changing the metrics. “What we gave was volume of sales,” acknowledged David Smith, another Forest Service spokesman. “That’s quite different from number of sales litigated.”

But it turns out that the volume of sales under litigation (69.4 million board feet) was being measured against annual timber volume (145.3 million board feet). That is apples and oranges, since “very little of this 69.4 million has been cut this year,” Noel acknowledged.

Moreover, “under litigation” is a rather expansive term because it includes projects which are still being logged even as disputes are settled in courts. (The Forest Service also sometimes counts as “under litigation” areas which are not under contract or where an environmental group simply has said it intends to sue.)

The Forest Service ultimately provided a figure of 271.3 million board feet that is under contract in Montana, as of Dec. 31, 2014. Given that many of the projects being litigated are being logged, it is unclear how much has been cut already. So the only reliable figure we can use is the projected volume of the four projects that are enjoined from any logging: Miller West Fisher (15.4 million board feet), Swan Flats (6), Lunar Kraft (4.3) and Meadow Creek (2).

That adds up to 27.7 million board feet, or about 10 percent of board feet remaining under contract. That’s a far cry from “nearly half.”

We should also note that of Montana’s nine national forests, only three have projects under contract that have been halted by litigation.

The Pinocchio Test

Given that Tester is the senior senator from Montana, his comments on litigation in Montana’s national forests are embarrassingly wrong. In both statements, he was wildly off the mark. He needs to brush up on his facts — and his math — before he opines again on the subject.

Four Pinocchios

Assiduous readers will recall that Forest Service employees generally think poorly of their agency, according to the annual “Best Places to Work” polling. Dissatisfaction with the Forest Service cuts across the demographic spectrum — young, old, black, white, male, female.

With one exception. If you are fortunate enough to be one of the Forest Service’s cadre of Senior Executive Service employees (e.g., chief, deputy chief, regional forester, and the like), you’re pretty happy about your workplace. SES employees give the Forest Service a score of “86” out of 100 as a workplace, compared to scores in the 50’s by every other employee group.

GAO’s recently-released report “OPM Needs to Do More to Ensure Meaningful Distinctions Are Made in SES Ratings and Performance Awards” sheds some light on SES employee job satisfaction. The report takes departments to task for inflated performance ratings and associated cash bonuses. It turns out that in the SES everyone is above average — way above average. USDA gave over 95% of its SES employees a performance rating of “5 – outstanding” or “4 – exceeds fully successful,” the two highest scores on the 5-point scale (government-wide, 85% of SES employees received a 4 or 5 rating). SES employees who score below a “3” are ineligible for performance awards.

USDA gave performance awards of 5-6% (about $10,000) to 100% of its SES employees with a 4 or 5 rating. In other words, over 95% of USDA’s SES employees received a nice pay bump.

Imagine what the performance ratings and bonuses would be if the Forest Service’s employees ranked their superiors.

Kent Connaughton retired from his position as Pacific Northwest Regional Forester in June of last year. Nora Rasure was promoted from her PNW deputy RF position to the Intermountain’s top dog seat two years ago. Former deputy RF Muareen Hyzer is something called “Threat Characterization & Management Program Manager” in the Wenatchee Forest Sciences Lab. PNW Chief of Staff Lisa Freedman has retired, too.

But you wouldn’t know any of the above from reading the Pacific Northwest Region Staff Directory, available on-line to the inquiring public. “Out-of-date” is a generous characterization. The directory includes people who now work for other agencies, in other regions, other jobs, are retired, or even deceased.

Meanwhile, if you want to know who is the current R6 regional forester, good luck with that. You won’t find his name listed on R6’s website. I’m not just picking on Region 6. The same holds true for the rest of the Forest Service’s organizational directory.

Maybe some of that $10 million that was to be spent on “re-branding” might be better used bringing its public directory up-to-date. As an organization, few things say “I don’t care” more than a worthless phone book.