New paper by Jerry F. Franklin & K. Norman Johnson in Biodiversity and Conservation:”Lessons in policy implementation from experiences with the Northwest Forest Plan.”

Abstract: Approximately 20 years ago, the preeminent goal for management of the federal forests of the Pacific Northwest shifted suddenly and permanently from sustained timber harvest to conservation of biodiversity and ecological processes, following a series of court cases over protection of species in decline that were associated with old forests. While old growth harvest has largely ceased, some key species are still in decline and forest management has been restricted more than intended. Creation of openings, even those based on disturbance processes, has been especially difficult. Some lessons from this experience include the difficulty of adaptive management, the importance of ecological foundations for management, and the need for stakeholder collaboration. In addition, it is essential to provide society with a vision of ecologically-based forestry, including field demonstrations, and to communicate this approach and its scientific foundation in the popular media.

The district court decision of Sept. 16, 2014, includes much discussion of owl habitat and what the USFS did and didn’t say and do regarding its EIS. For example:

“…the Forest Service explained in the ROD that the 2014 owl survey did not produce significant new information warranting a SEIS since “both the EIS and this decision recognize that owls forage in burned forests, and the EIS analyzes the effects of the various alternatives based on this understanding; therefore the underlying point raised in the August 21, 2014 comment letter, that implementing the Rim Recovery Project may adversely affect spotted owls in the area, was already addressed in the EIS and factored into this decision.” JA A00038. Neither the 2014 owl survey results nor Bond’s subsequent analysis produced data rising to the level of significant new information. The Forest Service’s reasoned evaluation of the 2014 owl survey data is sufficient.”

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — Current and former female firefighters of the United States Forest Service have filed a complaint with the Department of Agriculture alleging that they suffered job discrimination, harassment and sexual abuse at the hands of male co-workers and that top agency officials failed to stop it.

The women said the complaint, the first step in a potential class-action lawsuit, was filed late last month on behalf of hundreds of women who worked in the Forest Service’s Region 5, which encompasses more than 20 million acres in 18 national forests in California. The seven women who are the lead complainants said they faced retaliation when they reported the offenses to superiors….

One of the current complainants, Alicia Dabney, a former firefighter in the Sequoia National Forest in Centerville, Calif., said in an interview that she was the subject of repeated verbal abuse and physical taunts. “It was a frat boy atmosphere,” said Ms. Dabney, who was usually the only woman on her 20-person crew. “You are often isolated because where you work is so remote.”

Ms. Dabney said that her supervisor, who is still employed by the Forest Service, put her in a chokehold and tried to rape her in 2012. In another instance, she said, fliers with the words “Alicia Dabney is a whore” were left on the floor of the fire station.

She said that after she reported the harassment, the Forest Service fired her in 2012, citing what her superiors said was her failure to disclose her past criminal record on her job application. Ms. Dabney said that the agency had long known about her record and that “this was dredged up after I complained.”….

The current gender discrimination complaint is similar to ones filed in the 1970s and 1990s by female workers in Region 5 who said they were denied promotions and harassed by male co-workers. As part of the settlements stemming from those complaints, the Agriculture Department required the Forest Service in California to hire more women and to put in place civil rights enforcement programs, sensitivity training and a unit to investigate and resolve sexual harassment and hostile environment claims.

Read the entire article here.

“New Survey: Conservation Could Impact 2014’s Ballot Box”

“This year’s bipartisan survey of 2,400 registered voters across six states …”

“Westerners want their air, water and land protected, and where a candidate stands on these issues could potentially sway votes.”

“69 percent of Westerners are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports enhancing protections for some public lands, like national forests.”

I’ll believe it when I see it, but it at least suggests that the opposite is NOT true.

Less than a week ago, I noticed that the Forest Service’s employee search engine had lost its email addresses. Employee phone numbers were still available to the public, but not their email addresses.

Lacking any email addresses to find out what was going on, I picked up my 20th century phone and started dialing. Found a nice lady in Portland’s public affairs office who said she’d look into it.

On Monday, the FS’s webmeister emailed me: “This appears to be something that got inadvertently omitted during a recent code change. We’re testing out a new Web Content Management System (Drupal) with our national headquarters site and have been making some improvements to how the html markup gets rendered by the application. It’s likely that the ‘email’ address field was accidently over-written during the course of these changes.” He said it would be fixed within a day or two.

It was and is fixed now.

It’s anecdotal data only, but I’ve seen several steps made recently that suggest the Forest Service is clawing its way up the “Best Places to Work” ladder. Keep up the good work! And thanks for the quick response, too.

This article describes a project on the Lolo National Forest in Montana that is “a model of responsible, sustainable development of timber projects in national forests.” From what I gather from the article, the project involves harvesting a lot of dead a down material:

“The site is just south of Superior near Cedar Creek and encompasses hundreds of acres which will be harvested, not in a clear-cut slash and burn method, but instead using sophisticated techniques which will remove tons of dead debris that currently litters the forest floor, inhibiting the movement and migration of important animal species through the county.

“Brummett said the project will involve intermittent logging, road development and some burning of areas with particularly heavy debris load. She said the project has the unwavering support of Mineral County Commissioners and has been positively received by the communities it will affect.”

What are the odds of a lawsuit?

The CBD’s expected lawsuit against the USFS over salvage on the Rim Fire near Yosemite.

The introduction offers some points to ponder:

“Snag forest habitat, also known as “complex early seral forest”, is one of the rarest and least protected of all forest habitat types in the Sierra Nevada.”

Rare? Says who? Chad Hanson:

“Due to fire suppression policies, there is now about one-fourth as much high-intensity fire—the type of fire that creates complex early seral forest—as there was prior to the early 20th century (Hanson and Odion 2014, Odion et al. 2014).”

“This habitat—if not subjected to post-fire logging—supports levels of native biodiversity and wildlife abundance comparable to, and sometimes higher than, that of unburned mature/old forest (Raphael et al. 1987, Burnett et al. 2010, Swanson et al. 2011).”

Yes, and clearcuts can also support higher levels of native biodiversity and wildlife abundance than old-growth.

“The Rim fire logging project would log most of the snag forest habitat within the Rim fire on the Stanislaus National Forest.”

The EIS says: “Salvage of dead trees and fuel reduction (28,326 acres) including ground based mechanized equipment such as harvesters and rubber tired skidders (24,127 acres), ground based/skyline swing (16 acres) and aerial based helicopter (2,930 acres) or cable systems (1,253 acres).”

The Rim Fire burned 257,314 acres, including 154,530 acres of National Forest System (NFS) lands.

So the USFS proposes salvage on about 18% of the burned area (but won’t be taking all dead trees). The CBD’s complaint says 60% of the burned area was conifer forest. I do’t know how much of the USFS lands were conifer forests, but I don’t think 28,326 acres is “most” of the “snag forest.”

Update on the Red Mountain Flume-Chessman Reservoir project, discussed in several recent threads, including this one. Photos of logs and and article:

Chessman Reservoir lawsuit to continue as timber harvest begins

At least one of the two conservation groups suing over the Red Mountain Flume-Chessman Reservoir project plans to proceed with a lawsuit despite a federal judge saying the groups are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their case while denying a temporary halt to the project.

“We’re proceeding,” said Steve Kelly, executive director of the Montana Ecosystems Defense Council. “It doesn’t discourage me in any way because the principles in the case are sound.”

Federal Judge Dana Christensen in Missoula denied the Native Ecosystems Council and Montana Ecosystem Defense Councils a preliminary injunction, saying in part that the councils failed to show endangered species would be harmed and that the threat of wildfire to Helena’s water supply is real.

….

Update to Bear-iered or Not? District Court decision in Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Bradford, involving grizzlies, roads, and other issues on the Kootenai National Forest, handed down Aug. 28, throws out Alliance’s appeal, so the project may now move forward.