Uncategorized

NY Times: Forest management helped slow Bootleg Fire

by

In the NY Times on January 5 (I’m a subscriber). Excerpt:

When the Bootleg fire tore through a nature reserve in Oregon this summer, the destruction varied in different areas. Researchers say forest management methods, including controlled burns, were a big factor.

The Bootleg fire scorched some parts of the Sycan Marsh Preserve, left, while other areas that had been managed by foresters were spared the worst effects of the fire. Credit…Chona Kasinger for The New York Times

 

SILVER LAKE, Ore. — When a monster of a wildfire whipped into the Sycan Marsh Preserve here in south-central Oregon in July, Katie Sauerbrey feared the worst.

Ms. Sauerbrey, a fire manager for The Nature Conservancy, the conservation group that owns the 30,000-acre preserve, was in charge of a crew helping to fight the blaze — the Bootleg fire, one of the largest in a summer of extreme heat and dryness in the West — and protect a research station on the property.

Watching the fire, which had already rapidly burned through thousands of acres of adjacent national forest, she saw a shocking sight: Flames 200 feet high were coming over a nearby ridge. “I said, OK, there’s nothing we can do,” she recalled.

But as the fire got closer, it changed dramatically, Ms. Sauerbrey said. “It had gone from the most extreme fire behavior I had ever seen in my career to seeing four-foot flame lengths moving through the stand.” While the fire kept burning through the forest, its lower intensity spared many trees, and the station survived.

Firefighters describe this kind of change in behavior as a fire “dropping down,” shifting from one with intense flames that spread quickly from tree crown to tree crown to a lower-level burn that is less dangerous. There are various reasons this can happen, including localized changes in winds, moisture, tree types and topography.

But for Ms. Sauerbrey and her colleagues with The Nature Conservancy, what she witnessed was most likely a real-life example of what they and others have been studying for years: how thinning of trees in overgrown forests, combined with prescribed, or controlled, burns of accumulated dead vegetation on the forest floor, can help achieve the goal of reducing the intensity of wildfires by removing much of the fuel that feeds them.

…

American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas

by

Just received this from the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University:

NESP members may be interested in this call for comments on developing environmental policy.
The Department of the Interior, on behalf of an interagency working group co-led with the Council on Environmental Quality, Department of Agriculture, and Department of Commerce through National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is soliciting comments to inform how the American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas (Atlas) can best serve as a useful tool for the public and how it should reflect a continuum of conservation actions in the America the Beautiful initiative, recognizing that many uses of lands and waters can be consistent with the long-term health of natural systems and contribute to addressing climate change and environmental injustices. The input received will be used to develop the Atlas.
DATES:
Interested persons are invited to submit comments by 11:59 p.m. on March 7, 2022.
The interagency group will host virtual public listening sessions at the dates and times below.
  • Thursday, January 13, 2022, 2:00–3:30 p.m. ET
  • Wednesday, January 19, 2022, 6:00–7:30 p.m. ET
  • Friday, January 21, 2022, 11:00 a.m.–12:30 p.m. ET
Specific details will be posted on the Department of the Interior’s America the Beautiful web page on January 4, 2022. Listening sessions may end before the time noted above if all those participating have completed their oral comments.
To submit comments:
Comments must be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov and will be available for public viewing and inspection. In the Search box, enter the docket number presented above in the document headings. For best results, do not copy and paste the number; instead, type the docket number into the Search box using hyphens. Then, click on the Search button. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment.”

 

 

 

Dixie Fire, PG&E, and the US Forest Service

by

Mike Archer has this in his Wildfire News of the Day today:

CAL FIRE sent along a press release which announced that investigators determined that Pacific Gas & Electric was responsible for the Dixie Fire, which burned 963,309 acres, destroyed 1,329 structures and damaged 95 additional structures in Butte, Plumas, Lassen, Shasta, and Tehama counties after it started last July.
CAL FIRE Investigators Determine Cause of the Dixie Fire https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KOTmTdyMl-T1NGwF2s890NjHBFFyTWgu/view?usp=sharing

The Cal Fire PR says, “After a meticulous and thorough investigation, CAL FIRE has determined that the Dixie Fire was caused by
a tree contacting electrical distribution lines owned and operated by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) located west
of Cresta Dam.”

Looking at Google Maps, the power lines in question appear to be on the Plumas National Forest. If so, could the USFS be held liable? Or is it all on PG&E?

 

Study: Forest Restoration Can Benefit Spotted Owls

by

This study, “Forest restoration limits megafires and supports species conservation under climate change” ($), by Gavin Jones et al, is described in a Treehugger article. Excerpts:

“Forest restoration often involves some removal of live trees—mostly small and medium-sized trees in the forest understory that have grown in because of fire exclusion. These smaller trees increase fire risk to owl habitat, and removal of these smaller trees will protect the rare, larger trees that owls use for nesting,” lead author Gavin Jones, Ph.D., a research ecologist with the USDA Forest Service (USFS) Rocky Mountain Research Station, tells Treehugger.”

…

“We found the direct, and potential negative effects of forest restoration to owl habitat (that is, removal of trees in owl habitat) were small relative to the positive effects that restoration had on reducing fire risk to owls,” Jones says. “So even though in some cases we found that restoration could have negative short-term impacts to owls, it reduced the long-term impacts of severe fire. These long-term benefits led to better outcomes for owls.”

In some scenarios, the findings suggest that placing restoration treatments inside owl habitats would cut the predicted amount of severe fire almost in half compared to treating the same area outside of their territories.

This is another case of research confirming what many foresters and others have been saying for years.

“Big fires demand a big response”

by

An essay from The Conversation, “Big fires demand a big response: How 1910’s Big Burn can help us think smarter about fighting wildfires and living with fire.”

Excerpt:

A new fire paradigm

The response to the Big Burn was not only wrongheaded, in our view, but also crude in its single-mindedness. “Put all forest fires out” had a clarity to it, but a 21st-century fire paradigm shift will have to be connected to broader conversations about environmental knowledge and how it can best be shared.

The U.S. has learned that it cannot suppress its way to a healthy relationship with fire in the West. That strategy failed even before climate change proved it to be no strategy at all.

Building a more successful coexistance with fire includes figuring out how to work cooperatively. This includes broader conversations about environmental knowledge, what constitutes it and how best it can be shared. Indigenous communities have long lived with fire and used it to cultivate healthy ecosystems. Prescribed and cultural burning are important tools in mitigating catastrophic fire and simultaneously aiding forest health.

Living with fire also requires teaching everyone about fire. Schools at all levels and grades can teach fire knowledge, including the science of fire and its consequences for communities, economies and lives; the history and cultural practices of fire; and the plants, landscapes and materials that can help prevent fires.

Fire, Forests, and Carbon

by

An addition to our discussions of forest carbon and the management practices that impact carbon storage and ems, and calls for preservation, rather than active management. A new study from Cambridge University: “Fire effects on the persistence of soil organic matter and long-term carbon storage,” Nature ($), Dec. 23, 2021.

A Cambridge press release boils it down:

“Using controlled burns in forests to mitigate future wildfire severity is a relatively well-known process. But we’ve found that in ecosystems including temperate forests, savannahs and grasslands, fire can stabilise or even increase soil carbon,” said Dr Adam Pellegrini in the University of Cambridge’s Department of Plant Sciences, first author of the report.

He added: “Most of the fires in natural ecosystems around the globe are controlled burns, so we should see this as an opportunity. Humans are manipulating a process, so we may as well figure out how to manipulate it to maximise carbon storage in the soil.”

Fire burns plant matter and organic layers within the soil, and in severe wildfires this leads to erosion and leaching of carbon. It can take years or even decades for lost soil carbon to re-accumulate. But the researchers say that fires can also cause other transformations within soils that can offset these immediate carbon losses, and may stabilise ecosystem carbon.

Fire stabilises carbon within the soil in several ways. It creates charcoal, which is very resistant to decomposition, and forms ‘aggregates’ – physical clumps of soil that can protect carbon-rich organic matter at the centre. Fire can also increase the amount of carbon bound tightly to minerals in the soil.

“Ecosystems can store huge amounts of carbon when the frequency and intensity of fires is just right. It’s all about the balance of carbon going into soils from dead plant biomass, and carbon going out of soils from decomposition, erosion, and leaching,” said Pellegrini.

When fires are too frequent or intense – as is often the case in densely planted forests – they burn all the dead plant material that would otherwise decompose and release carbon into the soil. High-intensity fires can also destabilise the soil, breaking off carbon-based organic matter from minerals and killing soil bacteria and fungi.

Without fire, soil carbon is recycled – organic matter from plants is consumed by microbes and released as carbon dioxide or methane. But infrequent, cooler fires can increase the retention of soil carbon through the formation of charcoal and soil aggregates that protect from decomposition.

 

Lawsuit over Hiker’s Death on USFS land

by

This item was listed in Nick Smith’s HFHC newsletter yesterday. The trailhead in question is a few miles from my home. I walked the footbridge before the USFS stopped installing it each spring. Without the footbridge, hikers must ford the Sandy River, a glacier-fed stream that often is to fast and furious to cross.

The court’s opinion is interesting for its mention of USFS “parking fees” in the form of day-use fees and passes, which I think the USFS has been at pains to avoid calling “parking fees.” Also, an Oregon state law worked in the USFS’s favor: “a property owner is immune from tort liability if it charges a parking fee of less than $15 for use of its land.” Why $15? I have no idea.

CHICAGO — In a case arising from a man’s drowning on U.S. Forest Service property in Oregon, the Seventh Circuit ruled that a $5 pass qualifies as a parking fee of less than $15, and the government is thus immune from tort liability. The man drowned after a logjam ruptured, sending a tall wave and debris at a seasonal bridge across the Sandy River while the man and his friend were crossing.

/ December 27, 2021

Read the opinion here.

Happy Holidays, Everyone!

by

 

Peace on Earth and Good Will Toward Folks!

It is that special time of the year during which we can sing to trees without risking societal opprobrium. Here’s Nat King Cole in German:

And the Holly and the Ivy.  an interesting historical piece on the Holly and the Ivy, pre-Christian and Christian. apparently some of the earlier versions referred to foresters in this line ”

Holly hath berries, as red as any rose,
The foresters, the hunters, keep them from the does.

 

May peace, love and hope fill your hearts, your families and our world this season of  Christmas/Solstice/Kwanzaa.

 

I’ll be back January 3rd or thereabouts.  If you do donations at the end of the year, The Smokey Wire would greatly appreciate them.  Donations are not tax-deductible. However.

Journal of Forestry: Piloting a Climate-Change Adaptation Index on US National Forest Lands

by

The November 2021 edition of the Journal of Forestry just arrived in my mailbox. One open-access paper may be of interest to Smokey Wire folks:

Piloting a Climate-Change Adaptation Index on US National Forest Lands

It’s open to SAF members only.

Abstract

Climate change presents a novel and significant threat to the sustainability of forest ecosystems worldwide. The United States Forest Service (USFS) has conducted climate change vulnerability assessments for much of the 193 million acres of national forest lands it manages, yet little to no research exists on the degree to which management units have adopted considerations of climate change into planning or project implementation. In response to this knowledge gap, we piloted a survey instrument in USFS Region 1 (Northern region) and Region 6 (Pacific Northwest region) to determine criteria for assessing the degree to which national forests integrate climate-change considerations into their management planning and activities. Our resulting climate-change adaptation index provides an efficient quantitative approach for identifying where, how, and, potentially, why some national forests are making more progress toward incorporating climate-change adaptations into forest planning and management.

Study Implications

We used a self-assessment survey of planners and managers on US National Forests in Forest Service Regions 1 and 6 to design a climate change adaptation index for measuring the degree to which national forests units have integrated considerations of climate change into their planning and management activities. Our resulting index can potentially be used to help understand how and why the USFS’s decentralized climate-change adaptation strategy has led some national forests to make comparatively significant progress towards adapting to climate change while others have lagged behind.

Excerpt from the authors’ conclusion:

The national forests with the most robust responses were using vulnerability assessments to drive management priorities on their forests and were integrating climate change activities into their work with outside partners. Additional research is need to better understand the factors that drive national forest management units to adopt more robust considerations of climate change into their management and planning activities.

Objections to a Project on the Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests in Georgia

by

How about a break from looking at Western US issues? A News article here has links to several documents….

Excerpts:

The plan’s stated goal is to: “Create, restore and maintain ecosystems that are more resilient to natural disturbances.”

In the final draft of the plan, released Oct. 26, forest supervisor Edward Hunter Jr. wrote, “The reality facing our forests is that without active management on the ground to increase the resiliency of these ecosystems and difficult decisions for the sustainability of our recreation program, these public lands and all their inhabitants are at severe risk.” 

…

But Georgia ForestWatch, the Chattooga Conservancy, Georgia Chapter of the Sierra Club, and the Wilderness Society filed a joint 25-page objection to the plan on Dec. 13. The objection states the plan lacks sufficient opportunities for public participation, circumvents future National Environmental Protection Agency review and lacks clarity on how the plan will be implemented in specific areas. The plan does not properly account for carbon emissions and carbon storage, the objection states, and the plan would lead to an increase in carbon emissions in the near term. 

The final environmental assessment, “unlawfully fails to identify the actions that will receive additional review and the actions that will not,” wrote J.D. McCrary executive director of ForestWatch in a statement to The Times. 

“(The final assessment) does not quantify the project’s likely impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Given the threat posed by climate change and the need to reduce emissions in the near term, it is important for the Forest Service to understand the impact of its actions on carbon emissions and sequestration.”