Uncategorized

This morning I got an email from U.S. Forest Service Research News, which including a link to this new research from the USFS and partners concerning wildfires in California.

While the research may be surprising to some, it’s not at all surprising to many of us who have said the same thing going back a few decades now. We’ve had perhaps over a hundred debates about this on the blog over the years. Heck, Dr. Jack Cohen’s research documented much of this going back into the 1980s, if not even earlier. Richard Halsey and his California Chaparral Institute have been also talking about these issues for at least 20 years. And those of us who’ve been branded as “environmental terrorist groups” – and blamed for California wildfires by the likes of former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke – have been also trying to get the public and policy makers to understand the dynamics at play for decades as well.

Remember, it’s been very common for politicians from through the country (but especially the West) to use wildfires in California as the reason why we need to dramatically increase logging on our public lands by systematically weakening bedrock environmental laws. While that may make for good politics when people turn on their TV’s and see flames, it doesn’t make for good policy that will protect communities, firefighters and save lives and money.

Most California Fires Occur in Area of Wildland-urban Interface with Less Fuel and More People

Madison, WI, September 24, 2019 – In California, the state with more building destruction by wildfire than all of the other states combined, new research by a U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service scientist and University of Wisconsin-Madison partners found something surprising. Over nearly three decades, half of all buildings destroyed by wildfire in California were located in an area that is described as having less of the grasses, bushes and trees that are thought to fuel fire in the wildland-urban interface, or WUI.

The study by H. Anu Kramer with Forest Service scientist Miranda Mockrin and colleagues, “High wildfire damage in interface communities in California,” notes that a portion of the WUI defined as “interface” and characterized by having more homes but relatively little wildland vegetation experienced half of the building losses due to wildfire but composed only 2 percent of the total area burned by the wildfires assessed in the study. The study was recently published in the International Journal of Wildland Fire and is available at: https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/58348

California’s expansion of housing within and adjacent to wildland vegetation is not unique; the most recent assessment shows that the WUI now includes about one-third of homes in the United States. As wildfire management has become more complex, costly and dangerous, defining what constitutes WUI and defining more specific types of WUI has become more important as local communities strive to apply resources and policy-decisions where they will be most effective in saving lives and property.

The Federal definition of WUI describes two specific areas: “interface” WUI includes developed areas that have sparse or no wildland vegetation, but are within close proximity of a large patch of wildland. “Intermix” WUI, on the other hand, is defined as the area where houses and wildland vegetation directly intermingle. Both are separate from “rural” areas, which may be characterized by agricultural land and low-density housing and development (less than 1 house per 40 acres).

“Our findings show that WUI areas do experience the vast majority of all losses, with 82 percent of all buildings destroyed due to wildfire located in the WUI,” Mockrin said. “We were surprised to find 50 percent of all buildings lost to fire being destroyed in the interface portion of the WUI, however. Many risk reduction plans focus on natural vegetation fueling fire, but in the interface WUI where so much of the destruction is occurring, we have to consider finer-grained fuels such as wood piles, propane tanks, and cars.”

Study findings suggest that wildfires are still rare in urban areas. The Tubbs fire that struck Santa Rosa, Calif., in 2017 was similar to other California wildfires in that the majority of buildings lost in the fire were located in the WUI; however, the Tubbs Fire was unique in having 25 percent of all destruction occurring in urban areas. In comparison, 4 percent of destruction occurred within urban areas in other California fires. Other recent and highly destructive fires, including the 2018 Carr, Camp and Woolsey fires, included no urban area within their perimeters, exemplifying the rarity of the Tubbs’ building destruction in urban areas.

“Although the Tubbs fire was not the norm, it seems like every fall there is a new record-setting fire in California, with three of the five most destructive fires in state history having burned in the last 5 years and the deadliest California fire (the Camp fire) burning last year,” Kramer said. “These fires are fueled by the homes themselves, landscaping, and other man-made fuels that are seldom included in the fire models that are used to predict these fires. Our work highlights the importance of studying and mitigating the fuels in these interface WUI areas in California where most of the destruction is occurring.”

In addition to solidifying definitions of interface and intermix WUI so communities can address their different attributes in wildland fire planning, researchers suggest that fire behavior models should be revisited.

The study was co-authored by Volker Radeloff of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Patricia Alexandre of the University of Lisbon.

An article about the El Dorado National Forest is interesting:

Change in the wind for U.S. Forest Service

Give an overview of the challenges the forest faces. For example:

Employing 250 permanent and 100 or more seasonal workers, with most of his budget spent on salaries and vehicles, Crabtree said there is very little flexibility to buy equipment such as a grader or backhoe. “On top of that we have an organization chart with about 40 vacancies and almost all of those are non-fire, so we are struggling.”

Also mentions a fuel break — nice map, too.

The Camino-Pollock Pines fuel break, a collaborative effort between the El Dorado County Resource Conservation District, Cal Fire and the Eldorado National Forest will expand and reinforce a major control line that was constructed during the 2014 King Fire along the ridge above the South Fork of the American River, north of Highway 50. Over 100 property owners are involved in creating the fuel break, which is approximately 600 feet wide and extends approximately 8 miles from the Union Hill area near Camino to the Pony Express Trail near Pollock Pines. This fuel break includes treatment on approximately 1,165 acres of private land and 1,000 acres of National Forest land.

There are other ridge-top fuel breaks in the area that have been around for decades.

Imagine that. According to some experts, the Trump administration has used fuzzy carbon and climate math to justify their scheme to greatly expand logging of ancient, old-growth forests and road construction within the Tongass National Forest, one of the last remaining intact temperate rainforests in the world.

Adam Aton from E&E News has the full story:

The Trump administration says the Tongass National Forest is America’s best carbon warehouse — so it’s fine to increase logging there.

The Forest Service last week released a draft environmental impact statement for building new roads through the Tongass, a precondition for feeding more old-growth trees into southeastern Alaska’s struggling timber mills. Every 21st-century president has fought over whether to expand or curtail logging in the massive forest. Trump has gone the furthest; his Forest Service last week said the time had come for a final resolution and recommended opening almost the entire area to development.

At stake is the country’s largest forest. The Tongass is among the world’s best carbon sinks, and it’s one of the largest unfragmented ecosystems in North America. Its trees hold about 650 million tons of carbon, which roughly converts to half of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions in 2017.

Trump’s draft EIS says the region plays an “important” role in regulating global climate, and changes in its forests can carry “global consequences.” Those are notable statements from an administration that usually frames emissions deregulation and drilling growth as too insignificant to affect world temperatures.

To justify development in such a critical area, the administration turns to an argument that many scientists reject: Any emissions from logging would be “temporary,” as the timber would sequester carbon in building materials while replacement trees recapture even more CO2. The Tongass’ carbon load has stabilized or possibly even increased since logging peaked in the 1970s and ’80s before declining, according to the draft EIS.

“Potential negative effects on the Tongass may be ameliorated and may be completely reversed with time, reducing or eliminating potential negative cumulative effects on carbon and climate,” the document says.

Beverly Law, an Oregon State University professor whose forestry research is cited in the draft EIS, called the administration’s argument “misinformation.”

Some old-growth trees in the Tongass are more than a thousand years old, so it would take a very long time for the forest to regain such a huge amount of carbon, she said.

“We call it slow in, fast out,” she said in an interview, explaining that emissions from milling and transporting the lumber, along with decomposition of the waste wood, outweigh carbon sequestration.

“We’ve tracked this to landfill, and it’s a significant [amount of] emissions,” she said.

About 500,000 acres of old-growth forest — about 9% of all the trees in the Tongass — has been cut down, but only one-quarter of that has happened since 1990. Some of the region’s lumber mills have shuttered amid the slowdown, prompting the state of Alaska to petition the Trump administration to allow more logging of valuable old-growth trees.

The Trump administration’s preferred course of action would make available another 160,000 acres of old growth, while also nixing prohibitions on roads in 9.2 million acres of the Tongass. The Forest Service said that would happen in accordance with guidelines from the United Nations’ climate authority, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“The management mechanisms applied in all alternatives are consistent with internationally recognized climate change adaptation and mitigation practices identified by the IPCC,” the draft EIS says.

That line baffled Dominick DellaSala, president and chief scientist at the Geos Institute.

“I was one of the reviewers of the IPCC report, and I can tell you: Nothing in that report supports what they’re claiming,” said DellaSala, whose research was also cited in the draft EIS.

The draft EIS warns that Alaska could see an additional 1 to 3.5 degrees Celsius of warming by 2050, but it makes little effort to grapple with the implications of such warming.

“There is considerable uncertainty concerning the exact scope of the effects of climate change on the forests of Southeast Alaska and how best to deal with possible changes to the many resources managed on the Tongass,” the document says.

Climate models show Alaska warming faster than the rest of the country — the changes are already visible — but the Tongass is poised to fare better than its surrounding landscapes, DellaSala said. That could make it an oasis for wildlife that feels climate pressures elsewhere. But destroying habitat by logging and fragmenting the remainder with roads undermines that option, he said.

“Alaska’s going to be in big trouble in the coming century, so why give away the one opportunity to protect those forests that are going to help stabilize the climate?” he said.

Arches National Park is currently full.

When I saw this tweet just now, I was immediately reminded that former Arches National Park Ranger Edward Abbey saw this all coming way back in 1985. Back in 2012, we posted the never-aired Edward Abbey movie-essay. But please watch it again, and see how prophetically – and wryly – Abbey talks about the future of our National Parks: https://vimeo.com/49544042

It should also be mentioned that the “Arches National Park is currently full” announcement comes directly on the heels of the Trump administration opening up all the National Parks in Utah to ATVs, a decision that as made with zero NEPA and zero public notice or input.

As the Salt Lake Tribune reported last month:

The roar of ATVs could be coming to a Utah national park backcountry road near you under a major policy shift initiated by the National Park Service without public input.

Across the country, off-road vehicles like ATVs and UTVs are generally barred from national parks. For Utah’s famed parks, however, that all changes starting Nov. 1, when these vehicles may be allowed on both main access roads and back roads like Canyonlands National Park’s White Rim and Arches’ entry points from Salt Valley and Willow Springs….

Under the rule change, off-highway vehicles could roam Canyonlands’ Maze District and Arches’ Klondike Buffs — as long as they remain on designated routes. In general, ATVs would be allowed to travel roads that are open to trucks and cars.

The directive, which applies only to Utah parks, triggered an immediate backlash from conservation groups, which predicted the move will result in a “management nightmare” for parks already struggling with traffic jams and parking clutter.

Now the park service is inviting a whole new category of vehicle onto park roads, establishing new uses that will disrupt wildlife and other visitors’ enjoyment, warned Kristen Brengel, the National Parks Conservation Association’s vice president of government affairs.

[The directive was issued] after off-highway groups and Utah lawmakers led by Rep. Phil Lyman, R-Blanding, pressured the Interior Department to lift the prohibition….

Lyman is the former San Juan County commissioner who became a political celebrity after organizing an off-road vehicle protest ride though Recapture Canyon, which resulted in misdemeanor convictions, 10 days in jail and a reputation as a public lands warrior.

Adding pressure were UTV Utah and Utah OHV Advocates. According to the groups, Utah is home to 202,000 registered OHVs, or off-highway vehicles, the broad category that includes UTVs and ATVs.

“Despite being one of the largest groups of public land users, and even though the economic benefit of our community dwarfs most other recreational users combined, we often find ourselves discriminated against by decision-makers that head public land agencies,” the groups’ presidents, Bud Bruening and Brett Stewart, wrote in a joint July 29 letter to Bernhardt. “In Utah, this discrimination is particularly acute when it comes to the National Park Service.”

Sorry, Phil Lyman, but you actually don’t “find ourselves discriminated against.” You are not your ATV. Also, I’m willing to bet that every single person in Utah who owns an ATV, OHV or UTV also owns an automobile.

I wonder who pushed Trump to OK this….

Trump administration proposes expanding logging in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest

Nothing new, but how does Hansen get published so often?

From Nick Smith’s Healthy Forests, Healthy Communities email today… I don’t have an LA Times subscription, so can’t get the text.

Chad Hanson: California’s clear-cutting project in the Rim fire area is setting up the region for another tragedy (LA Times)
During hot, dry and windy conditions last November, the Camp fire devastated the towns of Paradise and Concow in the northern Sierra Nevada, ultimately claiming at least 85 lives and destroying thousands of homes. The tragedy was a wake-up call regarding the increasing risks to vulnerable communities stemming from the human-caused climate crisis. But forest fire behavior is complex, and multiple factors affect fire severity. In addition to high regional temperatures and aridity, the Camp fire was fueled by persistent forest mismanagement.

From the Billings Gazette:

NY Times, October 8, 2019:

When Biking and Bears Don’t Mix

Conservationists worry that the popularity of recreational mountain biking and e-bikes in public lands leads to unsafe conditions for humans, as well as for bears and other wildlife.

The article begins with an account of a mtn. biker killed by a grizzly:

Mr. Treat, an avid mountain biker, was zipping along at about 25 miles an hour through dense forest near Glacier National Park in the middle of a summer afternoon when he collided with a large male grizzly bear.

And mentions efforts to stop two ultramarathons in the Flathead National Forest.

Vast tracts of public land in the West have become favorite haunts of a growing number of mountain bikers, exploring wild areas for recreation. The Trump administration recently allowed e-bikes, or electric bikes, to be used on some trails under the jurisdiction of the Interior Department where bicycles are allowed.

The increasing popularity of trail biking has brought to the fore some of the inherent conflicts in the uses of public land — natural regions or playgrounds. And while the growth of tourism may help local businesses, the forays into deeper parts of the forests by more and more people are encroaching on wildlife.

Mechanized mountain bikes and e-bikes, especially at higher speeds, are incompatible with hiking, hunting, and bird and wildlife watching, some argue. Safety is also a concern. Some mountain bikers revel at bombing down trails at 20 or 30 miles per hour on single-track trails that hikers also frequent.

And biologists like Dr. Servheen who have spent decades studying grizzlies offer reminders about protecting the bears and other wildlife that unwittingly share their territory with more people and more mechanized vehicles.

In its report on Mr. Treat’s fatal accident, the interagency committee concluded: “The bear apparently had no time to move to avoid the collision. At a speed of 20-25 miles per hour, there were only one-to-two seconds between rounding the curve, the victim seeing the bear in the trail and impacting the bear.”

Folks, I’m looking into USFS partnerships with states, counties, NGOs, etc. For now, I’m focusing on roads. For example, Gila County, Arizona, maintains ~500 miles of roads, mostly unpaved, on the Tonto NF. Are you aware of any other road-maintenance partnerships? Reply here or to me directly at [email protected]. — Steve Wilent