Our hearts and prayers go out to colleagues, students, friends and family of Dr. Maness.

It is with great sadness that we share the news that Thomas Maness, dean of the College of Forestry, passed away peacefully at home yesterday after battling an illness for the last two and a half years.

Thomas was a true visionary. One only needs to look at the Institute for Working Forest Landscapes and the TallWood Design Institute to understand Thomas’s dedication to improving the health of our lands, people, businesses, and ecosystems, and to do so through collaborative work. Through his vision, he helped propel our College into a globally recognized leader in forestry.

He was our friend, colleague, leader, and mentor.

Thomas’s inspiring words were always backed by meaningful action and high expectations. He recognized that for the College to prosper, we had to make hard decisions to achieve the excellence he confidently knew we were capable of – in our teaching, research and outreach. Thomas taught us we should not shy away from tough issues because that is where we are needed the most. (http://blogs.oregonstate.edu/issuesinforestry/)

If excellence is the goal of our College, our careers and our own lives, then complacency is the nemesis. Thomas drove us all to seek and achieve excellence and he provided the tools for us to do so. Since joining the College as Department Head of FERM in 2009, Thomas viewed our students as the best opportunity we have to make the world a better place. His commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, recognition that we are housed on the traditional territory of the Calapooia people, and assertion that the College must be a driver for positive change in our professions and society is a baseline for our future as a community. Thomas also believed that with the best support and inspiring faculty mentors, anything was possible for our students upon leaving the College and OSU. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNQTM6CsVDg

Thomas committed to provide an inclusive, productive and engaging workplace. Many came to OSU because of his vision and specifically to work with Thomas. We learned more from him than we could ever ask of a mentor. Thomas was a once-in-a-generation personality.

Here’s a link to the note from OSU.
Here’s a post from the Capital Press that talks about his history pre-OSU.

This article from the Coos Bay World explains that the 5,400-acre Coquille Tribal Forest in Oregon is no longer “coupled” to BLM management practices — including Northwest Forest Plan restrictions on harvesting. Maybe the agencies ought to consult with the tribe as it considers revising the Northwest Forest Plan.

Interesting press release….

Norbeck Society
P.O. Box 9730

Rapid City, SD 57709

For Immediate Release

Alarming New Report Indicates Unsustainable Logging on Black Hills
National Forest

RAPID CITY (July 10, 2018) – A just-issued United States Department of
Agriculture report, Forests of South Dakota 2017, shows a trend of
depletion of standing merchantable timber on the Black Hills National
Forest.

The 2017 report reveals that for the study period ending in 2017, there
was 10 times the volume of timber harvested compared to net timber
growth on all forest land within South Dakota.  Further, the report
shows that for ponderosa pine (the primary commercial species in the
Black Hills), there was more volume lost to mortality or damage, rot,
etc. than there was volume gained in growth.  The ponderosa pine forest
was dying faster than it was growing primarily due to the mountain pine
beetle infestation.  This trend will diminish as the mountain pine
beetle activity decreases, but it still indicates that there have been
significant impacts to the standing inventory on the forest.  The Black
Hills National Forest needs a chance to recover, and this report shows
that there are serious issues with the sustainability of timber
management on the Forest at the current timber harvest levels.

The Forest Service is required by law to manage the National Forests for
multiple uses and sustained yields of timber. This simply means that
they cannot cut more wood on an annual basis than what grows. This basic
forestry tenet is taught at every Forestry school in the country. The
tool that ensures these sustained yields is known as an Allowable Sale
Quantity (ASQ), and it is used as a ceiling, not a target.  For the
Black Hills, the ASQ was set in the 1997 Forest Plan and was based on a
forest with almost double the current standing inventory.

Since 1997, about one third of the Forest has experienced mortality due
to wildfire and insect infestation.  These impacts alone should amply
indicate that the ASQ from 1997 is no longer valid. In response to a
mountain pine beetle epidemic, logging operations were increased and for
much of the past decade, harvests have been above the ASQ.  Harvests
have not been lowered since that time even though the mountain pine
beetle epidemic was declared over in 2016.
Awkwardly, the Black Hills National Forest is in the process of
approving the Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project, which calls for
185,000 acres of logging and clears the way for high harvest volumes to
continue. Concerns are growing over the long-term sustainability of the
forest ecosystem and the timber industry it supports.  Further concerns
are for the associated regional tourism industry and the high quality of
life enjoyed by area residents.

During a recent Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project Objection
Resolution Meeting with the Rocky Mountain Region Deputy Regional
Forester, Jacqueline Buchanan, the Norbeck Society used part of the
allotted time to discuss the depletion trend of the standing inventory
of timber.  Norbeck Society asked that language be added to the final
Record of Decision that would put limits on the amount of acres that
could be released out of the BHRL project each year, so that annual
sales of timber could be tapered down until an ASQ commensurate with
current standing volumes could be determined.

The Objection Response by the Forest Service is an assertion that the
ASQ set in the Forest Plan of 1997 is valid and that they plan to
continue with the high harvest volumes until the Forest Plan is revised,
which could take as long as eight more years.  Despite losing a
significant portion of the forest to several large wildfires and
mountain pine beetle infestations since 1997 the Forest Service
maintains that the ASQ from the 1997 Forest Plan is still valid, and
shows no inclination to make adjustments to annual timber sales.  This
is a cavalier response that ignores the reality of the current
situation.

The Norbeck Society views it as unfortunate that what was supposed to be
a project to promote resilience on the Forest will actually result in
unnecessary and even harmful harvesting of big trees from areas that
essentially pose no threat of insect infestation or catastrophic
wildfire.  In addition to the worry over the viability of the timber
industry in the future, being unwilling to manage for sustained yields
also has serious implications for the balance of uses on the forest and
for the livelihoods and quality of life for people in all walks of life
who depend on the health of the Forest.  A concerned public cannot
accept this.  The Black Hills National Forest is part of a portfolio of
assets owned by every American and it is important that it is managed
for sustainability.

Members of the press or public may wish to see Annual Reports of Forests
of South Dakota from previous years:
https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/fia/data-tools/state-reports/SD/default.asp

Forests of South Dakota 2017 report:
https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/ru/ru_fs158.pdf

Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Objection Response:
https://data.ecosystem-management.org/objections/displayDoc.php?doc=V1dwS1MyTldjRmhVYWtKb1ZucHNNVmt6Y0hwTlZUVnhWVlJDVDFwNk1Eaz0=

Black Hills Resilient Landscapes Project page:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=49052

Media Contact:
David Miller, Norbeck Society Steering Committee
605-484-0055
[email protected]

An article in the Missoulian summarized on Greenwire:

…

“It’s a pretty good result for the Bitterroot Backcountry Cyclists,” plaintiffs’ attorney Paul Turcke said yesterday. “The court declared the agency decision to close the areas unlawful as far as bicycles are concerned. For snowmobiles, not so much” (Rob Chaney, Missoulian, July 2).

Here is another in a series of interviews with Michael Rains by Evergreen Magazine.

A couple of my thoughts..if 70% of the women in the FS have been harassed at some point, I think that would not be as meaningful for working on change as “how many women have been harassed in the last 10 years?”. For women my age, some of whom are not retired, we started in a Forest Service in which smoking was allowed in the office, we may have been the first women professionals on a unit, and so on. Those were different times for sure. I’d zero in in the last ten years and figure out what was going on. Unlike Michael, I also think it needs to be joint Int/Ag. If I were to ask Michael he would probably say “interagency can be an “out” for taking responsibility as an agency.” While I agree with that, if the data suggest that Fire is the organization with the greatest probability of harassment, and Fire is managed as an interagency effort.. well.. IMHO, even if a joint approach leads to specific FS suggestions and problems compared to the other agencies, then those would be the responsibility of the FS to investigate and fix.

Here’s his idea for an independent investigator:

RAINS: Were I Chief, I would immediately call for a third-party, Independent Diagnostic and Evaluation (IDE) regarding all aspects of discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation at all levels of the Forest Service. The key is “independent, third-party.” The IDE will include key recommendations for immediate and lasting change to ensure the Forest Service becomes a more effective and contemporary public service agency, now and ahead. The IDE shall include a review and evaluation of the entire executive-level leadership of the Forest Service. An IDE Lead Evaluator, not from the Forest Service, will be named and approved by the Secretary of Agriculture.

EVERGREEN: Like separating the business of church from state.

RAINS: In a manner of speaking, yes. A suitable IDE could identify the need for what I have often called “Chief Worrier.” Someone, not from the Forest Service who possesses the skill and sanction to create lasting change, so the phrase, “zero tolerance in all aspects of discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation becomes a dominating core value in the Forest Service.” This is the chief responsibility of the Ambassador for Inclusion.

Here’s some of his ideas on culture:

EVEERGREEN: Might this mess somehow be related to the fact that the Forest Service has been a “man’s” organization for most of its history?

RAINS: Maybe. Recently, an associate and I were talking about this very thing and the discussion between us went, in part, like this:

“From the outset in 1905, the Forest Service has been a “macho” organization. And let’s face it. We can often be real jerks. Assertiveness inside the agency and with the public served was always rewarded. They wanted strength of character, ability to deal assertively with any situation, and do it alone if necessary. One was expected to hit the ground running. And, if you want to make it around here, you will do whatever it takes.”

I think that this idea is really worth talking about. I started in NFS in timber in 1979, and also worked in Programs and Legislation, R&D, and then back to NFS. I found quite the opposite, that assertiveness by me and some other women were sometimes taken as quite reprehensible. When I worked in Region 2 I would definitely say that assertiveness was not as valued among our line officers as ability to work with the public.
Looking back, it did seem to be a cultural norm that it was best to work things out yourself with individuals with jerky behavior. And that value might, indeed, lead to a lack of reporting of harassment. Anyway, it would be interesting to hear a variety of perspectives on what Michael said here. It might help to give the timeframe and general location of your experiences.

Study from Northern Arizona University “found the negative effects of climate change and wildfire, although significant and worrisome, could be mitigated by targeted forest restoration, thus reducing undesirable outcomes for multiple ecosystem services.”

…

“Although this study did not recommend courses of action, there are suggestions for forest managers. Flatley said managers from the U.S. Forest Service and National Parks Service can use the study to help decide whether to allocate limited resources to frequent restoration of smaller areas or less frequent restoration of larger areas.”

FYI, folks. I just received this announcement from the USFS….

• experience working with the government planning processes,
• knowledge and understanding of the various cultures and communities in New Mexico,
• ability to actively participate in diverse team settings;
• demonstrated skill in working toward mutually beneficial solutions to complex issues,
• respect and credibility in local communities; commitment to attending Panel meetings, and
• their contribution to the balance and diversity of the Panel.

Walter Dunn, Program Manager Collaborative Forest Restoration/Southwest Ecological Restoration Institutes Forest Service Cooperative & International Forestry, Southwestern Region p: 505-842-3425 c: 505-301-1291 f: 505-842-3165 [email protected] 333 Broadway Blvd., SE Albuquerque, NM 87102 www.fs.fed.us Caring for the land and serving people

I have never seen these types of restrictions before, but maybe they are common elsewhere? Here’s the link, thanks to Evergreen Foundation for putting in their Twitter feed.

DURANGO, CO –The San Juan National Forest (SJNF) is planning to implement Forest-wide Stage 3 fire closure this week, which will prohibit most entry into the forest. The purpose of the closure is to protect natural resources and public safety due to the danger of wildland fire. Fire danger on the SJNF remains very high due to exceptional drought and fuel conditions. The closure order is expected to be signed Tuesday, June 12, 2018 and remain in effect until the forest receives sufficient moisture to improve conditions.

The closure order will prohibit entry into the San Juan National Forest, including entry by the general public, most administrative entry by Forest Service employees, and most uses authorized under Forest Service permits and contracts. This means that forest campgrounds, day use areas, roads, and trails will be closed, including wilderness areas, and that hiking, dispersed camping, and other recreational activities are prohibited. Exemptions might be granted on a case-by-case basis with a written authorization from the Forest Service, which would include specific requirements for fire prevention. Exemptions must be requested from the appropriate District Ranger (below). Federal, state, or local officers conducting specific duties are exempt. The McPhee Recreation Area Complex boat ramp and marina will likely remain open but no shoreline use will be allowed.

The SJNF covers 1.8 million acres within the Dolores Ranger District, the Columbine Ranger District, and the Pagosa Ranger District across nine counties in southwestern Colorado. County and state roads and U.S. highways that cross Forest Service lands will not be affected by this order. On-going road closures due to the 416 Fire will continue to be managed by the La Plata County Sherriff. Businesses in local communities will remain open for business during the Forest closure at their discretion.

San Juan National Forest Supervisor, Kara Chadwick, wants concerned citizens to know that instituting a forest closure is an extremely difficult decision, and she is aware that the closure will affect a great many people, businesses, partner agencies, forest management activities, and the public. Forest managers use several criteria to determine when to implement restrictions and closures, including fuel moistures, current and predicted weather, values at risk from wildfire, fire activity levels, and available firefighting resources. The SJNF implemented Stage 1 fire restrictions on May 1, then Stage 2 fire restrictions on June 1, but conditions continued to worsen. “The indices our fire team uses to predict fire danger are at historic levels well before we can expect any significant moisture from the seasonal monsoons,” SJNF Forest Fire Staff Officer, Richard Bustamante said. “Under current conditions, one abandoned campfire or spark could cause a catastrophic wildfire, and we are not willing to take that chance with the natural and cultural resources under our protection and care, or with human life and property.”

Violating Stage 3 fire restrictions or going into a closed area carries a mandatory appearance in federal court, and is punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 for an individual or $10,000 for an organization, or imprisonment of up to six months, or both.

FYI, just received this….

Good afternoon!

On June 26, the U.S. Forest Service’s Pacific Northwest and Pacific Southwest Research Stations will be hosting a science forum to share key findings of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) science synthesis. The synthesis will inform the revision of land management plans for 17 national forests in western Washington, western Oregon, and northern California within the NWFP area. The Plan amended land management plans in 1994 to protect threatened and endangered species associated with late successional and old-growth forest habitats while still contributing to social and economic sustainability.

The synthesis is posted to https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/research/science-synthesis/index.shtml.

Northwest Forest Plan Science Synthesis – Science Forum

The forum will include a series of short presentations on the report’s key findings, followed by a question-and-answer session. This is not a public listening session about forest plan revisions; rather, it is an opportunity to learn about recent findings from the science synthesis.

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Portland

Multnomah/Holladay Rooms

1000 NE Multnomah Street, Portland, Oregon 97232

If you’re unable to attend in person, there will be an option for remote participation via Webcast. To register to attend either in person or remotely, visit https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/research/science-synthesis/index.shtml.

If you have any questions about the event, please contact Becky Gravenmier at [email protected] or (503) 808-2851. We hope you’ll join us either in person or virtually on June 26!

Apparently all of it. In an unpublished (i.e., non-precedential) memorandum, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision that forest fires are emergencies within the meaning of a Forest Service regulation that exempts actions taken in response from NEPA. Plaintiff’s argument that the adjacent National Park Service doesn’t agree and had prepared an EA assessing its future fire response actions was “immaterial.”

Perhaps, someday, the Forest Service will use NEPA to engage the public in planning its response actions to fire. In the meantime, quoting an earlier district court case, “[a]t least in the context of wildland fire suppression, NEPA review can not possibly be conducted at the site-specific level because of the emergency conditions in which the fire occurs, and to allow the agency to conduct site-specific NEPA review after the fire has already been extinguished is contrary to the purposes of NEPA.” California ex rel. Lockyer v. United States Forest Serv., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14357, *35, 60 ERC (BNA) 2104.