Water

Another payoff from standards in forest plans

by

This time mandatory standards ensure that a proposed pipeline project will protect water quality:

In Bath County, the Forest Service said an access road that impacts a wild brook trout stream, Laurel Run, “is unacceptable because it parallels the stream channel with the riparian corridor for much of its length and has numerous stream crossings.”

The letter says the access road is inconsistent with forest plan standards and best management practices concerning soil and water.

Why does the Forest Service want to get rid of standards when they revise their plans?  Do they think that some mealy-mouthed desired condition of “high quality water” in a forest plan would have the same effect?  That it would be legally sufficient to claim such vague, aspirational statements meet requirements to protect at-risk species?

Nez Perce Clearwater salvage project enjoined

by

The Idaho District Court enjoined the Johnson Bar Salvage Project on May 12, finding  violations of NEPA and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.  During the time between the release of the DEIS in March of 2015, and the publication of the FEIS in October of 2015, timber harvesting activities on burned state and private lands had occurred or were underway, and additional wildfires had burned or continued to burn, near the project area.

The court found that the Forest had failed to take a hard look at the effects of these events on sediment and visual quality, and should have prepared a supplemental EIS to address the new information.  The main flaw was failing to undertake a quantitative effects analysis of the new sediment sources comparable to what had been done for the original baseline.  There were also conflicting statements in the fisheries evaluation, and evidence that road decommissioning would not reduce sediment as claimed.  There was no support in the record for conclusory statements in the ROD about a lack of cumulative effects.  The urgency of the salvage harvest was not given great weight in the balancing of interests that supported the injunction because the project was scheduled over five years.

This sounds like a case where shortcuts were taken to try to complete a project that was overtaken by events.  Haste makes waste.

The Wild and Scenic River holding involved an out-of-date river plan, but may have some implications for vaguely written forest plans (in relation to rivers, diversity or other requirements):

The Forest Service cannot effectively analyze, nor can the public and Court crosscheck, the Forest Service’s analysis, without a River Plan that delineates objective standards, or predetermined criteria, for describing, assessing, and protecting the Wild and Scenic values of the Rivers. Without objective, predetermined criteria, the public is left to trust the Forest Service’s “word” that it considered all relevant factors necessary to protecting the Middle Fork Clearwater and Selway Rivers’ Wild and Scenic values and that the Project will not affect or have minimal impact upon the Wild and Scenic values.”

Climate Change Update

by

I shot this picture from the top of Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, along the Sierra Crest. At the end of July, there should be a lot more snow and ice (including small glaciers) in this view of north-facing slopes. The view behind me was obscured, for three afternoons, by a Fresno area wildfire, with smoke drifting up over the crest. I’m sure that the groundwater levels are extremely low, as well.

P9288472_tonemapped-web

Water levels at Mono Lake also continue to drop, exposing more of the famous Tufa formations, created by the fluctuating lake levels, over tens of thousands of years.

P9288543_tonemapped-web

Forest road pollution back in court

by

Sometimes winning a lawsuit doesn’t get you anywhere.

“EPA has concluded that forest roads are a “major source of erosion from forested lands, contributing up to 90 percent of the total sediment production from forestry operations.

“In 2003, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered EPA to strengthen and correct rules for urban runoff that flows through small municipal storm sewer systems, and examine the evidence on forest road runoff to determine whether it is necessary to regulate that water pollution source.

“More than a decade later, EPA has failed to comply with the Court’s order on both issues. NRDC and EDC have filed a petition in the same Court that issued this order to enforce the duties it imposed on EPA.”

Aside from showing the difficulty of making the government so something, there are some forest planning implications.  EPA will comment on forest plans, and the Forest Service should be paying attention to what EPA thinks is needed in the plans to mesh with their non-point source pollution permitting process (current or as influenced by this litigation).

The Rim Fire: Landscape View

by

Here is a view of the Granite Creek watershed, and a peek at the Tuolumne River canyon, too. The Rim Fire burned all the way to those most-distant ridgetops. For scale, you can see a vehicle in the middle of the picture. That road is the Cherry Oil Road, which connects Cherry Lake with Highway 120. That greenish tint is the vast growth of bearclover, easily reclaiming their “territory”. Bearclover is one of the reasons why clearcutting has been banned in Sierra Nevada National Forests since 1993.

P9232905-web

Rim Fire Salvage Logging, by SPI

by

Bob Zybach and I went on a field trip to the Rim Fire. The first stop on the tour showed us the Sierra Pacific Industries’ salvage logging results. I’m posting a medium resolution panorama so, if you click on the picture, you can view it in its full size. You can see the planted surviving giant sequoias on their land which were left in place. You can also see some smaller diameter trees, bundled up on the hill, which turned out to be not mechantable as sawlogs. You might also notice the subsoiler ripping, meant to break up the hydrophobic layer. They appear to have done their homework on this practice, and it is surprising to see them spending money to do this. SPI says that their salvage logging is nearly complete, and that they will replant most of their 20,000 acre chunk next spring. They have to order and grow more stock to finish in 2016.

SPI-panorama-big-web

Repeat Photography: Part Deux

by

It’s kind of a challenge to assemble pictures shot in different years, from different spots, and from different cameras. This is an excellent way to view and monitor trends, showing the public what happens over time to our National Forests. Sometimes, you have to look hard to see the differences. In any future repeat photography projects, I will be using very high resolution, to be able to zoom in really far.

East-Panther-Power-Fire-web

One of the reasons why you don’t see much “recovery” is that the Eldorado National Forest has finally completed their EIS for using herbicides in selected spots, almost 10 years since the fire burned. This is part of the East Bay’s water supply. Sierra Pacific replanted their ground in less than 2 years. So, the blackbacked woodpeckers should be long gone, as their preferred habitat only lasts for an average of 6 years. As these snags fall over, the risk of intense soil damages from re-burn rises dramatically. Somewhere, I have some earlier pictures of this area which may, or may not line up well with this angle. I’ll keep searching through my files to find more views to practice with.

 

BMPs and Posters on ForestEd Website

by

colorado3 Note: This is only the top half of the Colorado poster.. I got an http error when I tried to upload the whole thing. Perhaps it was too large??

There was a helpful discussion below with Gil and his JOF citation on BMP’s in his comment here. I remembered the poster session at the Spokane SAF meeting which had posters from around the country about BMP’s.. hunting for it on the Internet, I found this on the SAF ForestEd website…

Water Resources and Best Management Practices

In forestry, Best Management Practices (BMPs) are techniques or methods used to meet certain goals. BMPs are often used to address water quality concerns during silvicultural activities.

In the sections below, you will find a compilation of peer-reviewed literature, reports, policy documents, and more about BMPs for water resources.
Table of Contents:

Section 1 – SAF Encyclopedia Entry
Section 2 – Forestry Source Articles
Section 3 – Literature
Section 4 – Convention 2012: Posters and Presentations
Section 5 – 2012 Forest Management And Watershed Health Technical Symposium
Section 6 – Policy: Clean Water Act and Forest Roads
Discussion Forum

There is a US map you can click on to find the poster from a specific state (cool!). Thanks to Carlin Starrs and everyone at SAF who got this info online!

Federal forestlands would benefit from Oregon rules: Op-ed In Oregonian

by

From the Oregonian, here.

By James E. Brown, Hal Salwasser and Ted Lorensen

Managing some of the federal O&C forestlands more like private forestlands, as is supported by Oregon’s Reps. Peter DeFazio, Greg Walden and Kurt Schrader, would produce a better set of environmental and economic outcomes than is currently the case.

Oregon’s 29 million acres of diverse forests have four general emphases of management: multiresource, reserve, wood production and residential, based upon forest types, ownerships, policies and locations. About 60 percent of Oregon’s forests are federal. In combination for all ownerships, acreage planned to be managed under wood production, multiresource and reserve emphases are about equal, but in practice, because of litigation and other factors, the majority of federal lands have a reserve emphasis. Ensuring that more of the O&C lands — once owned by the now-defunct Oregon & California Railroad — are managed with wood production or multiresource emphases would restore the balance of outcomes intended under the Northwest Forest Plan and O&C Act.

Our federal lands are no longer economically sustainable, and local communities are impoverished because of that. Because of the chronic severe fire suppression costs, the basic infrastructure on our federal forest is no longer being maintained, and resource values and lives are being lost in catastrophic wildfires.

In comparison, Oregon’s approach to regulating and promoting forest management on private forestlands under the Oregon Forest Practices Act and the statewide land-use program is economically sustainable. While no single metric can evaluate the success of forest management, research from paired watershed studies demonstrates that modern forest practices maintain water quality and protect fish and fish habitat. Timber growth and harvest on private lands is in balance, and reforestation is excellent. Wood-production forests sustain family-wage jobs and provide increased revenues to local government. Timber harvested in Oregon is high quality and produces lumber that is economically competitive with other regions of the world. This helps avoid importing wood from parts of the world that have poor forest practices and also minimizes the substitution of less environmentally friendly products, such as concrete, steel and plastic.

Oregon’s approach of both effective and economically efficient forest practices is essential for sustaining forestland. “If it pays, it stays.” Loss in forestland value in California and Washington has resulted in significantly more conversion of private forest to non-forest uses than in Oregon. As an example, 25 percent of working forests in the Puget Sound area were converted to residential or commercial development between 1988 and 2004. In contrast, as of 2009, Oregon had 98 percent of the forestland that was forestland in 1974.

Forestland conversion is especially counterproductive to sustaining fish. Data for fish habitat from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife indicates that “the highest rearing potential among land uses was on private industrial forest land. … Urban and agricultural lands had the lowest capacity. … Federal and state forest land had a moderate capacity.” Private forestland support for salmon recovery has contributed to populations that again allow for the harvest this fall of wild coho in a number of streams, many with a majority of private forestlands. It is not logical that we could have such outcomes for fish on Oregon’s private forestlands if forest practices regulations were inadequate.

As the O&C lands are addressed and claims are made to prevent much needed management change, we urge you to dig a little deeper to find the facts about Oregon’s forests at the Board of Forestry’s website.

James E. Brown is a retired state forester. Hal Salwasser is a professor and the former dean of the College of Forestry at Oregon State University. Ted Lorensen is a retired assistant state forester.

Note from Sharon: It’s interesting to me, how Oregon’s Forest Practices regulation has been targeted by some in this issue about federal land management.