Debbie Page-Dumroese on “Why Biochar?”: From Biochar in the Southwest Workshop

Thanks to University of Arizona Cooperative Extension, Chris Jones and partners, for putting on this Biochar Opportunities in the Southwest Workshop, which involved researchers, forest management types, and current and future entrepreneurs, exchanging ideas, information and experiences.

Here’s the link to recordings of all the presentations and report-outs.

My personal favorite was Deb Page-Dumroese of the Rocky Mountain Research Station, one of the founders of, and a current leader in, the woody biochar field. I would call her an “eminence grise.” Her presentation starts 7 minutes in here. Rethinking slash piles, (clip above) is around 29 minutes.

If you’ve been following biochar from woody material off and on, as I have, this seminar is a great way to get up to date. If you have never learned about it, it’s a great introduction.

Cool Technologies Round-up: Wolves, Eagles, Sheep, Seed and Satellites

I’ve seen a variety of cool new technologies so thought I’d put them all in one post.

Drone seeding (if you watched the Bladon wildfire and hydrology seminar, you might reflect that aerial seeding in itself is nothing new). There is probably a history of direct seeding versus planting after fires, by location, somewhere. Still, doing it with drones is relatively new and could have some advantages.

Working to prevent eagle kills from wind turbines.

Grazing sheep under solar panels

I recently attended a Zoom Conference put on by Arizona State Extension on Biochar. A question came up in our group “why feed it to livestock?”. Apparently it’s allowed for food animals in Europe but not here (yet). This is why it’s good. Again, for sheep.

Hazing wolves. This is not new technology, but if you’re wondering how they do it at Yellowstone.

Wooden satellites cut space junk.

Sequoia Holdover Fire

The AP has an article out today, “A giant sequoia tree in California is still smoldering 9 months after it caught fire.”

Excerpt:

A giant sequoia tree in Sequoia National Park is still smoldering nine months after it caught fire during last summer’s wildfires.

National park scientists were surveying the damage caused by last year’s Castle Fire  when they discovered the burning giant sequoia in the remote Board Camp Grove earlier this week. They said the discovery shows just how dry conditions in the central Sierra have been this year.

“The fact areas are still smoldering and smoking from the 2020 Castle Fire demonstrates how dry the park is,” said Leif Mathiesen, assistant fire management officer for Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks, in a statement. 

“With the low amount of snowfall and rain this year, there may be additional discoveries as spring transitions into summer,” he added.

I hesitate to disagree with an AFMO who is on the scene, but it is not at all unusual for small hot spots to survive a winter, even a heavy winter. It happened in 2018 after the 2017 Eagle Creek Fire in the Columbia River Gorge, an area that gets 60 to 80 inches of rain a year. I say this is not to downplay the drought in Calif., but to offer some perspective. Holdover and “sleeper” fires are not unusual.

Memo: Trump admin knew, didn’t care, slashing habitat would likely cause northern spotted owl extinction

Press release from Western Environmental Law Center.

On the same day as the Trump administration announced the elimination of 3.4 million acres of critical habitat for the northern spotted owl, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s top owl expert formally objected to the decision in a document recently unearthed as part of ongoing litigation. The Jan. 15 memorandum, written by Oregon State Office Supervisor for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Dr. Paul Henson, found that “it is reasonable to conclude that [the reduction in critical habitat] will result in the extinction of the [northern spotted owl].” The Henson memo references other documents, as yet unreleased, indicating this was not the first warning of the dire consequences of the proposed rule. On Dec. 9, 2020, Dr. Henson likewise warned, “Most scientists (myself included) would conclude that such an outcome will, therefore, result in the eventual extinction of the listed subspecies.”

“We now know what we suspected all along, which is that the Trump administration actively disregarded the best available science when making wildlife and land management decisions,” said Susan Jane Brown, attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “Seeing in writing that callous disregard for the continued existence of this iconic species is sobering, to say the least, and revolting at worst. This is a clear example, and unfortunately not the first, of the prior administration giving out gifts to political allies rather than following the law. Thankfully, experts at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stood up for the northern spotted owl, and WELC and our clients are in court to ensure that the best available science rules the day.”

“We suspected that political favors, not science, guided the last-minute rulemaking change by the Trump administration,” said Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC). “Now we know that it was made clear to the Trump administration that its planned cuts to northern spotted owl critical habitat would result in the owl’s extinction. They knew but didn’t care.”

The Henson memo was written in response to a separate memo, signed by then-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Aurelia Skipwith, which outlined the legal and scientific justifications for the reduction in critical habitat. The Jan. 7, 2021 memorandum was reportedly not provided to Dr. Henson until the day before the formal rulemaking, making a more timely objection impossible.

This is not the first time that political appointees have personally inserted themselves into controversial decisions. In 2007, Julie MacDonald, then deputy assistant secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the Department of the Interior, was found to have manipulated decisions and agency science to benefit the Bush administration’s political agenda. The Interior Department under Interior Secs. Ryan Zinke and David Bernhardt have also been subject to a number of high-profile ethics scandals. Given this history, after the Jan. 15 critical habitat rule, eight Western lawmakers requested a formal investigation as to whether any government official improperly “inserted themselves into the scientific process in order to achieve preferred policy outcomes….”

The Biden administration has paused implementation of the Trump-era critical habitat rule until December, signaling its intent to formally reverse or revise the rule. Meanwhile, the timber industry has already filed suit against the delayed implementation and Congressional Republicans are lining up behind the timber industry, urging the immediate implementation of the Trump rule.

General background:

Timber harvesting in the Northwest has resulted in a widespread loss of spotted owl habitat across its range, which was a main reason for listing the species in 1990. Owls depend on habitat provided by the dense canopy of mature and old-growth forests; unfortunately, those forests are still a target for logging throughout the bird’s historic range. The northern spotted owl is already functionally extinct in its northernmost range, with only one recognized breeding pair left in British Columbia.

In response to a court order, in 1990 the Service listed the northern spotted owl as threatened, citing low and declining populations, limited and declining habitat, competition from barred owls, and other factors in the bird’s plight. Even after its listing, northern spotted owl populations have declined by 70%, and the rate of decline has increased.

In response to a petition filed by the Environmental Protection Information Center, in December 2021, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined that “uplisting” the owl from “threatened” to “endangered” was “warranted but precluded by higher priority actions.”

30 x 30 – America the Beautiful

The Biden Administration came out with America the Beautiful as an approach to 30×30.  I like the Principles (see image above), and I like the idea of getting agencies together, and counting the same things the same way.  Here’s a link.

American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas

To develop and track a clear baseline of information on lands and waters that have already been conserved or restored, the U.S. Government should establish an interagency working group of experts to build an American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas. The Atlas would be an accessible, updated, and comprehensive tool through which to measure the progress of conservation, stewardship, and restoration efforts across the United States in a manner that reflects the goals and principles outlined in this report.

The interagency working group—led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and NOAA, in partnership with the Council on Environmental Quality, and other land and ocean management agencies at the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and the Interior—would be tasked with gathering input from the public, States, Tribal Nations, a wide range of stakeholders, and scientists to assess existing databases, and to develop an inclusive, collaborative approach to capture and reflect conservation and restoration of lands and waters. The group, for example, could consider how to reflect State- and county- presented information, how to capture conservation outcomes on multiple use lands and ocean areas, and how to protect the privacy of landowners, and sensitive or proprietary information.

The U.S. Government has existing tools to draw from in developing the American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas, including USDA’s Natural Resources Inventory and Forest Inventory and Analysis programs, the USGS’s Protected Area Database (PAD), and NOAA’s Restoration Atlas and Marine Protected Areas Inventory, among many others, but they should be refined, coordinated, and supplemented to better reflect the state of conservation in America. For example, the PAD contains useful, but incomplete, information about the conservation status of Federal, State, and local government lands and private lands subject to conservation easements.28 It is an aggregated database built through contributions from States and partners throughout the nation; however, the PAD does not, for example, currently include information about the conservation strategies of Tribal Nations, and many other effective conservation tools that farmers, ranchers, and other private landowners are deploying to conserve the health of working lands.

The American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas would aggregate information from these databases and others, supplement this information with information from the States, Tribes, public, stakeholders, and scientists, and provide a baseline assessment of how much land, ocean, and other waters in the U.S. are currently conserved or restored, including, but not necessarily limited to:
• The contributions of farmers, ranchers, forest owners, and private landowners through
effective and voluntary conservation measures; …

What’s your favorite and least favorite part of the initiative?

Innovative Ways to Count Recreationists: Headwaters Report

Almost all of my Forest Service contacts said there was a great deal more recreation occurring on the National Forests due to Covid. But they didn’t have counts. Some public affairs sources said they would have to wait for their turn with NVUM (which is not every year for every Forest).

Note: this is just the information I received and/or pieced together from various contacts. Some contacts did not return emails. If this isn’t true, please speak up and comment or email me.

I think Headwaters Economics had a good point that in arguing for recreation budgets, we need to know the numbers. So they developed this report.

https://vimeo.com/headecon

I haven’t read it in its entirety, but would like to know what others think.

1. Is counting recreationists important to managers and others?

2, Is NVUM enough? Can it be fixed to be enough?

3. What do you think of Headwaters’ ideas?

4. What are your own ideas (about counting recreationists?)

5. Does it make sense for BLM and the FS to use the same approach since they are all mixed together spatially in parts of the country?

10-year anniversary of northern Rockies wolf delisting comes amid on-going slaughter

10-year anniversary of northern Rockies wolf delisting comes amid on-going slaughter

Undemocratic move decade ago opened floodgates for widespread wolf killing in Idaho and Montana, paving the way for even more barbaric wolf-killing schemes

MISSOULA, MONTANA—Ten years ago today, federal Endangered Species Act protections were stripped from gray wolves in Idaho, Montana, eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, and northern Utah because of a rider attached to a must-pass budget bill by U.S. Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) and U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID).

This undemocratic move a decade ago—which blocked any judicial review of the rider—opened the floodgates for widespread wolf killing in the northern Rockies, including by hunters, trappers, and state and federal agencies. State “management” of wolves in the northern Rockies has included Idaho Fish and Game (IDFG) hiring a professional hunter-trapper to go into the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness to slaughter wolves and IDFG conducting aerial gunning operations to kill wolves in some of the most remote roadless federal wildlands remaining in the lower-48 states.

More recently–during a 12-month period from July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2020–hunters, trappers, and state and federal agencies killed 570 wolves in Idaho, including at least 35 wolf pups. The state of Idaho also allows a $1,000 “bounty” paid to trappers per dead wolf, including wolves slaughtered on America’s federal public lands and deep within designated Wilderness areas. Right now, a bill currently sits on the desk of Idaho Governor Brad Little that would allow the state to kill 90% of the wolves in the state (up to 1,350 dead wolves in total) by hiring private contractors and allowing unlimited wolf killing by individual hunters and trappers.

The dire situation for wolves in Montana following the 2011 delisting rider is much the same. Fresh off revelations that Governor Greg Gianforte violated state hunting regulations in February when he trapped and shot a collared Yellowstone wolf, Gov Gianforte has since signed numerous draconian bills to slaughter more wolves.

New barbaric laws in Montana allow hunters and trappers to kill an unlimited number of wolves with a single license, allow a wolf “bounty,’ allows trappers to use cruel strangulation neck snares, extend the wolf-trapping season, and authorize night-time hunting of wolves on private lands and baiting of wolves.

“The barbaric situation facing wolves in Montana and Idaho prove that the gray wolf still needs federal Endangered Species Act protections. As we clearly warned ten years ago, the state ‘management’ of wolves essentially amounts to the brutal state-sanctioned eradication of this keystone native species,” said Sarah McMillian, the Montana-based conservation director for WildEarth Guardians.

“WildEarth Guardians and our allies filed a lawsuit ten years ago in an attempt and overturn this undemocratic, spiteful wolf rider because we believed the wolf delisting rider violated the U.S. Constitution. While our lawsuit wasn’t successful because Congress simply closed the courthouse doors, the hateful and on-going attempts to completely decimate wolf populations in Idaho and Montana warrants national outrage and action by Congress to restore wolf protections in the northern Rockies,” said John Horning, WildEarth Guardians’ executive director.

“State ‘management’ of wolves in Idaho and Montana harkens back to an era when people sought to exterminate wolves altogether, and nearly succeeded. These types of actions were not only deplorable in the early 1900s, but they have zero place in science-based management of a keystone species in 2021, especially in the midst of a biodiversity crisis and nature crisis,” said McMillian. “We must not abandon fragile wolf-recovery efforts and allow anti-wolf states, hunters, and trappers to push these iconic species back to the brink of extinction.”

Alpha female wolf by Ray Rafiti.

 

NFS Litigation Weekly April 30, 2021

Well, this first “weekly” we’ve received from the Forest Service since March 5 has a summary of one new Notice of Intent to Sue:  Litigation Weekly April 30, 2021_Email

On April 15, 2021, Friends of the Clearwater sent a 60-day notice of intent to sue the Forest Service alleging violation of the Endangered Species Act for approving the Hungry Ridge Restoration Project on the Nez Perce National Forest without consulting on grizzly bears, which “may be present” in the project area.  (The Summary also mentions a similar NOI received on February 22, 2021, on the End of the World Project).

 

But here are a few other things that were going on during the first part of April.

Court decision:  Natural Resources Defense Council v. McCarthy (10th Cir., April 8 2021)

The circuit court affirmed a decision by the District Court for the District of Utah, and held that the BLM was not required by NEPA to evaluate the effects reopening an area it had temporarily closed to off-highway vehicles.  (However, BLM did apparently consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service about effects on the Wright fishhook cactus, which was the reason for the original closure.)  The court held that, under BLM’s temporary closure regulation, BLM had no discretion to retain the closure once it determined that adverse effects could no longer occur. The court also found that the closure was not consistent with the Resource Management Plan’s designation of the area as open to off-highway vehicles, and this also limited BLM’s discretion to maintain the temporary closure.

The district court decision was described here.

Court decision:  Center for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt, (D. Nev., April 21, 2021).  (The news release contains a link to the court’s order.)  We previously discussed this case here.  

The district court gave the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 30 days to decide whether or not to list the Tiehm’s buckwheat and designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act because they failed make a timely 12-month finding on the plaintiffs’ petition.  A proposed lithium mine on BLM land would destroy as much as 90% of the global population.  The court dismissed the claim against BLM because they are under no obligation to respond to a petition from plaintiffs nor do they have a duty to act with regard to their planning requirements.  The FWS has now said they can’t meet this timeline, as explained here.

New lawsuit:  Center for Biological Diversity v. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (D. D.C., filed April 15, 2021)  (The article includes a link to the complaint.)

The FWS released a plan in 2016 to address a portion of the more than 500 species waiting for Endangered Species Act protection in the U.S, but plaintiffs say the agency neglected to make dozens of findings every year since because of interference from the Trump administration.  In this case plaintiffs complain about delays in listing decisions for nine species, including the Franklin’s bumblebee from Oregon, the Sierra Nevada red fox and Hermes copper butterfly from California, and Bartram’s stonecrop and Beardless chinchweed from Arizona; and critical habitat decisions for eight plants and the Suwannee moccasinshell found in Florida, and the pearl darter fish in Mississippi.

An Arkansas man pleaded guilty in federal court in Missouri to cutting timber and damaging trees in the Mark Twain National Forest, including removal of 27 walnut and white oak trees.  He may be sentenced to up to 10 years in federal prison without parole.  “The value of the timber was placed at approximately $20,269, and the ecological damage value of the trees cut from the national forest and remediation costs to the U.S. Forest Service totaled more than $44,000.”  (Does that say something about the economics of timber sales there?)

BLM OK’s 2K-acre Solar Farm in California

E&E News reported today that a 2,000-acre solar farm in SE California got the OK. It will provide to power about 87,500 homes. See also here. And BLM Nepa docs here.

A colleague who works in the Northeast wonders why many folks there object to any sort of commercial timber harvesting, but say little about solar farms, such as a proposed 200-acre solar farm in a forested area of Mass.

From E&E News:

The Biden administration today announced approval of a major solar farm in Southern California, the final green light for a renewable energy project first proposed more than a decade ago.

The Bureau of Land Management record of decision authorizes Sonoran West Solar Holdings LLC to build Crimson Solar, a 350-megawatt power and energy storage project. The project will cover roughly 2,000 acres of BLM land in the Chuckwalla Valley, near the Arizona border.

The project, which can generate enough electricity  is expected to connect to the regional electrical grid at a nearby substation operated by Southern California Edison.

Some environmentalists have criticized the project, saying it has the potential to harm archaeological sites, migratory birds and other wildlife, including the desert tortoise and the Mojave fringe-toed lizard.