Best Places to Work Report 2012

by

BestPlacesheader
Here’s a link.

So a cursory analysis (more holiday chores call today) suggests that once again, the further you get from the direct supervisor (65% )to “senior leadership” (37%) the less people felt good about their leadership. We had the same kind of thing in our Region’s morale survey before I retired.

But here’s the thing; most people on the ground and many people higher don’t know for sure whether irritating programs and policies come from the “Forest Service leadership” or the Department. I always wanted to follow this survey up with more interviews in depth about what folks wanted leadership to do that they weren’t doing or, more likely, what they want leadership to not do that they are doing, and to parse that out.

‘Cause it could be that, say in some of the more draconian diversity efforts, the Department is chewing on FS leadership about not doing enough, and the folks on the districts think that the FS leadership dreamed up some of the more Dilbertian policies. So it’s easy to say that “leadership should” and much harder to figure out exactly how that would work. I gotta say that I feel a great deal of sympathy for these folks who can be between a rock and a hard place.

In our region’s surveys we also had narratives which I found to be much more illuminating than numbers, at least in terms of what kinds of things might make a difference. You have to listen with the “ears of your heart,” as Benedict of Nursia would say, and you can’t “listen” to percentages. Based on his Rule, I bet he knew a great deal about management and leadership. I bet there is a management book out there somewhere based on his teachings.. anyway, I digress.

I always like to compare the FS to BLM which has the same kind of mission, in the same kinds of places, with many of the same kinds of people.

You can always break it down by demographics as well.

But here’s my check on what I would call “related” agencies:

FS 53.4 down 4.7 (this “down” seems to be of concern in such a large agency)
Rural Development (USDA) 56.5
Farm Services Agency (USDA) 59.5
Solicitor’s Office (INT) 60.4
OGC (USDA) 60.4
Reclamation (INT) 61.3
National Park Service (INT) 61.3
BLM (INT) 61.8

Now, you could analyze to see if, as there appears to be, based on this 10 minute analysis, there is a “USDA” effect. Also, we know many folks who work with both agencies on Service-First and do some interviews. Anyway, that’s what I would do. I would also examine small versus large agencies, as sometimes that might make a difference. So I would take agencies of comparable size and missions and compare across Departments. The problem with this approach is that there is only one large one in USDA. So it seems like the Forest Service is hopelessly confounded with USDA in this kind of analysis.

The Forest Service has a cadre of bright and talented social scientists.. it would be interesting to set some of them to analyze these data in detail (publishing their findings on the internet with opportunities for discussion, including follow-up interviews). Seems like this has been going on long enough that understanding more would be good.

Anyway, what is y’all’s take on these numbers?
Anyway, what do you all see in these figures?

Circuit Breaker: How Solar Power Came to San Dimas

by

san-dimas-solar-forest-service

Char Miller send this link with the comment “Thought folks would enjoy this piece today about yesterday’s dedication of a new solar array that will be fully powering …”

Here’s a link and below is an excerpt.

In this case, however, there was an unsung hero operating outside the limelight. Every speaker yesterday mentioned that this dedicatory event would not have occurred without the persistence of Renee Jewell, the Forest Service’s Commercial Services Manager working out of its regional office in Vallejo, California. She may be located deep within a large bureaucracy but she’s no petty clerk.

Jewell is credited with identifying the policy conundrum that blocked the San Dimas and other federal projects, and applauded for persistently prodding the various constituencies — state and federal agencies, the Public Utilities Commission, and SoCal Edison — to figure out a solution.

Her tenacity evokes another narrative about the source of human progress: the power of an individual, like the sun’s energy, can light our way forward.

Kudos to Renee and any other unsung heroes and heroines involved in this project!

Webcast Rescheduled for Tomorrow. Tom Yulsman at CSTPR on State of the Media

by

cstpr_fall2012

Here’s the link. If you aren’t available at 12 MT, it will be recorded.
Here’s Tom Yulsman’s website..

CSTPR Noontime Seminar: State of the Media, and Implications for Climate Change Coverage
CSTPR Noontime Seminar
Fall 2012 Series
Thursdays 12:00 – 1:00 PM
The Communications-Policy Nexus
Media, messages, and decision making

********
NOTICE: THE NOONTIME SEMINAR SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 8 HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED.
********

Rescheduled Date:
Thursday, December 13

State of the Media, and Implications for Climate Change Coverage

by Tom Yulsman, School of Journalism & Mass Communication, University of Colorado Boulder

CSTPR Conference Room, 1333 Grandview Avenue

Free and open to the public

Watch the webcast live

Abstract: Today, anyone with WordPress and Youtube accounts can have the equivalent of their own newspaper and television station. This has drawn readers and eyeballs away from traditional media. While news organizations have finally embraced the online environment, ‘in the digital realm the news industry is no longer in control of its own future,’ according to the 2011 State of the News Media Report from the Pew Research Center. And in the past 10 years, one out of every three newsroom jobs has vanished, with specialists such as science and environmental reporters being among the first to go. At the same time, traditional news organizations – and newspapers in particular – provide the bulk of what is known as ‘accountability news.’ This is the information that the bloggers, pundits, talk radio hosts, commentators and so-called ‘citizen journalists’ depend on to produce their own content. In this talk, I’ll cover the details of these trends, and discuss the implications for covering complex issues such as climate change.
Thursday, 13 December, 2012
12:00 PM – 01:00 PM

Bankrolled and bioengineered, China supplants Wisconsin’s paper industry

by
Workers at the Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) nursery center perform a seedling classification of three-month-old acacia trees in an adaptive net shelter. Qualified seedlings are delivered to plantation site, while other smaller trees are left to continue to grow. The nursery is one of two APP nurseries in China where workers select the tallest trees that yield the most pulp, clone them and plant the cloned seedlings. Image by Mike De Sisti. China, 2012.
Workers at the Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) nursery center perform a seedling classification of three-month-old acacia trees in an adaptive net shelter. Qualified seedlings are delivered to plantation site, while other smaller trees are left to continue to grow. The nursery is one of two APP nurseries in China where workers select the tallest trees that yield the most pulp, clone them and plant the cloned seedlings. Image by Mike De Sisti. China, 2012.

A non-forestry friend found this.. thanks, Chuck!

Here’s a link.

Below is a quote, which reminds me a bit of our energy discussion in terms of sometimes-mysterious currents of world trade, as to where jobs are, where resources are developed and where they are used. Like this quote from below:

It does not explain how a Wisconsin tree can be cut down, turned into pulp, trucked to a port, shipped 7,000 miles around the globe and come back as paper less expensive than that produced in the mill a few miles away.

“These inventions came from China,” Lindsay said. “When people go pointing their finger at the Chinese paper industry or saying we shouldn’t be buying paper from China – paper came from China.”

The West, he says, is in denial about the competitive edge offered by Chinese science, engineering and ingenuity. And Wisconsin’s paper industry, he says, has lost the culture of investment, innovation and risk that defined it in the last century.

“You can only get so much from an old machine,” Lindsay said. “And only so much from your trade tariffs or whatever else you are doing to protect your product from lower-cost products from elsewhere before you eventually have to face the reality.

“You have to innovate to survive in this world.”

But China’s success is not nearly that simple. It does not explain how a Wisconsin tree can be cut down, turned into pulp, trucked to a port, shipped 7,000 miles around the globe and come back as paper less expensive than that produced in the mill a few miles away.

The Washington-based Economic Policy Institute estimates the Chinese government doled out at least $33 billion in subsidies to its paper industry from 2002 to 2009 – the period that coincides with its stunning growth. That’s more than $4 billion a year, a number that is growing. The entire annual payroll for all of Wisconsin’s mills – including those making paper towels, tissue and cardboard – is $2.4 billion.

In China, there is government support at every step of the process – money to create plantations, import raw materials, build new equipment and power the mills.

Subsidies support 30% of the total annual output of Chinese paper mills, according to Usha Haley, a New Zealand economics professor and author of “Subsidies to the Chinese Industry: State Capitalism, Business Strategy and Trade Policy.”

She notes raw materials represent 35% of the production cost of Chinese paper: “If the Chinese are buying those at world prices, how is Chinese paper selling at a substantial discount compared to U.S. or European paper?”

To be sure, there are grants, loans and tax breaks in the United States, typically aimed at boosting individual operations. The largest, in effect from 2005 to 2010, was for an alternative fuel known as black liquor, a byproduct of the pulping process. The subsidy averaged $280 million a year when it was in effect, about 7% of the size of the annual Chinese subsidy to its paper industry.

Here’s a link to more information and photos on the same subject from the Pulitzer Center.

Report:“National Forest Health Restoration: An Economic Assessment of Forest Restoration on Oregon’s Eastside National Forests.”

by

report

Thanks to Terry Seyden for this one.
In the interests of transparency, I’d like to try to establish some background information on these kinds of reports.

Who wanted it: This report was done at the behest of Governor Kitzhaber.
Who produced and funded it: “The report was assembled with funding and guidance from conservation groups, government agencies, academic institutions and business trade associations.”

Here is the link to an article about it (including a link to the document and a four page summary).

Below is an excerpt from the story.

The report looks at doubling the number of acres of east-side national forestland that undergo restoration – such as selective harvest, thinning and underbrush removal – from 129,000 annually to 250,000. Doing so, the report states, could create an additional 2,300 jobs in eastern and south central Oregon. The study says every $1 million invested in restoration generates $5.7 million in economic returns.

The work brings timber to struggling mills, provides jobs, and restores fire resiliency to the forest, the report states. Because of fire suppression, historic practices and passive management, some dry-side federal forests are choked with as many as 1,000 trees per acre, where historically about 75-100 trees per acre were typical. Some 80 percent of the 11.4 million acres of east-side forests under U.S. Forest Service management are at moderate to high risk of devastating crown fires.

The report highlights the importance of local collaboratives – in which government, industry and conservation interests work together to plan and implement restoration jobs.

Wanted: Leader for Peacemaking in Federal Lands/Environmental Issues

by

Andy had another great idea in his comments here.

Let’s imagine an MLK or Gandhi of our world… what would she/he look like? What would he/she do? Maybe what we’re missing is some kind of leadership. Seeking peace and justice through compassion and non-violence.. what would that look like in our relatively puny microcosm of the world?

And the flip side, what keeps you or I or Andy or Bob from becoming that kind of visionary leader?

Can we bridge the ideological divide on crucial conservation issues? The Science of Conversion

by

Check out this post on Bob Berwyn’s blog.
Some thoughts:

1. If you had read Doug Bevington’s book (recommended reading), you wouldn’t see the polarization between parties as “astounding.” According to that book, it was the conscious choice of national and other green groups to ally themselves with one party.

2. Believing that people are in one or another group versus a combination of thoughts and values on different topics is rather dehumanizing. That makes it easy to think of them as “other” and to study them rather than listen to them as human beings. This often happens to rural folks. Who controls the agenda of “science”? Generally a set of folks. Who gets treated as objects to be studies rather than listened to? Generally another set of folks.

3. Like many scientific studies, this one has many implicit values. Because I was a federal employee and had to work for people of both political parties, I don’t remember any R’s being “for” deforestation or toxic waste. Just sayin’. I think the world is a little more complex than being portrayed.

4. Finally, framing things as moral issues can be tricky. In my experience, it tends to be the last resort of someone who wants to tell you what to do or think, when you don’t agree and don’t find that person’s arguments to be convincing. There are general moral principles that most all folks agree on but often environmental questions are what Rushworth Kidder would call “right vs. right” in his book How Good People Make Tough Choices: Resolving the Dilemmas of Ethical Living (recommended reading). Also, framing things as moral issues tends to needlessly get people riled. That can lead to bad things like the Inquisition or .. well you can name your own .. current or historic.

You all across the country probably didn’t see this but in Boulder there was the following behavior you can read about in a story here Boulder County condemns ‘mob harassment, cursing and intimidation’ at fracking hearing:Commissioners announce security plan for future meetings:

Upon returning, Domenico, chairwoman of the board, asked the crowd to “behave in a manner that is respectful” so the board would have a chance to hear everyone who wanted to speak.

“In my mind, the fundamental problem with the hearing we had last night was the behavior of a certain subset of the folks who were there that were really determined to intimidate anyone who had a different perspective,” Toor said Wednesday. “In order to have a democratic process, you have to have an environment where everyone is able to safely express their opinions.”

Other “troubling” behavior cited by the board in its statement included jeering of Wendy Wiedenbeck, a Denver-based community relations adviser for Encana Oil and Gas USA, during her presentation at the meeting and the “mob harassment, cursing and intimidation” some protesters engaged in as they followed Wiedenbeck to her car later.

“Suppressing alternative comments and shutting out voices through intimidation and fear is not part of the democratic process we hold dear,” the commissioners’ statement read. “Last night’s effort by a small segment of attendees to threaten and intimidate a speaker walking to her car was nothing short of shameful. Public hearings should create a space for everyone to feel comfortable to participate.”

Wiedenbeck, and Encana employee since 2004, said in an email that she has attended hundreds of public hearings on behalf of the company and has never encountered as much harassment as she did Tuesday. Even after trying to leave the area, she said, protesters followed her, blocked the path of her car and pounded on her windows.

Once you have determined that the “other” is not like you, and is “immoral” to boot, then it becomes OK to engage in behavior that is disrespectful or hurtful.

5. It creeps me out when people subvert a noble goal, “departisanization” which I fully support, by not listening to both sides and finding a center of shared values, but by attempting to convert the people who disagree in a vaguely underhanded (er… immoral?) way. Ick!

More Wonkfests: EPA on Forest Roads

by

Ah.. it doesn’t get better than this. Here’s a link to the Supreme Court oral arguments. Note for the People’s Database: seems to me like all oral arguments should be posted for any courts.

On December 5, two days after the Supreme Court arguments that John described, the University of Minnesota Department of Forest Resources hosted a seminar called “Will Forestry Become a Regulated Activity Under the Clean Water Act? The speakers were David Tenney, John Barnwell, and Lisa Thornvig. It’s interesting how the issues in Oregon flow (so to speak) all over the country. Here’s a link to the webcast.

Gotta love these webcasts. Thank you University of Minnesota for posting! and thanks to SAF for the link. We ragtag hobbyist wonks appreciate it greatly!

Massive Coalition Calls on President Obama to Nominate Rep. Raúl Grijalva as Interior Secretary

by

378381_2510987911695_752544583_n
WASHINGTON— In a letter sent today, a broad coalition of 238 conservation, Hispanic, recreation, animal welfare, religious, labor, youth, business and women’s groups urged President Barack Obama to nominate Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) as the next interior secretary when that position opens. Grijalva is currently ranking member of the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, and a leading Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee. 

The selection of the next interior secretary is “an important moment to place a renewed emphasis and urgency on some of the most critical issues of our age, including climate change, the protection of endangered species and preservation of water and wild lands,” reads the letter. “We strongly believe Congressman Grijalva exemplifies the modern and forward-thinking vision of the Department of the Interior.”

Rudi Navarra, director of Latinos Go Green, said: “Congressman Grijalva would be an excellent secretary of the interior. He understands conservation issues, and would represent all Americans of diverse backgrounds in protecting America’s great wildlife and wild places for generations to come.”

Kierán Suckling, director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said: “Congressman Grijalva’s a visionary leader with the courage and practical skills to solve the long list of pressing environmental issues we face. There’s no better person for interior secretary than Mr. Grijalva.”

Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, said: “Representative Grijalva has long been an environmental leader on the Natural Resources Committee, and his expertise is just what is needed at the Department of the Interior. For too long the oil, mining and coal interests have been at the helm of the Department of the Interior, but Rep. Grijalva would remake the agency to put the American people before polluters.”

Carole King, musician and spokesperson for the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, said: “President Obama is a very smart man who was elected by a broad coalition to accomplish great things. If he nominates Congressman Raúl Grijalva as the next secretary of the interior, he will be choosing a highly qualified, experienced leader who will help him protect America’s public lands, address climate change, and ensure a sustainable economy for future generations.”

Suzan Shown Harjo (Cheyenne & Hodulgee Muscogee), president of The Morning Star Institute, said: “Raúl Grijalva has worked with Native American nations and people for many years. He understands what we face as ancient cultural continuums, as governments and as families. He is brilliant, dedicated and effective at protecting our vital natural resources and national heritage. He is perfect for this job.”

Brock Evans of the Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs, and president of the Endangered Species Coalition, said: “The secretary of the interior is the most important environmental position in the whole U.S. government. Whoever holds this position has tremendous power over wildlife, national parks and wildlife refuges, and many other legal authorities that ensure American environmental health. In the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt, this coalition will continue to insist to the White House that only someone with a strong and proven environmental record should be secretary of the interior.”

Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of Center for Food Safety, said: “As ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee and co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Congressman Grijalva has been a strong force for environmental stewardship, protection of public lands and resources, and economic justice. Grijalva’s leadership and thorough understanding of complex issues throughout his tenure in the U.S. House of Representatives makes him the ideal candidate for secretary of the interior.”

The letter with a full list of 238 signatory groups from around the country is available here. The groups include Latinos Go Green, Latina Lista, Ciudadanos Del Karso, Vegabajenos Impulsando Ambiental Sustentable, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Women Food and Agriculture Network, Friends of the Earth, Rainforest Action Network, American Forests, Labor Network for Sustainability, Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs, Christians Caring for Creation, Public Citizen, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Food and Water Watch, New Mexico Wilderness Alliance, Committee on Idaho’s High Desert, Southwest Montana Wildlands Association, Washington Wild, Wild Utah Project, Wildlife Alliance of Maine, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, South Florida Wildlands Association, Tennessee Environmental Council, the Wisconsin Resource Protection Council, the Arizona Wilderness Coalition, Desert Protective Council, Friends of Animals, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Green Delaware, Kentucky Heartwood, Kids vs. Global Warming, United Church of Christ Network for Environmental & Economic Responsibility, Rocky Mountain Wild, Sea Turtle Conservancy, Tucson Audubon, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, West North Carolina Alliance, Wild Idaho Rising and WildWest Institute.

Uncle Sam’s Cabin- New Book

by

UncleSamsCabinsCoverForWeb

Les Joslin Publishes Revised Edition of Uncle Sam’s Cabins

Les Joslin, editor of the Pacific Northwest Forest Service Association’s quarterly OldSmokeys Newsletter for the past seven years and a contributor to this blog, recently published a revised and enlarged edition of Uncle Sam’s Cabins: A Visitor’s Guide to Historic U.S. Forest Service Ranger Stations of the West.

Les has carved out a niche writing, editing, and publishing Forest Service history these past couple decades. The original 1995 edition of Uncle Sam’s Cabins, long sold out, contained the stories of 75 historic ranger and guard stations. This new, revised, enlarged edition, contains 92—95 if you count the one historic ranger station structure that’s served its purpose at three locations in three states since 1933 and inspired this book.

“As close as I can fix it,” Les writes in the prologue of the new editon, “my interest in U.S. Forest Service ranger stations—which resulted in the original 1995 edition of this book—dates from the afternoon in June 1962 when I arrived at the old Bridgeport Ranger Station to begin my Forest Service seasonal ‘career’ as a fire guard” on the Toiyabe National Forest. Later that year, the one-room, Great Deperssion-era, district ranger’s office building, replaced by a new structure, was moved to the Reese River Ranger Station site in central Nevada. “I wouldn’t see it again for 42 years.”

“But, over the years, I ran across many other historic ranger stations—they’re historic if built before World War II—on national forests throughout the West. In the early 1990s, I hit on the idea of doing for historic ranger stations what [other writers] had done for fire lookouts.” The result was the 1995 edition of Uncle Sam’s Cabins. And now, some 17 years later, the revised edition, again to tell the stories of those which best meet his criteria of accessibility, historical integrity, and interest to visitors.

“The revised edition includes many of those same historic ranger stations and many others I have discovered during the ensuing 15 years.” All have fascinating stories. Some remain in service, some are interpreted historic sites, many support themselves as recreation rental cabins. In a poignant epilogue, Les shares what became of that one-room Bridgeport Ranger District office building that inspired Uncle Sam’s Cabins and is pictured in its current location on the cover of this revised edition.

The original edition had, as this revised edition has, a simple format. After an introductory chapter on forest rangers and ranger stations, the historic ranger stations profiled appear in chronological order in seven chapters based on the Forest Service’s seven western regions. Access information is provided for each.

The purpose of this book is straightforward: to advance and enhance heritage tourism on the National Forest System and to increase awareness and appreciation of the Forest Service heritage. The revised edition does this in 333 pages that include 260 historic and current photographs and eight maps.

The revised edition of Uncle Sam’s Cabins is available from Wilderness Associates, P.O. Box 5822, Bend, Oregon 97708 or from the publisher’s website at www.wildernessheritage.com for $20 per copy including postage, or from Amazon.com for the same.