healthy forests debate
Forest Service Moves Forward on Bitterroot Healthy Forest Project
By Dana Green, 3-30-06
 | |
|
Bitterroot National Forest officials announced Thursday they have come to a final decision on a plan for logging and thinning on 6,000 acres in the Middle East Fork drainage.
The Middle East Fork project, officially proposed in 2004, is the first large-scale project under Bush's Healthy Forests Restoration Act, designed to streamline the review process for fuel reduction work on forest lands.
In his official record of decision, Bitterroot Forest Supervisor Dave Bull said he plans to move forward with the original Forest Service alternative with a few key modifications.
Proposed thinning on approximately 100 acres of old-growth Douglas fir and ponderosa pine has been dropped, and 23 units that were originally included in the draft plan are now on hold until soil experts can conduct a soil analysis in spring.
The decision were based on the input of environmental groups, but emphasized the goals that came out community meetings held after the fires of 2000, Bull stated in the release. In a question-and-answer document, Bull clarified that the modifications reduced the projected timber harvest by about 3.4 million board feet.
"We realize that many would like to see more done on the land and others would like to see less. We look forward to implementing this decision with the support of the community," he said.
Forest officials now plan to put stewardship contracts out to bid, with the hope of getting the project started this summer, said Sharon Sweeney, public affairs officer for the Lolo National Forest, who fielded calls on the announced decision.
"Work should begin as soon as July," Sweeney said.
The Healthy Forests act, signed in 2003, removed the post-decision public appeal process, emphasizing upfront collaboration on proposed projects.
The Middle East Fork project has sparked vigorous protests from environmental groups, concerned over logging in old-growth stands and areas with fragile soils under the Forest Service's proposed plan.
Those groups proposed their own alternative to the Forest Service plan last March, which focused on fuel reduction work closer to nearby residences and less extensive work in the wildland/urban interface.
Their option would be more effective and efficient in protecting property and people, environmentalists argued.
Native Forest Network Director Matthew Koehler said environmental advocates will be reviewing today's decision closely in coming weeks.
Groups have little issue on half of the proposed fuels reduction work, including 2,194 acres of slashing of small trees and prescribed fire and 487 acres of pre-commercial thinning of pine, Koehler said.
"We support the type and location of that work," Koehler said. "It's closer to homes and communities."
But the remaining 2,900 acres where there will be commercial logging contain mature trees that can withstand fire and provide critical habitat, he argued.
"Those are some of the best pockets of mature, untouched forest in the East Fork drainage," he said.
The Middle East Fork project has been marked by controversy since the environmental review process began in 2004.
Forest Service officials have insisted they have been gathering public input on fuels reduction work on the Bitterroot since the fires of 2001. Their alternative will remove trees impacted by the Douglas fir bark beetle epidemic and reduce wildland fire threat to local residents, they argued.
Environmentalists, on the other hand, believe they were left out of initial meetings, and have protested against commercial logging on significant portions of the project.
Environmentalists also protested last summer when Forest Service staff began marking trees on the proposed project site, which forest officials defended as standard practice.
And in September, the project once again sparked controversy when three members of Friends of the Bitterroot, a local environmental group, were kept out of a public meeting announcing support for the official plan by Forest Service law enforcement officers.
Forest Supervisor Dave Bull and Sula District Ranger Hollingshead will host an open house at the Sula Clubhouse on Mon., April 3, from 3 to 7 p.m. to discuss the decision and plans for implementation with those who want additional information. Call Hollingshead at 821-3201 for further information about the decision or the open house.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
• This decision still includes 2,893 acres of industrial logging in some of the best remaining pockets of unlogged, mature forests in the East Fork of the Bitterroot. Generally, these logging units are deeper in the forest, far from homes and the East Fork community. These forests also provide critical habitat for the huge elk, bighorn sheep and mule deer herds found up the East Fork. As we review the ROD over the upcoming days, we'll certainly be reviewing what the Forest Service's decision calls for in these special areas.
• On initial review it appears as if we could support about 2,600 acres of fuel reduction work that's part of this decision, including 2,194 acres of slashing and prescribed fire and 487 acres of pre-commercial thinning. We want to make sure the public knows that we do support effective, bona-fide fuel reduction work to help protect the East Fork Community from future wildfires.
• The Forest Service is claiming that all treatments in old-growth have been dropped. However, much of this is due to nomenclature and the USFS's bureaucratic designation of areas, not because all logging units in forests that are comprised of unlogged, mature/old-growth forests have been dropped. For example:
- The forests where 1,428 acres of industrial logging has been approved with this decision in the Intermediate Commercial Treatments category are described by the Forset Service (FEIS 3.2, p10) as: "predominantly mature Douglas-fir/ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir forests."
- The forests where 891 acres of industrial logging has been approved with this decision in the Salvage/Regeneration category are described by the Forest Service (FEIS 3.2, p11) as: "areas are characterized by mature stands...."
We would invite the public to visit some of these areas (as we have done over the past 18-months) and see for themselves just how beautiful these remaining pockets of unlogged, mature forests up the East Fork are. While the Forest Service might not consider them "old-growth" in a bureaucratic sense, they are clearly "old-growth" in every sense of the definition and provide critical habitat for elk, bighorn sheep, mule deer, pine martins, goshawk, bear, coyote and a host of woodpeckers and other critters.
• Of the approximately, 1,500 acres that were deferred/dropped from this record of decision:
- 100 acres were deferred for old growth
- 417 acres were deferred for soils review
- 1017 acres were deferred because soil conditions are already above the legal limit for soil damage
It's important to note that for the past 18-months conservation groups and PhD scientists have repeatedly pointed out to BNF officials concerns with this project regarding old-growth and soil issues. The BNF never once admitted any problems with this project in regards to old-growth and soils. In fact, they outright rejected all our official HFRA Objection points on these issues. Yet today, they have essentially dropped 1,500 acres from this decision due to old-growth and soil issues, which is in fact an admission that our concerns about old-growth and soil resources were valid.
• The Forest Service still appears to be hiding behind the "Collaboration Cloak." It's important to point out that the official HFRA collaborative process for this project was limited to one meeting, held on September 28, 2004. This is not what most people would consider a "collaborative process," especially since BNF officials showed up at that meeting with their logging units already presented on a map and their minds made up.
The BNF is using other meetings, going back as far as meetings that were held in 2000 while the Bitterroot fires were burning and meetings regarding the Bitterroot Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and essentially wrapping these into the "collaborative" process for this HFRA project. This is disingenuous at best. Furthermore, Jed Fitzpatrick, who lives in the East Fork within the project area, attended a March 2004 meeting that the BNF has been using to bolster their "collaboration" claim, and told the Ravalli Republic, ""They didn't say we're going to log this much acreage in the Middle East Fork," Fitzpatrick said. Rather, the meeting focused on things the agency could do to benefit the local community, he said. He remembered talking about things like back-country access for horses, fishing access and more toilets. "There was no way this plan (alternative 2) was birthed from that."
The BNF's notion of a collaborative HFRA process for this project is certainly much different than the process the Lolo NF has used for the proposed DeBaugen HFRA project. During that collaborative process (the project is in scoping) to date 6 official HFRA collaborative meetings and 2 official HFRA field trips have been held. Again, this compares with one official HFRA meeting on the Bitterroot and zero official HFRA field trips.
• Since NFN's FOIA request revealed that as of October 20, 2005 the BNF spent $208,363 marking trees and unit boundaries for this project BEFORE the decision was made, how much taxpayer money did the BNF waste by marking trees and unit boundaries and then dropping about 1,500 acres (about 25%) from the decision. Does that mean that 25% of taxpayer money (about $50,000) was wasted due to the BNF marking trees/units prior to their decision?
• On March 28 Sula District Ranger told the Ravalli County Resource Advisory Committee that the ROD wouldn't be released until Mid-April. This, despite the fact, that she knew differently: the decision had been signed and was to be released to the public today, March 30.
Again, you can find more information about this project at http://www.nativeforest.org or by contacting the Native Forest Network at 406.542.7343.