Forest “Restoration” a Ruse

Forest ‘Restoration’ Rule is Ruse to Increase Logging

By Chad T. Hanson
January 31, 2018

The U.S. Forest Service recently proposed a sweeping effort to identify aspects of environmental analysis and public participation to be “reduced” or “eliminated” regarding commercial logging projects in our national forests. The Trump administration is attempting to spin this as an effort to promote “increased efficiency” for the expansion of forest “restoration,” but these are just euphemisms for more destructive logging.

Last summer, the Trump administration endorsed the Resilient Federal Forests Act, an extreme bill that would dramatically curtail environmental analysis and restrict public participation to increase logging of old forests and post-fire clear-cutting in our national forests. The bill passed the House of Representatives in the fall but stalled in the Senate. This new regulatory proposal is simply an effort to implement the same pro-logging agenda without going through Congress.

The proposal targets an astonishing “80 million acres of National Forest System land” for commercial logging — much of it comprising old-growth forests and remote roadless areas — based on the claim that logging and clear-cutting of these areas is needed, ostensibly to save them from fire and native bark beetles. Not so.

The overwhelming scientific consensus among U.S. forest and fire ecologists is that these natural processes are essential for the ecological health of our forests, including large events that create significant patches of dead trees, known as “snag forest habitat.” It may seem counterintuitive to some, but the science is telling us, loudly and clearly, that this unique forest habitat is comparable to old-growth forest in terms of native biodiversity and wildlife abundance. Many native species depend upon patches of dead trees, and the understory vegetation that grows in such patches, for food and homes. Forests naturally regenerate after fires, including the largest ones such as the 2013 Rim Fire in the Sierra Nevada, creating a complex and rich ecosystem.

The Trump administration’s claim that increased logging will curb forest fires is equally suspect. Science tells us that forests with the fewest environmental protections, and the most logging, actually burn more intensely, not less. This is because logging companies remove relatively non-combustible tree trunks, and leave behind flammable “slash debris” — kindling-like branches and twigs — and remove much of the forest canopy, which otherwise provides cooling shade.

The Forest Service has now begun promoting the notion that the 257,000-acre Rim Fire emitted about 12 million tons of CO2, based on a computer model that makes the mythological assumption that trees are essentially vaporized during fires. This is part of the “catastrophic wildfire” narrative that the Trump administration has weaponized to argue for rollbacks of environmental laws, and more commercial logging.

In fact, even in the most intensely burned patches, only about 2 percent of the total biomass of trees is actually consumed. Don’t be fooled. Trump’s proposal is nothing more than a thinly veiled attack on our national forests for the benefit of the logging industry.

Chad T. Hanson is director of the John Muir Project (www.johnmuirproject.org) and the author of “The Ecological Importance of Mixed-Severity Fires: Nature’s Phoenix” (Elsevier, 2015).

April 13, 2018: Dogwood Logging Plan on the Gualala River is Back!

STOP “Dogwood” floodplain logging plan! Revised version as bad as original.

Rick and Jeanne Jackson
Gualala, CA

APR 13, 2018 — Friends of Gualala River, FoGR, along with Forest Unlimited, is taking legal action against the resubmitted Timber Harvest Plan “Dogwood,”.

This THP that would log in the floodplain of the Gualala River. CAL FIRE approved this Logging Plan on March 30, 2018.  Dogwood contains the largest tracts of mature redwoods in floodplains, beginning at the boundary of Gualala Point Regional Park’s campground and extending up over 5 miles of the river.

These floodplains are wholly special riparian habitats: they are part of the river, which naturally occupies the floodplain when it flows over its banks. It’s a potent natural sediment trap, or “sink” for the silt and clay that runs off of the eroding slopes and landslides above it. When its vegetation is flattened, the floodplain loses its capacity to trap sediment. This plan in effect logs the river itself, as the river includes its floodplains.

The Gualala River’s floodplain supports extensive seasonal wetlands. Salmon and steelhead feed and fatten on the floodplain, including its wetlands, during those special flooding events such as we had in early April.

Among the environmental reasons and legal basis for the lawsuit to protect the Gualala River are:

• Gualala Redwoods Timber (GRT) essentially re-filed the same unacceptable GRI Dogwood logging plan, without substantively addressing either public or FoGR comments.

• GRT dismissed public concerns, and disregarded meaningful reduced project alternatives.

• GRT dismissed the existence of seasonal wetlands in the floodplains, which is not credible.

• GRT disregarded CAL FIRE’s own scientific guidance on how to assess riparian redwood logging plans. They didn’t even assess the effects of winter 2017 flooding of the floodplain on the part of Dogwood they did harvest (lower Buckeye Creek) or compare it with unharvested areas to validate their predictions of how benign their floodplain logging plan is. If they were serious about environmental protection, they would have at least monitored to verify their predictions and assurances. They didn’t.

• GRT didn’t assess the endangered red-legged frog adult impacts during the non-breeding season, when they move away from breeding ponds and into floodplains to feed at night and hide out under cover by day. They treated frogs impacts as though they were in a hot, arid inland climate (inactive or close to ponds in the dry season) rather than on the more humid coast (where they move overland in foggy, cool weather and at night). And the plan still says the nearest known occurrences of red-legged frogs are 21 miles away, contradicting added information that they are present in the plan area! Careless and confusing contradictions show how sloppy the RPF and CALFIRE are in preparing a revised plan, even after losing last year’s CEQA lawsuit to FoGR and their allies.

• GRT didn’t even do a cumulative IMPACT analysis of the floodplain logging. They just tallied up cumulative PROJECTS: total plan acreages of different silvicultural treatments in other logging plans, and didn’t even distinguish acreages of floodplain from slopes, or wetlands from non-wetlands. So, there was no assessment of the cumulative environmental effects of those projects on fish, wildlife, floodplains, wetlands, plants, etc.

• The THP acknowledges that the river “regularly floods its banks,” but omits any reference to the special salmonid feeding habitat it provides when it does, or the impacts of disturbing the floodplain soils and habitat with skid road use, logging, and hauling. That’s why there are special scientific guidelines and rules for assessing logging plans that venture into floodplains. And GRT and CALFIRE either disregards them or asks for “exceptions” to the rules. We refuse to allow this.

• GRT and CAL FIRE really didn’t fix anything in the old THP. They made minor technical amendments that still dismiss the public’s legitimate concerns.

FoGR and their allies will continue their fight against this egregious logging plan, which would harm the river, its floodplain, and the wildlife that live in or beside it. Logging in the floodplain is a terrible idea that needs to be stopped before it inflicts damage on the Gualala River.
The importance of this area is demonstrated by Sonoma County plans to make it centerpiece of River Park as far back as 1950s, when timber and salmon fishing were still booming.
Logging of Dogwood is set to start on May 15, 2018. FoGR and their allies will be in court before that date. Please help us in our fight by donating to Friends of Gualala River. http://gualalariver.org/

Friends of Gualala River (FoGR) is a non-profit association dedicated to protecting the Gualala River watershed and the species that rely…
http://gualalariver.org

Forest Connectivity

In the 1980s, an ecologist named Thomas Lovejoy conducted an unusual experiment in Brazil’s Amazon rain forest. As loggers moved in with chain saws to clear trees for cattle pasture north of Manaus, he asked them to leave untouched several small “islands” of forest to see how the animals within them fared.

The results were unsettling.  Read more.

 

Santa Rosa cuts down trees in Courthouse Square

Santa Rosa City Council and business leaders’ plan for the old courthouse square began to be evident in February 2016 as the first 20 of 91 trees to be removed were cut. The claim is that it’s the best plan to revitalize downtown. Revitalization efforts come at the cost of the lost of many mature trees to allow for more parking and widening a road.

Press Democrat article here…

Going dry fast – Part 2

by Will Parrish, Anderson Valley Advertiser

Voluntary Measures

For years, wine industry leaders have opposed regulation on the grounds that it is burdensome and of questionable value. California agribusiness representatives have consistently maintained that they can manage their properties in an environmentally responsible manner without the need for government oversight. In the case of the wine industry, the leading edge of this effort is a marketing and certification initiative called “fish friendly farming” which has certified 100,000 acres of vineyards, including a majority of those that suckle at the banks of the Russian River.

The initiative was developed by the California Land Stewardship Institute (CLSI), a nonprofit organization based in Guerneville.

“I’m not a big fan of regulations,” the group’s executive director, Laurel Marcus, said in an interview. “I think they lead to a lot of conflict.”

Continue reading “Going dry fast – Part 2”