Wednesday, April 23, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle

Push for more logging in the Sierra to curb fires
U.S. Forest Service chief backs revised plan in S.F. speech

by Glen Martin

U.S. Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth, decrying complaints by some
environmentalists as diversions, threw his agency's weight Tuesday
behind a forest management plan favored by the logging industry.

Bosworth, addressing the San Francisco Commonwealth Club on Earth Day,
championed California's revised selective logging plan as a model for
reducing fire hazards in national forests throughout the Western
United States.

Citing last year's catastrophic fire season -- by some accounts, the
worst in 50 years -- Bosworth said he was determined to reduce the
fuel loads on Western forests, which threaten both ecological
integrity and rural communities.

"That's what we're trying to do with the (revised) Sierra framework,"
Bosworth said, referring to California's proposed forest management
plan. "The problem is especially great with dry forest ecosystems. In
the Southwest, (ancient) ponderosa pine forests typically had
densities of 15 to 50 trees an acre. Now we're seeing densities of
hundreds, even thousands of trees to the acre. We have to restore
these systems to their historic conditions."

Bosworth's remarks, reiterated at an afternoon address at UC Berkeley,
formalized his agency's commitment to selective logging over
"prescription" burning, the method favored by many environmentalists.

His speech indicates that the Forest Service will be moving to
implement policies nationwide that mirror the plan endorsed by Jack
Blackwell, the service's regional forester for California.

Under Blackwell's proposed changes to the Sierra Nevada Framework, a
management plan formulated during the Clinton administration, timber
extraction for fire reduction purposes will increase in the Sierra's
11 national forests from about 200 million board feet annually to 450
million board feet.

Environmentalists expressed dissatisfaction with Bosworth's wildfire
policy while timber industry representatives said they were heartened.

Bosworth said that the fire threat from excessive fuel loads must be
considered the paramount danger facing the nation's forests. He also
cited three other major threats: habitat fragmentation, unmanaged
recreation and invasive species.

"We're trying to get people focused on the real issues like fire and
fuels, not diversions like timber harvest," said Bosworth. "If you
read the papers, it looks like we're just trying to get the timber
cut. (That's) bogus. It's about reducing fire hazard."



DIFFERENT VIEW OF THINNING
Environmentalists agree that Western forests need to be thinned but
are wary of selective logging -- which they say can be used as a
stalking horse for commercial logging.

"Actions speak louder than words," said Warren Alford, a regional
representative for the Sierra Club. "While the Forest Service talks
about stewardship, they simultaneously attempt to undermine the Sierra
framework and roll back protections for roadless areas. Then they
characterize any objections as diversions."

Many coniferous Western forests have evolved from open woodlands
stocked with very large trees to exceptionally dense thickets of
smaller trees.

There are two reasons for this.

First, wildfires were vigorously suppressed throughout the past
century, allowing brush and saplings to form an impenetrable
understory. That problem was compounded by the aggressive clear-cut
logging that took place from the 1960s through 1980s. Logged areas
have grown back luxuriantly, but the timber is closely spaced and
highly flammable.

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups are expected to file a
motion in U.S. District Court today defending the existing Sierra
Nevada Framework against the Forest Service's proposed revisions.

THREAT TO TOWNS
Daniel Smuts, the assistant Western regional director for the

Wilderness Society, said fire risk to woodland communities is the most
immediate concern in the national forests, and that's where the
emphasis should be placed.

"What we see the Forest Service doing is proposing unrealistic
solutions to real problems," said Smuts. "We should concentrate
(timber thinning) around rural communities, where the risk is real.
But the service wants to open vast, remote areas to these projects --
that's basically a push to open them to logging."

But Phil Aune, the vice president of public resources for the
California Forestry Association, said Bosworth's approach is the only
practical one.

"He definitely has the right focus," said Aune. "On the Sierra alone,
forests are producing 2 billion board feet of annual growth. Even with
the proposed framework revisions, thinning would only account for less
than one- quarter of that growth. If we're going to seriously address
wildfire hazard, we need to identify effective prescriptions and
treatments. And among those are mechanical thinning."

To support such thinning, some commercial logging must be part of the
process, Aune said.

"You can't do a job of this size with appropriated funds alone," Aune
said. "If the resources are available -- e.g., the capital inherent in
the trees -- why not ask local foresters to help with local fire
hazard reduction programs? Wherever the forest products industry can
aid in that, we will. We'll bid on any project that is commercially
viable."

Grazing stuff snipped

Comment by poster: I see that the "preservationists" want to defend
the current SNF plan which relies too much on prescribed fire. (They
don't know what they're getting into, methinks G The Regional
Forester here has certainly done his homework and has fully expected
this move. ) I stated several years ago that the plan was "fatally
flawed" because of clean air restraints, public dislike of smoke,
excessive amounts of both live and dead fuels and overstocking of
highly flammable trees.
It will be interesting how the Forest Service will implement the
amended plan, after it makes it through the comment period. With
"outsourcing" still being a biggie in the Bush Administration, can
private industry do a better and cheaper job than the current Forest
Service staff? That will be under study but, the current staff,
decimated by downsizing, retirements and reorganization, is inadequate
to implement the new strategy. Currently, contracting out timber
management work is too expensive and requires intensive inspection (at
even more cost). Previously, much of the on-the-ground work was done
by temporary employees, whose skills were, at many times,
questionable, and resulted in what I called "Federal McForestry". It's
quite a quagmire and I hope it will be worked out soon. I have no
doubt that the amended Sierra Nevada Framework will provide a better
balance of forest management to restore our "Range of Light". (I also
have no doubt that it will provide excellent career opportunities for
myself, and others, who have toiled unselfishly for many years.)

Larry

massive snip

Comment by poster: I see that the "preservationists" want to defend
the current SNF plan which relies too much on prescribed fire. (They
don't know what they're getting into, methinks G The Regional
Forester here has certainly done his homework and has fully expected
this move. ) I stated several years ago that the plan was "fatally
flawed" because of clean air restraints, public dislike of smoke,
excessive amounts of both live and dead fuels and overstocking of
highly flammable trees.
It will be interesting how the Forest Service will implement the
amended plan, after it makes it through the comment period. With
"outsourcing" still being a biggie in the Bush Administration, can
private industry do a better and cheaper job than the current Forest
Service staff? That will be under study but, the current staff,
decimated by downsizing, retirements and reorganization, is inadequate
to implement the new strategy. Currently, contracting out timber
management work is too expensive and requires intensive inspection (at
even more cost). Previously, much of the on-the-ground work was done
by temporary employees, whose skills were, at many times,
questionable, and resulted in what I called "Federal McForestry". It's
quite a quagmire and I hope it will be worked out soon. I have no
doubt that the amended Sierra Nevada Framework will provide a better
balance of forest management to restore our "Range of Light". (I also
have no doubt that it will provide excellent career opportunities for
myself, and others, who have toiled unselfishly for many years.)

Larry

The Feds can't fix roads or manage forests without additional income and
they sure aren't going to get it from this administration. Unfunded
mandates from on high are are a rallying cry all over. Everybody's
hurting this year. SOME logging and SOME controlled burns are a
necessity just to begin catching up on the backlog.

Our el nino weather pattern looks like it will give us a late wet spring
- that makes it tough for burn bosses since underburns may still be
cooking when the shift to full summer happens. Its a good time for
commercial thinning. Too bad prices are so low.

mhagen wrote in message ...

The Feds can't fix roads or manage forests without additional income and
they sure aren't going to get it from this administration. Unfunded
mandates from on high are are a rallying cry all over. Everybody's
hurting this year. SOME logging and SOME controlled burns are a
necessity just to begin catching up on the backlog.

Our el nino weather pattern looks like it will give us a late wet spring
- that makes it tough for burn bosses since underburns may still be
cooking when the shift to full summer happens. Its a good time for
commercial thinning. Too bad prices are so low.

And we haven't even factored in the real potential for another serious
fire season, despite the late rains. Also, I didn't mention the
difficulty in "threading the needle" in burn windows. Commonly,
prescribed burns are done in the fall, just to avoid "reburns" when
the weather changes to the heat of early summer. If it's dry in the
fall towards November, you can forget "burning targets" and it's just
lumped on to the backlog again. Many fire crews have lots of temps and
their appointments are strictly limited to exactly 1039 hours during
the year. Is it any wonder why the Sierra Nevada Framework is being
amended to provide more of a balance between prescribed burning and
thinning? Let's see what the "preservationists" do to explain how the
current plan would deal with the overwhelming reasoning against using
prescribed fire and hand-thinning to reduce 70% of the massive fuel
loads (as per the current SNF).

I don't see those prices going up anytime soon, either. Maybe when
private lands run out of small trees? G

PS The rain has some small morels coming up in my yard. They don't
look very edible but, it's an usual sight.

Larry

(Larry Harrell) wrote in message . com...

PS The rain has some small morels coming up in my yard. They don't
look very edible but, it's an usual sight.


Oops....make that "unusual". There's very little in the way of rotting
organic matter there, except for a larger cedar stump.

Larry

....and the sensible 'nodding donkey' ov mainstream americanna speaks
scientific 'sanity'.

your so boring america.

Blessed be,

King Amdo.


Larry Harrell wrote in message
om...
Wednesday, April 23, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle

Push for more logging in the Sierra to curb fires
U.S. Forest Service chief backs revised plan in S.F. speech

by Glen Martin

U.S. Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth, decrying complaints by some
environmentalists as diversions, threw his agency's weight Tuesday
behind a forest management plan favored by the logging industry.

Bosworth, addressing the San Francisco Commonwealth Club on Earth Day,
championed California's revised selective logging plan as a model for
reducing fire hazards in national forests throughout the Western
United States.

Citing last year's catastrophic fire season -- by some accounts, the
worst in 50 years -- Bosworth said he was determined to reduce the
fuel loads on Western forests, which threaten both ecological
integrity and rural communities.

"That's what we're trying to do with the (revised) Sierra framework,"
Bosworth said, referring to California's proposed forest management
plan. "The problem is especially great with dry forest ecosystems. In
the Southwest, (ancient) ponderosa pine forests typically had
densities of 15 to 50 trees an acre. Now we're seeing densities of
hundreds, even thousands of trees to the acre. We have to restore
these systems to their historic conditions."

Bosworth's remarks, reiterated at an afternoon address at UC Berkeley,
formalized his agency's commitment to selective logging over
"prescription" burning, the method favored by many environmentalists.

His speech indicates that the Forest Service will be moving to
implement policies nationwide that mirror the plan endorsed by Jack
Blackwell, the service's regional forester for California.

Under Blackwell's proposed changes to the Sierra Nevada Framework, a
management plan formulated during the Clinton administration, timber
extraction for fire reduction purposes will increase in the Sierra's
11 national forests from about 200 million board feet annually to 450
million board feet.

Environmentalists expressed dissatisfaction with Bosworth's wildfire
policy while timber industry representatives said they were heartened.

Bosworth said that the fire threat from excessive fuel loads must be
considered the paramount danger facing the nation's forests. He also
cited three other major threats: habitat fragmentation, unmanaged
recreation and invasive species.

"We're trying to get people focused on the real issues like fire and
fuels, not diversions like timber harvest," said Bosworth. "If you
read the papers, it looks like we're just trying to get the timber
cut. (That's) bogus. It's about reducing fire hazard."



DIFFERENT VIEW OF THINNING
Environmentalists agree that Western forests need to be thinned but
are wary of selective logging -- which they say can be used as a
stalking horse for commercial logging.

"Actions speak louder than words," said Warren Alford, a regional
representative for the Sierra Club. "While the Forest Service talks
about stewardship, they simultaneously attempt to undermine the Sierra
framework and roll back protections for roadless areas. Then they
characterize any objections as diversions."

Many coniferous Western forests have evolved from open woodlands
stocked with very large trees to exceptionally dense thickets of
smaller trees.

There are two reasons for this.

First, wildfires were vigorously suppressed throughout the past
century, allowing brush and saplings to form an impenetrable
understory. That problem was compounded by the aggressive clear-cut
logging that took place from the 1960s through 1980s. Logged areas
have grown back luxuriantly, but the timber is closely spaced and
highly flammable.

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups are expected to file a
motion in U.S. District Court today defending the existing Sierra
Nevada Framework against the Forest Service's proposed revisions.

THREAT TO TOWNS
Daniel Smuts, the assistant Western regional director for the

Wilderness Society, said fire risk to woodland communities is the most
immediate concern in the national forests, and that's where the
emphasis should be placed.

"What we see the Forest Service doing is proposing unrealistic
solutions to real problems," said Smuts. "We should concentrate
(timber thinning) around rural communities, where the risk is real.
But the service wants to open vast, remote areas to these projects --
that's basically a push to open them to logging."

But Phil Aune, the vice president of public resources for the
California Forestry Association, said Bosworth's approach is the only
practical one.

"He definitely has the right focus," said Aune. "On the Sierra alone,
forests are producing 2 billion board feet of annual growth. Even with
the proposed framework revisions, thinning would only account for less
than one- quarter of that growth. If we're going to seriously address
wildfire hazard, we need to identify effective prescriptions and
treatments. And among those are mechanical thinning."

To support such thinning, some commercial logging must be part of the
process, Aune said.

"You can't do a job of this size with appropriated funds alone," Aune
said. "If the resources are available -- e.g., the capital inherent in
the trees -- why not ask local foresters to help with local fire
hazard reduction programs? Wherever the forest products industry can
aid in that, we will. We'll bid on any project that is commercially
viable."

Grazing stuff snipped

Comment by poster: I see that the "preservationists" want to defend
the current SNF plan which relies too much on prescribed fire. (They
don't know what they're getting into, methinks G The Regional
Forester here has certainly done his homework and has fully expected
this move. ) I stated several years ago that the plan was "fatally
flawed" because of clean air restraints, public dislike of smoke,
excessive amounts of both live and dead fuels and overstocking of
highly flammable trees.
It will be interesting how the Forest Service will implement the
amended plan, after it makes it through the comment period. With
"outsourcing" still being a biggie in the Bush Administration, can
private industry do a better and cheaper job than the current Forest
Service staff? That will be under study but, the current staff,
decimated by downsizing, retirements and reorganization, is inadequate
to implement the new strategy. Currently, contracting out timber
management work is too expensive and requires intensive inspection (at
even more cost). Previously, much of the on-the-ground work was done
by temporary employees, whose skills were, at many times,
questionable, and resulted in what I called "Federal McForestry". It's
quite a quagmire and I hope it will be worked out soon. I have no
doubt that the amended Sierra Nevada Framework will provide a better
balance of forest management to restore our "Range of Light". (I also
have no doubt that it will provide excellent career opportunities for
myself, and others, who have toiled unselfishly for many years.)

Larry

(mhagen) writes:

Our el nino weather pattern looks like it will give us a late wet spring
- that makes it tough for burn bosses since underburns may still be
cooking when the shift to full summer happens. Its a good time for
commercial thinning. Too bad prices are so low.

I managed some underbrush burning in March. We had a couple weeks of
nice dry weather, followed by a day of a nice breeze, so I torched a
brush line of blackberries that I sprayed out last year. Whoosh. I had
flames 20' high, and may have unintentionally cooked a few trees.
There are some toasty branches, but all of them still have green crowns.
I'm hoping they survive. I would never have the nerve to burn later in
the year.

It is nice that the fuel is gone. I didn't get it all, since there was
plenty that was just too wet to burn, but now the brush line looks more
like a fire break than a disaster waiting to happen.

I don't follow timber prices, but if prices bump, post a heads up here,
would you? I would love to do some thinning, but can't afford it in this
market.

TIA

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

"Larry Harrell" wrote in message
om...
Wednesday, April 23, 2003 San Francisco Chronicle

Push for more logging in the Sierra to curb fires
U.S. Forest Service chief backs revised plan in S.F. speech

by Glen Martin

U.S. Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth, decrying complaints by some
environmentalists as diversions, threw his agency's weight Tuesday
behind a forest management plan favored by the logging industry.

Bosworth, addressing the San Francisco Commonwealth Club on Earth Day,
championed California's revised selective logging plan as a model for
reducing fire hazards in national forests throughout the Western
United States.

Citing last year's catastrophic fire season -- by some accounts, the
worst in 50 years -- Bosworth said he was determined to reduce the
fuel loads on Western forests, which threaten both ecological
integrity and rural communities.

"That's what we're trying to do with the (revised) Sierra framework,"
Bosworth said, referring to California's proposed forest management
plan. "The problem is especially great with dry forest ecosystems. In
the Southwest, (ancient) ponderosa pine forests typically had
densities of 15 to 50 trees an acre. Now we're seeing densities of
hundreds, even thousands of trees to the acre. We have to restore
these systems to their historic conditions."

Perhaps he meant, "restore these systems to their PRE-historic
conditions"???? Are they going to rebuild ancient forests with 15-50 trees
per acre?




Bosworth's remarks, reiterated at an afternoon address at UC Berkeley,
formalized his agency's commitment to selective logging over
"prescription" burning, the method favored by many environmentalists.


Why not use both??????



His speech indicates that the Forest Service will be moving to
implement policies nationwide that mirror the plan endorsed by Jack
Blackwell, the service's regional forester for California.

Under Blackwell's proposed changes to the Sierra Nevada Framework, a
management plan formulated during the Clinton administration, timber
extraction for fire reduction purposes will increase in the Sierra's
11 national forests from about 200 million board feet annually to 450
million board feet.


It's not how much you cut, it's how you do it! Industry just likes to
discuss the numbers, not the silvicultural methods- most of which have been
well understood for a very long time.




Environmentalists expressed dissatisfaction with Bosworth's wildfire
policy while timber industry representatives said they were heartened.

I don't think it was their heart that was effected. More like their wallet.
The discussions are always about whether or not to cut, not how to cut and
what the results will be.



Bosworth said that the fire threat from excessive fuel loads must be
considered the paramount danger facing the nation's forests. He also
cited three other major threats: habitat fragmentation, unmanaged
recreation and invasive species.

"We're trying to get people focused on the real issues like fire and
fuels, not diversions like timber harvest,"

Diversions? Yuh, timber harvests are such trivial things- they're just
diversions. duh.......



said Bosworth. "If you
read the papers, it looks like we're just trying to get the timber
cut. (That's) bogus. It's about reducing fire hazard."



Yuh, right- we belive that- just like we belive that Saddam Husseing was
getting ready to attack 'Murica with "nuck-lear" bombs.






DIFFERENT VIEW OF THINNING
Environmentalists agree that Western forests need to be thinned but
are wary of selective logging -- which they say can be used as a
stalking horse for commercial logging.

"Actions speak louder than words," said Warren Alford, a regional
representative for the Sierra Club. "While the Forest Service talks
about stewardship, they simultaneously attempt to undermine the Sierra
framework and roll back protections for roadless areas. Then they
characterize any objections as diversions."

Many coniferous Western forests have evolved from open woodlands
stocked with very large trees to exceptionally dense thickets of
smaller trees.

There are two reasons for this.

First, wildfires were vigorously suppressed throughout the past
century, allowing brush and saplings to form an impenetrable
understory. That problem was compounded by the aggressive clear-cut
logging that took place from the 1960s through 1980s. Logged areas
have grown back luxuriantly, but the timber is closely spaced and
highly flammable.

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups are expected to file a
motion in U.S. District Court today defending the existing Sierra
Nevada Framework against the Forest Service's proposed revisions.

THREAT TO TOWNS
Daniel Smuts, the assistant Western regional director for the

Wilderness Society, said fire risk to woodland communities is the most
immediate concern in the national forests, and that's where the
emphasis should be placed.

"What we see the Forest Service doing is proposing unrealistic
solutions to real problems," said Smuts. "We should concentrate
(timber thinning) around rural communities, where the risk is real.
But the service wants to open vast, remote areas to these projects --
that's basically a push to open them to logging."

But Phil Aune, the vice president of public resources for the
California Forestry Association, said Bosworth's approach is the only
practical one.

"He definitely has the right focus," said Aune. "On the Sierra alone,
forests are producing 2 billion board feet of annual growth. Even with
the proposed framework revisions, thinning would only account for less
than one- quarter of that growth. If we're going to seriously address
wildfire hazard, we need to identify effective prescriptions and
treatments. And among those are mechanical thinning."

To support such thinning, some commercial logging must be part of the
process, Aune said.

"You can't do a job of this size with appropriated funds alone," Aune
said. "If the resources are available -- e.g., the capital inherent in
the trees -- why not ask local foresters to help with local fire
hazard reduction programs? Wherever the forest products industry can
aid in that, we will. We'll bid on any project that is commercially
viable."

Grazing stuff snipped

Comment by poster: I see that the "preservationists" want to defend
the current SNF plan which relies too much on prescribed fire. (They
don't know what they're getting into, methinks G The Regional
Forester here has certainly done his homework and has fully expected
this move. ) I stated several years ago that the plan was "fatally
flawed" because of clean air restraints, public dislike of smoke,
excessive amounts of both live and dead fuels and overstocking of
highly flammable trees.
It will be interesting how the Forest Service will implement the
amended plan, after it makes it through the comment period. With
"outsourcing" still being a biggie in the Bush Administration, can
private industry do a better and cheaper job than the current Forest
Service staff? That will be under study but, the current staff,
decimated by downsizing, retirements and reorganization, is inadequate
to implement the new strategy. Currently, contracting out timber
management work is too expensive and requires intensive inspection (at
even more cost). Previously, much of the on-the-ground work was done
by temporary employees, whose skills were, at many times,
questionable, and resulted in what I called "Federal McForestry". It's
quite a quagmire and I hope it will be worked out soon. I have no
doubt that the amended Sierra Nevada Framework will provide a better
balance of forest management to restore our "Range of Light". (I also
have no doubt that it will provide excellent career opportunities for
myself, and others, who have toiled unselfishly for many years.)

Larry