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