Analysis of the DEIS for Wildlife Conservation Strategy Phase I for the Boise National Forest
Full text [here]
Selected Excerpts:
By Ned N. Pence, Retired Forester
Jan. 24, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The Boise National Forest comprises nearly 1.68 million forested acres. A current Forest Plan was completed in 2003; however since 2000 the forest has experienced extensive wildfire, affecting about 380,000 acres (17% of the forest). The purpose of the project is to complete a comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (WCS) for the forest and amend the 2003 Forest Plan (Summary, page 6). The Wildlife Conservation Strategy is being completed in conjunction with the Sawtooth National Forest and the Payette National Forest that have also experienced similar extensive wildfires.
The DEIS explains that Forest Plan amendments are necessary for eight reasons (Summary, page 8):
1. Add to or modify existing management direction to emphasize retention of most forest stands that meet the definitions of old-forest habitat or large tree size class.
2. Add to or modify existing management direction to focus restoration in forest stands classified as large tree size class and medium tree size class to promote desired old-forest habitat or large tree stand conditions and reduce hazards and risks to these habitats.
3. Delete wildlife standard WIST01 and replace it with a more comprehensive and diverse strategy for wildlife conservation that relies on scientifically accepted conservation concepts and associated principles.
4. Move the 400,000 acres in the planning unit that fall within Management Prescription Category (MPC) 5.2 (Commodity Production Emphasis) to a restoration emphasis.
5. Add or modify existing management direction to emphasize retention of large snags while balancing other objectives associated with a given MPC (e.g., the desire to provide for economically viable timber harvest on lands suitable for timber production).
6. Prioritize vegetative and associated wildlife habitat restoration treatments to increase the overall probability of restoration success.
7. Identify the location of priority or key habitat areas for wide-ranging carnivore species, such as wolverine, and retain linkages between these habitats. Based on the best information available, identify where potential conflicts between this species and human use may exist and whether further review is warranted.
8. Balance wildlife habitat restoration needs with multiple-use objectives, and allow treatment exemptions for treatments that respond to emergencies, provide for public health and safety, and allow for the exercise of existing rights and other statutory requirements.
The Boise National Forest desires to return the vegetation to “historical conditions” believing that past forest management – wildfire suppression, and timber harvest have “directly and indirectly affected habitat quality, quantity, and distribution” (Summary, page 7). It is not possible to know what “historic conditions” (prior to human settlement) were; however, the Forest Service believes past management practices have resulted in:
1. Substantial reduction in the abundance and extent of large trees size class and old forest habitat.
2. Substantial reduction in the abundance of legacy ponderosa pine and western larch, and large snags.
3. Substantial increases in tree densities and ladder fuels resulting in reduced habitat quality.
4. Reductions in habitat quality due to an increase in climax tree species.
5. Reductions in forest cover from uncharacteristic wildfire, insects and disease.
6. Reductions in habitat quantity and quality due to historic and/or continued human use.
The above concerns prompt me to ask, which is more important, habitat or human use to satisfy current and future needs? The Forest Service must recognize that it is not possible to change current human needs and the impossibility of returning the historic conditions that existed prior to European settlement. However, the desire to return the historic role of fire has to make one wonder.
There is considerable evidence that Native Americans regularly burned the forest to satisfy their needs prior to European settlement. The “mosaic” that the Boise National Forest seems to desire was the result of hundreds of years of deliberate human caused fires combined with allowing lightning fires to burn. It is doubtful that current management can duplicate those conditions due to existing fuel loading without mechanical treatment and then frequent prescribed fire. A major question and concern should be: “Will current attitudes and needs allow the Forest Service to return the historic role of fire?” Current attempts using Wildland Fire Use (WFU) and Appropriate Management Response (AMR) have resulted in catastrophic fire and the expenditure of millions of dollars. …
