LARGEST FOREST SERVICE LOGGING PROJECT IN MODERN HISTORY
Help save the Siskiyou National Forest in Oregon from the LARGEST FOREST SERVICE LOGGING PROJECT IN MODERN HISTORY. Your letters needed by January 5th, 2004! The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) "preferred alternative" proposes logging 518 million board feet of trees on 30,000 acres, or 46 square miles!
Help save the Siskiyou National Forest in Oregon from the LARGEST FOREST SERVICE LOGGING PROJECT IN MODERN HISTORY. Your letters needed by January 5th, 2004!
The Bush Administration and Forest Service have proposed a huge post-fire logging project on the Siskiyou National Forest in southwestern Oregon that will damage the Siskiyou Wild Rivers.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) "preferred alternative" proposes logging 518 million board feet of trees on 30,000 acres, or 46 square miles! That's enough trees to fill log trucks lined up end to end for nearly 900 miles!! The proposal calls for logging more than 12,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Areas, meaning that up to 60,000 acres of roadless wildlands would be disqualified from Wilderness consideration.
In response to the massive logging proposal from the Forest Service, conservation groups have developed a common-sense restoration proposal called the Siskiyou Wild Rivers Conservation Alternative:
The Siskiyou Wild Rivers Conservation Alternative would:
Provide Natural Recovery for Natural Areas The Kalmiopsis Wilderness, Wild & Scenic River corridors, Roadless Areas, Botanical Areas and other natural or ecologically special areas should be protected. There should be no logging, road building, tree planting or other intrusive projects in these areas.
Heal the Wounds
About 20% of the lands within the Biscuit perimeter were in previously "managed" landscape. This is where true restoration cantake place. Examples of restoration activities that can make a difference include:
Road Decommissioning and Closures, Noxious Weed Control and Erosion Control for Bulldozed Firelines.
Protect Rivers & Water Quality
Absolutely no logging in Riparian Reserves (areas adjacent to creeks) or areas vulnerable to mass erosion due to unstable soils. Protecting these areas protects salmon.
No Sacrifice Zones
Post-fire logging will retard the recovery of the Biscuit area and could severely damage the environment. Any logging should be confined to Matrix forestlands where it is allowed under the Northwest Forest Plan. The Siskiyou Wild Rivers Conservation Alternative relies on guidelines from the "Beschta Report"
< http://www.fire-ecology.org/science/Beschta_Report.pdf>. It recommends there be no post-fire logging on unstable areas and trees over 20 inches in diameter be left standing.
No "Logging for Learning" Research
The Forest Service wants to conduct research by extensively logging in the Biscuit burn area. This logging would damage our forest soils and wildlife in the name of science.
WHAT YOU CAN DO!!
Your help is needed! The public has until Monday, January 5th, 2004 to comment on this extreme logging scheme. Please use the sample letter below as a template along with the talking points.
Send your official comments by January 5th to:
Scott Conroy, Forest Supervisor c/o ACT2
PO Box 377
Happy Camp, CA 96039-0377
Fax: 530-493-1775 or 530-493-1776
Dear Supervisor Conroy,
The Siskiyou Wild Rivers area over which the Biscuit Fire burned is extremely important for its giant wildlands, its wild rivers, salmon and for its famed biological diversity. These natural values and the recreation they support are important to protect. Natural recovery rather than post-fire logging will best protect these values.
Unfortunately, the Preferred Alternative in the Draft EIS proposes massive logging and also logs two of Oregon's largest roadless areas - the North and South Kalmiopsis Roadless areas.
I urge you not to log these special places of the Biscuit area: The Roadless Areas, Botanical Areas and Late-Successional Reserves. Leaving burned trees on the land is not wasteful. These trees are needed for the recovery of the forests. Logging them will damage thin soils, cause erosion and slow recovery.
Decommission and close roads that can cause mass erosion and spread noxious weeds or Port Orford cedar disease. Discontinue the Learning Opportunities science project that would log across 30,000 acres.
Please choose the Siskiyou Wild Rivers Conservation Alternative which satisfies the above comments. This alternative is very similar to Alternative 4 without the "Learning Opportunities" research component.
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Information and Talking Points you may also wish to include in your letter:
* The "Preferred Alternative" recommends logging more than 12,000 acres of Inventoried Roadless Area. This impact would disqualify 60,000 acres of roadless area from future Wilderness designation.
* There should be no post-fire logging in Roadless Areas, Late-Successional and Riparian Reserves, Botanical Areas and Scenic River Areas.
* Post-fire logging can damage fragile soils, intensify erosion and degrade wildlife habitat. Dead trees are the building blocks for forest recovery.
* There should be no post-fire logging of large trees or trees of any size on steep slopes, severely burned sites and areas with rocky, erosive or fragile soils.
* The "logging for learning" mega-research would log large amounts of trees across 30,000 acres. This so-called research project should be abandoned. We already know that post-fire logging can harm soils, simplify the ecosystem and slow recovery. Don't subject the Late Successional Reserves to this huge logging fiasco.
* Rehabilitate scars from fire fighting and other human impacts.
* Plant nursery seedlings only in burned plantations. Native forests should be allowed to recover in their own time as they have here for thousands of years.
* Expand the Hoover Gulch Research Natural Area to include the Babyfoot Lake area and the watersheds of Dailey, Rancherie, Fall, Days and Fiddler Creeks. This block of land is botanically rich and important for recreation and tourism.
* The closure/decommissioning of old mining tracks and spur roads in the fire area is important to protect botanical values, watershed integrity and to prevent the introduction of non-native plants and Port-Orford cedar root disease. These roads include the Chetco Pass Road, McGrew Trail and all tracks in inventoried roadless areas.
* Fire lines (including old roads and trails used as fire lines), Botanical Areas, and serpentine lands must be closed to motorized use.
* Fuel management zones should be developed in the urban-interface, not in Roadless, Botanical and other sensitive areas.
* The Forest Service proposed logging doesn't make economic sense. The timber sales will cost more to log than the revenues they bring in. Most jobs will be short-lived and out of the area. These won't be "new" jobs but will substitute for other logging work elsewhere.
---------------from the freddie website--------------------------------
Make your comments count
E-mail your substantive comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Commenters must submit substantive comments (see §215.2) in order to have standing to appeal the forthcoming decision. For appeal eligibility, each individual or representative from each organization submitting substantive comments must either sign the comments or verify identity upon request. Comments will be read, reviewed, and considered, regardless of whether it was one comment repeated many times by many people, or a comment submitted by only one person. Additionally, emphasis will be placed on the substantive content of comments, rather than on the number of times a comment was received (or the number of signatures on petition or form letter response).
For this review, substantive comments are defined as "comments that are within the scope of the proposed action, are specific to the proposed action, have a direct relationship to the proposed action, and include supporting reasons for the Responsible Official to consider". Substantive comments are more valuable to the Forest Service because they act to:
Provide new information pertaining to any alternative Identify a new relevant issue or expand upon an existing issue Identify a different way (alternative) and/or modify existing alternatives considered Develop and evaluate alternatives not previously considered to meet the underlying need Identify a specific flaw in the analysis to assist us in making factual corrections, and/or supplement, improve or modify our analysis Ask a specific relevant question that can be meaningfully answered or referenced Identify an additional source of credible research, which if utilized, could result in different effects
add a comment on this article
add a comment on this article