Forestry Issues

August 2006

No-no Nunes...

A San Joaquin Valley lawmaker wants to speed logging in several Sierra forests. Environmentalists say they fear for the fate of the Giant Sequoia National Monument and vulnerable species.

Soon, House members will have to sort out the renewed conflict.

"We need legislation to clear this up," said Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Tulare.

Thursday, a House subcommittee will conduct the first hearing into Nunes' controversial logging legislation. Newly minted but months in the making, the bill would essentially streamline several timber projects on the Sequoia and Sierra national forests.

Some of the logging would be on the 327,769-acre Giant Sequoia National Monument, established by President Clinton in April 2000. (more)

Text of draft of Nunes bill as of July 2006

April 2006

Environmentalists Likely to win on post fire logging on Eldorado Forest. 9th circuit court of appeals upholds ban on harvest!

"Logging will remain temporarily halted on two Eldorado National Forest fire-salvage sales, which had been supplying logs to a pair of Tuolumne County sawmills.

A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that Sierra Pacific Industries cannot log in two sections of the forest damaged by wildfires in 2004.

A lower court in August had denied a request by two environmental organizations to immediately end the logging.

But a federal appeals court judge in January temporarily halted the shipments.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in its Friday ruling barred the logging pending ruled the Earth Island Institute and the Center for Biological Diversity are likely to eventually win their lawsuit. (more)"

January 2006: Good News/ Bad News

Judge blocks timber sales in three states, Monterey Herald

By Gene Johnson, January 9, 2005

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/breaking_news/13587791.htm

SEATTLE - A federal judge who struck down a Bush administration decision to ease logging restrictions last summer issued an injunction Monday blocking as many as 144 timber sales in three states. (more)

Quincy Logging: Disappointment, Issue Not Resolved

Forest Service wins key battle over project, Sacramento Bee

By Jane Braxton Little
January 24, 2006

QUINCY - A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of a U.S. Forest Service logging project near Meadow Valley, handing the agency a crucial legal victory..... Craig Thomas , director of the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign, one of the plaintiffs, said he was disappointed by the decision. The Forest Service victory does not resolve the complex issues and the threat of environmental damage involved in the Quincy Library Group logging, he said. (more)

October 2005 Updates

For full report go to http://www.xerces.org/Forest_Pest_Myths/Logging_to_Control_Insects.htm

Logging not much help against forest insect outbreaks

By Jeff Barnard

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) -- Logging is not very effective at controlling insect outbreaks, and can leave a forest less able to withstand another infestation of tree-killing bugs, according to a new study by the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation.

"There is no evidence that once an infestation has started we can log our way out of it," the report said. "Even thinning, which is widely promoted as a solution, has mixed results. Caution should be used when thinning for long-term pest suppression because of the potential for increasing the simplicity of a forest and thus its susceptibility to future infestation." more....

September 2005 updates

A Light in the Forests

New York Times

September 9, 2005

The Bush administration has largely succeeded in its systematic effort to roll back environmental protections for America's national forests. It has weakened agreements to protect old-growth trees in the Pacific Northwest, persuaded Congress to adopt an industry-friendly plan for fire suppression and overhauled rules governing forest management in ways that erode safeguards not only for the forests but also for the endangered species that live there.

Now, however, a rebellion is brewing where the White House least expected it. Western governors are challenging the most controversial rollback of all: the decision to repeal a popular rule approved near the end of the Clinton administration to protect nearly 60 million acres of remote national forest from commercial development.

The attorneys general of California and New Mexico and the governor of Oregon have filed a suit charging that the administration failed to conduct necessary environmental reviews before imposing the new rule. They argued further that the rule would endanger "the last, most pristine portions of America's national forests," leading to excessive logging and destroying essential watersheds.

The lawsuit followed complaints from other governors, including Republicans, that the new rule would saddle them with impossible administrative burdens. The rule would requires states to survey all roadless areas within their borders and devise protection plans, then submit the plans to Washington for approval, with no guarantee of success.

The rebellion is an embarrassment for an administration that had assumed that the governors would leap at the chance to exercise states' rights. It now seems clear that the governors prefer a uniform national approach to federal roadless areas rather than piecemeal management.

The rebellion should also improve the prospects of a bill introduced by Sherwood Boehlert, Republican of New York, and Jay Inslee, Democrat of Washington, to restore the old roadless rule. Now that the governors have spoken, there seems to be no reason to further indulge the commercial interests of a few timber companies.

California Fights Back:

Lawsuits filed to protect the Sierra Forests

The Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign Along with the California Attorney General and Other Environmental Groups File Suit Against 2004 Revisions to the Sierra Nevada Framework...(more)

Articles on the February 2005 lawsuit against the Bush administration revisions to the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan

Is the Forest Service becoming a "rogue agency?"

The U.S. Forest Service lost 44 court cases during the past two years in which the agency was found guilty of violating environmental laws by a federal court, according to an internal memo released today (Feb 17) by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The rate of adverse court findings has been steadily growing with each passing year of the Bush Administration....(more)

Promises, promises....What's a Governor to do???

Our new gubernator promised to defend the 2001 Sierra Nevada Framework and work to prevent the Bush administration from dismantling it. Since then, we have found little to no support from the Governor, despite his promise...(more)

The state of California is right to resist the Bush administration's plan...(editorial from San Jose Mercury news)

A federal judge halted the Bush administration's bid to keep logging 2,000 acres in Giant Sequoia National Monument, saying he questioned the science used to justify cutting in a preserve that houses two-thirds of the world's largest trees.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, ruling in a lawsuit brought by environmentalists, also questioned whether fire control was the government's real motive for allowing commercial logging in the monument.

The so-called "Saddle Project" was approved years ago, but cutting began only this summer, when timber prices were high.

The government, Breyer wrote late Friday in issuing a preliminary injunction barring further logging, "waited five years to execute this contract because of unfavorable timber prices."

In 2000, just after the project was approved, Congress declared Sequoia National Forest a national monument, which generally prevented further logging on thousands of acres in the Central Valley area of Tulare County. The government argued the project was grandfathered in and therefore not covered by monument rules.

The Justice Department, which defended the logging plan in court, declined to say whether it would challenge Breyer's injunction.

Breyer ruled that he was unsure whether the project, which included harvesting 31,000 conifer trees that are hundreds of years old, "would still protect the forest from fire."

Sequoia trees were not targeted in the harvest by logging concern Sierra Forests Products.

The Sierra Club and other groups brought the case this year to stop the logging that began July 10 and ended Aug. 5 after Breyer issued a temporary injunction barring further harvesting. A preliminary injunction is issued when a judge believes plaintiffs would prevail at trial.

"The Forest Service has argued that because the project was approved before it being named a monument, they said they could still do this years later, but the judge said they could not," said Patrick Gallagher, a Sierra Club attorney.

It was not immediately clear how many acres were logged over four weeks, but environmentalists estimated hundreds

The Campaign, Sierra Club, and Other Environmental Groups File Suit Against Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan....

On Thursday, January 27, 2005, the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign along with the Sierra Club, Tule River Conservancy, Earth Island Institute, Sequoia Forestkeeper, and the Center for Biological Diversity filed suit to prevent implementation of the Giant Sequoia National Monument Management Plan.

On January 11, 2005, the Forest Service, despite widespread opposition, affirmed the Giant Sequoia National Monument Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD), which determined the management direction the Forest Service will take in the Giant Sequoia National Monument. Both the FEIS and the ROD fail, in many ways, to implement the protective purposes of the 2000 Presidential Proclamation that created the Monument. The Giant Sequoia National Monument contains approximately two-thirds of all of the giant sequoia trees in the world and provides important habitat for many fragile species.

One of these species, the Pacific Fisher, relies on the Giant Sequoia National Monument to supply important habitat. However, the Fisher's declining population could eventually be forced to extinction under the current Monument management plan due to logging in their habitat. Intensive logging allowed under the plan can cause them to abandon existing habitat areas and become more vulnerable to predation.

This pro-logging plan is contrary to the Proclamation, which states "[r]emoval of trees, except for personal use fuel wood, from within the monument area may take place only if clearly needed for ecological restoration and maintenance or public safety." This management plan would arbitrarily allow trees up to 30 inches in diameter to be removed from the forest for fire risk reduction, a strategy that is not supported by the best available fire science. Instead of logging large trees to supposedly prevent fire, which is a natural part of the Monument ecosystem, the Forest Service should remove surface fuels - the brush, lower branches, and small diameter trees which are the most flammable materials in the forest. Removing these most flammable materials would protect the large trees that are the essential elements of the old forest ecosystem that must be protected.

To read the complaint filed by the Sierra Club Environmental Law Program and Earthjustice, in support of the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign and the other groups, visit:
http://www.sierracampaign.org/Updates/2005-02-03_EnvironmentalGroupsSue.html

A Lifelong Activist's Last Fight, Parade Magazine

Martin Litton is determined to save our nation's giant sequoias. At 87, he's a force to be reckoned with.

Last January, the Forest Service, now run by Mark Rey, a former timber-industry lobbyist,, released a plan for managing the monument. The plan, which took three years to design, will enable commercial timber companies to cut a large number of trees-up to 7.5 million board feet per year, including young sequoias-up to 30 inches in diameter.
Sequoia activists don't buy any of this. Eight environmental groups, plus California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, are calling for Gaffrey to scrap the plan. (At press time, no decision had been made on an appeal.)

Martin Litton, who has set up an organization to protect the trees, is demanding a more radical solution: an end to the Forest Service's stewardship of the monument, if these forests are to be saved," he declares, "the monument and the sequoias within it must take their rightful place among the treasures within our National Park system" I haven't
got much time left, but this is a fight I will wage as long as I'm alive."

(Read the whole article)

What You Can Do
To learn more about Martin Litton's efforts to protect the sequoias, visit www. sequoiaforestkeepe.org or write: Sequoia ForestKeeper, P.O. Box 2134, Kernville, Calif. 93238