Ed-
This sale has been going on for years. When it first came out I was
against it, and had some involvement with Sierra Club (at that time
lead locally by Sharon Galbraith)...it has undergone significant
changes since then.
Per your suggestion I took a quick look at the document, found that I
would support the objectives, and such as found on pages three and
four, and that they had consulted with forest scientists with whom I
had personal and professional interchanges with over a period of more
than a decade, and have found support for many of their findings in my
own research.
As I said earlier, I have not been a supporter of the KNF's previous
management.
But Ed, they've done their homework and my cursory read of their NEPA
document suggests that they've got a good plan. Were I to read it
closer, I am thinking I would support it barring hidden devils in the
details...
I particularly like their current paradigm replacement for the old
'desired future condition' with what was not too llong ago a fire
management paradigm. I suggest we continue this discussion from here,
as 'here' is the crux---here is where fire and forest management merge
('here' are whole western states of fire-adapted forest ecosystems).
don
Sent from Don's iPhone 3GS...
On Oct 23, 2009, at 7:43 PM, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Don,
>
> I don't understand your usage of the term 'salvage.' They are not
> doing anything to areas that have burned and are arguing that
> thinning existing forests target by this action will prevent fires
> in the future in this area. They are talking about thinning
> existing forest. So where does the salvage fit?
>
> Ed
>
> "Oh, I call myself a scientist. I wear a white coat and probe a
> monkey every now and then, but if I put monetary gain ahead of
> preserving nature...I couldn't live with myself." - Professor Hubert
> Farnsworth
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Don Bertolette
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 10:26 PM
> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Kaibab Plateau, AZ
>
> Ed
> Disturbance?????
> The fire that the sale is trying to salvage 'nuked' whole Sections
> (square miles) of open park- like yellow-barked og ponderosa
> pines...the goshawk population needs familiar hunting 'structures',
> not arbitrary age classes...it's the 3-D spatial relationships the
> goshawks look for and gravitate to...
> -don
>
> Sent from Don's iPhone 3GS...
>
> On Oct 23, 2009, at 7:02 PM, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Don,
>>
>> I am not a goshawk ecologist and can not with any good conscious
>> choose between one camp and the other. It just strikes me that if
>> the goshawks are actively breeding and foraging in the forest as it
>> exists, then cutting down 80% of the trees in the area they have
>> chosen to live is not likely to make things better. Certainly the
>> disturbance of the habitat will be a further detriment to their
>> population.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> "Oh, I call myself a scientist. I wear a white coat and probe a
>> monkey every now and then, but if I put monetary gain ahead of
>> preserving nature...I couldn't live with myself." - Professor
>> Hubert Farnsworth
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Don Bertolette
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 9:51 PM
>> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Kaibab Plateau, AZ
>>
>> Ed-
>> I am on the road and relying on my iPhone which I am sure you
>> cosider a blessing, as it forces brevity on me...;-)
>>
>> If you'll read the two opposing camps (Cole Crocker-Bedford
>> vs. Richard Reid (?)) on goshawk habitat preference I think
>> you'll find it's not so much an issue of diameter class sizes per
>> se, but the forest structure and the way it impacts 'flyways'...a
>> bunch of 1" to 4.9" undergrowth would not be goshawks preferred
>> ground cover for preying on small animals. Where it gets more
>> controversial is the upper story crown structure spatial
>> arrangement and I must recommend Cole's paper/studies to you for a
>> better understanding of forest/goshawk biological relationships.
>> Don
>>
>> Sent from Don's iPhone 3GS...
>>
>> On Oct 23, 2009, at 4:15 PM, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> People
>>>
>>> Perhaps I should elaborate more with some specifics: The
>>> items in plain text are quotes from the
>>> http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/kai/projects/jacob-ryan/JR_EA_Revision.pdf
>>> document. The italicized text in maroon are my observations.
>>>
>>>
>>> The uneven aged stratum (15,233 acres) have three or more size-
>>> classes, with a little less than half in goshawk post-fledging
>>> family areas (PFA) and the remaining in foraging areas (FA).
>>> Approximately 25 percent of the stands in the project area (6,637
>>> acres) are even-aged as a result of past shelterwood seed-tree
>>> harvests.
>>>
>>> [This means that more than half the post fledgling family areas
>>> for the goshawks is in the even-aged stands in the project area]
>>>
>>> [various tables present the projections of the forest situations
>>> 20 and 40 years in the future, however I should point out that the
>>> data used make the projections can be manipulated to produce
>>> almost any result desired]
>>>
>>> To increase tree vigor, improve tree growth and promote healthy
>>> trees, there is a need to reduce stocking to the recommended
>>> levels of about 150 trees per acre. The resulting stands would be
>>> more resilient to the effects of periodic drought, disease, insect
>>> attack, and fire.
>>>
>>> Replacement nest areas are identified within each PFA that does
>>> not have six identifiable current or historic nest areas. Within
>>> the project area there are approximately 3,200 acres of identified
>>> nest areas plus an additional 1,000 acres identified as
>>> replacement nest areas. Currently, the nesting areas average more
>>> than 600 trees per acre and some of these trees are providing
>>> ladder fuels into the overstory crowns. The average tree diameter
>>> is 6 inches and basal area is 127 square feet per acre (Table 5).
>>> The stand density index averages 295 and along with the other
>>> information means that the site is fully occupied and competition-
>>> induced mortality is occurring. Uneven-aged sites that comprise
>>> the existing nest areas display similar characteristics to the
>>> replacement nest areas. There is a need to avoid stand-replacing
>>> wildfires to maintain this wildlife habitat and move the areas
>>> toward fire-adapted conditions. The table below shows the modeling
>>> of existing nest areas over time with very high tree density levels.
>>>
>>> The existing nest sites are currently in the self-thinning mode
>>> (tree mortality) of development due to competition between trees
>>> for available light, moisture, and nutrients. By 2033 if left
>>> untreated, the trend would be continued mortality and extremely
>>> slow tree growth. The forecast for average tree diameter increases
>>> would be less than 1.0 inch in 20 years and less than 2.0 inches
>>> in 40 years. Those same trees under optimal less
>>> congested conditions should increase in diameter by 1.5 inches
>>> each decade (10 years). Tree mortality continues to increase
>>> through 2053 and puts these stands at risk from wildfire, insect
>>> attack, and disease. The probability exists that some kind of
>>> detrimental disturbance such as a wildfire could decimate these
>>> stands between now and 2053 if no corrective action takes place.
>>>
>>> [Nice ladder fire photo to add emotional impact to the data
>>> presented]
>>>
>>> [The game being played in the tables is the idea that a forest can
>>> be drastically thinned, without changing its official "Vegetation
>>> Structural Stage' as defined by the guidelines. It is in effect
>>> saying that removing 80% of the trees in the area does not affect
>>> the forest because it still is in the same classification category]
>>>
>>> this project and detailed in Chapter 2 in response to the purpose
>>> and need described on page 4:
>>>
>>> Thin and convert the even-aged stratum to uneven-aged sites in FAs
>>> (3,170 acres) and PFAs (3,467 acres)
>>>
>>> Thin uneven-aged stratum in FAs (8,026 acres) and PFAs (7,207 acres)
>>>
>>> Thin and enhance site structure in northern goshawk nest
>>> areas (3,205 acres) and replacement nest areas (1,000
>>> acres)
>>>
>>> [This data is presented in the form of a series of tables. If you
>>> look at the numbers, consider the plan for the Uneven aged
>>> foraging areas, which contains about half of the Post
>>> Fledgling Foraging areas: 84.4% of the trees 1' to 4.9' in
>>> diameter will be removed, 49.9% of the trees 5" to 11.9" in
>>> diameter will be removed, and 9% of the trees 12' to 17.9" in
>>> diameter will be removed. Similarly in the even aged stands,
>>> which hold over half of the post fledgling foraging area, 85.9% of
>>> the 1-4.9" trees will be removed, 66% of the trees 5 to
>>> 11.9" in diameter will be removed, 54.5% of the trees 12 to 17.9"
>>> will be removed and 63.6% of the trees 18 to 23.9" will be
>>> removed. Also consider that the smaller sized trees make up a
>>> much higher percentage of the total tree population, so extremely
>>> high numbers of smaller trees will be removed. And then tell me
>>> this will not have any adverse impact on the foraging
>>> behavior of the goshawks?]
>>>
>>> [They are also proposing thinning the nesting areas of the goshawk
>>> as well, which I can not see as benefiting the goshawk population]
>>>
>>> Edward Frank
>>>
>>> "Oh, I call myself a scientist. I wear a white coat and probe a
>>> monkey every now and then, but if I put monetary gain ahead of
>>> preserving nature...I couldn't live with myself." - Professor
>>> Hubert Farnsworth
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Edward Frank
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 5:43 PM
>>> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Kaibab Plateau, AZ
>>>
>>> Don,
>>>
>>> You can download the revised management plan for the project at:
>>>
>>> http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/kai/projects/jacob-ryan/JR_EA_Revision.pdf
>>>
>>> If you look at it the plan goes over and over about the need for
>>> thinning and other management in certain areas of the forest to
>>> reduce fire risk and promote goshawk habitat - although aside from
>>> arm waving drivel it is vague on how their plans will actually do
>>> anything that will help the goshawk population. Much of the plan
>>> is based upon dangers they have projected that will exist in
>>> 2053. It is an amazing coincidence that their
>>> projections of the dangers involved match up so well with what
>>> they originally planned to do when the plan was first proposed in
>>> the mid- 90's without thought of these exacting numerical
>>> justifications. There is no rationale presented for doing
>>> anything to the old growth forest identified in the plan, yet it
>>> is to be thinned and harvested. In fact many areas previously
>>> identified as old growth are now classified as mature or younger
>>> forests in this latest revision. Sure looks like a hatchet job to
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Edward Frank
>>>
>>> "Oh, I call myself a scientist. I wear a white coat and probe a
>>> monkey every now and then, but if I put monetary gain ahead of
>>> preserving nature...I couldn't live with myself." - Professor
>>> Hubert Farnsworth
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Don Bertolette
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 1:02 AM
>>> Subject: [ENTS] Re: Kaibab Plateau, AZ
>>>
>>>
>>> While I am in NO way an apologist for the NKF, the forest is old, it
>>> is habitat for the Goshawk, although there is significant
>>> controversy
>>> between raptor experts (my last NPS supervisor/mentor was one of
>>> them
>>> and I recommend reading papers by him, for one side of this story.
>>> His
>>> name is Cole Crocker-Bedford. His stands against the logging of
>>> goshawk habitat on the Tongass National Forest in Alaska are legion.
>>> I am having a senior moment trying to recall the other goshawk
>>> biologist...Richard ....maybe Reid?
>>> Don
>>>
>>> Sent from Don's iPhone 3GS...
>>>
>>> On Oct 22, 2009, at 6:25 PM, Josh Kelly
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Lovely!
>>> >
>>> > I'm sure there is some hyperbole in the press release, but there
>>> is no
>>> > way that timber sale will be a good one.
>>> >
>>> > Josh
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 22, 9:17 pm, "Edward Frank" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >> People
>>> >>
>>> >> FYI: Form the Center for Biological Diversity:
>>> >>
>>> >> This Tuesday, the Center for Biological Diversity sharply
>>> >> criticized the U.S. Forest Service's latest take on devastating
>>> >> plans to log old-growth trees in the Kaibab National Forest.
>>> >> Unfortunately for the forest -- which houses the country's
>>> largest
>>> >> breeding population of the imperiled northern goshawk -- the
>>> Forest
>>> >> Service has issued a new environmental assessment for the
>>> >> controversial Jacob Ryan timber sale, which would
>>> log 26,000 acres
>>> >> but was halted in May thanks to work by the Center and Sierra
>>> Club.
>>> >> The new assessment drops protections for old-growth trees,
>>> >> essentially stating that the Kaibab Plateau has too much old
>>> growth
>>> >> -- so axing those irksome old, large trees will be good for
>>> wildlife.
>>> >>
>>> >> This marks the Forest Service's fourth attempt to move forward
>>> with
>>> >> Jacob Ryan, and the Center will work to make sure it's the last.
>>> >>
>>> >> Edward Frank
>>> >>
>>> >> "Oh, I call myself a scientist. I wear a white coat and probe a
>>> >> monkey every now and then, but if I put monetary gain ahead of
>>> >> preserving nature...I couldn't live with myself." - Professor
>>> >> Hubert Farnsworth
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org
Send email to [email protected]
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en
To unsubscribe send email to [email protected]
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
