BOF decision leads JDSF to return to objectionable practices

[Vince Taylor]

Dear JAG members,

It has taken almost no time for the BOF decisions on JAG's recommendations to show how important for protection of important forest values and for public acceptance were the recommendations rejected by the BOF.

The proposed Water Gulch THP vividly demonstrates that the Board's rejection of key elements of the JAG consensus has destroyed the balanced management agreements that satisfied all of the competing interests represented on the JAG. The THP proposes widespread group selection, herbicide use on tan oaks, and demonstrations at variance with Matrix Silviculture with no associated review and that do not provide any significant new information.

The BOF in its action on the JAG report, threw out  the carefully developed JAG consensus on Matrix Silviculture, replacing it with FPR selection silviculture, which includes unlimited group selection. JDSF staff has lost no time, proposing to apply group selection to80-85% of the 825-acre Water Gulch THP. There may be grounds for some group selection in areas dominated by tan oak, but the proposed extensive use of group selection is directly contrary to the spirit of the JAG consensus on silviculture in the Matrix.

The BOF rejected JAG's recommendations on herbicide use. Immediately, JDSF is ignoring the JAG's desire to minimize herbicide use, proposing to apply "hack and squirt" herbicide  to tan oaks in the group selection areas, with no approved experimental protocol.

Here is an excerpt for the THP Summary:

Group Selection
Group selection will be implemented on approximately 80% to 85% of the THP area. Less than 20% of the group selection harvest area (excluding WLPZ’s) will be made up of gap openings at any one time.. The average group opening is expected to be 1.5 to 2.0 acres, with larger group openings up to 2.5 acres in areas where topographic and/or logging operational constraints exist. Primary considerations for establishing logical group opening locations (and size) will include planning for future groups and choosing areas where conifers are expected to maintain site occupancy. With the exception of corridor trees, harvesting between groups is not proposed. Following the creation of groups , redwood seedlings will be planted at a 10-12 foot spacing.

Hardwood control measures will be implemented within groups to reduce competition with naturally regenerating and planted conifer seedlings. A proportion of groups will include either “hack and squirt” of standing hardwoods, implemented during the pre-harvest on standing hardwoods, or mechanical cutting of hardwood sprouts from harvested hardwood stems/seedlings sometime post-harvest (2-3 years). Pre-harvest “Hack and squirt” applications will allow time for foliage decay, thus releasing nutrients and increasing sunlight to the forest floor in time for scheduled tree planting. Post harvest mechanical treatments will allow manual control of regenerating hardwood, thus reducing competition.

The Board of Forestry also rejected the JAG's recommendations for restricting research and demonstration in the Matrix to ensure that silviculture at variance with Matrix guidelines would only occur pursuant to a peer-reviewed research plan.

The THP summary lists many "Demonstration" elements, but these are not associated with an approved research project, as the JAG proposed for silvicultures that depart from Matrix silviculture, as do the proposed group selections. Nor do any of the demonstrations "provide new information of significant value," as required by the JAG recommendations. The JAG report made these restrictions to guard against use of pseudo-demonstrations to justify economically appealing but ecologically damaging logging. In a probable oversight, the BOF did not reject the section of the JAG report containing these restrictions (V. Demonstration a Research-Oriented Management Context, p. 41).  Apparently, though, JDSF staff thought the Board's actions gave it the green light to return to old, publicly objectionable practices.

Instead of the end of animosity and conflict that the JAG report promised, the Board of Forestry has succeeded in throwing that promise away. The Board, JDSF staff, and logging interests may all be happy. I am not, and I speak for many others.

I am disgusted and disheartened.

I cast my vote strongly against approval of the Water Gulch THP.

Vince
 

[Jani, Mike]

I would hope that others would weigh in on this.  I’d like to get a sense about how everybody is feeling in terms of Cal Fire staff’s interpretations of the BOF direction.  It seems to me, that the Director should consider the Board’s actions and then consider the work of the JAG, and perhaps give further direction to the staff in terms of implementation and what in terms of studying the options they need to do to look at the economics and ecological effects of variances from what we had asked them to consider.  I do feel that because we were never able to get to the next step in understanding the numerical implications of our recommendations that THIS is what the JDSF timber harvest program should be focused on at this point.

--
To post to this group, send email to
jackson-adv...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jackson-advisory-group?hl=en?hl=en

[Linwood]

Looking back at our recommendations and reading the description of the current stand conditions, I am not sure that the proposed silviculture strays that from what we recommended. 

 

 

Here is the description of the stand:

 

Overall, conifer stocking is poor. Isolated pockets of both poor and moderately stocked conifers were observed throughout

the sale area. Stem counts are moderate is some areas, yet diameters are generally small, with few trees exceeding 30

inches DBH. Tanoak is relatively abundant throughout the sale area. Much of the area is composed of dense tanoak

canopies, and a significant factor in maintaining conifer growth rates and site occupancy.

 

In our silvicultural guidelines we clearly made an exception for such stand:

 

In stands historically dominated by conifers, and where previous management or fire

occurrence has resulted in hardwood-dominated stands, exceptions may be made to the

standard Matrix Silviculture Guidelines. Exceptions must be approved by the JAG upon

recommendation of the Forest Manager.

 

The staff is proposing something that is an exception and is seeking input from the JAG.  This is what we had asked for and this is what we are getting.  I am willing to visit the site with an open mind and give my input as an EX-JAG member. Hopefully, others will do the same.

 

 

Linwood

[Mike Anderson]

My thoughts are:

 

1. The prescription staff has developed is a reasonable one for this particular stand.

2. We can't forget the Board of Forestry has adopted a large portion of the JAG's recommendations.

3. The staff is tasked with using their professional judgment in managing the forest under strict and sometimes conflicting guidelines and needs to be allowed flexibility to do their job properly, I believe the Board of Forestry understands this.

4. Historically the staff has done an excellent job of applying management guidelines to the ongoing management of the forest, they should be judged on their results not on perceptions.

5. We should all be able to agree JAG successfully altered the trajectory of forest management on JDSF, it is a process not a project and can not be judged by a single THP summary.

 

     Mike Anderson
  Office: 707-964-2770
    Cell: 707-489-0837
     Fax: 707-964-7407
www.andersonlogging.com

----- Original Message -----

From: Jani, Mike

To: Vince Taylor ; Mike Anderson ; Dan Porter ; Brad Valentine ; JAG Group ; Mike Liquori ; Jere Melo ; John A. Helms ; Kathy Bailey ; linda perkins ; Forest Tilley

Cc: Tuttle, Crawford ; George Gentry ; russ Henly

Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 12:04 PM

[Jani, Mike]

Thanks for pointing that out Linwood

[Vince Taylor]

Dear Mike,

As a logger who only reluctantly went along with the JAG recommendations on silvicultural guidelines for the Matrix, Older Forest Development, and Late Seral Development, I am not surprised that you are sanguine about the actions of the Board of Forestry and the Department.

I ask you, though, to reflect on the basic purpose of the JAG process -- to develop a consensus on future management of Jackson State Forest in order to put an end to the controversy, animosity, and conflict that plagued this public forest for fifteen years. You, I and everyone else on the JAG found enough common ground and understanding that we were able to achieve the consensus that was the goal of JAG. This was an achievement of which I have been proud and happy to support.

Although you personally find no fault with the Board actions, I ask you to consider the wider context and  help to get the Board to revisit its hasty, closely held decisions made without working with the JAG in a collaborative process. The Board decisions, if allowed to stand, will further erode public trust in the state's management of public forests and return us all to the conflicts and actions that we all worked hard for two and one-half years to eliminate.

Vince