Supporters back USFS restoration plan
Conservation groups have distinctly different interpretations of a proposed forest restoration project in the Libby Creek area.
Will it restore a badly degraded forest, making it more ecologically resilient, or does the project ignore critical habitat for endangered wildlife because the restoration is designed to encourage the growth of timber for logging?
The two interpretations have landed the Mission Restoration Project in U.S. District Court, where the Montana-based Alliance for the Wild Rockies sued the U.S. Forest Service last year, saying the project violates the law because it doesn’t improve habitat for endangered fish, grizzly bears and the spotted owl.
At the core of the argument are conflicting definitions of a healthy forest, alliance Executive Director Mike Garrity said. The alliance believes a healthy forest sustains the wildlife that use it. National forests are supposed to be managed for multiple uses — wildlife habitat, timber and recreation, he said.
The alliance contends that the Forest Service’s plans for the Mission Project favor only the timber, because thinning the forest would allow trees to grow more quickly, essentially creating a tree farm and more profits for timber companies, Garrity said.
The Mission Project was designed by the North Central Washington Forest Health Collaborative, which includes the Forest Service, conservation groups, the timber industry, and an Okanogan County commissioner, and works toward a consensus-based approach to forest restoration.
The project is unique because it evaluated the entire landscape — 50,200 acres in Libby and Buttermilk creeks — and prescribed treatments only for those areas that had been so degraded by past management actions that they won’t be ecologically healthy without intervention, said Dave Werntz, science and conservation director for Conservation Northwest.
Collaborative members Conservation Northwest, the Methow Valley Citizens Council (MVCC) and the Wilderness Society filed a brief in court in August in support of the Forest Service, highlighting the benefits of the Mission Project to wildlife habitat and the environment.
The traditional Forest Service approach is to use existing roads to log commercially valuable timber, Werntz said. What’s different about the Mission Project is that it identifies the areas degraded by past logging and fire suppression and prescribes interventions — thinning, logging and prescribed fire — to bring them to ecological health, he said.
“Conservation Northwest supports the project — and filed the amicus brief — because it’s thoughtfully put together and applies science in a robust and responsible way to improve habitat for the most vulnerable species,” Werntz said.
“These watersheds used to have fabulous old-growth forests. The purpose is to restore populations of large old-growth trees that will be most resilient to fire,” Werntz said.
Targeted treatments
While the area to be thinned is just 20% of the total — with only 1,853 acres destined for commercial logging — the alliance says that removing that many trees would be highly disruptive to endangered species.
Logging equipment will damage the forest floor, causing sediment run-off in streams, where it would smother gravel where salmon lay eggs. And allowing more sunlight to reach the forest floor would increase fire danger by drying out the forest — and encourage faster tree growth, Garrity said.
But the Forest Service and other conservation groups say the project includes measures that will actually reduce the amount of sediment that gets into streams. Plans for logging in the winter will protect the soil, the conservation groups contend. It will also protect winter range for mule deer, the Forest Service said.
The Mission Project would be the first in the Methow Valley Ranger District to take this approach to forest restoration, Werntz said. Some steps have already been implemented, including fencing wet meadows to keep cattle out, he said.
Okanogan County Commissioner Chris Branch, who has a background in the timber industry and environmental studies, joined the forest collaborative early in his term as commissioner. Before that, the county hadn’t been part of the group. The landscape-scale approach to restoration is valuable because it takes aquatic species, wildlife habitat, roads and climate change into account, Branch said in a court filing supporting the project.
“Historically, the relatively dry portions of this landscape had more frequent fires that maintained canopies of trees and shrubs to be more open, allowing ground cover and grasses to diversify,” Branch said.
But the alliance says the North Cascades have always had thick trees and vegetation. Wildlife including grizzlies and the spotted owl require this dense habitat, Garrity said. The law requires the agency to help these animals recover, he said.
The Forest Service consulted with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service about the effects of proposed treatments on endangered species, which agreed that the Mission Project isn’t likely to adversely affect these protected species.
The Mission Project is designed to move the forest toward conditions identified in its forest plan, the Forest Service said in a response filed in court in August.
The collaborative says the project would actually enhance habitat by building beaver dam analogues and installing culverts and woody debris in streams for steelhead.
The alliance’s claims that the project would harm endangered species are too general, the Forest Service said.
Moreover, most declarations submitted to the court in support of the alliance’s lawsuit don’t even mention grizzly bears, the agency said, arguing that the alliance doesn’t have the standing to bring the lawsuit.
Fewer roads, improved habitat?
The Mission Project proposal would actually decommission 34 miles of roads and preserve a 5,500-acre roadless area as wilderness, according to the collaboration’s conservation groups. Decommissioned roads will be seeded, they say.
But the alliance says that the Forest Service often doesn’t decommission roads in a way that puts the forest back to its original state — they simply gate them or change the designation on a map, Garrity said. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that there will be funding to carry out these measures, the alliance said.
“We’re all for logging for fire protection,” Garrity said. But the alliance points to research that recommends thinning in areas closest to houses, in conjunction with a green buffer and building materials that help protect homes from fire.
The battle over the ecological health of the forest is taking place in an era of climate change and increasingly dry conditions. The conservation groups say the hotter, drier weather will cause more frequent and more catastrophic fires, but the alliance says that dense, unlogged forests and soil act as a carbon sink, helping counter global warming.
Using scientific analysis to identify degraded areas and then restore ecological resilience is particularly important to help the forest withstand climate change, Werntz said.
The alliance’s lawsuit asks the Forest Service to do an environmental impact statement, a detailed analysis they say would reveal the devastating impacts the Mission Project would have on endangered species.
The Forests Service plans to offer the timber sales for bid in 2021 as long as the requirements in an evaluation of the impacts of the 2018 Crescent Mountain Fire on the Mission Project area have been met, according to Meg Trebon, Environmental Coordinator for the Methow Valley and Tonasket ranger districts.
A hearing in U.S. District Court is scheduled for November.
