BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Healthy Forest Alternative
to the
Phase II Forest Plan Amendment
What is it?
· Land and Resource Management Plans (usually called Forest Plans) are long-term strategic documents that authorize when, where, how, and how much forest management takes place on a given National Forest for a period of 10-15 years, after which time the plans are revised. In 1989, the Black Hills National Forest began such a revision. The Forest Plan Revision was finished in 1997, but appeals and litigation from environmental special interest groups caused the Forest Service to have to complete a series of amendments to the Revision. The Phase II Amendment is, hopefully, the culmination of these processes. When Phase II is finally complete in the summer of 2005, the Black Hills National Forest will have the dubious distinction of having spent 15 years to develop a 10-15 year Plan.
· The Forest Service released the Draft Phase II Amendment in September, 2004, and requested public comment and review. In their analysis they considered a series of different management approaches, called “alternatives,” and have selected Alternative 6 as their preferred option.
· The focal issues of consideration (the "scope" of the analysis) in Phase II are wildlife species viability, forest health and the risk of pine beetle infestation and wildfire, as well as something called "Research Natural Areas." In the period of time since the 1997 Plan was signed, the Black Hills have seen over one million trees killed by mountain pine beetles, and over 170,000 acres burned by unnaturally intense and catastrophic wildfires. These damaging events are a symptom of a larger problem: The condition of the forest. There are more relatively large trees on the Black Hills today than ever in history. In fact, the volume of trees 9 inches and greater on the forest has more than doubled in the period of time between the 1950 and 2000. Furthermore, these trees are of a relatively uniform age. This has created a monotony of conditions out on the forest, which are greatly susceptible to beetles and wildfires. The over abundance of these conditions is what we call, "the wall of wood."
· Finding a way to reduce the risk of beetles and wildfires while providing the habitat needed to sustain wildlife species was the central task of the Forest Service in putting the Phase II Amendment together. Regrettably, upon review of the alternatives considered in Phase II, none of them, including Alternative 6, are sustainable. They would not meaningfully reduce the insect infestations or wildfires that have plagued the Black Hills, and would not provide for viable wildlife populations. The Black Hills Forest Resource Association and Black Hills Regional Multiple Use Coalition, rather than simply complaining about the Forest Service’s proposal, elected to gather input from various groups and organizations and produce an alternative of our own. This is The Healthy Forest Alternative.
What’s wrong with the Forest Service’s Alternative 6?
· Alternative 6 would do the wrong thing, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.
· The wildlife species of greatest concern in Phase II need big trees for their habitat. The Forest Service, however, did not focus on managing for big trees. They instead assumed that the best habitat for these species was located in the most densely-packed areas of the forest, and simply proposed to leave these areas alone in order to “preserve” habitat. However, the densest forests are also those most at-risk from beetle outbreaks and catastrophic wildfires. The very same habitat the Forest Service wanted to “preserve,” therefore, will inevitably be destroyed. Alternative 6 would let beetles and wildfires continue to run roughshod over the Black Hills while eating up habitat needed for wildlife in the process - the worst of both worlds.
· The failure to manage the most at-risk areas of the forest also fails to solve the problem of monotonous conditions, and the continued accumulation of more, and more, and more biomass on the forest. Thus, the Forest Service's alternative perpetuate, and indeed worsen, the very conditions that have caused this forest to become so susceptible to beetles and wildfires. Wildlife species that depend on dense habitat and large trees will suffer as a result. So, too, will we who live in or near the Black Hills suffer. Our economic base and quality of life are detrimentally impacted by these out-of-control bugs and wildfires. They threaten the scenic beauty of the forest, as well as the clean air and clean water it provides to us.
What does The Healthy Forest Alternative do to fix it?
· Historically, there were a lot fewer trees on the Black Hills. However, it's not quite so simple as 'more' or 'less' trees. Research tells us there were also more large trees and more diversity in conditions across the forest. The big trees and diverse forest conditions provided the habitat needed by the wildlife species of concern in Phase II. A diversity of conditions across the landscape ensured that wildfires and mountain pine beetles could not readily consume tens of thousands of acres at a time.
· The Healthy Forest Alternative would re-create patchy stands of large trees on a portion of the forest, using what’s called “uneven-aged management.” The priority areas for applying this system of management will be the most at-risk areas of the forest - the same areas Alternative 6 would have walked away from.
· The resulting forest conditions will be more resistant to beetle outbreaks and to catastrophic wildfires, especially crown fires. This resistance will persist over time, so that the forest does not simply re-grow into an at-risk condition.
· Focus will be maintained, as well, upon protecting At-Risk Communities from wildfires, restoring hardwood forests, creating forest-wide diversity, and providing for community economic stability.