U.S. Shifts Policy on Sierra Trees, Wildlife Protected by Glen Martin San Francisco Chronicle - January 13, 2001 The U.S. Forest Service unveiled a long-awaited management plan for the Sierra Nevada yesterday, signaling drastic cutbacks in logging and sweeping protections for old-growth trees and endangered species. The plan's dramatic shift in policy sparked predictable responses from environmentalists, who enthusiastically endorsed it, and timber industry advocates, who vehemently opposed it. The Sierra Nevada management plan affects more than a tenth of the state -- the 11.5 million acres of the 11 national forests that cloak California's premier mountain range. It does not apply to the Sierra's ample tracts of private land. The process leading to the plan began in 1992 with attempts to protect the endangered California spotted owl. Eventually it grew into an attempt to define a comprehensive management vision for the entire Sierra Nevada. The effort drew widespread attention and was frequently punctuated by acrimonious conflict between environmentalists and the timber industry. After a draft of the proposed plan was released by the Forest Service in May, the agency received comments from about 47,000 people. The goal of the final plan, said Brad Powell, the Pacific Southwest Regional Forester for the Forest Service, is to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire while preserving old-growth forests, enhancing wildlife habitat and protecting endangered species such as the California spotted owl and the Pacific fisher, a large weasel-like predator. "Over...this decision-making process, it became increasingly clear that we must stop declines in...California spotted owls and other species that depend on old forests for their survival," Powell said. "We must also continue our program of thinning and prescribed burning... to protect the public (from wildfire)." Jay Watson, western regional director of the Wilderness Society, said the plan represents a "fundamentally important" transition in forest management. "It focuses on both old-growth preservation and fire protection, and it will result in very real ecological and economic benefits," Watson said. Powell said the plan will preserve older, bigger trees in the Sierra while encouraging the cutting of "smaller trees, which carry fire across the landscape." INDUSTRY CITES FIRE DANGER But Chris Nance, a spokesman for the California Forestry Association, said the plan affords no real wildfire protections. "Basically, there are too many trees in the woods," Nance said. "Today, Sierra forests are 80 percent denser than they were 100 years ago. This plan guarantees to exacerbate the problem." Nance said vigorous thinning of crowded woods will not only provide timber for new homes and fuel for biomass power production plants, but will assure that the Sierra's growing communities will be protected from wildfire. "Our greatest concern is to prevent these forests from becoming one gigantic wildfire that fails to recognize boundaries between national forests, national parks, wilderness areas, rural communities and campgrounds," he said. "With a catastrophic wildfire, you have a forest nobody can use -- whether it's an environmentalist out for a hike or a logger seeking to thin a forest." The basic components of the plan include: Preserving old-growth trees on about 4 million acres, in addition to maintaining current protections on 2.6 million acres of already designated wilderness areas and wild and scenic river corridors. A ban on cutting conifers greater than 30 inches in diameter, except where a threat to human safety exists. East of the Sierra Nevada crest, the maximum allowable diameter is 24 inches. Thinning thick stands of trees and burning accumulated forest floor debris to "fireproof" forests. Annually producing about 350,000 tons of dry wood chips from thinned trees for biomass energy production, compared to a current annual average of 259,000 tons. Protection of sensitive ecosystems around lakes, meadows and streams to both ensure water quality and enhance wildlife. Reducing annual timber harvests for the region over the next 10 years to 108 million board feet. For the past three years, harvests from Sierra forests have averaged 200 million board feet, and for the past 10 years, the annual average was 300 million board feet. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Not all environmentalists were ecstatic about the plan. "The old-growth component is a big leap forward, but we're concerned about the aquatic strategies," said Deanna Spooner, the California projects director for the Pacific Rivers Council. "It appears destructive activities such as grazing, logging for fire protection and off-road vehicle use will be allowed in the buffer zones around lakes and streams." The plan undercuts a competing Sierra forest management scheme, the federal Quincy Library Group Recovery Act. The Quincy law resulted from community efforts in the Sierra town of Quincy to define a pilot logging plan for the northern Sierra, one that would reduce fire hazard by selectively logging large "treatment areas." Under the Sierra plan, the Quincy project would be scaled back considerably. Environmentalists generally opposed the Quincy plan, claiming it allowed for the decimation of old-growth timber. Timber advocates generally favored it, praising it for its "local input" component. The Quincy plan won the support of Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein and Republican Rep. Wally Herger of Marysville. They secured its passage in Congress, and it was signed into law by President Clinton in 1998. FEINSTEIN ON THE ATTACK Yesterday, Feinstein sent a letter to Ann Veneman, the designated secretary of agriculture for President-elect Bush, decrying the Sierra framework. As agricultural secretary, Veneman will oversee the Forest Service. Feinstein urged Veneman to promote the Quincy plan. "If (Quincy) works, we'll learn something," Feinstein wrote. "If it doesn't, we'll learn something else. It continues to be one of my top priorities." Daniel MacLean, a spokesman for Herger, was more acrid in his comments. Herger "is outraged," MacLean said. "The Quincy project will only receive lip service under the current plan. The congressman will support any effort to undo this rushed judgment. That might include legislation, regulatory relief (from the Bush administration) or legal efforts." Watson said the Bush administration would have difficulty overturning the plan because such an effort would require a completely new environmental impact analysis -- and that would take years. "The new Congress could come after it with an appropriations rider," Watson said. "We expect that, and we frankly welcome it. I believe we'll win."