A view of Mt. Hood from Timothy Lake. Photo by K. Carpenter/U.S.G.S.

Off roaders are going to start seeing a lot of “closed” signs in the Mt. Hood National Forest.

A new Forest Service plan dramatically cuts back where off road vehicles are allowed. Environmental groups couldn’t be much happier.

Just how much of a reduction are we talking about? Currently, off road vehicles are allowed on more 2,300 miles of roads and trails. Under the new rule, they’re allowed on 146 miles in four distinct areas around the forest.

Here’s another big change. The current rules allow off roaders into areas where they are no roads or trails. It’s officially called “cross country” travel. Right now 395,000 acres are open to cross country travel. Under the new plan, it’s zero.

Bark, the environmental watchdog group for the Mt. Hood National Forest calls the new travel plan, “A huge victory.” The group is especially pleased because the travel plan moves off roading away from Wilderness Areas.

From the environmental point of view, here’s the problem. Off roading is a lot more popular than it was 20 years ago. More users mean more stress on the system. Plus, the vehicles are bigger and more powerful. They can do a lot more damage to environmentally sensitive areas. In 2004, the U.S. Forest Service named unregulated off roading as one of the four top threats to National Forests and Grasslands.

They are also conflicts with other users of the forests. When hikers and off roaders share trails, it can be a safety problem. That’s a big reason why Mt. Hood officials say they’re closing off so much of the forest. Besides, if you’re going on a hike to get away from it all, who wants to hear a noisy OHV?

Off roaders will be understandably upset by the new travel plan. They’re losing a huge chunk of the forest. But compared to what’s happening elsewhere in Oregon, Mt. Hood is the exception. All of the national forests have issued new travel plans, or are working on them. Most of them provide lots of miles for off roaders to roam.

Just across the river in Clark County, Washington DNR is planning a major expansion of the the off road trail system in the Yacolt Burn State Forest.

For more information:

Mt. Hood National Forest Travel Management Plan

Earlier Stories:

New Hiking, Off-Road Trails Coming To Clark County

Mt Hood: Putting The Brakes On OHVs In The Forest

Quiet Forests: It’s Decision Time On Mt. Hood

Northern Spotted Owl. Photo by Dennis Newman.

As if old growth logging, and competition from barred owls wasn’t enough.

There’s another threat to Oregon’s fragile population of northern spotted owls.

Research from Oregon State University says climate change may also hurt the spotted owl’s chances for survival.

The Impact of Climate Change

Climate change models predict Oregon and the Pacific Northwest will experience warmer and drier summers, as well as warmer and wetter winters, because of global warming. Lead researcher Betsy Glenn says both of those trends make it harder spotted owls to survive, but in different ways.

• Unusually dry summers reduce the food supply for spotted owls. That’s when you’re mostly likely to see big declines in the numbers of northern flying squirrels and other small mammals that spotted owls like to eat. Glenn says less food means lower survival rates for adults and owls won’t expand into areas when there’s not enough to eat.

• If the spring time nesting season is colder and wetter than normal, Glenn says it hurts the survival chances of owl fledglings.

“Adult spotted owls have fairly high annual survival rates, while reproduction is much more variable,” says Glenn. “We found that survival was more closely related to regional climate measures such as drought, while recruitment of new owls into the population was more often associated with local weather conditions.”

Other Factors Still Important

The researchers also found that the impact of climate and weather was very different at the six locations they studied in Oregon and Washington. They conclude that other factors, such as the quality of habitat, also play a major role in the future of the spotted owl. That includes the increasing number of barred owls, a larger and more aggressive species. Barred owls are driving spotted owls from their traditional territories.

A quote from the research, which appears in the journal Biological Conservation.

“Given that natural resource managers cannot control climate variation and barred owls are likely to persist and increase in the range of the northern spotted owl, maintaining sufficient high quality habitat on the landscape remains the most important management strategy for the conservation of this subspecies.”

Related Story:

VIDEO: Owl Vs Owl: The Feds May Be Ready To Take Sides

Photo from Friends Of Mt. Emily.

An icon of Northeast Oregon has a date with the logger, unless a lot of money can be raised quickly.

What’s at risk is 500 acres of the Mt. Emily Recreation Area near La Grande. A timber company is getting ready to cut down most of the big trees in the Trails Unit, a section that’s hugely popular with hikers, bikers and horseback riders.

Local efforts to save the trees are falling behind and falling short. So the group Friends of Mt. Emily is appealing statewide for help.

Here’s the threat. Forest Capital Partners owns most of the timber rights in the Mt. Emily Recreation Area even though the land is owned by Union County. The company wants to begin logging the 500 acre trails unit on July 1st.

Here’s the rescue plan. If Union County can raise $600,000 by the end of May, it can buy the trees and would operate the area under a sustainable forestry plan.

Sue Miller of the Friends group says with two weeks to go, they still need $500,000. “This is a one time opportunity for our generation to leave a legacy of sustainable forestry” she says. “We urgently need all donations, large and small.”

Complicating things – this is an all or nothing proposition. Raising some of the money won’t save some of the trees. The timber company wants all of the cash up front before calling off the harvest.

If you want to help out, check out the donation page on the Friends of Mt. Emily website. There are two ways to donate, either through the county or the Blue Mountains Conservancy. Either way, the contributions are tax deductible.

The Film Club at Eastern Oregon University has produced a short video about efforts to save the trees.

Video: MERA Trails Unit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcZXpjl-yOo

Does this land need "liberating" from the federal government? Photo of the Umpqua National Forest from the U.S. Forest Service.

Apparently they do, according to Oregonians in Action. The property rights group says it will lobby the next Legislature to pass a law giving Oregon the power to condemn and seize federally owned land in the state.

That includes 15 National Forests and Monuments, a National Park, and millions of acres of land managed by the BLM. About 55% of the state is federal land, according to OIA.

The group argues the state could do a better job of managing forests than the federal government. It complains of environmental rules that, “have gone too far”.

“The results have been predictable,” says OIA, “the failure to properly manage federal forestland has resulted in catastrophic wildfires, the loss of wildlife habitat, and the slow destruction of Oregon’s timber industry.”

While the group raises some legit issues, the intent here is to increase logging in Oregon forests and put more timber land into private ownership.

The proposed legislation is modeled after a law passed in Utah earlier this year. The sponsors of that legislation want to take over the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and open it up for coal mining.

Utah’s Attorney General and the Legislature’s legal counsel admit the law probably will be overturned by federal judges. The real purpose is to ignite a legal battle that could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court where conservative justices might come up with a friendlier ruling.

For More Information:

Natural Resource Report: OIA plan: Use state to condemn and liberate Federal land
Salt Lake Tribune: Utah lawmakers propose using eminent domain to take federal land (Written before the law was passed.)
Deseret News: American Indians first to face land-grab controversy

The reason? More timber revenues for counties, schools and other local governments. But environmental groups say wildlife will be hurt.

The areas most impacted by change are the Tillamook and Clastop State Forests in Northwest Oregon. They make up more than 80% of those 630,000 acres.

Under the plan, the Board expects about 196 million board feet to be harvested every year – an increase of 7 percent. Less land will be preserved as “older forests”. Instead of trying to protect 40-60% of state forests, the new goal is 30-50%.

The Oregon Sierra Club says this also means more clear cutting. It says that under the old rules, no more than 15% of a forest can be a recent clear cut. Now that’s increasing to 25%, or another 50,000 acres.

In a press release the group says, “Among the chief concerns from conservation groups are the increased levels of clear cutting, the lack of an independent scientific review of the changes, and the lack of any permanent protected areas for salmon, older forests, and clean water.”

Local officials in Northwest Oregon have complained for years that they’re not getting enough timber revenue from the forests. The last forest management plan was approved back in 2001 and according to the Forestry Board the “economic returns” have never lived up to expectations.

A view of the Calapooya Mountains in the Umpqua National Forest. Photo from U.S. Forest Service.

If you’re not happy with what’s going on in our National Forests, then this is the year to do something about it.

The Obama Administration is working on a new planning rule that will guide the future of all 155 National Forests and Grasslands across the country. What’s at stake? Big issues such as logging, mining, old growth, stream and river quality, wildlife and recreation.

On Tuesday, the Forest Service holds a series of public meetings in Portland to hear from Oregonians.

The Forest Service hasn’t had much luck with planning rules lately. Versions written in 2000, 2002 were dropped, 2005 and 2008 updates were blocked by courts. The result? National Forests are still working under the 1982 rule – written almost three decades ago. An update is long overdue.

Bark, the watchdog group for the Mt. Hood National Forest, recently sent a message to members urging them to attend Tuesday’s public meetings. It’s asking members to show up and support clean water, protecting wildlife habitat and quiet recreation over timber harvests and other corporate uses of the forest. Bark says dealing with climate change should become a priority for the Forest Service. A recent study by the Wilderness Society found that National Forests in Western Oregon are the best in the nation for carbon storage.

The Wilderness Society has its own list of priorities for the a new forest planning rule. They include:

• Using sound science to guide forest planning decisions
• Protect habitat for fish and wildlife
• Address climate change by preserving large areas of old growth forest for carbon storage
• Preserve water and watersheds for safe drinking water
• Protect America’s outdoor legacy by making sure recreational uses of the forests are sustainable
• Protect more areas as Wilderness

This month, the Forest Service is holding a series of public meetings called roundtables. Here’s what you need to know about Tuesday’s event in Portland.

• Where: In the Multnomah Room of the Doubletree Hotel near Lloyd Center, 1000 NE Multnomah Street, Portland.
• When: There will be three discussion sessions, starting at 9:00am, 1:00pm and 6:00pm. There will also be two open houses from Noon to 1:00pm and 5:00pm to 6:00pm.

The Forest Service is asking you to e-mail ForestServiceMtg@LSAResults.com if want to attend, and to include your name, address and any affiliation if you have one. But this is not mandatory.

For more information:

Bark: Forest Service Planning Rule

Wilderness Society: Our Forests Our Future

U.S. Forest Service: Forest Planning Rule

U.S. Forest Service: Planning Rule Blog

Natural Oregon: They’re Not Forests, Think Of Them As Lungs For The Earth

New research has found that older Douglas-fir trees in Oregon are just as susceptible to Swiss needle cast as younger ones, suffering the same needle loss and in some cases almost stop growing. Photo from OSU.

Oregon’s state tree, the Douglas Fir, is under attack from a disease that’s spreading and intensifying through the Coast Range.

It’s called Swiss needle cast, a fungus that causes the tree to lose its needles and stunts its growth. Researchers with Oregon State University say the disease has gotten so bad, it’s damaging forests to the tune of $200 million per year.

They suspect global warming may be a cause.

Swiss needle cast is not new to Oregon’s forests and for a long time wasn’t considered much of a problem. But starting in the 1980s, researchers say the disease became much more widespread and got significantly worse in the late 1990s.

“It’s now clear that this epidemic is a new phenomenon, with far more severity and impact than anything we’ve observed from Swiss needle cast in the past,” says Dave Shaw, an assistant professor at OSU and director of Swiss Needle Cast Cooperative. “We’ve known of this disease for decades but it was considered a non-issue in terms of forest health. A perfect storm of conditions that favor this fungus has caused a major epidemic that is still growing.”

The “perfect storm” Shaw refers to includes how the forests are managed, plus a changing climate.

Oregon’s coastal forests used to be more diverse, with greater variety in the types of trees that grew there and greater variety in their ages. But as the forests were logged, the trees that came down were replaced mostly by Douglas Fir.

The disease also spreads more easily in warm temperatures and rainy spring seasons.

“We now know that weather is a driver in the epidemiology and spread of this disease,” says Bryan Black, an assistant professor of forestry based at OSU’s Hatfield Marine Science Center. “We can’t say yet whether climate change is part of what’s causing these problems, but warmer conditions, milder winters and earlier springs would be consistent with that.”

Young trees drop their needles, turn yellow and grow much more slowly when infected by the fungus Swiss needle cast. Photo from OSU.

In 2008, an estimated 376,000 acres of coastal forests were infected. But the researchers say it could spread to two million acres.

Most of the time, Swiss needle cast doesn’t kill the tree, but does slow its growth. In severe cases, the tree stops growing. “Tree growth has been reduced so much at severely-impacted sites that we could not actually find a growth ring that went all the way around some trees,” Black says. “At these sites the overall growth rate over the past 25 years was reduced by more than 85 percent in comparison to non-diseased trees.”

The researchers used to believe that the disease primarily only affected younger trees, those less than 40-years old. The hope was that the disease was something the trees would simply outgrow. But the newest research shows that older trees are just as vulnerable as younger ones.

Forestry officials have limited options to stop the disease. Fungicides work well, but are expensive and can damage the environment. One possibility is planting less Douglas Fir and using more western hemlock, red alder or other species.

Despite its name, Swiss Needle Cast is native to the Pacific Northwest. But, it was discovered in Europe in trees that had been imported from this region.

A view of Mt. Hood from Lolo Pass Road. Photo by Dennis Newman.

The Mt. Hood National Forest is giving itself more time to make a huge decision that will affect just about everyone who uses the forest.

It’s going to spend the spring and summer doing additional environmental studies before making a final ruling on where to allow off road vehicles.

That ruling was expected by today, but now it’s being put off until August.

Mt. Hood officials say they want the extra time to study what are called “survey and management” species. These are animals and plants that require old growth forests to survive. But they’re so rare, or so isolated, they’re especially vulnerable to activities that disturb their habitat.

Federal officials, timber and conservation groups have been fighting for years over how to apply survey and management rules. During the Bush years, the feds tried to eliminate them. But recently a federal judge told the federal officials they had to follow the rules. That decision is what led to today’s announcement.

Of all the National Forests in Oregon, Mt. Hood is by far doing the most to limit off road travel. The preliminary plan calls for creating a handful of places where off road vehicles are allowed – effectively separating them from “quiet users” such as hikers, campers and hunters.

Right Now:

• Off roading is allowed on about 2500 miles of roads and trails.
• Off roaders can drive off trails, officially known as cross country travel, on about 395,000 acres of the forest.

Under the preliminary plan:

• Off roading is allowed in six areas with about 221 miles of roads and trails.
• Cross country travel is banned.

Related Stories:

Mt Hood: Putting The Brakes On OHVs In The Forest
Quiet Forests: It’s Decision Time On Mt. Hood

The group had been withholding judgement ever since the deal was announced almost two months ago. But now, the group’s Conservation Director Ivan Maluski tells me that without some changes, the Sierra Club will oppose the measure.

His critique of the logging bill is, in many ways, similar to concerns raised by the Obama Adminstration.

Here’s what Maluski says is wrong with Wyden’s bill.

It doesn’t increase protection for old growth forests.

Maluski says that many of the protections in the bill are already enforced through regulations. While putting them into law is a good idea, Maluski says there’s nothing new here for old growth.

The bill doesn’t allow administrative appeals of Forest Service logging decisions for several years.

A bad idea, says Maluski. He says the Sierra Club has made good use of administrative appeals. He thinks they’re a way to get the attention of the Forest Service when the agency makes a bad call. Maluski estimates the group has protected about 50,000 acres of forests this way during the past few years. He adds the appeals process avoids court fights. Take away that option and Maluski says will be more likely to go court.

That’s pretty much what Agriculture Undersecretary Harris Sherman says, too. In his testimony Wednesday before the Senate Sherman told the subcommittee, “An administrative review process serves as an important and useful process for resolving issues and averting litigation. With no established administrative method to review decisions and areas of disagreement, we could see more litigation during the interim period as a result of having no administrative review process.”

Maluski also doesn’t like the mandated levels for logging during the first three years of the bill. In year one, the Forest Service would have to log 80,000 acres of Eastside forests – more than double current levels. That would grow to 120,000 acres in year three.

He says the mandates ties the hands of the Forest Service, threatens forest restoration and increases pressure for more road building.

Again, Undersecretary Sherman raised similar concerns. He says the mandates may give Eastern Oregon residents, and the timber industry, “unrealistic expectations” about how much logging the Forest Service can handle.

For more information on the Sierra Club’s position see this post on their blog.

Sierra Club Weighs in on Senator Wyden’s Eastside Legislation

A view of Steins Pillar in the Ochoco National Forest. Photo from BLM.

Long time adversaries in Oregon’s timber wars told the Senate today they’re ready to make peace, at least in Eastern Oregon.

The setting was a hearing on the Eastern Oregon Logging bill sponsored by Senator Wyden. Based on a historic compromise between timber and conservation groups, the bill hopes to revive the region’s logging industry while at the same time protecting old growth trees and restoring forests.

But despite the talk of peace and collaboration, it’s clear there are still some hard feelings out there.

About the only thing all the witnesses agreed on is that Eastern Oregon’s forests are in deep trouble and need help.

One of the key players in the compromise is Andy Kerr, a senior advisor for Oregon Wild. Kerr says he’s still very much part of the wilderness movement, and still believes in protecting areas from logging and development. But as hard as it may be for people to change their views, he says that’s exactly what he’s done regarding Eastern Oregon forests. The science, he says, now tells him these forests need “active management.”

“Eastern Oregon forests are not pristine, but sick and wounded.”

Kerr thinks it’s time to bring back controlled fires and forest thinning projects to remove trees that have become an ecological threat to overall forest health and stands of old growth. He’s talking about what he calls an “unnatural concentration” of younger and smaller trees that are susceptible to fires. Kerr says they are outcompeting old growth, robbing them of moisture and nutrients, leaving them vulnerable to disease and insects.

“While it is not a perfect bill,” says Kerr, “it is nonetheless a great bill.”

Kerr’s partner in the talks is John Shelk with the Ochoco Lumber Company of Prineville.

Shelk paints a desperate picture of the timber industry in Eastern Oregon. Since 1990, 23 mills – many owned by Ochoco Lumber – and 2,000 jobs have disappeared.

“How much longer the eight remaining mills can survive,” says Shelk, “depends on supply of saw logs.” He says the timber industry in Eastern Oregon depends on timber from federal forests and increasing the volume of that timber is “critical”.

But like Kerr, Shelk says he’s also worried about the health of the forests. Falling timber harvests have led to overcrowded forests which he says leads to insect and disease infestations and increased risk of fire.

“I think it is fair to say that it is not the bill any of us would have written, but we believe it is a workable compromise that will improve the health of Oregon’s Eastside forest and help to preserve the livelihoods and tax base of our rural communities.”

One critic at the hearing was Larry Blasing of the Grant County Forest Commission. Calling the bill a “bureaucratic nightmare”, he says it addresses the wrong problem. He says the problem isn’t how the Forest Service manages the land, but rather the environmentalists who oppose how they do it and the appeals court that support the environmentalists.

Blasing says what’s happened is that the Forest Service does a long “mating dance” with environmental groups before projects even get off the ground. “This isn’t the best way to manage forests,” he says.

Blasing also criticized the bill for not including jobs or economic considerations among its goals. “Each timber job is critical to our economy,” says Blasing. “As timber goes, so goes our economy.”

Wyden disputed that argument later in the hearing.

But a more interesting moment came when Idaho Senator Jim Risch talked about what he went through getting an agreement on wilderness areas in his state. Speaking directly to Blasing he says, “You have to go forward on this.” Both sides, says Risch, need to realize that the only way to get this done is through a collaborative process.