In a blatent display of self-serving fear-mongering, the timber industry
has renewed it's efforts to frighten the public into the further
destruction of our national forests in the name of "fire protection."
Playing on the fears of the general public caused by the recent string of
wildfires in the west. And what is the industry's proposed solution to
50 years of mismanagement that have led to the current conditions of our
forests? Ta-da, more logging!!!!
Last week American Forest and Paper Association president Henson
Moore said, "recent cutbacks in logging to protect endangered species"
have increased the fuel load, and that "increases the liklihood of
forrest fires." Moore of course made no reference to 50+ years of
industry-backed fire suppression on the national forests that safeguarded
industry profits while stifling the natural fire processes that had
"managed" our forests for thousands of years. Echoing Moores sentiments
was a full-page ad in the LA Times by the California Forestry Association
which advocated more logging on Federal lands to "prevent forest fires
and bolster the economy."
The facts, however, are quite clear as to the origins of the fuel
load problem, and more mismanagement is not the answer. Below is a copy
of the ONRC's forest fire policy which takes a more common-sense approach
to what is need to protect our forests from catastrophic fire.
> Wild and Prescribed Fire in Forests of the Intermountain West
> Over a hundred years of logging, grazing, fire suppression, road-building, and
> development have resulted in widespread fragmentation and degradation of the
> magnificent coniferous forests of the Intermountain West. Many of these
> forests are recognized by the scientific community as being critically
> destabilized. Still, significant areas, including wilderness, roadless areas, and
> moist forests, remain relatively unchanged.
>
> Originally, most ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forests of the Intermountain
> West were open and park-like, with large, majestic trees underlain by dense
> grass swards. These low- and mid-elevation forests were shaped by millennia
> of recurrent forest fire, which helped maintain the forests' ecological integrity
> by reducing tree densities, controlling forest pests, and releasing a steady
> supply of nutrients into the soil. Many of the plant and wildlife species in
> these arid western forests evolved with fire-return intervals as short as 7-30
> years and are dependent on the conditions created by fire for regeneration,
> rapid growth, food, and shelter.
>
> Due to nearly a century of active fire prevention, fire-fighting, and livestock
> grazing, which eliminates the fine fuels necessary to carry low-intensity
> surface fire, ever greater numbers of tree seedlings and saplings have survived
> to maturity. Forests that were once open and park-like due to periodic
> thinning by low-intensity ground fire now develop into dense thickets. During
> dry seasons and prolonged drought, these trees become stressed, limbs fall to
> the ground, and trees die. Consequently, dead woody debris accumulates and
> forests become increasingly prone to intense fire. Without periodic fire to
> reduce this fuel load and limit tree numbers, species composition of the forests
> changes from dominance by fire-tolerant, sunlight-loving species such as
> ponderosa pine and western larch, to dominance by fire-sensitive,
> shade-tolerant species such as Douglas-fir and true firs. These changes, in
> combination with selective logging of large, fire-tolerant trees, have created
> conditions in which many of the original park-like forests have been converted
> into dense, fire-prone, and increasingly disease- and insect-prone stands.
>
> Nevertheless, many forests in the region have not been significantly affected
> by recent changes in the fire regime. Riparian forests and wetter forests on
> north-facing slopes and at higher elevations traditionally experienced fewer
> fires. And forest types such as high-elevation lodgepole pine and Engelmann
> spruce-subalpine fir have always developed into dense flammable forests,
> which were periodically consumed by stand-replacing fires.
>
> Because of drought, selective logging, high tree densities, high fuel loads, and
> the loss of a mosaic of burned and unburned forest stands, low-elevation
> forests and those on south-facing slopes are now more vulnerable to
> destructive fire, insects, and disease than they were formerly. ONRC
> advocates that land managers initiate measures that mimic nature in reducing
> fuel loads, so as to return forests to their pre-EuroAmerican-settlement
> densities and fire regimes. These activities (see next page) include prescribed
> burning, thinning of small fire-sensitive trees, removal of livestock, a let-burn
> policy in some areas, and less destructive fire-fighting techniques. Salvage
> logging, as currently practiced, should be prohibited since it damages already
> disturbed soils, watersheds, and wildlife habitat. Despite pronouncements by
> the timber industry, commercial thinning and post-fire logging may not reduce
> the frequency of fire. In fact, these activities often increase the intensity and
> rate of spread of fire because of increased fuel loads from logging debris left
> on the ground. Consequently, salvage logging is incompatible with
> ecosystem-based management.
>
> Prescribed Fire
> The long-range goal of fire management policy should be to restore forest
> types, fire cycles, and habitat mosaics to those found before EuroAmerican
> settlement. For some areas, this is best achieved by manually igniting fires,
> which thin the understory and remove excess fuels. A region-wide, long-term
> plan for restoring intermountain forests needs to be developed. The plan
> should include a 30-year schedule of prescribed fire to reduce fuels, as well as
> district-by-district maps delineating areas targeted for a let-burn policy, fire
> prevention, or fire suppression.
>
> Priority for prescribed burning should be given to forests near developed areas
> (the urban/wildland interface), low-elevation or south-facing forests most
> transformed by past fire suppression, and areas with unnaturally high fuel
> loads.
>
> Where absolutely necessary to reduce ladder fuels that carry fire into canopies,
> small non-commercial trees may be thinned, lower limbs pruned, and litter
> raked away from large tree trunks and snags.
>
> Fire Prevention
> Fire prevention should not be a goal of forest management in the
> Intermountain West except when human life and extraordinary ecological
> values are at stake. Since fire is an inevitable and ecologically essential
> component of forest ecosystems, managers should focus on restoring historical
> fire regimes.
>
> Artificial fire breaks should be constructed only where proven effective, and
> not at all in wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, roadless regions, municipal
> watersheds, or ecologically sensitive areas.
>
> Livestock grazing should be eliminated from public forests and wild ungulates
> maintained within their year-round carrying capacities so that dry grasses can
> once again fuel low-intensity surface fires.
>
> Private property owners should be required to take measures to "fire proof"
> their property by clearing flammable vegetation, adding fire-resistant roofs and
> shutters, and taking other reasonable precautions. By choosing to live in or
> adjacent to wildlands, homeowners must assume the risk of protecting or
> replacing their property rather than relying on taxpayers through their funding
> of fire-fighting agencies.
>
> Fire Suppression
> Fire suppression activities should be conducted only when absolutely necessary
> and with utmost care for the long-term integrity of the ecosystem.
> Low-impact fire-fighting techniques should be used.
>
> Fire suppression should be conducted only where human life, developed
> property, or irreplaceable ecological values (e.g. rare forest types or a major
> portion of the population of an endangered species) are at stake, or in areas
> that should be protected until prescribed burning can reduce excess fuels.
>
> Fire suppression should not be allowed in wilderness, wild and scenic rivers,
> and roadless regions, unless these areas have irreplaceable natural values and
> are scheduled for prescribed burning.
>
> Fires should not be actively fought where nearby natural fire barriers such as
> bodies of water or rocky ridges are likely to extinguish the fire.
>
> Due to the risk of de-watering, surface water should not be taken from small
> streams and lakes for fire suppression. Fire-fighting retardants and foams,
> which are toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms, should never be used near
> streams.
>
> Bulldozing and other forms of disturbance should be prohibited in stream
> channels, riparian areas, wetlands, and on sensitive soils and steep slopes.
>
> As much funding should be available for restoring natural forest ecosystems as
> for fire suppression.
>
> Post-Fire Activities
> "Restoration" activities such as salvage logging, grass seeding, bulldozing, and
> stream clearing may be as damaging to forests as fire suppression and should
> be prohibited unless proven effective and beneficial.
>
> Note: Municipal watersheds should be evaluated for non-commercial thinning,
> prescribed fire, and fire suppression on an individual basis. These activities
> are appropriate for some, but not all, watersheds.
>
Bret Diamond
Oregon, USA
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0