SNFPA Management Review and Recommendations

Regional Forester Jack Blackwell's Prepared Comments
March 18 Press Conference

March 2003

Thank you for all being here today. I'm glad to see so many of you. There are too many of you to name individually, but I want to welcome the fire chiefs from many of our communities and representatives of the many state and federal agencies we work with, including the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the state of California and the state of Nevada.

I'm also pleased to see so many of the organizations and interest groups we've been working with -- the California Forestry Association, the California Cattlemen's Association, the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign, the Wilderness Society, the Forest Service Retirees Association, and others. I'm pleased to see county supervisors here. And I also welcome our own employees from the field, including the district rangers and forest supervisors, who work so hard to do what is best for the land.

We are truly all in this together. I am always struck that all of us want the same thing for the national forests in the Sierra Nevada. We want good habitat for wildlife, clean water and scenic beauty. And we want to reduce the unnatural risk of fire that threatens all these things, and threatens our communities.

We do, of course, sometimes have differences of opinion on how to achieve those goals. I would like to bring us all as close together as I can. And I want to do what is right for the land. A Forest Service review team did a great job of coming up with some recommendations for me to improve the January 2001 Sierra Nevada Framework decision. Those recommendations came to the team in large part from our fine people working on the ground, some of whom are with us today.

Since receiving those recommendations earlier this month, I have met with a number of people inside and outside our organization about them. I've gotten a lot of support and some excellent advice from a number of people. I think you'll see their feedback reflected in my decision and in the few refinements I am making to the recommendations, which I'll mention in a moment.

There are a couple of things I want to point out first. One is that the team's recommendations are home grown. They are based on a thorough, very visible, open, and professional review conducted by people in California and Nevada who are most familiar with the Sierra Nevada. The recommendations are ecologically sound and they are economically sound. They represent a commonsense approach. I want to move ahead with them.

The proposal provides for more protection for the environment, for owls, for people and for communities. It builds on the strengths of the original Framework, including the same land allocations, the same 130,000 acres of treatments, the same old forest emphasis areas, and the same priority to protect communities.

Now, I want to highlight some of the major features of the recommendations we want to move forward with over the next few months.

• The Framework always recommended a strategic approach, with opportunities to work with our many partners. While the review team suggested keeping that option, I want to be more specific. Several of our partners on the interagency team suggested that we do strategic analysis prior to treating fuels. After listening to them, I have decided to require strategic planning before treating fuels. This analysis will help us identify where we should treat fuels and how intensively we need to treat on a given site or watershed, to reduce the risk of wildfires. We are asking some of our interagency partners to help us develop a process for rapid assessment of where and how the work needs to be done. We need to move quickly and develop fuels treatments that are both effective and efficient. This kind of analysis will help ensure that we continue to protect big trees, old forests, owl habitat, and peoples' homes and property.
• I am also adding a mitigation measure in owl protected activity centers to require that, wherever possible, if treatments must take place in theses areas, those treated acres will be replaced by adjacent acres that are of comparable quality.
• The team, our partners and I all agree that we need to put most of our effort into treatments in the wildland urban interface (the WUIs). Seventy five percent of our work will be in treatments immediately adjacent communities. We also will ensure that the definition of the WUI boundaries are the same 1 ½ miles called for in the original Framework.
• I am adopting the team's advice to not use gaps or small clearings until we learn more about them. The exception to this is in the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Pilot Project where the HFQLG Act directs us to test this silvicultural treatment, and in certain ecosystems in which the original Framework called for special regeneration efforts.
• I am in full agreement with the recommendation to implement the HFQLG Pilot Project to the full extent allowed by law.

To those who sincerely believe that the best way to protect the forest is to thin small areas of only the very smallest trees and brush, I have this to say...AND PLEASE HEAR ME...It does not work! These are letters from the district rangers who have been working for two years to implement the Framework. They tell me repeatedly that they cannot make it work with its current set of complex, overlapping rules.

To those who say we have been at this for over ten years and enough is enough, I have this to say. We will keep working to further improve our management and the financial efficiency of the more than 32 million dollars we are presently spending each year on fuels treatments. The stakes are too high, we must spend this money effectively. We must continue to learn and adapt, learn and adapt, learn and adapt.

HOW MANY MORE WAKE-UP CALLS DO WE NEED? Look at what is happening around the West! Catastrophic fires are becoming more and more frequent. They are becoming bigger and bigger. They are doing more damage to the environment than ever before with great loss of property, enormous amounts of sediment produced, and significant amounts of key wildlife habitat destroyed. Recall last summer alone:

• The Rodeo-Chediski Fire in Arizona -- 468,000 acres burned, over 500 buildings destroyed, tremendous loss of Mexican spotted owl habitat, largest fire in the state's history.
• The Hayman Fire in Colorado -- 137,000 acres burned, over 130 homes destroyed, huge negative impacts to Denver's watershed, largest fire in the state's history.
• The Biscuit Fire in Oregon -- 500,000 acres burned, approximately 80,000 acres of northern spotted owl habitat destroyed, largest fire in Oregon's history.
• The McNalley Fire right here in the Sierra Nevada -- 150,000 acres, one of the largest in California history. It nearly destroyed precious groves of Giant Sequoia. Were it not for the heroic efforts of California's wildland firefighters, it may well have. The McNalley fire was not a typical wind-driven fire, it burned furiously and was a fuels-driven fire that destroyed nine California spotted owl Protected Activity Centers and severely damaged two more.
• Finally, look at the massive die-off of trees on the San Bernardino National Forest caused by a combination of prolonged drought, dense vegetation, and insects and disease. The prolonged drought that we are now in, coupled with the incredibly dense vegetation, may cause a similar pattern of events and tree mortality in the Sierra Nevada.

I repeat, HOW MANY MORE WAKE-UP CALLS DO WE NEED?

Our critics say we are doubling the logging allowed under the original Framework. It is clear to us now that the level proposed under the Framework was too low to really get the job done. The proposal, even at 450 million board feet will thin the equivalent of only 20 percent of the annual growth. This includes the brush and ladder fuels associated with the small and medium size trees. All of the large trees and most of the medium trees will be protected.

Some people claim we will be cutting the large trees, but please, look at this photo of stand in desperate need of fuels treatment. Look at the next photo of this same stand after treatment using a 30 inch rule. This looks good to me -- it leaves healthy habitat and removes dangerous fuels. We could not have done this under the Framework rules as they are today.

Look, too, at this map. It shows the areas with high fire risk. It also shows the 850 communities, that are surrounded by high wildfire risk areas.

And, please, look at this graph which shows how the trend in wildfires is increasing. Notice the annual average is increasing and is now nearly 70,000 acres burned. We must treat this problem. We have to bring this trend line down. I believe our proposal will bring the line down and will answer those wake up calls we've been getting over the last decade. I hope you all will continue helping us as work out the details of this proposal.

I want to thank all of you who are here today and who have helped us get to this point. I'll probably overlook someone, but I want point out at least a few of the many people who have helped.

• First, my thanks to the review team for their hard work, long hours and personal sacrifice away from their homes and families.
• Also my thanks to the forest supervisors and district rangers, many of whom are here today. Their presence is especially significant. These are the people charged with making all this work on the ground. They are here to demonstrate this is a bottom-up proposal, not top-down. It was developed in large part by listening to them.
• To Regional Forester Brad Powell, who is with us here today, I commend you for your courage and foresight in developing the original Framework. We retain the solid foundation you established. Based upon two years of additional experience, new information, and the results of this review, we propose to further strengthen the Framework you helped build. Thank you for being here with us today and for your support.
• To Director Steve Thompson and the rest of our colleagues in the US Fish and Wildlife Service, we will continue to work and consult with your staff on a professional basis as we move forward.
• To our colleagues in California and Nevada state government, the only way we can effectively manage our natural resources is cooperatively. The only way we can effectively respond to emergencies is cooperatively. We need you. You need us. We need each other. Let us continue to work closely together.
• To wildland firefighters throughout California and Nevada, to the Fire Chiefs, the Fire Safe Councils, and the various wildland fire organizations, my respect and admiration go to you. Because of the unprecedented heavy fuels buildup, you are successfully fighting very dangerous wildfires that burn hotter and more intensely than anyone has ever seen. We are deeply concerned about firefighter safety. We will not let you down.
• To the people in the ski industry and the recreation coalition, thank you for working with us. We have addressed most of your concerns.
• To the ranchers in the Sierra Nevada and your organizations, the California Cattlemen's Association and the California Farm Bureau, thank you for working with us. We have been able to address some of your concerns. There are still serious problems to be worked on locally. They can not all be solved. We care about you. We need you. We want you to remain as part of our rich cultural heritage in the Sierra Nevada.
• To our friends in the Quincy Library Group ... you came together collaboratively. You solved your problems. You all met, worked hard, listened with respect to each other, and finally developed a community-based plan with a wide variety of interests. WE WANT YOU TO SUCCEED!
• To our friends in the environmental community ... You are sincere. You care passionately and deeply for the Sierra Nevada. You've been involved since the beginning. You've been to all the meetings and field trips. I acknowledge and applaud your commitment. We need your help. Please continue to work with us.
• To our friends in county government ... thank you for working with us. You are in the wonderful position of not only caring deeply for the Sierra Nevada, but you get to live there every day.
• To our friends in the California Forestry Association and the forest industry... we need your help. Your mills must remain open to process the thinnings from the forest. You provide jobs, security, and are a key and necessary part of the social and economic fabric of our rural communities.

As you can see we have a remarkable group of partners helping us. I am not implying that they all agree with every word and recommendation in our report. But I do believe they are here to show their interest and concern for the Sierra and their willingness to move forward working with us. I encourage members of the media to talk with these people and to hear their stories in their own words.

To those who agree with us, we want to continue to work with you.

To those who disagree with us, we want to continue to work with you.

There is one thing we all agree on; that is our love for the Sierra Nevada and our commitment to make it better. LET'S BUILD ON THAT.

Today I leave you with...

• My pledge to the rural residents threatened by fires, we will work as hard as we can to protect you and your communities.
• My pledge to the California spotted owls, we will do everything we can to maintain a viable and stable population over both the short term and the long term.
• My pledge to the American taxpayers, we will spend your money wisely.

So, today I accept the team's recommendations, and give them my profound thanks for their work. We now begin our next step, which is to prepare a supplement to the original Framework decision's Environmental Impact Statement. The supplement will document new information since early 2001, and analyze our proposed changes. There will be a 90-day public comment period on a draft SEIS this summer.

I will shortly publish in the Federal Register a notice stating we intend to strengthen the Framework by supplementing the original EIS with the new information, findings, and recommendations of the Review Team. As we continue that process, we will further list and disclose the environmental effects to the best of our ability. As part of our analysis, we will conduct a science consistency check. We will continue to work with our interagency partners, especially the US Fish and Wildlife to ensure continued protection of spotted owls and the other species.

We know we don't have all the answers. And we never will. But we are committed to keep learning.

This is still a proposal. It is subject to further modification as we continue to study and refine it using the EIS process. I expect it will continue to be improved. There is great hope that we will reach agreement on a new adaptive management approach that can be included as a key component.

I invite everyone in this room to participate fully in this process, to look at these issues on the ground and to discuss constructive and effective ways to deal with them. After working with you all over this summer, I expect to make a final decision this coming fall.

Now, Brad Powell will make a few comments. After that, I will take questions from the news media.

I will now take questions from the reporters here.

USDA Forest Service · Pacific Southwest Region