Field meeting on 3/17/03

Attendees: Cal Mukumoto, Gregory MacClarren, Elke Dortmund, Wade Fagen, Karen Coulter, Fara Currim, Bruce Berryhill, Marcus Kaufmann, Kate Fitzpatrick, Vickie Dunaway, Dave Moyer, Steve Foster, Bill Anthony, Bob Flores, Slater Turner, Scott Thompson, and Cindy Glick.

Cal, the Chair and Gregory, the Co-chair facilitated the meeting. The meeting was held in the field to look at the 106 acre stand where the FS would like to use the stewardship pilot contracting authorities, down near the jct of Rds. 14 and 1419 intersection. The agenda for the meeting was to view the forest stand to be treated, to determine what pilot authorities could be implemented. The stand chosen will have an upper thinning limit of trees less than 12" DBH. The FS proposes to pre-mark the trees to be cut on the west half of the unit while the contractor will choose the trees to be cut on the east side of the unit (the 1419 Rd. is the dividing point). Slater Turner and his presale crew had flagged in pink some of the trees that could be removed under this prescription so the group could visualize what stewardship pilot authorities might be implemented with this effort.

Conversation highlights:

• There is still confusion on the difference between designation by description and designation by prescription.
• An accountability standard has not been set up- how will we measure to determine if the contractor cuts greater than 12 inch trees?
• The Forest plan allocation focus of the area is on creating habitat for the white headed woodpecker, which likes more open forest conditions.
• We need design criteria in the contract for decreasing damage to big game in the area, ie the selection of the 10-20% wildlife buffers.
• What will we do with the forest slash? Leave tops attached or cut to length?
• What are the expected fuels treatments?
• Can we do a CE now to treat this project separate from the EIS? Bill A. said no, we don't have the authorities to do so yet.
• MPMT could monitor this stewardship pilot and Force Account work.
• Are soil impacts above the 20% standard for best management practices?
• We want the latitude for cost collection. (ie BD collections)
• We need to determine what "local economic benefits" are. Are family wages being paid?
• We need more information on best value contracts and establishing the criteria on how to compare/select contractors.
• We need to do west half of unit as a separate contract from the east half of the unit, to facilitate better data collection efforts for monitoring..
• Define failure to perform clauses.
• How will we measure how well the Contractor/ MPMT/ FS/ local community work together?

Bill Anthony gave a snapshot of the EIS process: July 1st is the earliest that we could implement this MPMT pilot project if there are no appeals.