|
USFS burning policy needs to be decided before wildlife withers
away By
MATT WILLIAMS, Outdoors Writer 5/31/03 In an old legal battle dating back nearly three decades, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Texas Committee on Natural Resources (TCONR) are set to square off once again next month, this time in the U.S. District Court in Beaumont. I call it an old battle because that's exactly what it is, one that comes with a healthy price tag that's costing tax payers dearly and resulting in the loss of more and more critical wildlife habitat in several national forest areas the longer it continues to drag out. At issue are the techniques and tactics the USFS says it needs to use to manage a portion of the 600,000-acre national forest system for the red cockaded woodpecker (RCW), a native species placed on the endangered species list in 1970. USFS in 1988 was federally mandated to manage about 200,000 acres of national forest land for the habitat-sensitive woodpeckers. The action came as the result of a lawsuit filed by TCONR and the Sierra Club. The ’88 ruling turned out to be a good thing, because it curbed the cutting of hardwoods and forced the USFS to develop an RCW management plan calling for the implementation of prescribed burning and occasional thinning of timber around woodpecker colony sites. The objectives were to rid the forest floor of dense under brush and create an open understory lush with grasses where the endangered woodpeckers, and other wildlife, could flourish. Ironically, the same special interest groups who pushed so hard for the 1988 injunction to enhance RCW habitat, filed for a motion to change that injunction in 1999. Why? In a nutshell, the environmentalists didn't believe the USFS was managing the forest the way they thought it should be managed. Amazingly, despite the pleas of professional wildlife biologists and veteran foresters, a legal ploy made by a lay group of environmentalists worked like a charm. On July 14, 1999, a "temporary" restraining order was issued banning the continuation of prescribed burns, timber thinning, etc, within 1200 meters of any of the RCW compartments in the south Angelina and south Sabine national forests. Most of the Davy Crockett and Sam Houston national forests were excluded from the order. The temporary restraining order remains in place nearly four years later. Consequently, years of hard work, pristine habitat and the wildlife populations which have blossomed because of it, are on the verge of going down the tubes. And I'm not just talking about the endangered RCWs, either. A sizable portion of a $4 million eastern wild turkey restoration project is in jeopardy, as well. Since 1988, the state has released more than 7,000 eastern wild trapped turkeys in counties all over the region. The seed stock was trapped in other states and flown to Texas at a cost of $525 apiece. About $500,000 worth of the seed stock was released onto the Angelina, Sabine, Sam Houston and Davy Crockett national forests. The birds have adapted so well to their new homes that there is a restrictive, two week hunting season in place in 40 East Texas counties. Turkeys have done exceptionally well amid the upland pine/hardwood mixtures of the southern Angelina and Sabine national forests, especially in prescribed RCW burn areas. That's because what's good for the woodpeckers is great for the turkeys and other wildlife. Fire promotes an open understory and the growth of ideal wildlife forage. Plus, it expels the ambush shield utilized by coyotes, bobcats and other predators. Sadly, habitat conditions aren't near as plush in these areas today as they were prior to the 1999 injunction. Some have grown so thick that burn crews would be starting from scratch if the injunction were lifted tomorrow. "A forest is like a house — if you don't do maintenance on a house for four years, what do you think it will look like?" said Larry Bonner, USFS team leader for wildlife, soil, water and air. "The 1999 injunction has prevented us from performing maintenance activities on the land, when and where it needs to be done." I can attest that Bonner is right on target with his assessment. I'm a turkey hunter who has spent at least a week on national forest land every spring since 1997. I knew where the biggest populations of birds were then, and I know where they are now. They're concentrated in areas with open understories created by prescribed burns. But the scope of these attractive areas is beginning to shrink at a rapid rate. I won't even set foot in the area where I collected my first public land gobbler in 1998. It's way too thick. "The area that used to harbor the epicenter of the eastern wild turkey population on public land has changed dramatically since the injunction," said John Burk, TPWD wild turkey program leader. "A lot of the best areas that the USFS had gotten to the maintenance stage are now marginal to unsuitable as turkey habitat. Others are history. The 25,000-acre Moore Plantation in Sabine County is gone. They're going to have to start all over in that area." While turkey populations are still holding their own for the time being, the endangered woodpeckers aren't faring well at all. Jeff Reid, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wildlife biologist with a serious interest in RCWs, said endangered RCW populations are doomed unless the court makes a prompt decision and allows prescribed burns to continue. Reid said he's noticed a definite downswing in populations on the Angelina and Sabine national forests since the burning ban went into effect. In contrast, counts on the Sam Houston and Davy Crockett indicate populations are stable or increasing. RCW management burns are still allowed on those forests. "The woodpeckers are in trouble on the Angelina and the Sabine," Reid said. "All the gains that have been made since 1988 have been lost, because the USFS hasn't been able to burn. The conditions have gotten so bad that the birds are having difficulty finding food. So they haven't been able to raise as many chicks." The impacts of the 1999 injunction cut much deeper than a loss of wildlife and habitat. Since 1988, the forest service has spent thousands of dollars conducting the prescribed restoration burns. Burk said it costs about $15 per acre to undertake such a project. Burn 1,000 acres and somebody has to write a $15,000 check. Like Reid, Burk said he is hopeful that U.S. District Judge Richard Schell will arrive at a quick decision when the case comes up on June 24 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Beaumont. Moreover, he hopes Judge Schell puts the TCONR group in their place. "It amazes me that a handful of people with no biological training or background can determine forest management policy," Burk said. "There are a train load of biologists out there that know these turkey and RCW populations are headed downhill, and we know how to stop it. These (TCONR) people are not qualified to have an opinion on these topics. And yet, in the eyes of the court, their testimony is just as valid as ours." Janice Bezanson, TCONR executive director, will probably disagree with Burk's assessment. Bezanson, who is based in Austin, said her organization's board of trustees consists of 23 people. Although she couldn't name a trustee with professional credentials as a wildlife biologist or forester, she did say the organization consults with professionals in both fields. Bezanson said some of the "top experts in the country" will testify on TCONR's behalf that the USFS's prescribed burning techniques are not healthy for the forest system as a whole. "We are not opposed to prescribed burning to mimic natural fires," she said. "But we feel in many cases that the forest service is burning more frequently than what is natural, which is causing the loss of herbaceous and hardwood species. The forest service needs to be more specific in what their management objectives are and not use prescribed burning as a catch-all, cure-all." Bezanson also objects to the fact that the forest service is asking the court to lift the 1988 injunction, which prohibited clearcutting near RCW colonies and ultimately forced the USFS to manage certain compartments for the endangered species. "USFS wants us to lift both injunctions and let them go so they can do what they want to do," she said. Bezanson introduced Larry Shelton of Nacogdoches and Richard Donovan as two of the most knowledgeable individuals on TCONR's board of trustees. Shelton builds cabinets for a living and has two years worth of college level forestry courses under his belt. Donovan worked for Temple Inland before going into real estate. Shelton, who says he's not anti-fire, said TCONR's goal is to reform the way national forests are managed. Regarding prescribed burning, he'd like to see it used only in site specific cases, not as a blanket policy over all the upland forest. "I am an advocate of burning," he said. "But I'm also an advocate of letting natural processes dictate what should be out there. USFS doesn't acknowledge that there are different forest types and community types that can be managed without fire. If we could get an agreement on that, perhaps we could reach an agreement on what areas could be burned." Shelton said the organization also objects to some of the USFS's RCW management practices. He referred to their game plan as "very arbitrary" and said USFS has made decisions to manage for the birds in vast areas without any real historical evidence that the birds were or weren't there to begin with. "Other resources may be suffering because of these arbitrary management practices," he said. "Our intent is not to hurt the woodpeckers, the turkeys or anything else. What we'd like to see is the best areas to be managed for woodpeckers and turkeys and go ahead and do it right." Shelton believes the USFS burning policy produces "mediocre results at best." "The burns are not getting done properly," he said. "They're uniformly spending their resources over a vast area, so all the results are mediocre. We'd like to see them reform their policy — burn 25 percent of the upland habitat frequently, 50 percent moderately and 25 percent infrequently. That way, there will be some of everything out there." Shelton bases his strategy partly on the results of small-scale burns he's performed is his own property. The tracts consume 1/2 acre and five acres respectively. Is a 1/2-acre burn representative of what occurs on a 1,000 acre burn? "In some ways, no," said Shelton. "But I know what's out there. I can specifically look at and count each plant and see how they are responding. Plus, I've got more control over the burn on a small area. Some of the larger burning experiments that have been attempted on the national forest have been abandoned because they couldn't get them burned right. "We're asking them to do something creative," Shelton added. "But when it comes to governments and bureaucracies, it takes them forever to change directions on anything." No argument, here. This whole case is a perfect example. For four years a federal judge has been sitting on what was supposed to be a "temporary" restraining order and some of the prettiest country in the region and the wildlife that lives there is withering away as a result. It's high time a ruling is made. Hopefully, it will be a decision based on fact, not fiction. Got an opinion? To comment on the forest management issue contact: U.S. Sen. John Cornyn 517 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 202-224-2934 FAX: 202-228-2856 Web site: http://Cornyn.Senate.gov East Texas office: Tyler 903-593-0902; Fax: 9903-593-0920.
Kay Bailey Hutchison SR 284 Russell Building Washington, D.C. 20510 202-224-5922
Room 214 Cannon Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Office: 202-225-3035 Fax: 202-225-5866 1300 E. Pinecrest, Suite 30 Marshall, Texas 75670 Office: 903-938-8386 Fax: 903-935-5772 U.S. Rep. Jim Turner 701 N. First St. Room 201 Lufkin, Texas 75901 E-mail: tx02wyr@mail.house.gov 936-637-1770 208 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 202-225-2401 Fax: 202-225-5955 |