Recently I attended a “Conversation
with the Chief” of the U.S. Forest Service, Gail Kimbell. I was invited to give a
presentation on the impact of the current management of the National Forests on the County
budget, social and economic well-being of our citizens and the threat of fuel build-up on
the Forests and wildfire risk to local communities. Supervisor Cook assisted with
additional comments.
The presentation discussed the unfulfilled 1991 MOU the Klamath National
Forest had signed with the Board of Supervisors pledging to identify, demonstrate and
promote products and services involving Forest resources that contribute to economic
development and diversification of the County. I also talked briefly about the Siskiyou
County Board of Supervisors’ Resolution declaring the National Forests to be a “dangerous
public nuisance” and directing the U.S.D.A. “to commence immediate and
accelerated efforts to abate this nuisance through comprehensive and widespread hazardous
fuel reduction on National Forests throughout Siskiyou County.”
Another presentation I found of particular interest was from Mark
Bosetti of Sierra Pacific Industries, who talked about the loss of milling and
manufacturing infrastructure and the shortfalls in timber supply to keep the mills and
biomass (energy) plants running. Mills and plants are not running at full shift capacity
and maximum efficiency. Consequently, they have higher overhead and lose competitiveness
in the market. It was noted that there are few facilities that have survived post
Northwest Forest Plan are not dependent upon large private timber holdings.
The question was asked: “Are we no longer in the business of
harvesting timber from federal lands?”
Chief Kimbell replied that it was “no longer the focus of
management and was just another function.” She explained that the “public”
said that it wanted a “bigger picture” for how the National Forest was managed
and the end product condition of that process. Removal of logs, biomass and wildfires were
now only a part of the “treatment” of the Forests. Timber and wood products were
“no longer a primary focus of the Forest.” She said that recent court decisions
have reinterpreted various federal laws such as NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act)
and NFMA (National Forest Management Act) as an expression of “social license.” The Chief stated that we “lack the social
license to put a chainsaw into the National Forest.”
I did express “astonishment” at her statement and my
concerns that the mission of the US Forest Service had been changed. The 1897 Organic Act stated that the purposes for establishing the Forests in the
first place were: (1) "a continuous supply
of timber for the use and necessities of United
States citizens;" and (2) securing favorable conditions of water flows. (In 1978, United States v. New Mexico, the
court rejected claims that the Act established a third purpose for
which forests could be created - "to improve and protect the forest within the
boundaries.”) The Act also directed the Secretary to make provisions against
destruction of the forest reserves by fire and depredations. The Forests were always
intended to be working forests, not parks, nature museums or unmanaged wildlands.
At the turn of the last century, concerns over the
lack of management of valuable public timber stands and threats of wildfire had actually
led to the County inviting the establishment of the Forests here in Siskiyou County.
(According to the September
15, 1903, Yreka Journal: "A.F.
Porter of Washington, DC, agent of the Bureau of Forestry arrived Monday…The
objective is to make a complete examination of the county as to suitability of creating a
forest reserve. Mr. Porter passed a good deal of his time with Mr. C.H. Edward of the
Forest Reserve Committee and District Attorney Given. The matter was fully discussed and
all data prepared by the committee was placed at Mr. Porter's disposal. He stated that in
the creation of a forest reserve the Government would take in consideration the wishes of
the people in the part affected, he further stated worthless land would not be
incorporated therein. The commission will make its report to the Secretary of the Interior
about February 1, 1904, and the matter will
soon thereafter be determined.") In the 1940s, the Siskiyou County Board of
Supervisors urged further acquisition of surplus Southern Pacific Lands to “assure a
long term logging and lumbering economy.”
In the original Congressional debates over the
Organic Act, Senate Report No. 105, 22 stated:
“…unless the reserved lands of the public domain are made to contribute to the
welfare and prosperity of the country, they should be thrown open to settlement and the
whole system of reserved forests be abandoned." It seems that we have come full
circle.
|
