What Lies Ahead for Monument?
By Robert Plain, Ashland Daily Tidings
February 11, 2005

The recently released resource management plan and final environmental impact statement for the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument contains no limit to the size of tree that can be felled within the 52,940-acre federally protected land.

While conservationists say they are concerned, most are taking a wait-and-see approach as the Bureau of Land Management proposal heads to the next stage of public comment.

The RMP/FEIS, which will govern the monument for the next 10 years, would allow for thinning on 22 percent of the monument's 25,340-acre "old-growth emphasis area." But what came as a surprise to conservationists was that on these 5,665 acres, there are no restrictions to the size of trees that could be removed.

"We don't have a diameter limit," Howard Hunter, BLM's assistant manager for the monument said. "There may be a few instances in which we remove large trees."

Hunter added, "It is not our intention to cut big trees" though some of the felled lumber could become "commercial material."

"Yes, there could be some money made," he said. BLM will present its proposed plan in a public meeting at the Bellview Grange, 1050 Tollman Creek Road, 7 p.m.

Hunter said he believes the proposal is a reasonable management plan that incorporates the most sound suggestions from more than 17,000 comments BLM received.

"We really looked to make this consistent with people's concerns," he said.

Protection needed

While the RMP/FEIS was being debated in the previous public comment period, several scientists and environmentalists co-signed an official comment that requested that BLM not eliminate any tree over 17-inches in diameter at breast height.

"General thinning should focus on trees [smaller than] 17-inch-dbh since trees larger than this size play a differentially important role as wildlife habitat, contribute less to hazardous fuels ... and are the next cohort of trees that over time will replace older trees," reads the statement submitted by the group.

"It doesn't make sense to cut big trees to protect big trees," said Dennis Odion, a local resident who co-signed the comment and has a Ph.D. in vegetative ecology. "Given what could potentially happen, there needs to be protection for the larger trees. Unless the goal is for a larger timber volume but that is not what the monument is about.

"I'm sure a lot of people must have commented about diameter," he added.

Dave Willis, chair of the Soda Mountain Wilderness Council and largely credited as the driving force behind the area becoming a national monument, said the lack of diameter restrictions "could be a Trojan horse."

"In the past, when BLM has had a blank check, the forest has not benefited," he said.

Willis believes the Medford office of the BLM, who prepared the RMP/FEIS, probably has the best of intentions. "But I'm still concerned that even a well-intentioned plan could be abused by larger forces who want to turn what is by law a protected area into a timber basket again," he said.

"There is certainly such a thing as ecologically-based thinning that sends a few logs to the mill," Willis explained. "There is also commodity-based thinning in sheep's clothing that is very often used to send a lot of logs to the mill."

Lorie List, a BLM environmental planner, said their office chose not to institute a diameter restriction because the BLM wanted to be able to thin larger trees in order to protect the old growth pine trees in the monument. She said some large fir trees could be sacrificed if they encroach on the monument's old-growth pine trees.

"If an 18-inch Douglas fir is crowding an old-growth pine tree, we may want to manage that," she said. To which Hunter added, "We don't want to tie our hands."

List said there are five conditions under which the BLM would "treat" the old-growth emphasis area. They are, according to the document, managing young stands, reducing fire hazard, habitat connectivity, fire hazard near the wildland urban interface area and the loss of pine forests throughout the monument.

The RMP/FEIS is still not set in stone, List explained. Residents have until March 14 to file either a comment with the Medford office or an official protest to BLM headquarters in Washington, D.C., she said. A protest can only be filed by a group or individual that has already filed a comment during the public comment phase of the planning.

"Once we resolve any protests," List said, "we put out the record of decision." The record of decision, she said, indicates that the RMP/FEIS is the governing law. This could happen as early as August and management of the monument could then proceed as proscribed, List said.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.