REDWOOD NEEDLES Presented by the Sierra Club Redwood Chapter Newsletter, The REDWOOD NEEDLES Return to Article Menu Quincy plan will harm wildlife, water quality by Bill Corcoran, Conservation Associate, Angeles Chapter Sierra Club What you can do   Sierra Club says plan will restore logging, not forests The Forest Service has released its draft report detailing how it proposes to put into action the controversial Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Act, universally opposed by environmental groups and passed by Congress in 1998. In an unusual move that reflects turmoil within the Forest Service's own ranks, the agency has identified two "preferred" alternatives in its draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Public comments are due by July 26 (see box). The Sierra Club is urging its members to reject all of the considered alternatives and instead call for an end to the commercial logging of Sierra Nevada national forests. "These timber sales take money from taxpayers' pockets to degrade our public forests and silt up streams that provide Californians with pure drinking water," said Barbara Boyle, Sierra Club Regional Director. "By ending the commercial logging of our forests, Americans will protect their wildlife, fisheries and water quality." "By choosing two preferred alternatives, the Forest Service is sending a clear signal that the Quincy Group plan cannot comply with federal environmental law," said Boyle, who cited the 1976 National Forest Management Act, which requires that the Forest Service ensure the "viability" of all wildlife species found on the national forests. A Sierra-wide analysis of viability for over 100 species is being developed by Forest Service scientists but won't be released until July at the earliest. "The plan the Quincy Group proposed would degrade the old growth forest even further than it already has been, causing hardship to wildlife like the goshawk, Sierra Nevada red fox, and California spotted owl," said Boyle. She believes the Forest Service is having trouble reconciling the agency's existing legal responsibilities and the increased logging called for in the Quincy legislation, which was championed by California U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. The plan, which would increase logging across an area larger than Rhode Island-- 2.5 million acres--would also cause problems for recreationists. "Hikers, anglers, birders and campers should be very concerned with this plan," said Scott Hoffman Black, director of the Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign (SNFPC), an alliance of organizations seeking reform of logging practices in the Sierra Nevada. "The Forest Service," said Black, "has missed an opportunity to protect forests, streams, and wild California." The two identified alternatives would increase logging on the Plumas, Lassen and part of the Tahoe national forests. Alternative 2, which the Forest Service calls its "proposed" alternative, would nearly triple logging over current levels-from a current 124 million board feet to 319 million board feet annually in the three affected forests. Alternative 4, labeled the "preferred" alternative, would increase logging to 206 million board feet annually. Commercial logging on the three forests loses money--in FY 1997 the Forest Service itself admitted losing $800,000 on the Lassen and Plumas Forests, and $5 million throughout the Sierra Nevada. Black complained that the Forest Service proposals will increase taxpayer- subsidized destruction of the forests' natural resources while ignoring recent scientific recommendations for the protection of water quality. The affected forests contain the Feather River, an important water source for northern and central California, as well as the last spawning streams for endangered wild salmon in the Sierra Nevada. Erin Noel, a staff attorney for SNFPC, ridiculed the Forest Service's selection of two alternatives. "Two poor alternatives don't make one good one," said Noel, who noted that "the long-term health of local economies, fish and wildlife, and our rugged Sierra forests and canyons all depend on the ecological health of national forest lands and ought not to be traded against each other to achieve political compromise." What you can do Comments on Quincy Logging Plan Needed Now The public comment period for the Quincy Logging Plan ends July 26, 1999. Please take a few moments to help protect our dwindling Sierra Nevada old growth and wildlife. The Sierra Club asks its members to write the Forest Service and urge the rejection of all of the Quincy Library Group Act Environmental Impact Statement alternatives. Please urge the Forest Service to choose a plan that makes use of the best available science and make their plan stronger by requiring all of the protection measures listed below: 1) PROTECT ALL OLD GROWTH FORESTS, including those identified in the SNEP Report. 2) COMPLETELY PROTECT RIPARIAN (streamside) AREAS following the strategy outlined in the SNEP Report. Streamside areas provide very important habitat and logging there damages fisheries and water quality. 3) PROTECT ALL ROADLESS AREAS OVER 1000 ACRES. The last remaining unroaded areas provide endangered wildlife with critical habitat. The proposed alternatives would defer logging in some (BUT NOT ALL) roadless areas greater than 5000 acres, but does not protect smaller areas. It also provides no PERMANENT protection for any roadless areas of any size. 4) MAXIMIZE USE OF PRESCRIBED FIRE, WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO NATIONAL FOREST LANDS NEXT TO DEVELOPED PRIVATE PROPERTY. The supporters of the Quincy Act made the misleading claim that more logging would result in lower fire danger. Rather than increasing logging, the Forest Service needs to use low intensity fires to thin the forests and reduce fire risk, especially near populated areas. 5) WAIT TO FINALIZE A PLAN UNTIL INFORMATION IS COMPLETE FROM THE SIERRA-WIDE PLANNING PROCESS NOW UNDERWAY. Right now, there is also a management plan being developed for the entire Sierra range. The Forest Service must include consideration of this larger plan in their plan to implement the Quincy Act. Most importantly, the findings on how increased logging and other development could harm wildlife (viability analysis) must be considered before going forward with ANY Quincy alternative. 6) ELIMINATE COMMERCIAL LOGGING. Ultimately the only way to restore Sierra forests is by ending commercial logging. Commercial logging is often a money loser; in much of the Sierra logging is heavily subsidized by taxpayers like you. The Quincy Act calls for 40-60,000 acres of heavy forest "thinning" and for small clear cuts on over 9,000 acres per year. But this logging would cause serious habitat fragmentation and is likely to violate existing laws to protect wildlife. The Forest Service should be urged to end taxpayer-subsidized logging on our National Forests. COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY JULY 26, 1999 By mail: David Peters, Project Manager Forest Recovery Act Project PO Box 11500 Quincy, CA 95971-6025 By e-mail: FRACT/r5_plumas@fs.fed.us To view the Draft EIS visit http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/hfqlg/ Return to Article Menu Last updated on 3/02/99 Comments or suggestions? Drop us a line at heyneedles@aol.com