« February 2004 | Main | April 2004 »
March 31, 2004
Painter Run Bid Notice Up
We have posted the Painter Run Timber Sale Bid Notice and Prospectus. This gives details on the Painter Run Timber Sale Contract to be awarded today including stand by stand details on timber sale species and volumes.
Now, maybe you've never seen one of these. But this is the type of notice the Forest Service sends out to timber companies when they want bids for timber. It is key if you want to know how the Forest Service follows through on decisions it makes in environmental impact statements.
We've posted both a pdf version of the Painter Run notice for download and a html index to view images of the document on-line. Please use this thread to let us know what format you prefer. The Forest Service does not post this information so we hope that making this information available will help interested folks.
Update: We've now posted the bid notices for the Dead Horse Windthrow Salvage and Enterprise Timber Sales. Check out the Timber Bids Index.
Posted by jkleissler at 03:01 PM | Comments (3)
March 30, 2004
Forest Service to Hawk Painter Run Timber
Well, tomorrow, the Forest Service is scheduled to open bids for the Painter Run Timber Sale at 1pm in Ridgway. We're having scanning difficulties but will continue working on them so we can get the prospectus posted tomorrow. I thought we had it fixed but we ran into a small niche problem today.
Posted by jkleissler at 05:27 PM | Comments (0)
Server Problems
Yesterday some of you might have encountered server problems. Our entire website was down due to a service attack on our hosting company (the entire company went down). The problems have been located and they are making changes to avoid future outages. I apologize to anyone who tried to access our site and found it impossible.
Posted by jkleissler at 03:02 PM | Comments (0)
March 26, 2004
And the Winner is...
Allegheny National Forest Supervisor Kevin Elliott is the Load of Crap Award Winner for this bit from the Allegheny website:
ANF Forest Supervisor Kevin Elliott said "The public has expressed considerable interest in seeing us salvage this highly valued material in addition to the need to regenerate the damaged areas." He added, "We thank the Administration and Congress for these new tools."
You know, over 2,000 people wrote letters, attended meetings, and voiced protest over the East Side Timber Sale and that didn't convince Kevin Elliott that the public "expressed considerable interest" in having the Allegheny protected. Two-thirds of the American public opposes commercial logging and hundreds of thousands of Americans wrote in protest of the "new tools" Elliott brags about above. But, don't worry, we know what Kevin Elliott means by the "public" when he talks - for Supervisor Elliott the public doesn't refer to Americans - only timber industry interests.
Update: This is worse than I thought. It is pretty clear from this article that the Forest Service is using ategorical exclusions to break up the wind-storm damage from 2003 into segmented projets in order to avoid more detailed environmental review. This is illegal and relates directly to the Martin Run CE as well I think. Click on the extended view to read the press release.
Six months after a violent summer storm ravaged Northwestern Pennsylvania and the Allegheny National Forest (ANF) in July 2003, the Forest Service has begun to use a variety of new streamlined process tools to salvage downed trees that otherwise might have gone untouched for more months or years before sawyers moved in. The timely action preserves the wood's value.ANF Forest Supervisor Kevin Elliott said "The public has expressed considerable interest in seeing us salvage this highly valued material in addition to the need to regenerate the damaged areas." He added, "We thank the Administration and Congress for these new tools."
To move the recovery process ahead as quickly as possible, the ANF included salvage timber in some existing sales where feasible. Through February 2004, more than 900M board feet of various species have been salvaged from the storm. This wood had a contract value of $668,090.
Utilizing "limited timber harvest categorical exclusion", a new analysis tool that allows harvesting of wind-thrown trees in small plots of less than 250 acres and where environmental impact is negligible, the Forest Service plans to move forward in line with the new regulations before the downed trees deteriorate in value.
The first of the salvage harvests using categorical exclusion is near the Timberline ATV Trailhead on State Route 948 in Elk County. Kane Hardwood was awarded this timber sale, six acres in size, formally known as the Timberline ATV Trailhead Windthrow Salvage.
The ANF was particularly anxious to complete the Timberline ATV Trailhead salvage since the winds downed valuable black cherry trees immediately beside well-traveled State Route 948. The public has expressed concern over the wood decaying if not moved from the site prior to insects and decay ruining the wood. "The possibility of theft also makes it a good practice to harvest these logs as soon as possible," said Marienville District Ranger Leon Blashock, whose office has responsibility at the Timberline ATV Trailhead.
Because of the sale area's proximity to the highway, no access road was required and as part of the sale, Kane Hardwood was required to return blown down root wads into an upright position to improve visual quality .
Posted by jkleissler at 05:45 PM | Comments (5)
Rendell Getting the Propaganda Tour Today
This is in this morning's Bradford Era:
HARRISBURG ‹ Gov. Ed Rendell will visit Kane Hardwood at 11 a.m. today to tour the sawmill operations and discuss the "importance of ensuring the long-term protection and productive use of Pennsylvania's forests."The Democratic governor is traveling through the state to promote his "Growing Greener II" initiative.
The Growing Greener initiative is a four-year, $1.4 billion state initiative for land conservation and environmental protection.
Ok, now that is laughable. Rendell is going to tour Kane Hardwoods, Collins-Pine's (Oregon) main operator in Pennsylvania. That is correct, the same company that has been certified as "sustainable" for whole-heartedly embracing the "SILVAH" logging system designed to convert native forests to black cherry dominated tree farms. And they are calling this the "long-term protection ... of Pennsylvania's forests"? I would also dispute the "productive use", as if giving priority use of their lands to forest products equals "productive use". I have no problem with Collins-Pine emphasizing timber management on their lands, but calling a spade anything other than a spade is utter nonsense.
But this is also interesting. Most of the article is dominated by a one-sided report of propaganda from the Pennsylvania Forest Products Association:
Rendell's interest in the state's forests have concerned one forest products group.According to a press release from the Pennsylvania Forest Products Association, association officials sent a letter to Rendell asking him to reconsider two components of his budget proposal that could have a negative impact on the state's forest products industry.
In the governor's plan, $100 million will be spent on new forest protection initiatives and the proposed implementation of the two fees on manufacturing operations.
"In his budget address, the governor expressed support for the Pennsylvania forest products industry," said Paul Lyskava, executive director for PFPA. "But these proposals are counterproductive and will only further add to the cost of doing business in the state."
The forest plan initiative is part of the governor's $800 million Quality of Life bond proposal.
According to Lyskava, "The U.S. Forest Service confirms in its ongoing forest inventory that there has not been a statistically significant loss in forest acreage over the past 15 years. Pennsylvania also has more forested acres now than it did in 1955.
The release continues with information that the state's forest land that is already protected from development through government ownership, land trust activities and Pennsylvania's Clean and Green Program includes 47 percent, or 7.8 million acres.
Ok, before I go on, lets strip this of the utter lies and propaganda. Lsykava is a propaganda artist left-over from the Ridge administration (he ran Ridge's Pennsylvania Hardwood Development Council whose expertise was exporting Pennsylvania logs and jobs). So it isn't surprising that this is the best nonsense that he can come up with. He argues that there has been no change in the amount of forest land in the last 15 years. Yeah, sure, I'll buy that. But what does that mean? Nothing, because the surveys he is citing consider clearcut lands and 20 year old unhealthy scrap woodlands as forests just the same as if it were old growth habitat where Northern Goshawk roam. His comments sound important but say nothing about the actual state of Pennsylvania forests.
And now for Lyskava's final claim. According to Lyskava 47% of our forest lands in Pennsylvania are locked up in state forest lands and the "Clean and Green Program." What, is he kidding us? The primary lands in the "Clean and Green Program" are industry lands (timber, coal, oil & gas, etc..). Just look at any Game Commission map showing the Clean & Green Lands. In fact, last I checked Collins-Pine was enrolled in this program except that they so badly wanted a profit at the expense of hunters that they violated the program's requirements to keep these lands open to the public.
Oh, but our favorite timber industry propagandists aren't done yet:
PFPA is also opposed to the governor's plan to impose two new fees on emissions and byproducts that are part of manufacturing processes, according to the release."For the forest products industry, these new taxes will have the greatest impact on value-added wood processors, including furniture and cabinet manufacturers, paper companies and producers of engineered wood products. Many companies in these sectors are already struggling to remain competitive in an ever-increasing global marketplace," added Lyskava.
The state's forest products industry includes more than 2,600 facilities. It employs about 90,000 Pennsylvanians, or about 11 percent of the state's manufacturing workforce.
Well, hot damned, the PFPA cares about the manufacturing sector? Well, not exactly I think. They include "engineered wood products" in their list of "value-added wood processors." What a joke. If there is a primary threat to real Pennsylvania manufacturers of furniture and cabinet makers it is the engineered wood products industries. And lo and behold, guess who the biggest polluters are amongst the PFPA's list of "value-added" industries: the chip & glue companies who make paper and engineered wood products.
This article prompted me to check out the PFPA's website where I encountered their new education program. And yes, it is a "curriculum" of blatant lies and propaganda intended for our schools - these industries love to brainwash people. Here I encountered their less than slick streaming "education" video. Their streaming video declares that "unmanaged old growth forests become stagnant and diseased." Enough said! Except then the video goes on to say that all harvesting must comply with "strict state regulations". Are they kidding? Pennsylvania has some of the weakest regulations in the country! I suppose truth is too much to ask. It is sad that so much of public education is guided by extremists like the PFPA. Who would have thought!? For some good comedy click here. Maybe someone can make a transcript.
Posted by jkleissler at 12:16 PM | Comments (0)
March 24, 2004
New Pennsylvania Conservation Blog
The Pennsylvania Wildlands Recovery Project (PWRP) has set up a new blog on wildlands conservaton and recovery in Pennsylvania. The PWRP news blog already has a great post up by Dave Bonta on the DCNR's "Action Plan" for PA's state forests. Check it out!
Posted by jkleissler at 09:23 PM | Comments (0)
March 19, 2004
Defend Allegheny Wilderness!
Action Alert
Allegheny Wilderness Needs your Help Today!
The U.S. Forest Service is trying to use a loophole to circumvent federal environmental laws and allow logging in the heart of a proposed Wilderness Area next to the Tionesta National Natural Landmark in Pennsylvania’s Allegheny National Forest. The Tionesta Scenic and Research Natural Areas are the largest old growth forest in Pennsylvania made up of towering 500-year old Eastern Hemlock and American Beech trees.
The logging was initially proposed as part of the Martin Run Timber Sale. That project will be outlined in a detailed environmental impact statement due out this spring. But the Forest Service doesn’t want to wait and has moved forward plans to log 51 acres in the heart of the proposed Tionesta Wilderness Area now without environmental review and without following requirements to address public comments already submitted in protest! Read a previous action alert on the Martin Run sale here.
The Forest Service is attempting to turn a natural forest event into an opportunity to sidestep environmental laws. A recent wind storm has blown over some trees and left others leaning over 7 miles of deer fencing along proposed logging sites in the Martin Run project. Instead of repairing the fence, modifying its design, removing it, or simply cutting away the trees the Forest Service is trying to use this opportunity to do a commercial timber sale of black cherry trees.
The loophole involves the use of a new "category" of logging activities, created by the Bush administration, which can go forward without detailed environmental review. The "Categorical Exclusion" however cannot legally be applied for a project where the Forest Service has already acknowledged there may be a significant effect. Furthermore, the federal courts have already determined that logging adjacent to the Tionesta Scenic and Research Natural Areas in such a project without detailed consideration in an environmental impact statement prior to logging is illegal (Curry v. US Forest Service).
We need letters of protest sent today, Friday, March 19, 2004. They can be sent by e-mail to Supervisor Kevin Elliott or fax to 814-726-1465. Letters postmarked today are also accepted: Supervisor Kevin B. Elliott, Allegheny National Forest, RE: "Fence and Salvage CE", PO Box 847, Warren, PA 16365.
You can read the Allegheny Defense Project’s public comment letter by clicking on the extended text box.
March 19, 2004
Re: "Fence Salvage"/Martin Run Project
Ranger John Schultz
Bradford Ranger District
Allegheny National Forest
29 Forest Service Drive
Bradford, PA 16701
(814) 362-4613
(814) 362-2761 fax
Dear Ranger Schultz,
I am writing in response to your notice dated March 3, 2004, relating to attempts to categorically exclude certain "Fence Salvage" portions of the Martin Run Project. The following comments are provided on behalf of the Allegheny Defense Project and our Supporters and the National Forest Protection Alliance (NFPA).
1. This is a blatant attempt to circumvent the legally required consideration of environmental impacts and alternatives and is therefore illegal and should be immediately withdrawn as a proposed Categorical Exclusion.
2. The Forest Service has already determined that the activities proposed by the Martin Run Project will have a cumulative significant impact and therefore requires preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. These activities cannot be implemented through a Categorical Exclusion.
3. The public has already provided public comment on the Martin Run Notice of Intent and is anticipating that public comment will be responded to and addressed within the environmental impact statement for that project. Adopting a Categorical Exclusion for this project would allow the Forest Service to circumvent the detailed consideration of public comments required for environmental impact statements by substituting that process for the far less extensive and far more superficial review allowed in Categorical Exclusions.
4. While the Forest Service contends that this is necessary in order to repair the damaged fences, the Forest Service actually intends to carry out portions of the Martin Run Project as a commercial timber sale as evidenced by the scoping letter: "To expedite repair and maintenance of these fences, this small portion of the salvage harvest contained in the Martin Run Notice of Intent needs to be completed at this time."
5. It is one thing to remove trees that have fallen directly on fences. It is another to say that portions of the Martin Run Project need to be salvaged now through a categorical exclusion while they are still being considered in the scoping period for the Martin Run DEIS. Even the map associated with the CE notice is labeled as part of the "Martin Run" project.
6. By attempting to circumvent the EIS process, the Forest Service is bypassing consideration of more reasonable alternatives such as modifications to the fences themselves or simply moving the trees off of the fence lines themselves instead of removal of the trees. Tree fall along fences is persistent across the forest and the granting of this CE would establish a dangerous precedent for commercial timber sales along fenceways across the national forest in violation of the NEPA. 40 CFR § 1508.25. Alternatives looking at modifications to fence construction and design, as well as alternatives to the fence and log management program itself, are much more reasonable responses to the issue of treefall along deer fencing.
7. The decision to proceed with commercial logging as part of the Martin Run Project prior to the issuance of a Record of Decision is specifically prohibited by the NEPA because it prohibits the careful, detailed consideration of alternatives to commercial logging activities. 40 CFR § 1506.1,Until an agency issues a record of decision as provided in § 1502.2 … shall be taken which would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives. Furthermore, there can be no question that the decision to implement commercial logging now will prejudice the ultimate alternatives considered and decision made in the Martin Run Project.
8. Projects can not be segmented and broken up in order to evade more detailed review as required by the National Environmental Protection Act. This is a long-standing principal of the NEPA which would be violated by the implementation of the NEPA. 40 CFR § 1508.27(b)(7), Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts.
9. Even if these activities were isolated (and not part of a larger project) they cannot be categorically excluded from consideration in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment.
a. The Categorical Exclusion for timber harvest relied on for this project, which was adopted specifically in order to address fire hazards, provides as follows:
13. Salvage of dead and/or dying trees not to exceed 250 acres, requiring no more than _ mile of temporary road construction. The proposed action may include incidental removal of live or dead trees for landings, skid trails, and road clearing.Examples include but are not limited to:
a. Harvest of a portion of a stand damaged by a wind or ice event and construction of a short temporary road to access the damaged trees.
b. Harvest of fire-damaged trees.This CE, which is illegal to begin with, does not apply to the project at hand. The commercial logging proposed would occur over a 7 mile linear area. While the non-contiguous acreage of logging is quoted as only 51 acres, this does not cover the miles of skid trails and other disturbance activities that would be required to cover this project.
b. The Categorical Exclusion cannot be used for projects where extraordinary circumstances are present. Nearly all of the proposed logging sites abut or are adjacent to the Tionesta Scenic Area – a National Natural Landmark, documented habitat for the federally endangered Indiana bat, and the largest old growth forest in the entire state of Pennsylvania. In fact, in Curry v. US Forest Service, the presence of logging activity adjacent to Tionesta Scenic Area is part of what defines the need for an environmental impact statement. This is not a single extraordinary circumstance but a series of extraordinary circumstances that are impacted. In addition, these logging activities would occur in such close proximity that noise would be evident from the nearby North Country Trail – a National Scenic Trail. Furthermore, noise disturbances would affect recreationists within and near the Tionesta Scenic Area. Finally, the proposed activities all occur within the proposed Tionesta Wilderness Area (See http://www.alleghenywild.org) and the Tionesta Special Area (as outlined in the Act to Save America’s Forests). See 36 CFR § 219.27(b)(4), consideration of adjacent stands and residual trees.
c. The Categorical Exclusion can not be used to cover projects which may have a significant impact on the environment. It has already been determined that the proposed activities will require a preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for which a Notice of Intent has already been issued.
d. The NEPA requires that past, present, and future events be considered when considering whether or not an environmental impact statement is required (or when a categorical exclusion may be considered). The decision to maintain fences for the purposes of initiating future regeneration as part of a commercial logging practice itself sets a precedent for future activities which must be considered within the context of this proposal.
e. The Categorical Exclusion standard which the Forest Service hopes to use on this project itself is illegal. In the scoping notice, it suggests that the standard for consideration of whether a Categorical Exclusion can be used is "whether potentially significant effects would occur to any of the following categories of extraordinary circumstances." This is incorrect. The potential for significant effects is what determines whether or not an Environmental Impact Statement is necessary after preparing an Environmental Assessment. The same standard cannot be applied to Categorical Exclusions because then there would be no part in the NEPA process for Environmental Assessments. The presence of extraordinary circumstances requires the preparation of Environmental Assessment. After an Environmental Assessment is prepared then the potential for significant effects, and not just to extraordinary circumstances, is used to determine whether an EIS is required. The Forest Service proposes to apply an incorrect interpretation of law in pushing through this illegal Categorical Exclusion.
f. The Categorical Exclusion #13 is illegal. According to the Federal Register Notice for its adoption, this category is only applicable where target trees "still have some economic value as a forest product." Therefore it is clear, that economic value of the trees is a primary consideration in all cases where this CE may even be considered. This violates the provisions of the NFMA which strictly prohibit the choice of vegetation manipulation primarily for commercial returns. 36 CFR § 219.27(b)(3).
g. The proposed timber sale would exacerbate the potential for future windthrow damage near these fence areas, which is already exacerbated by past logging activity. This has obviously had a past significant impact and will further increase the likelihood of future tree fall as the result of wind disturbances. 36 CFR § 219.27(b)(4), requiring consideration of impacts of logging on residual trees.
10. The proposed "Fence Salvage" portion of the Martin Run Project would "propose to remove these trees through a commercial timber sale and would include fallen trees within a 25 foot zone on either side of the fence (some leaning trees could be as much as 75-100 feet away from the fence)." Yet, the purported purpose of this Categorical Exclusion is to repair fences. Repairing fences does not require commercial logging and the failure to consider alternatives to commercial logging, or to explain why consideration of such circumstances was not given due consideration in the original environmental analysis, undermines the purpose, intent, and letter of the NEPA.
11. There can be no question that the decision to use commercial logging methods to remove timber in this instance, where non-commercial alternatives are clearly available, violates the National Forest Management Act requirement not to choose logging methods primarily on the greatest commercial return. There is no justification for using commercial logging in this instance other than commercial returns which is a clear violation of this premise.
12. The scoping notice acknowledges that the repair to the fences is meant to protect seedlings grown on the site for commercial logging purposes – further exacerbating the link between this proposal and the NFMA prohibition in selecting logging systems primarily for the greatest commercial return.
13. This project is an insult to those who provided public comment on the Martin Run Notice of Intent with the expectation that their public comments would be responded to within the EIS and would not be prejudiced by illegal logging activities implemented through illegal CEs. These citizens have a right to have their public comments on the Martin Run project addressed through the legally required processes outlined by NEPA for Environmental Impact Statements and not circumvented while we await the preparation of that EIS.
We appreciate your immediate attention to these public comments.
Sincerely,
Jim Kleissler
Forest Watch Director
Posted by jkleissler at 09:22 AM | Comments (1)
March 04, 2004
Allegheny National Forest... or Tree Farm?
It shouldn't surprise anyone that Congressman John Peterson would know nothing of the role that fallen trees play in maintaining a healthy forest. But this does approve that all of our efforts to educate the Congressman about forest biology have fallen on deaf ears - or atleast ears that care little about science and lots about big profits for big timber.
And so it is that Congressman Peterson has persuaded US Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth to visit the Allegheny National Forest this spring to discuss the need to salvage log all of those trees downed by wind storms last summer. Perhaps while Chief Bosworth is in town Peterson can explain why he thinks logging, herbicide, and fertilizer applications that have been documented to deplete healthy soils of essential elements is a forest health solution. Perhaps Peterson can explain why we would want to further deplete forest soils which are known to be causing tree health problems forest wide.
Then again, maybe our Congressman isn't all that concerned about forest health after all. Maybe the fact that his solutions to forest health problems always involve opening up more public lands areas to timber companies isn't just a coincidence. Perhaps Congressman Peterson can help us answer this question? Maybe we should drop him an e-mail?
Click on the extended text box to read my letter and Peterson's press release.
For Immediate Release March 3, 2004U.S. FOREST CHIEF DALE BOSWORTH AGREES TO VISIT ALLEGHENY NATIONAL FOREST, WORK TO
ADDRESS TIMBER BLOWDOWNWashington -- At the urging of U.S. Congressman John Peterson (R-PA/5), U.S. Forest Chief Dale Bosworth has agreed to visit the Allegheny National Forest this spring to discuss a number of issues relating to the ANF including possible solutions for salvaging the timber which was blown down last summer.
Peterson discussed the problem with Bosworth during a hearing held today by the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, of which Peterson serves as vice-chairman. "Federal regulations and bureaucratic red tape have made it nearly impossible for the Forest Service to properly manage our forests," according to Peterson. "On the Allegheny National Forest, which contains the finest hardwood in the country, thousands of acres of trees were blown down last summer by severe storms and high winds. The value of the timber is between $50 and 100 million, yet the Forest Service estimates that it could take several years to salvage much of the timber because of bureaucratic red tape."
Congressman Peterson questions USFS Chief Dale Bosworth as Congressman Don Sherwood looks on.
"By the time the Forest Service is able to salvage the timber, what was once a majestic hard wood forest will simply be rotting wood on the forest floor," continued Peterson. "It doesn't make sense to have trees decaying on the ground simply because the Forest Service has its hands tied by red tape. The Forest Service has professional foresters, fish and wildlife biologists, ecologists and other scientists on staff who have years of experience managing healthy forests. We must provide them with more flexibility to make decisions about how to manage our forests instead of having our forest policy driven by lawsuits and red tape. I look forward to having Dale Bosworth visit and see for himself the issues we are facing in the Allegheny National Forest."
Bosworth also agreed to work with Peterson to look at ways to expand recreational opportunities in national forests, as well as to discuss the implementation of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act and how it may be able to help streamline the bureaucracy and expedite forest management decisions in the future.
-###-
And my letter:
Dear Congressman Peterson,I am writing to inform you of some biological information that will be useful in enhancing your knowledge of the biological role of fallen trees within the Allegheny National Forest.
As you may have heard, Allegheny National Forest soils have been depleted by a combination of historical logging and acidic rain. The depletion of essential cations such as magnesium and calcium has been documented by the Forest Service to expedite tree decline in the Allegheny National Forest.
In your recent press statement, you state that fallen trees in the Allegheny National Forest are a waste. However, scientists will tell you that fallen trees are essential to regenerating forest soils while maintaining important forest conditions essential to regeneration of Eastern Hemlock and the survival of other surrounding trees during periods of drought.
It also appears that you have advocated for commercial logging used in combination with fertilizers and herbicides as a "solution" to these fallen trees. Scientific researchers have documented that commercial timbering, fertilizers, and the herbicide Oust contribute towards deficiencies in essential cations in forest soils. Therefore it is not in the Forest Service's best interests to initiate commercial logging in the Allegheny National Forest.
I appreciate your continued commitment to the best available science.
Sincerely,
James Kleissler, Forest Watch Director
Allegheny Defense Project
Posted by jkleissler at 04:39 PM | Comments (1)
Gotta Appreciate the Gall
Only the timber industry would propose subsidized logging without careful regulation and oversight as a resolution to a natural, beneficial forest condition. This is the latest from industry hack Jack Hedlund:
The Bush Administration has delivered a few new "tools' to the forest management toolbox. They are intended to assist forest supervisors who are finding it increasingly more difficult to match their budget to management needs. Perhaps most intriguing is the one called "stewardship contracting." Simply put, this new tool allows for a "goods for services" arrangement between the Forest Service and a willing contractor.Let's say a particular forest incurred a great deal of wind damage during a given funding year. Since the forest budget for the year was established during the previous year, there is unlikely to be any extra funds available to address the situation. Stewardship contracting would allow the supervisor to arrange clean up with willing contractors fore whatever profit might make for the service.
By this method, forest health and safety issues could be addressed much more rapidly and at little additional cost to the Forest Service while benefiting multitudes of taxpayers through job development and revenue flow. It could be a win-win situation.
Does this windthrow scenario ring any bells?
Only one problem there Jack. Salvage logging is solely done to salvage the economic value of a downed tree and has nothing to do with forest health. Unless by forest health you mean removing essential forest structure while contributing towards increased degradation of already troubled forest soils.
Posted by jkleissler at 01:28 PM | Comments (0)
March 03, 2004
PA Oil Prices Surging
It seems that crude oil prices have jumped in response to global market conditions. Yes this means more pressure to drill in Pennsylvania's wild habitats. Of course, this also points to the fact that oil is a global market which we cannot isolate ourselves from no matter how much we wish to. This is from the Oil City Derrick
PennGrade crude oil prices are sizzling, thanks to a hike in demand for fuel and fears that domestic supplies are too tight and oil imports will be curtailed.The price refiners will pay for a 42-gallon barrel of the paraffin-rich PennGrade crude jumped Tuesday to the highest level since the war with Iraq started in March 2003.
Ergon Oil Purchasing of Newell, W.Va., pegged its price per barrel to $33.50 on Tuesday. Although the jump was small at 75 cents, the new posted figure is the highest since March 13, 2003, when the onset of the war with Iraq sent the price to $34.25.
That hefty pricetag lasted only a week, dropping to $26.50 once the war started and supply interruption worries dissipated.
At the same time, American Refining Group of Bradford, the second major buyer of petroleum produced in the western Pennsylvania oil patch, posted a higher price at $32.25 a barrel on Tuesday. That's the highest ARG has listed in more than a year.
... PennGrade crude, the waxy petroleum found in the Appalachian Basin, is coming off a very good year, price-wise. The average per-barrel price paid to producers was $28 and change in 2003, a full $6 higher than the average in 2002 and the highest level in more than a decade.
...Several factors are pushing up the price of crude oil. U.S. petroleum supplies are tight at the same time that there is worry about looming cuts in production from OPEC, a disruption in the oil flow from Venezuela because of political turbulence, and projections for greater demand, especially for gasoline supplies this spring and summer.
And while high crude oil prices promise expensive gasoline at the pumps, the $30-plus range for oil is good news for producers in Pennsylvania's oil patch that runs through the northwestern counties.
Those are some excerpts. I'm not sure how long the Derrick keeps their links active so don't be surprised to find the link dead in a day or so.
Posted by jkleissler at 06:36 PM | Comments (0)
Fixing Payments to Counties
This is old news by a week or so but important nonetheless. For years the ADP has been working to enable a more financially secure system by which the Forest Service can provide revenues to local counties in lieu of property taxes (which the federal government doesn't pay on public property). The timber industry led by the Allegheny Forest Alliance has fought this every inch of the way. The timber industry has cost local communities millions of dollars through their political lobbying against a fixed payment system.
Fortunately, cooler minds have finally prevailed. And by disabling the connection between timber sales and payments to counties each of the counties (except Forest which opted out of the timber payment system three years ago and has already seen the benefits of fixed payments) is now seeing a huge boost in their revenues from the federal government for fiscal year 2003 (which closed on September 30, 2003).
Don't tell the Warren County School District that "money doesn't grow on trees."
The school district raked in $118,000 more in Allegheny National Forest timber harvest receipts than expected this year.Fiscal director Larry Conrad told members of the school board's Finance Committee on Monday that he had projected the school district would receive $700,000 to apply to the current fiscal year's budget.
But Conrad said the check has now been received from the federal government and the amount is actually $818,748.
Some of the unexpected revenue may have to offset areas of the budget where revenue projections fell short, however, said Conrad.
Nonetheless, Conrad said, "This $818,000 is certainly a positive."
Since the school district opted for the U.S. Forest Service "safety net" program over the next three years rather than speculate on what its share of actual timber harvest revenues would be, Conrad said the district can expect to receive the same amount of $818,748 in each of the next two years.
Committee chairman Dale Gerbec asked what the school district would have received this year if it had decided to speculate on timber sales.
Conrad said that figure is not known at this point because there are still a number of timber sales "in the pipeline."
The $818,748 is the most the school district has received since the 1997-98 school year, when $901,775 was received. In the years which followed, the school district received between $430,600 and $692,500 as the volume of timber sales on the forest declined, chiefly due to ongoing litigation.
It isn't clear to my why the newspapers are still reporting the payments as timber revenues. The amount of the payments now have nothing to do with the amount of timber cut or its market values (historically more significant in determining payments than logging levels anyway).
Another important correction is the insinuation that they don't know what the payments would have been based on timber sales. if Warren County had opted to remain dependent on the unreliable timber payment system the current payments would be based on 2003 timber sales which are historical and have nothing to do with what is "in the pipeline". Nevertheless, it is very unlikely that they would be as high as the guaranteed payments. I should also point out that even if they do exceed fixed payments in a given year there is no guarantee that they will continue at that high pace in the future - indeed that is even more unlikely since market values and logging levels always have and always will fluctuate. Which is why guaranteed payments always made more sense that the antiquated timber payment system.
Posted by jkleissler at 05:55 PM | Comments (0)
Industry Spokesman warns of too many trees!
Jack Hedlund, executive director for the Allegheny Forest Alliance (AFA) is at it again -- warning the public that, yes, there are trees in the forest. The following is his letter to the editor that appeared in the Oil City Derrick on March 2:
At a recent meeting with Allegheny National Forest leadership, much time was spent attempting to legitimize reasons why the July windthrow clean-up would be stretched over three years and would be limited in scope.An astute and concerned professional forester raised his hand and asked whether any attempt would be made to determine the value lost by these management decisions. Most in attendance agreed it was a legitimate question that deserved a creditable response.
Given the sea of red ink in which our government is swimming, you would think every effort would be made in all quarters of the government, including the United States Forest Service, to pay down the deficit. But, the windthrow issue is another case in point where federal bureaucracy prevents an expeditious response and politicians exhibit indifference toward the situation as well as potential solutions.
Perhaps even more glaring is the inventory situation. The ANF is currently overstocked with mature trees (close to 60 percent) desperately needing attention if for no other reason than sustainability and forest health. In addition, this national forest, unlike nearly all others in the system, is capable of turning a profit each and every year through appropriate management.
It is painfully clear the bureaucratic system from top down and the politicians from both sides of the aisle would rather tax or go further into debt than ambitiously seek ways to use the resources at their disposal to correct the problem.
Posted by Ryan at 03:52 PM | Comments (2)