***********************************************
WORLDWIDE
FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS
National
Monument for Giant Sequoias Recommended
***********************************************
Forest Networking a Project of Forests.org
http://forests.org/ -- Forest
Conservation Archives
http://forests.org/web/ -- Discuss Forest
Conservation
04/07/00
OVERVIEW
& COMMENTARY
President
Clinton is soon to determine whether to establish a 355,000
acre
national monument to protect Giant Sequoia groves in California.
If
indeed the action is taken, it is both admirable in terms of
recognizing
that forests are sustained over large spatial scales, and
lacking
in understanding the nature of disturbance in maintaining
forest
pattern and process. The policy
acknowledges that survival of
individual
trees and groves is "very much affected by what happens on
the
surrounding forest. Logging or nearby development can profoundly
affect
water quality in the groves and threaten the long-term
survival
of these rare trees." Forest
sustainability requires
managing
for the context, and this appears to have been embraced.
However,
disturbingly, mechanical thinning (read my lips: logging) is
not
ruled out when prescribed burns are far more ecologically
appropriate
for maintaining sequoias and their plant associations.
Fire is
part of the ecology of many types of forests and their
Species,
and overly stated threats of forest fires must not be used as
an
excuse for industrial forest activities in intact, large forests
that
possess outstanding biodiversity and ecosystem values. Let the
sequoias
be.
g.b.
*******************************
RELAYED
TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: Glickman Recommends National Monument for
Giant Sequoias
Source: Environment News Service
Status: Copyright 2000, contact source for
permission to reprint
Date: April 7, 2000
Byline: Cat Lazaroff
WASHINGTON,
DC, April 7, 2000 (ENS) - Agriculture Secretary Dan
Glickman
announced today that he is recommending that President
Clinton
establish a 355,000 acre national monument to protect Giant
Sequoia
groves in the Sequoia National Forest in California. The
proposal
is likely to draw opposition from some members of Congress,
and has
already drawn criticism from environmental groups.
"Ancestors
of the Giant Sequoias once grew as far east as Colorado
and
Wyoming; now these precious trees are only found on the west
slope
of the Sierra Nevadas," said Glickman. "To ensure the permanent
survival
of these ancient giants we must provide them with permanent
protection."
In
February, President Bill Clinton asked Glickman to explore whether
the
trees ought to be protected as a National Monument under the 1906
Antiquities
Act. Clinton may use his executive authority under the
Act to
create a National Monument without Congressional review, as he
did in
January when he created two new monuments in Arizona and one
in
California.
Glickman
said that a careful review of scientific data and other
information
has led him to believe that the groves warrant permanent
protection
as a U.S. Forest Service (USFS) national monument. While
there
are some existing protections for Giant Sequoias, no such
protections
exist for the surrounding sub-watersheds on which these
trees
depend, or in areas where the risk of fire to Sequoia groves
must be
controlled.
"Despite
their tremendous size, giant sequoias are vulnerable,"
Glickman
said. "They are very much affected by what happens on the
surrounding
forest. Logging or nearby development can profoundly
affect
water quality in the groves and threaten the long-term
survival
of these rare trees."
In
formulating his recommendation, Glickman said that he kept in
mind
the concerns and potential impacts on those within forest
dependent
communities near the Sequoia National Forest. To that end,
the
Secretary included a number of specific recommendations, in the
event
the President chooses to designate a Giant Sequoia monument.
Glickman
recommended that the USFS continue to manage the monument
as part
of the Sequoia National Forest. A science advisory panel
would
be created to assist in development of a management plan for
the
monument. This would allow the best science to guide the
appropriate
choice and mix of ecological management actions,
including
mechanical treatment, prescribed burning, and other
techniques
necessary to protect the giant sequoia groves from
catastrophic
fire and other threats.
Management
prescriptions to protect the giant sequoia groves and
other
objects protected by the monument would thus be based on the
best
available science, thereby addressing a major concern raised by
several
members of Congress, the California Forestry Association and
local
residents.
All
land within the boundaries of the monument would be removed from
the
commercial timber base under Glickman's plan. Previously sold
timber
sales would continue, as would timber sales that have a
signed
decision notice prior to January 1, 2000. This would provide
a two
and a half year transition timber supply under the new
monument
designation without adversely affecting the Giant Sequoias.
Glickman
said current grazing and special use permits should remain
valid,
and would likely be renewed through normal permit processes,
subject
to otherwise applicable laws and regulations governing land
use.
All other valid, pre-existing rights, including the access
rights
of private inholders, would also be preserved.
The
management plan would require continued public and recreational
access
for hunting, fishing, camping, and certain other activities.
Existing
camps (for instance, the Camp Whittsett Boy Scout Camp and
Pyles
Boys Camp) would likely continue to operate, subject to normal
permit
processes. Other facilities, such as Hume Lake Christian
Camp,
which are located on private land within the proposed monument
would
be unaffected by a monument designation.
In
addition, if the monument were created, Glickman said he would
direct
the USFS to increase and enhance educational opportunities
within
the monument.
The
Secretary's recommendation was based on information gathered by
a team
of career federal employees, including members from the
Sequoia
National Forest, Washington Office staff, as well as U.S
Geological
Sruvey Biological Resources Division, the Bureau of Land
Management
and National Park Service within the Department of
Interior.
They conducted an intensive review of available scientific
and
other information, such as historical texts and environmental
documentation
prepared for previous federal actions within the area.
The
team gathered extensive public comment from two public meetings
held in
the Visalia and Fresno, California, and in consultation with
the
State, members of the California congressional delegation, local
governments
and the Tule River Tribal Council.
The
President will review the Secretary's recommendation and
determine
whether to use his executive authority to establish a
Giant
Sequoia monument.
On
Wednesday, the House Resources Committee passed a bill which
could
delay any action to create the new monument. The Giant Sequoia
Groves
Protection Act (H.R. 4021) would initiate an 18 month study
by the
National Academy of Sciences into protections for giant
sequoia
trees in California.
"I
strenuously oppose a Sequoia National Monument designation
because
it could do more harm than good," said California
Representative
George Radanovich, a Republican, in testimony before
the
committee. Radanovich was among those who said placing the
sequoia
groves and the surrounding forest off limits to logging
would
increase the amount of flammable materials in the region,
increasing
the risk of forest fires.
"The
President claims we need to 'protect these trees.' But far from
protecting
these trees, the Clinton/Gore monument may actually
increase
risks by limiting management tools for reducing these
hazards
around the groves," said Radanovich. "A catastrophic fire,
that
kills the trees and sterilizes the ground, or a bug infestation
that
wipes out entire groves, could destroy these groves forever."
But the
Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group,
said
Glickman's proposal does not go far enough to reduce logging.
The
proposal would permit an advisory committee to allow
non-commercial
logging "under the guise of so called forest health,"
said
NRDC in a statement today.
"The
kind of forest health logging that's been done in the past is
actually
a mechanical thinning process that shears whole swaths of
forest
land," said NRDC attorney Andrew Wetzler. "Mechanical
thinning
is commercial logging in everything but name. The trees are
cut and
sold by the timber industry. All the Forest Service has done
is to
open the door for the timber industry to drive its trucks
through."
In
Sequoia National Park, adjacent to the land proposed as a
National
Monument, the National Park Service has used controlled
burns
rather than mechanical logging to reduce the risk of
catastrophic
forest fires. Healthy giant sequoia trees depend on
fire to
clear out competing underbrush, and sequoia cones release
their
seeds only when activated by a forest fire's heat.
"The
final step to granting giant sequoias full protection is to
select
an appropriately qualified scientific panel to determine how
to
allow the natural process of fire to shape these forests," said
Carl
Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club. "We urge the panel
be
built on the experience at the National Park Service, which has
demonstrated
its ability to create an appropriate fire environment
using
controlled burning without relying on logging."
###RELAYED
TEXT ENDS###
This
document is a PHOTOCOPY for educational, personal and non-
commercial
use only. Recipients should seek
permission from the
source
for reprinting. All efforts are made to
provide accurate,
timely
pieces; though ultimate responsibility for verifying all
information
rests with the reader. Check out our
Gaia's Forest
Conservation
Archives & Portal at URL= http://forests.org/
Networked
by Forests.org, Inc., gbarry@forests.org