Thunder Fire Threats

image
Fire mosaics.

Final Reports (PDF)

Links:

Related pages:

Initial efforts on fire recovery from the Forest Service considered educational use, however, with the passage of the Gorton salvage rider (the Logging without Laws legislation) emphasis turned exclusively towards logging. Salvage means to save from loss or destruction. Since this fire created wildlife habitat rather than destroyed it, salvage would seem unnecessary. Furthermore, the fire created a mixed forest mosaic likely to be less susceptible to future insect epidemics. The only reason to salvage in the Thunder Mountain Fire area is for an excuse to put roads into a unique roadless area. Although timber production is allowed here under the Forest Plan (this Plan is still under appeal, by the way) the primary management directive is for preserving lynx habitat. On our first winter survey into the burn, we found 4 individual sets of lynx tracks, all in high intensity burn areas. It would seem that the natural processes have already fulfilled the management directive for the Meadows. Would we improve it by creating unnatural openings, providing more human access on roads, and potentially degrading stream and riparian areas already temporarily compromised by this natural event?

An Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the Thunder Mountain Fire, which received a "Caring for the Land Award" from the Regional Office. Logging of the area began in mid June, 1996. Within the first month of logging, it became apparent that the Landscape Treatment Unit Design Criteria for which the award was given, had not been implemented on the ground. This design criteria specified that buffers would be applied around all seeps, bogs, wetlands and riparian areas, that corridors and reserves would be maintained in each unit, that the 5 largest trees/40 acres would be retained, that logging would not occur on slopes less than 15% or greater than 40%. The stumps, some greater than 35" diameter, present on flat benches and adjacent to wetlands and riparian area are testimony to the lack of compliance with these specifications.

In essence, this means that there is no guarantee that the principles set forth in an Environmental Impact Statement will actually be implemented on the ground. This is an arrogant attack on the public involvement process and under normal circumstances would seem also to be illegal. We are, however, operating under the reign of the Gorton salvage rider and so access to the legal system is curtailed. Several environmental groups including the Methow Forest Watch, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, Sierra Club and the Kettle Range Conservation Group filed for a temporary restraining order. An out of court settlement was reached that required the Forest Service to adequately mark riparian buffers and trees to be retained in the remaining unlogged units. This was done on August 13,1996. However, the additional volume lost to the purchaser because the units were marked according to specifications will have to come from somewhere else.

Thunder was one of 2 sales prepared following the Thunder Mountain fire. The other sale, Dog, was offered in October, 1995 but was not sold. This sale is by far the worse of the 2 sales. Under the Glickman directive, this sale should be withdrawn, because it is in a roadless area and because these trees are not "immeninently susceptible to fire". Write to the people listed below and request that Dog be officially withdrawn as a salvage sale.

The issues discussed above concerning the Thunder Mountain fire are of national concern. First, the unique values of our remaining roadless areas are consistently overlooked in favor of logging (for a bid of $29,000 in this case). This area is priceless for the habitat that it offers. The educational value of Thunder Mountain fire is also without measure. My good friend, Marty Walter, has said, in regard to the wholesale devastation of native forests, that we are destroying the libraries before we've read the books. In this case, I would add that we don't even know what the titles of those books are. A second point of general concern is the arrogant disregard of the Forest Service for the specifics of their own EIS.