GROUPS URGE U.S. FOREST SERVICE TO "DO BETTER"
Conservationists say future of forests must emphasize land protection
MINNEAPOLIS, Aug. 27 - Conservation groups today urged the U.S. Forest Service to "do better" and abandon plans that would increase logging and motorized recreation on the Superior and Chippewa National Forests, arguing that greater emphasis should be placed on protecting these dwindling wild lands. The groups shared their concerns as part of the public comment period on the proposed management plans for both Minnesota forests. 22 conservation groups sent a letter to the U.S. Forest Service, as well as submitting individual comments by numerous groups urging changes to the draft plan.
"The U.S. Forest Service proposal permits too much logging, too much motorized recreation, and not enough conservation in the Superior and Chippewa National Forests," said Susan Solterman, policy director of Minnesota Audubon. "It is deeply troubling that the Forest Service considers revenue generation from these treasured lands more important than resource protection."
Representatives from Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, American Lands Alliance, and Sierra Club North Star Chapter joined Minnesota Audubon at the press conference.
Once approved, the 15-year management plans will guide everything from habitat preservation and recreation, to timber sales on the two national forests, which cover 2.8 million acres in northern Minnesota. The U.S. Forest Service will accept public comments on the plans until Sept. 11.
Conservationists say the Forest Service can do a better job of protecting public lands. The groups fault the plans for promoting off-highway vehicle and motorboat recreation at the expense of land and water protection. The management plans offer no strategy for addressing the likely harm to be caused by an influx of such activity.
"Biological diversity is the greatest asset of our national forests, and therefore these areas should not be managed like tree farms," said Lois Norrgard, organizer for American Lands Alliance. "The Forest Service's plan pays lip service to this diversity and delays the recovery of some of the most vital forest habitat for the lynx, wolf, eagle and other raptors, and migratory songbirds."
Environmentalists praised the agency for using modern measures of forest health and for comparing management plan alternatives to natural forest conditions once found in Minnesota's forests, when there was a greater balance between the various trees and cover type in the areas now known as Superior and Chippewa National Forests. The commitment falls short though, as the Forest Service plan fails to restore the areas' former natural diversity.
"We expect state-of-the-art resource management in Minnesota, and this plan just doesn't deliver," said Matt Norton, a forester for the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. "We now have the ability to design logging plans to mimic natural events such as fire and wind, so by logging smarter we can actually improve the health of our forests. This plan, however, increases logging at the expense of forest health."
Conservationists also criticized the agency for failing to recommend greater protection of roadless areas in the forests. While Superior National Forest had no land recommended for wilderness, the preferred plan for Wisconsin national forests includes 15,000 acres of wilderness designation. A study released in June noted that almost 90,000 acres in Superior National Forest are suitable for wilderness designation.
"With the demand to recreate in wild places like the Boundary Waters, one would expect the Forest Service to recommend some federal land as wilderness," said Melissa Lindsay, executive director of Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness. "But the agency ignored its own studies showing growing demand for wildland recreation and protection."
"Recreation has a much bigger economic impact than logging," said Clyde Hanson, Sierra Club North Star Chapter Conservation Chair. "We expect the final plan will add a full and fair economic analysis."
Environmental groups have generated thousands of substantive comments from the public in response to the plans. They hope that these remarks will shape the Forest Service's final plans, which should be released next year. The federal agency last revised management plans for Superior and Chippewa National Forests in 1986.
"Everyone who loves Minnesota's national forests - hikers, canoeists, hunters, anglers, birdwatchers and campers - are urged to tell the Forest Service that these special places must be protected," said Solterman of Minnesota Audubon. "The comment period is the public's chance to shape the direction of our national forests and we can't afford to sit idle during this rare opportunity."
For more information and to submit comments, go to www.northstar.sierraclub.org/forests or to www.superiornationalforest.org. To view the letter from 22 Minnesota conservation groups commenting on the forest plans, go to the Minnesota Environmental Partnership website at www.MEPartnership.org.