A coalition of groups are criticizing plans for managing about 4 million acres of national forest lands in Idaho and Montana.
Conservation groups in the region, as well as the Nez Perce Tribe, have submitted their objections to the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests Land Management Plan from the U.S. Forest Service.
Nick Gevock, Northern Rockies field organizer for the Sierra Club, said the plan would expand the land available for clear-cutting.
"This is really a debate about the highest and best use of these lands," Gevock explained. "This would degrade hundreds of thousands of acres of prime wildlife habitat."
Gevock noted hunting and angling groups have also expressed criticism about the plan because of its effects on wildlife. The Forest Service said the focus on timber harvest is to reduce fuel for wildfires in the forest. The agency is processing feedback and expected to finalize its plan this summer.
Jeff Juel, forest policy director for Friends of the Clearwater, said harvesting more of the forest will exacerbate climate change, taking away trees that naturally sequester carbon. He argued it would also harm endangered species in the region.
"Take for example species that are on the Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests," Juel outlined. "The wolverine, the Canada lynx, Chinook salmon, steelhead and grizzly bears, which are slowly trying to make their way back from adjacent areas, especially in Montana and farther north in Idaho."
Gevock added the coalition is concerned, considering the plan will drive management in the region for the next 20 to 30 years.
"It's a really diverse group just coming out and saying this type of management plan is not acceptable in 2024," Gevock stressed. "We need to more thoroughly consider the needs of wildlife and the people who love wildlife."
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
The Mississippi River is the drinking water source for 20 million people and its starting point in northern Minnesota has new protections following completion of a deal to preserve several thousand acres of forested land.
The Conservation Fund and Northern Waters Land Trust said the deal, years in the making, covers more 8,200 acres across nine counties between Walker and Duluth.
Emilee Nelson, associate Minnesota state director for The Conservation Fund, said her group purchased a larger chunk of land in 2020 and since then, the Land Trust worked to secure state funding for the acreage in the deal. She pointed out downstream, the river has seen surrounding land converted to other uses, which takes away key buffers.
"The importance of leaving forests on the landscape really helps to soak up water that hits the landscape like a sponge," Nelson explained. "It helps to filter any sort of debris before it hits the Mississippi River."
Separate plans are being finalized with county governments to ensure permanent management and public access to the lands. Nelson emphasized it should benefit hunters and anglers, while protecting wildlife habitat. She added the timing is important with political pressure on the landscapes for possible industrial uses. Rep. Pete Stauber, R-Minn., is part of the push, citing the need for jobs.
Nelson pointed out with such a deal, local timber companies can still benefit from effective forest management, including the need to clear out dying trees.
"When we own it, we would contract with local loggers to help do prescribed thinnings, and to then deliver lumber to local mills, like in Bemidji," Nelson noted.
Organizations involved in the deal said it will protect jobs in the outdoor recreation and tourism sector.
Disclosure: The Conservation Fund contributes to our fund for reporting on Environment, Hunger/Food/Nutrition, Public Lands/Wilderness, and Sustainable Agriculture. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Access to the beloved Pacific Crest Trail may soon be limited - due to a drop in federal grants and big layoffs proposed for federal public lands agencies.
In the next two weeks, the Trump administration is expected to release the reduction-in-force targets for the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
Megan Wargo, chief executive officer of the Pacific Crest Trail Association, said federal grant money dried up last October, so they've had to cancel 56 weeks of crew maintenance work on the trails.
"If large sections of the trails are forced to be closed because of this lack of maintenance and care, that's devastating that folks won't be able to access their public lands because of these cuts," she explained.
Volunteers help keep the trails clear of debris and repair erosion from storm damage. The Pacific Crest Trail runs more than 2,600 hundred miles from Mexico to Canada and includes landscapes from Anza Borrego in the South, to Sequoia, Kings Canyon, and Lake Tahoe in the Sierras, and points north.
Wargo said the National Trails System Act calls for a public-private partnership to manage the national scenic trails. The Pacific Crest Trail Association normally gets between $667 million per year in federal funding - about a quarter of what it needs to help maintain the PCT.
"Typically, that breakdown is about 25% value that's coming from the federal government, while the other 75% is coming through private donations and that volunteer service hour value," she continued.
Wargo added that cuts to the federal workforce hobble agencies' abilities to make grants and approve volunteer projects. And that means less brush gets cleared, raising the risk of wildfires in California.
get more stories like this via email
April is National Native Plant Month, an observance at the core of South Dakota's identity.
People wanting to protect the state's beloved grasslands encourage landowners in urban and rural areas to set aside growing space. South Dakota's prairies often conjure up images of species like tallgrass, which have deep roots good at absorbing water. But some varieties have not fared as well because of different types of land use. The World Wildlife Fund said only 53% of the Great Plains region's grassland remains intact.
Drew Anderson, a farmer, rancher and conservation advocate from Lemmon, conserves native plants, noting every little bit helps, and they do not have to just grow in rural settings.
"There's just a growing appreciation for the native grasslands that are making their way into urban areas," Anderson pointed out. "People are using big bluestem in front of commercial buildings and places like that."
The desire is reflected in a recent ad campaign from the South Dakota Grasslands Coalition and statewide polling. In a survey commissioned by the group, there was broad bipartisan support among voters to prioritize effective grassland management. Anderson added patience is a challenge they are up against because it can take a year or two to see real evidence of native plant growth.
Anderson added it is not just livestock grazing standing to benefit from an abundance of grasslands.
"The grasses help provide habitat for many different wildlife species, whether it's migratory songbirds (or) pollinators," Anderson emphasized.
If you want to grow some native plants on your property but are unsure how to get started, Anderson recommended visiting your local Natural Resources Conservation Service office. The Grasslands Coalition also has guidance and other key information on its website.
Disclosure: The South Dakota Grassland Coalition contributes to our fund for reporting on Endangered Species and Wildlife, Environment, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email