Snog Timber Sale

Update: 7/11/02

Update: 1/11/2001

Unit 11 Tree with Tree-Sitters isolated in a clearcut. (Tree is now dead and at the mill).

The Umpqua National Forest issued a press release this morning concerning the Snog Timber Sale in the Diamond Lake Ranger District. We have won a partial victory and are very pleased that part of Snog, 55 out of 180 acres, has been spared the ax. The Forest Service decided that clearcutting in four units (units 1, 2, 4,7) "held a risk of adversely impacting the health" of the watershed, but clearcutting the remaining six units does not risk the health of the watershed. Those of us who have hiked to unit 2 know firsthand what a spectacular forest has been saved (for now). But we also know what a spectacular forest has been lost. Since early last summer, two tree-sit protests have worked to save Snog, one in unit 2 and one in unit 11. Unfortunately, at the same time the Forest Service was making deals to spare unit 2, they plowed the road of snow into unit 11, re-started loggers' contract time, and had the remaining trees cut down -- the trees that were the protective buffer around the tree-sit (see picture on left). The trees were quickly cut and just left on top of the snow. The loggers left and the Forest Service stopped their contract-time for the rest of the winter. Now, that was sneaky. The snow continues to fall, covering the bodies of the ancient trees that, after 500+ years of sheltering nesting birds, will never see another spring on the Umpqua. The entire sale is 10 units totaling 180 acres. Last summer, about 50 acres were clearcut. Another 55 acres have just been withdrawn. The Forest Service allowed about 5 more acres clearcut this winter. That leaves 70 acres of the sale still at risk of being clearcut this coming summer.

The purchaser of Snog (Huffman-Wright) had earlier stated they would like the entire timber sale withdrawn because it was uneconomical for them to log it, but the Forest Service refused and forced them to begin logging last summer. Also, this past September the Forest Service allowed 12 acres of reserved, protected old-growth to be accidentally clearcut in Snog's adjoining sister sale, Pinestrip.

Considering the reluctance of the purchaser to log any of Snog, the mistake that happened at Pinestrip and the acknowledgement that clearcutting Snog is hurting the watershed, the Umpqua National Forest should withdraw the entire timber sale -- not just 30% of it.

In January 2001, the Forest Service in Washington, D.C. stated that old-growth forests are in need of additional protections but will wait years to act on this. Snog can't wait for years. All of our remaining old-growth forests must be saved, and the Forest Service has the opportunity to withdraw all of Snog now.

The Forest Service's press release follows in its entirety:

Umpqua National Forest
For Immediate Release January 11, 2001
For more information contact: Cheryl Walters, 541-957-3259, Rick Golden, 541-498-2531, Hap Huffman, 541-839-4251.

Roseburg, OR – Officials with the Umpqua National Forest and Huffman and Wright Timber Corporation have mutually agreed to remove four units in the 9.3 million-board-foot Snog Timber Sale on the Diamond Lake Ranger District.

According to Umpqua National Forest Supervisor Don Ostby, the decision to withdraw the units was prompted by a review of new information he received from biologists working on the Umpqua National Forest and a watershed analysis completed since the sale was originally sold.

"Harvesting those four units held a risk of adversely impacting the health of the Rough Creek watershed," said Ostby. "After hearing professional advice from my biologists and reviewing associated information, I am unwilling to take that risk. I appreciate Hap's willingness to cooperate in this matter for the protection of public resources."

"The Forest Service did a more than adequate job of laying out the sale. I believe that all interests were protected," said Hap Huffman with Huffman and Wright Timber Corporation. "In the interest of cooperation, I am willing to relinquish these units and do what is best for all concerned."

The four areas involved in the decision, units 1, 2, 4 and 7, comprise 55.7 acres and an estimated 2.3 million board feet. Withdrawing the four units was done through contract modification. This action was one of approximately eight contract modifications completed on the Umpqua National Forest in the past year.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/umpqua

8/7/2000

Snog Timber Sale
Diamond Lake Ranger District
Garwood Butte Roadless Area

Logging Begins Today even though
Purchaser Wants Sale Cancelled

The Snog timber sale is over 180 acres of clearcuts in Fish Creek and Watson Creek (above Watson Falls), tributaries of the North Umpqua River. Four of the Snog units are located along the roaded edge within the Garwood Butte 3,000 acre Roadless Area

Huffman and Wright Logging Company purchased the sale 5 years ago but just began logging today after the Forest Service refused their request to cancel the timber sale. Because of depressed market conditions for timber, it is uneconomical for Huffman and Wright to log it, but the Forest Service threatened to penalize Huffman and Wright if they did not begin immediately.

If the sale is not cancelled before they are finished, 1,850 log truck loads of old-growth (9.25 mmbf) will go down the highway, at a loss to the timber industry and the environment.

We support Huffman and Wright's request to cancel the Snog timber sale. The Forest Service has absolutely no good reason to refuse their request. In Snog's Environmental Analysis, the Forest Service stated the "purpose and need" for the sale was to contribute to the economic stability of local communities. If the sale is uneconomical to log, the Forest Service is undermining their entire reason for selling public forests in the first place.

More importantly is the environmental damage that will be caused by logging Snog. The Umpqua National Forest's own study, Fish Creek Watershed Analysis, recommended that no further canopy openings should occur in Rough Creek, a tributary to Fish Creek and the North Umpqua River. Snog timber sale, in Rough Creek, will clearcut 180 acres of old growth forests, in spite of the findings to: "Avoid regeneration harvest within... Rough Creek drainages for the next decade, since these types of activities would further reduce the hydrologic recovery of these areas by creating additional openings in the forest canopy. Further decreases in hydrologic recovery are likely to further aggravate channel instability in those drainages."

Even the Umpqua National Forest's fisheries biologist strongly objected to Snog, saying it did not comply with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan. In June, 1995 he wrote to his superior: "the professional and scientific basis for this decision is grossly inadequate and unsupported by any data, documentation, literature, or inventory."

Clearly, since this sale will contribute to the channel instability in the headwaters of the North Umpqua River, as well as economic hardship to the purchasers, the Forest Service should immediately cancel this sale. But the Umpqua National Forest seems determined to have this forest clearcut, in spite of requests from the purchaser and environmentalists, and in spite of the scientific conclusions that the sale is harmful to the environment.

On Monday, attorneys for Huffman and Wright wrote to Harv Forsgren, Regional Forester: "The local forest has shown no interest in either cancellation or deferral of the harvest. The company has began harvest today and it is clear that the forest has no interest in preventing harvest or sale. However, the company remains interested in cancellation." In the ensuing three days, the Forest Service has been silent on why they are forcing the company to log.


Update: 8/31/00

More Problems:

Besides contributing to channel instability, Snog is breaking the law in other ways. For instance, the Umpqua National Forest is cutting the largest old-growth trees illegally. The Northwest Forest Plan requires the "dispersed retention" (uncut trees scattered within the clearcut) to "include the largest, oldest live trees... in the unit". (C-42). John Ouimet, Diamond Lake District Ranger, has said that 4 out of 5 of the biggest old-growth trees in unit 2 are marked for cutting. He also said he realizes this is "a problem" with what the law requires.

For instance, in unit 2 there is a 6-foot diameter tree marked for cutting that is just a few feet away from a 4-foot tree marked for retention. I asked the Forest Service why the larger tree wasn't saved, as the law requires. Their answer was that the law only requires the largest trees be saved "when possible". They said it was not possible to save any of the old growth trees inside of unit 2 because of "logging systems, or something" -- even the old-growth just a few feet away from a smaller tree that somehow won't interfere with logging systems. The Forest Service refused to discuss the matter further. (Conversation with Terry Brumbly, Umpqua NF Supervisors Office, 8/31/00).

In unit 11, I saw one of the biggest and oldest trees already cut and laying on the ground (see picture, right). The Forest Service illegally marked for cutting all the biggest trees. This tree was 550 years old.


More Details:

In 1995 Umpqua National Forest fisheries biologists objected to this slaughter of Fish Creek. Fish Creek has been habitat for steelhead, coho, and cutthroat trout, (temporary blocked by Soda Springs Dam which could be removed in the near future). Snog, along with three other 1995 sales in Fish Creek: Pinestrip, Roughneck, and Watchdog, were the basis of a law suit challenging the salvage logging rider. We lost. On December 6th, 1995, Judge Hogan ruled that the logging rider bars environmental challenges to public timber sales, thereby giving the Umpqua National Forest supervisor complete discretion, insofar as environmental laws are concerned.

Fish Creek Watershed Analysis.

In May of 1999, the Umpqua National Forest did a Watershed Analysis for the entire Fish Creek. It backed up what the fisheries biologist had been saying all along -- Snog is not consistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, which forbids agencies from further degrading watersheds. Snog is located in Rough Creek/Dog Prairie subwatersheds of Fish Creek. (Picture on right: Dog Prairie Creek next to Unit 2). The agencies own analysis found that "Areas within the watershed where regeneration harvest may not be consistent with ACS objectives include the Rough Creek... Dog Prairie Creek drainages.... Recommendations: Do no regeneration harvest in the Rough Creek, Clear Creek, and Dog Prairie Creek drainages for the next decade." (page 171)

But Snog will clearcut (regeneration harvest) 180+ acres now, this year, not in 10 years. The watershed analysis says on page 160: "...regeneration harvest should not occur within the Clear Creek, Dog Prairie Creek, Lower Rough Creek, and upper Rough Creek Subwatersheds within the next decade (2000-2010), due to hydrological and fisheries concerns over degraded stream habitat."

The streams effected by Snog are already "degraded stream habitat", and Snog will degrade them further by clearcutting above them. Again, the watershed analysis says, "Avoid regeneration harvest and new road construction within the Clear Creek and Rough Creek drainages for the next decade, since these types of activities would further reduce the hydrologic recovery of these areas by creating additional openings in the forest canopy. Further decreases in hydrologic recovery are likely to further aggravate channel instability in those drainages." (page 162)

The Forest Service admits that the clearcuts of Snog will further aggravate channel instability by creating additional openings in the forest canopy. So why are they going to clearcut it anyway? Because they can. The salvage logging rider suspended all environmental laws.

Watershed Analysis states that "Anecdotal records from the 1920s to 1940s indicate that Fish Creek provided some of the best fishing of all North Umpqua River tributaries." (page 137)

The Fish Biologists

The Forest Service's fisheries biologist concluded in the Biological Evaluations for Snog (and the three other sales in Fish Creek) that there will be a "moderate to high consequence" of adverse effects to aquatic resources as a result of the proposed timber sales for at least four identifiable reasons: (1) channel morphology; (2) water quality; (3) sediment regime; and, (4) flow regime. They state that the proposed timber sales have a "high probability" of causing low-flow channel widening, reducing habitat quality through channel simplification, pool filling, causing an increase in chronic and acute inputs of fine sediment and an increase in sediment loading generally, and causing a adverse changes in the flow regimes of the affected streams. In addition, the sales have a "moderate probability" of increasing water temperature, elevating pH, and increasing water turbidity.

In June, 1995 the Umpqua National Forest fisheries biologist wrote to his superior: "the professional and scientific basis for this decision [the timber sales] is grossly inadequate and unsupported by any data, documentation, literature, or inventory. The entire basis rests on professional judgement, a judgement that was rendered by an unknown person with (I assume) no professional standing to make such a judgment and for which there is no supporting documentation."

So why did the Forest Service supervisors ignore their own experts and sell Snog anyway? Because they could. The salvage logging rider suspended all environmental laws.

On August 27, 1997, the Forest Service fisheries biologist summarized these sales in Fish Creek: "Available evidence suggests that the Fish Creek watershed is substantially altered and may not be attaining the Desired Conditions for aquatic resources (Fish Creek BE, Forest Plan Monitoring, Upper Fish Creek WA). .... The proposed action [Snog] is not expected to have substantial direct adverse effects to fish or fish habitat, however, continued adverse cumulative effects are likely. Additionally, recovery may be retarded. Overall, this action will further degrade some aspects of the affected sub-watersheds and cumulatively add to the degraded conditions described for the Fish Creek basin. As a result, it will retard or prevent attainment of ACS objectives and therefore appears to be inconsistent with the ACS."

Update: 9/12/00

Currently there are two tree-sits protesting the Snog timber sale, one in unit 2 and one in unit 11. Since unit 11 is being actively logged right now, the Forest Service has put on a "closure," barring the public from access to unit 11 (only) and 450 feet around the unit. The loggers are reportedly not cutting trees to within 300 feet of the tree-sit. The loggers had reported some vandalism in unit 11, but the police report contains considerable less damage then reported in the newspaper. The tree protectors have denied doing any property damage, stating they are non-violent and respectful to all people and property. They say cutting down old-growth forests is the only disrespectful violent act currently being committed.

The tree-sit in unit 2 is not in a closed area. It is legal to visit there and go on a beautiful walk through Dog Prairie, across Dog Prairie Creek, and through a magnificent old-growth forest to the 200-foot tall, six-foot diameter Douglas Fir tree with the sitter's platform 140 feet up the tree.

Both the tree sit in unit 11 and in unit 2 are in some of the largest and oldest trees within the proposed clearcuts. The Forest Service was supposed to have "retained" these trees. The tree-sitters could just be helping the Forest Service follow the law.

Update: 10/26/00

Another biologist comes out against Snog

On the heels of the Forest Service admitting they accidentally clearcut the riparian reserves of the Pinestrip timber sale, new information has shown they are finding even more errors in Snog, a sister sale to Pinestrip, in the same watershed and linked by a 1995 lawsuit we lost due to the salvage logging rider.

Tree-sitters are currently holding off logging in two units of Snog, unit 11 and 2. The purchaser has told the Forest Service they want out of their contract due to falling timber prices.

Twice before, once in 1995 and once in 1999, federal fisheries biologists have claimed that clearcutting Snog would violate the Northwest Forest Plan.

Now, another biologist has stepped forward. On September 13, 2000, Richard Golden, Fisheries Biologist for the Diamond Lake Ranger District of the Umpqua National Forest, wrote to his superiors:

"...clearly the regeneration harvest units in the Dog Prairie Creek portion of the Snog sale are inconsistent with the Fish Creek WA [1999 Watershed Analysis], as was the Dog Prairie DEMO sale that immediately preceded it. It is my understanding that, for different reasons, both of these sales are legal. However, the Rough Creek and Fish Creek stream channels are indifferent to legal issues, and we are in fact continuing to degrade conditions in these watersheds. This is in direct contradiction to most of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives listed on page B-11 of the NWFP ROD [Northwest Forest Plan]. Therefore, based on the Dog Prairie Creek units, it would not be possible to find the Snog timber sale consistent with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, and thus the NWFP. Consideration of these facts puts me at odds with the apparent Forest position that cancellation of the Snog units in Dog Prairie Creek, and/or re-initiating NEPA are not justified or worth consideration.

"The reason that I am bringing up these issues is merely to point out that if I personally am questioned on these issues, that my responses, which I believe are the accurate and appropriate, would not be consistent with the apparent Forest position."

In light of this new information, coming right after the Forest Service admitted they mistakenly cut the Riparian Reserves of Pinestrip, in the same watershed, clearly means the Forest Service should modify the Snog timber sale to drop all uncut units.

John Ouimet, Diamond Lake District Ranger, told me this morning that since the Pinestrip stream-side protection buffers have already been accidentally clearcut, "There's nothing we can do about it now." This uncaring attitude is a mockery of our environmental laws. Clearly there IS something they can do now. They can cancel all uncut units in the Snog timber sale.

But in spite of even the requests from the loggers, the Umpqua National Forest is insistent on clearcutting as much old-growth in Fish Creek as fast as they can -- legal or illegal. They are playing a "catch-me-if-you-can" game. If we don’t catch illegal riparian cutting before it happens, the Forest Service knows they are sheltered by the Logging Rider.

People to call, if you’re so inclined:
Region 6 Director of Natural Resources, Ron Escano. 503-808-2955
Jim Caplan, Umpqua National Forest Supervisor. 541-672-6601