[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_empty_space][vc_column_text]

Drilling Approved Near Mount St. Helens

[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space][vc_column_text]FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 3, 2018
CONTACTS:
Nicole Budine, Policy and Campaign Manager, Cascade Forest Conservancy, 607-735-3753
Matt Little, Executive Director, Cascade Forest Conservancy, 541-678-2322
Tom Buchele, Managing Attorney, Earthrise Law Center, 503-768-6736

Drilling Approved Near Mount St. Helens
Conservation and Recreation Groups Oppose Due to Impacts on Fish, Water Quality and Recreation.

Portland, OR – On December 3, 2018, the Bureau of Land Management granted permits to conduct exploratory drilling in the Green River valley, just outside the Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument. The Forest Service issued a similar decision consenting to drilling on these lands in February 2018. A coalition of over 20 conservation and recreation groups opposes the project, claiming mining exploration and development will destroy recreational opportunities in the area, significantly harm wild steelhead populations in the Green River, and pollute the water supply of downstream communities.
“Tens of thousands of people have expressed opposition to this dangerous mining proposal that would impact one of our most treasured National Monuments,” said Matt Little, Executive Director of the Cascade Forest Conservancy. “Approving mining activities along a pristine river that is in the shadow of an active volcano is absurd. We will work with downstream communities, backcountry recreationists, and local concerned citizens to protect this treasured river valley for future generations.”
The drilling permits allow Ascot Resources Ltd., a Canadian mining company, to drill up to 63 drill holes from 23 drill sites to locate deposits of copper, gold, and molybdenum. The project would include extensive industrial mining operations 24/7 throughout the summer months on roughly 900 acres of public lands in the Green River valley, just outside the northeast border of the Monument. The prospecting permits allow for constant drilling operations, the installation of drilling-related structures and facilities, the reconstruction of 1.69 miles of decommissioned roads, and pumping up to 5,000 gallons of groundwater per day.
Some parcels of land in question were acquired to promote recreation and conservation under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA). In a previous lawsuit filed by the Cascade Forest Conservancy (then the Gifford Pinchot Task Force), a federal judge invalidated Ascot’s drilling permits and held that the agencies violated the LWCFA by failing to recognize that mining development cannot interfere with the outdoor recreational purposes for which the land was acquired. This decision by the BLM and Forest Service to once again issue Ascot drilling permits follows the release of a modified EA in 2017, prepared in response to this prior court decision.
“This project would severely impact recreation opportunities due to noise, dust, exhaust fumes, lights, vehicle traffic, the presence of drill equipment, and project area closures,” said Tom Buchele, Managing Attorney of the Earthrise Law Center. “I cannot fathom how the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management could legally conclude that drilling would not interfere with recreation without violating the LWCFA.”
The pristine Green River flows through the Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument, passing through old growth as well as a unique post-eruption environment that provides habitat for a variety of native fish and wildlife. The Green River flows into the North Fork Toutle River and Cowlitz River, which provides drinking water to thousands of people in downstream communities.
The following coalition voices have expressed their consistent opposition to efforts to develop a mine near Mount St. Helens.
“This prospecting is a threat to wild steelhead in the Green River and the rest of the Toutle and Cowlitz River system,” said Steve Jones, Clark-Skamania Flyfishers. “Washington fisheries managers made the upper Green River a Wild Steelhead Gene Bank in 2014 because this habitat offered the best hope for sustaining wild fish in that system. This river drainage needs to be conserved, not exploited.”
“This is a short-sighted decision that taxpayers will ultimately be forced to fix,” said Kitty Craig, Acting Washington State Director for the Wilderness Society. “Paving the way for industrial mining operations in the blast zone of an active volcano is a recipe for disaster.”
“Mount St. Helens is no place for a mine,” said Tom Uniack, Executive Director for Washington Wild. “The greater economic and social value of this incredible area lies with the equestrian, mountain biking, and other world-class recreational opportunities accessible to local residents and visitors alike.”
“With outstanding recreation, as a wild steelhead sanctuary, and as a source of clean drinking water for downstream communities, the Green River – a candidate Wild and Scenic River – is the last place for a mine,” said David Moryc, Director for Wild and Scenic Rivers for American Rivers. “The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management should not be green-lighting mining on our public lands that were purchased explicitly for conservation and recreation purposes,”
“The Green River and its downstream rivers the North Fork Toutle River and Cowlitz are home to three species of wild steelhead and salmon listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA),” said Rich Simms, founder of the Wild Steelhead Coalition. “This mining project will undermine the immense work being done to protect these imperiled fish. It is absurd this ludicrous project is even being considered, yet alone moving forward for approval.”
 

###

DOCUMENTS:
Bureau of Land Management FONSI: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/52147/163268/199263/BLM_FONSI_20181002.pdf
Bureau of Land Management Decision Record: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/52147/163270/199265/BLMDecisionRecord20181002.pdf
Cascade Forest Conservancy Objection Letter: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/final-objection-on-letterhead-1.pdf
Judge Hernandez’s Opinion: https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/17566-gifford-pinchot-mining-decisionpdf.
 
MAPS/PHOTOS:
Map of the Project Area: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Map-of-Mt-St-Helens-mine-area-zoomed-in.jpg
Green River Valley photo: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/IMG_5183.jpg
Green River: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Green-River-July-2018-015-1.jpg
Green River valley aerial: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/IMG_6177.jpg
Green River valley aerial labelled: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/GRV-labelled-aerial.jpg
 
VIDEO:
Cascade Forest Conservancy “Mount St. Helens: No Place for a Mine” : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjVk78cVNCk[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_column_text]***Note 11/1/18: Comments on the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Long-Term Conservation Strategy are now due 12/6/18
 
Marbled murrelets are seabirds about the size of a robin, related to puffins, and some might say they are similar in shape to a potato. A majority of their lives are spent out at sea, where they feed on small fish and crustaceans. The nesting behavior of marbled murrelets was a mystery until 1974 when the first nest was discovered. These birds do not build a nest, but instead lay one egg on a mossy limb of an old growth conifer.
To provide suitable nesting habitat for marbled murrelets, trees need to have old growth characteristics such as large, mossy branches and other deformities that can be used as nesting platforms. Generally it takes forests at least 100 years to develop these characteristics. While raising chicks, murrelets must return to the sea nightly to forage for food, therefore mature forests must also be located within 55 miles of marine waters to be suitable as nesting habitat. This unique nesting behavior inescapably binds the fate of marbled murrelets with the fate of mature and old growth forests.
What is the Long Term Conservation Strategy and why is it important for marbled murrelets?
Due to past forest mismanagement and extensive clear-cutting, coastal mature and old growth forest throughout the northwest is only a small fraction of what it used to be, and much of what is left is highly fragmented. This has heavily impacted marbled murrelet populations, which rely on large, contiguous areas of coastal old growth for successful nesting. In Washington state the marbled murrelet population is currently 44% smaller than it was in the early 2000s – a decline of about 4.4% every year! This decline prompted Washington state to list the marbled murrelet as endangered, meaning that they are “seriously threatened with extinction throughout all or significant portion of the state.” (WAC 232-12-297).
A significant amount of low elevation, coastal, mature forests in Washington is on state trust lands managed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 1.4 million acres of state trust lands are within 55 miles of marine waters (within the range of the marbled murrelet), and 15% of current murrelet habitat in Washington is on land managed by DNR, about 212,000 acres. DNR is currently analyzing alternatives for a Long Term Conservation Strategy (LTCS) for the marbled murrelet on DNR-managed land, and the outcome of this process will have a large impact on murrelet populations for decades to come.
The LTCS for marbled murrelet is an important change to the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for state trust lands. DNR manages these trust lands to provide revenue for trust beneficiaries through timber harvest, however, these lands must also provide habitat for native species. When conducting harvest activities on trust lands, DNR may unintentionally harm or harass murrelets. This is called a “take” under the Endangered Species Act. Normally, take of a federally endangered or threatened species is prohibited, but the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) can issue an Incidental Take Permit to entities such as DNR so that they may still undertake activities that could potentially impact listed species. The Habitat Conservation Plan is used by DNR to apply for an Incidental Take Permit from USFWS. In order for the HCP to qualify for an Incidental Take Permit, DNR must, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize and mitigate impacts of take and it must be determined that the take will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the species in the wild. If the Long Term Conservation Strategy meets the relevant criteria, it will amend the Habitat Conservation Plan and USFWS will issue DNR a new Incidental Take Permit. Essentially, the Long Term Conservation Strategy is important because the murrelet habitat provided on DNR lands through an effective strategy will likely help murrelet recovery in Washington state.

Take Action – Comment on the Revised Draft Environmental Statement by November 6^th!
Currently, there is a comment period on the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (RDEIS) for the Long Term Conservation Strategy. In the RDEIS, the agencies analyze eight alternatives that present varying levels of acreage for marbled murrelet conservation. Alternatives F and G add the most acreage for murrelet conservation and will likely benefit murrelet populations in Washington.
 

 

 
Alternative H is DNR’s preferred alternative. This alternative is not adequate to protect current and future murrelet habitat, especially in southwest Washington. Alternative H allows too much harvest of mature and old growth forest over the next 50 years without preserving enough habitat as mitigation. This would be devastating to murrelet populations in Washington.
Now is you opportunity to speak up for marbled murrelets in Washington and comment on the Long Term Conservation Strategy. DNR and FWS are seeking public input on the RDEIS until November 6^th. You can submit comments electronically at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MMLTCSRDEIS . Here is some suggested information to include in your comments:

• It is a critical time for marbled murrelet conservation as their population in Washington has experienced a 44% decline since 2001.
• DNR and FWS should protect more mature and old growth habitat which murrelets rely on for nesting. Alternative H is inadequate to protect current and future murrelet habitat, especially in southwest WA.
• No Long Term Conservation Strategy should include net loss of habitat. It should include more, larger murrelet conservation areas to improve geographic distribution of murrelets.
• The strategy should better protect murrelets from natural disturbance and the impacts of human-caused disturbance, especially where murrelets are known to nest and other special habitat areas.
• The strategy should support conservation for murrelets in the long-term by setting aside sufficient current and future mature forest to offset logging and to improve habitat conditions for murrelets. The existing population should not be put further at risk due to the strategy.

 
References and Helpful Links
There’s a lot to learn about the marbled murrelet and the Long Term Conservation Strategy. Check out these resources for more information.
https://www.dnr.wa.gov/long-term-conservation-strategy-marbled-murrelet
https://wecprotects.org/marbled-murrelet/
http://www.mariaruthbooks.net/marbled-murrelets/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_column_text] 
The Cascade Forest Conservancy (CFC) has grown a special partnership with the Cowlitz Indian Tribe (CIT) on a number of important projects. The Tribe has been a partner of ours for many years, collaborating in the field as well as on natural resources policy issues, but now we are rolling up our sleeves for several on-the-ground restoration projects. Most recently, the Cowlitz Tribe has been a key partner on our beaver reintroduction efforts, and a sub-grantee of a CFC Wildlife Conservation Society grant. This exciting collaboration is a major, landscape-scale restoration project in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest that grew out of our 2016 Wildlife and Climate Resilience Guidebook (which can be viewed here – https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Wildlife-and-Climate-Resilience-Guidebook-2017.pdf).

To date, CIT has collaborated with us on many pivotal aspects of the project – joining us on beaver habitat surveys, forming agreements with wildlife trapping companies to gather the beaver, and creating holding facilities to keep the beaver comfortable until they can be relocated.
Over the next year, CFC and CIT will continue to work closely to capture and relocate beavers from private lands, where they are often trapped and killed, to wild places where they help provide crucial functions to vulnerable waterways. Beaver’s industrious nature leads them to expand wetlands and fish habitat, create pools where water can cool down and slow down, and combat other effects of climate change. We are grateful to the Wildlife Conservation Society for giving us the opportunity to pursue this ambitious and important project.

Our work with the Cowlitz Tribe doesn’t end there. A forest-wide effort to restore huckleberry to the landscape is currently in its second year. The U.S Forest Service, Pinchot Partners Collaborative Group, CFC, CIT, and other agencies have worked together to create the first draft of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest Huckleberry Management Strategy. The strategy will be a guide for future huckleberry management by the Forest Service to ensure huckleberries are healthy and plentiful each season for pickers of all types. 
Finally, we are very excited that a representative of the Cowlitz Tribe working on cultural resources is considering joining our Board of Directors. His background as an ecologist makes him a great addition to our Board and we look forward to bringing our two organizations closer through his involvement.
Our mission is to protect and sustain the forests, rivers, wildlife, and communities in the heart of the Cascades. The Cowlitz people are one of the communities that we are proud to call friends and partners. Together, we will continue to preserve the lands, history, and natural resources that are so important to our families and future generations.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_empty_space height=”35px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”94″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center” qode_css_animation=””][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#444444″ thickness=”3″][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][vc_column_text]At the end of March Congress passed an appropriations bill over 2,200 pages long that allocated $1.3 trillion dollars to many government programs and agencies. This massive bill also included legislation that directly impact our public lands by addressing funding for wildfires and a new categorical exclusion (CE) that allows some timber sales to move forward with less environmental review. This new CE and other policy changes in this bill are attempts to weaken our environmental laws and limit public input on our federal forests, and we must remain ready to oppose further harmful riders in future bills.
 
What is the appropriations bill?
A bill that is over 2,200 pages long, concerning over a trillion dollars, and written in complicated legislative language, can seem overwhelming to many of us. This large bill specifies how much money will go to different government programs and agencies for fiscal year 2018.
Congress is required by law to pass twelve appropriations bills allocating discretionary spending for each fiscal year, which starts on October 1. However, since Congress was unable to come to an agreement on these bills in 2017, they extended the process through March 23 through “continuing resolutions” which provide temporary funding for federal agencies and avoid a government shutdown while Congress works through the appropriations process. This spending bill is large because it is an omnibus bill that combines the twelve funding areas.
Appropriations bills must be passed because without them, many government agencies and programs go unfunded and must shutdown. The importance of these bills makes them a target for riders, provisions that are unrelated to federal spending but are often added onto federal spending bills. Riders are a tactic used to enact legislative changes that would be difficult to pass on their own.
 
How does this bill impact our public lands?
For our public lands, some of the best news comes from what is not in the bill. Thanks to the dedication of concerned citizens throughout the country, some of the worst forest management provisons were not added to the bill. Portions of the Westerman Bill, including new categorical exclusions allowing timber harvest with little environmental review, had the potential to be added to this bill as riders. Another rider would have allowed reckless logging and road-building in roadless areas in Alaska’s national forests by exempting these forests from the 2001 Roadless Rule. Exempting millions of acres of public lands in Alaska from the Roadless Rule could have set a dangerous precedent for developing roadless areas throughout the U.S.

Although several harmful environmental riders did not make it into the bill, one that did is a new categorical exclusion (CE) for hazardous fuels reduction projects up to 3,000 acres. These are projects where the agencies propose reducing wildfire risk through commercial timber harvest. New CEs for timber harvest projects are concerning because CEs limit public input and environmental review. Instead of going through the normal public input process, which involves preparing an environmental assessment and multiple public comment periods, the agencies would only have to provide public notice and one comment period. To use this CE, the Forest Service must maximize the retention of old-growth and large trees and use the best available science to maintain and restore ecological integrity. Also, these projects must be developed collaboratively, not include permanent road construction, and be located outside wilderness and other protected areas. Commercial timber harvest to reduce fuels is potentially controversial in areas with mature forest and large trees. New CEs such as this one risk cutting short public input and conversations that address these difficult topics. In our view, controversial projects necessitate a thorough public input process, where stakeholder concerns can be addressed early on, if these projects are to move forward without future challenges.
The appropriations bill also includes funding for fighting wildfires. Intense wildfire seasons over the last years have rapidly depleted the Forest Service’s budget because of “fire borrowing.” Fire borrowing occurs when the Forest Service maxes out on funds allocated for fighting wildfires and the agency uses money from other accounts. By taking money from other accounts to fight fires, the Forest Service delays other projects, including those that support recreation and restoration. The wildfire funding fix passed as part of the appropriations bill includes a cap on the Forest Service’s wildfire suppression budget and establishes a $2.25 billion emergency fund for the agency to use instead of borrowing from other programs. These changes will go into effect in fiscal year 2020, and will help the Forest Service retain funds for ecological restoration and recreation services in future years.

Secure Rural Schools (SRS) payments to counties were also extended for two more years. The Secure Rural Schools Act, passed in 2000, provides funding to rural counties and schools located near national forests. Prior to SRS, rural counties and schools received 25% of revenues generated from timber sales on national forest lands. Unfortunately, SRS payments have not always been consistent due to delays in reauthorization by Congress, forcing small communities to operate on smaller budgets. Extending SRS payments for two more years fixes the immediate problem, but a long-term solution is needed for this program that benefits local communities, forests, wildlife, and recreation.
Additional provisions impacting public lands in the appropriations bill include overriding a Ninth Circuit Court decision that required the Forest Service to re-initiate Endangered Species Act consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service for land and resource management plans. Also, the bill does not include separate funding for the Legacy Roads and Trails program, which was previously funded at $40 million. The Legacy Roads and Trails program has funded road decommissioning, road maintenance and repairs, and removal of fish passage barriers. LRT has benefited aquatic wildlife throughout our national forests, and we are concerned that this program will not be utilized to its full potential without a budget separate from other Forest Service road programs.
Appropriations and other must-pass legislation can become a battleground for public lands, and we will continue to oppose under-the-radar attacks on our bedrock environmental and public participation laws. For further information about the appropriations bill and related public lands issues visit the links below.
• 2018 Appropriations Bill: “Is This Any Way To Drive An Omnibus? 10 Questions About What Just Happened” –NPR
• Wildfire Funding Fix and new Categorical Exclusion: “The Energy 202: Congress finally found a new way to fund wildfire suppression” – The Washington Post 
[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height=”35px”][vc_row_inner row_type=”row” type=”grid” text_align=”left” css_animation=””][vc_column_inner][vc_gallery interval=”0″ images=”161″ img_size=”full” onclick=””][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#444444″ thickness=”3″][vc_empty_space height=”35px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”yes” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=”” css=”.vc_custom_1465592094531{background-color: #96d1ae !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner row_type=”row” type=”grid” text_align=”left” css_animation=””][vc_column_inner][vc_empty_space height=”125px”][latest_post_two number_of_columns=”3″ order_by=”date” order=”ASC” display_featured_images=”yes” number_of_posts=”3″][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_column_text]In forest collaborative groups, diverse stakeholders including environmental organizations, timber companies, recreational organzations, and other interested members of the community come together to discuss timber sales and other proposed projects with Forest Service staff. Cascade Forest Conservancy is a founding member of, and active participant in, both forest collaboratives in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. The Pinchot Partners, formed in 2003, focuses on projects in the Cowlitz Valley Ranger District, and the South Gifford Pinchot Collaborative, formed in 2011, focuses on projects in the Mt. Adams Ranger District. Through collaborative participation, our goal is to influence GPNF projects to be sustainable for wildlife, fish, water quality, and local communities.
During the warmer months our meetings involve field trips where we can see proposed sale units or projects after they are completed. Seeing how projects look on the ground inspires robust conversations about topics such as riparian habitat, harvest practices, and roads. Last year, the SGPC went on a trip to a temporary road that had been used in a timber sale and obliterated. Seeing this former temporary road led to a discussion about the impacts of temporary roads that is ongoing. The Pinchot Partners visited units for the Iron Crystal timber sale and areas that would be part of huckleberry monitoring efforts. During the huckleberry trip, Pinchot Partners members were able to learn about our huckleberry monitoring process from CFC staff.
Another important role of the collaborative groups is to vote on retained receipts funding. This is money generated from selected timber sales that is used to fund restoration activities. Both collaboratives get to vote on our priorities for restoration activities and how much funding should be allocated to these projects. The collaborative groups have chosen to fund high school field work crews, aquatic restoration projects, riparian planting, invasive weed treatments, and many other projects through retained receipts.
Over the last year in the South Gifford Pinchot Collaborative we have worked on the Upper White Salmon timber sale, formed subcommittees to focus on important topics, and began discussing the Middle Wind timber sale. The Upper White Salmon project was located in drier forest near Mt. Adams. A focus of the collaborative discussion in this project was the harvest prescription for mature forest units with large trees. After several meetings we were able to reach a compromise that considered wildlife habitat, the role of fire on the landscape, and the future climate change impacts. The Middle Wind project is located in a part of the GPNF that has many riparian areas and listed fish habitat. We would like to see this project implemented in a way that improves aquatic habitat and reduces road mileage in the watershed. We have also participated in subcommittee meetings to develop a Zones of Agreement document for the group focused on plantations. The intent of that document is to streamline discussion for topics we agree on, and to educate others about the SGPC.
This year the Pinchot Partners drafted a response to the Iron Crystal Environmental Analysis and developed a huckleberry restoration strategy in partnership with the Forest Service, CFC, and the Cowlitz Indian Tribe. The Iron Crystal response required several long phone calls and in-person meetings to work through the range of values at play in this project. Many of us shared concerns with the analysis prepared by the Forest Service and met with local Forest Service staff to discuss these issues. We were successfully able to submit a letter before the comment period deadline. In addition to our role as a board member of the Pinchot Partners, CFC also began a new partnership with the collaborative through our huckleberry monitoring. Huckleberry is an important plant to the region culturally, recreationally, and economically, and the Pinchot Partners decide huckleberry restoration should be a priority concern for the organization in the coming years. On February 27-28 the Pinchot Partners held their annual meeting in Packwood, WA. The day and a half meeting is full of great discussions and presentations with Forest Service staff, and this year we visited the White Pass Country Museum and learned about the history of the local communities. Last year, the Pinchot Partners celebrated their 15^th anniversary. Over the last fifteen years, our dedication to working together on forest projects has made the partners an example for other collaborative groups throughout the region.
Finding common ground can sometimes be slow, challenging work. It often requires balancing environmental, economic, cultural, and recreational concerns and reconsidering what success means for each of us. Successful collaboration relies on a diverse group of stakeholders, representing a full spectrum of user groups, and bedrock environmental laws. Attempts to weaken environmental laws by Congress present a direct threat to the progress collaboratives have made toward rebuilding trust and developing projects that benefit forests and communities. We are encouraged by the progress these organizations have made since their formation, and we look forward to working on future projects together.
Both collaborative groups meet monthly, and the meetings are open to the public.
To learn more visit:
South Gifford Pinchot Collaborative: http://www.southgpc.org
Pinchot Partners: https://pinchotpartners.org/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_column_text]Beavers have a bit of a reputation as being nuisances for landowners. But to us, they are self-adapting ecosystem engineers! For that reason, we are beginning a project with Cowlitz Indian Tribe to reintroduce more beavers into the aquatic ecosystems of Gifford Pinchot National Forest. Beavers are able to build resilience to climate impacts, create wetland and side-channel habitat, and improve water quality for downstream communities. In the face of climate change, events like increased winter streamflow and low summer flows and drought, these furry engineers can help mitigate the impacts of fluctuating streamflows. A newly constructed dam will increase channel complexity and forge new routes of flow. This process also helps keep water in the system for longer periods of time and transfers water to wetland areas that could otherwise become dry. Dams can create more deep pools, which is important for many threatened and at-risk fish species that reside in GPNF. All in all, the reintroduction of beavers a unique and self-adapting way to improve aquatic health and enhance resilience to climate impacts we expect to see in the future.

Our goal with the beaver project is to release 18 – 25 beavers over two years into strategic locations in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. To date, we have carried out site visits with Forest Service biologists and Cowlitz Indian Tribe, begun a spatial analysis to identify optimal release sites, worked with specialists concerning pre-release habitat modifications, planted willows for future beaver forage, and set up plans with local hatcheries to serve as holding facilities for the beavers. Beaver speed dating, anyone? In October, our Young Friends of the Forest participants got the opportunity to visit the forest and gather field data to help assess potential beaver relocation sites. As the year progresses, we will continue to assess more potential beaver relocation sites, and once those sites are chosen, the acquisition of beavers from landowners will begin. From there, beavers will be housed for brief periods of time at local hatcheries, set up with a mate (the beavers will have a higher rate of success in a pair), and then released! Keep an eye on our social media for updates throughout the year. A huge thanks to the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation for helping to fund this project, as well as our many project partners – especially Cowlitz Indian Tribe and U.S. Forest Service.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”5/6″][vc_column_text]From old-growth forests to snow-covered alpine areas, Washington’s South Cascades are home to a variety of habitat types that support a wide array of plant and animal populations. Connectivity throughout the landscape allows wildlife to move between habitat areas, enabling populations to be more resilient to a changing climate. Cascade Forest Conservancy has identified some of the key areas in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest that, with increased protections, would improve and sustain the ability of wildlife populations to move between patches of habitat and be more resilient to climate change impacts. Increased protections for these areas could range from administrative action, which protects a few select ecosystem values, to designation under the Wilderness Act.
Although there are a variety of approaches for mitigating the impacts of climate change, there is one theme that runs throughout: protect land rapidly to buffer biodiversity against climate change. Climate change is already causing a shift in different forest types, and these impacts are likely to continue in future generations. For current habitat to persist as functional habitat in a changing landscape, reserves and protected areas should be expanded.
Protected areas provide a way to improve connectivity across the landscape by reducing road densities, eliminating some harmful human activities, and otherwise making key habitat areas and corridors available for wildlife. Climate change is impacting habitat by causing a shift in forest types and a decoupling of species relationships. Warmer, drier years are beginning to move forest types north and to higher elevations, and these impacts may be long-lasting on the landscape. Some wildlife populations will need to migrate to adapt to these changes. If there is not suitable habitat nearby, or it is not connected by a corridor of dispersal habitat, events such as a wildfire or drought could wipe out populations. By protecting key habitat areas in the forest through laws, regulations, and other designations, we can help ensure that they remain intact to benefit wildlife populations.
Key areas identified for increased protection in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest.

To identify priority areas for increased protection in this region, we first located roadless areas to determine where connectivity would be improved by maintaining large roadless areas and smaller connected ones. We also focused roadless areas because Inventoried Roadless Areas already receive some protections under the 2001 Roadless Rule and are good candidates for additional protection. Locating roadless areas on a map also helped to determine where remnant road segments could be removed to benefit connectivity across the landscape. Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) are roadless areas greater than 5,000 acres that have been inventoried by the Forest Service during the Roadless Area Review and Evaluation (RARE) and other assessments. IRAs meet the minimum criteria for designation under the Wilderness Act and are managed in accordance with the 2001 Roadless Rule.
We also located uninventoried roadless areas, which are areas that are predominately roadless, but were not formally inventoried by the Forest Service. Remnant roads, or roads that are closed but still on the Forest Service road system, remain in some uninventoried roadless areas. These remnant roads and roads that lie between two potentially conjoining roadless areas are top priorities for road reduction. To understand where roadless areas exist in relation to habitat core areas and connectivity corridors, we overlaid maps of connectivity corridors on roadless maps. This helps us determine where to focus our climate adaptation efforts to strengthen roadless values and decrease fragmentation.
Based on these maps, and the need for reserves of different habitat types, we identified the following areas as key places for increased protections in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest. Some of these areas are suitable for designation under the Wilderness Act, but others may be more suited to being protected administratively such as through special area designation or forest plan amendments.
 
(1) Trapper Creek Wilderness Addition
The “Bourbon Creek” addition to the north side of the Trapper Creek Wilderness contains healthy stands of old-growth forest, and it is currently part of an Inventoried Roadless Area. This Wilderness expansion would provide an important enlargement of contiguous habitat in the southern Gifford Pinchot National Forest and an additional buffer to the surrounding mix of forest lands subject to timber harvest, encroaching forest edges, and roads. Also, there is a lack of Wilderness areas in the GPNF that are easily accessible from population centers. The Trapper Creek Wilderness is a popular location for day-use backcountry recreation, and expansion will enhance those opportunities while also making more habitat available for wildlife. Wildlife camera surveys have shown this area to be well-used by a diverse set of animals and considering the nearby pressures of urban expansion, logging, and habitat shifts, there is good reason to formally establish protection for this area.

(2) Siouxon Creek
The Siouxon Creek area is home beautiful waterfalls and patches of old-growth forest closely intermingled with post-fire habitat created by the many great fires that swept through this area in the early 1900s. These unique features make this area important habitat for many different wildlife populations. Siouxon Creek is also a popular recreation area, and recreation in this area is likely to increase as the nearby population centers in Southwest Washington continue to grow. This important connectivity corridor and popular recreation area would benefit from formal administrative or legislative designation to protect habitat values.
(3) Dark Divide
This iconic roadless area is drenched with more lore and wonder than any other part of the Cascades. This area is thought to be home to Bigfoot, and it was once considered to be the likely landing site of D.B. Cooper, who parachuted from a plane in 1971 with bags of stolen money. Not only is the Dark Divide a landscape of legends, it is also highly important as a habitat reserve for its contiguous old-growth forest stands. Unfortunately, the Dark Divide has been filled with the loud and damaging footprint of off-road vehicles (ORVs). Due to the noise and large ruts created by ORVs, terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality has decreased along with the opportunity for backcountry hiking and camping. The Dark Divide has yet to gain a level of increased protection despite its high value as a large reserve of roadless old growth habitat.
These three areas are a subset of the key areas we have identified for increased protection in the GPNF. A large network of protected areas in Washington’s South Cascades is a long-term goal that will involve partnerships, citizen involvement, and various conservation approaches. Designation of these areas requires working on several levels to increase our understanding of needs and optimal routes for building climate resilience in these forest ecosystems. Many of our on-the-ground efforts will be carried out at the local, ranger district, and regional levels. However, it is also important to continue to advocate for strong national policies as many GPNF projects will be implemented based on national policy. Public involvement in these efforts will be critical. We encourage citizens to write, call, or meet with their congressional representatives and Forest Service officials to advocate for the protection of key natural areas. To learn more about these efforts and CFC’s other strategies to promote climate resiliency in the GPNF, check out our Wildlife and Climate Resilience Guidebook, which can be found by clicking [here][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”1/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row]

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_separator type=”normal” color=”#444444″ thickness=”3″][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][vc_column_text]FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 23, 2017
CONTACTS:
Nicole Budine, Policy and Campaign Manager, Cascade Forest Conservancy, 607-735-3753
Matt Little, Executive Director, Cascade Forest Conservancy, 541-678-2322
Tom Buchele, Managing Attorney, Earthrise Law Center, 503-768-6736
Steve Jones, Board Member, Clark-Skamania Flyfishers, 360-834-1265
Kitty Craig, Washington State Deputy Director, The Wilderness Society, 206-473-2523
 

Mining Exploration Approved Near Mount St. Helens

Conservation and Recreation Groups Oppose Due to Impacts on Fish, Water Quality and Recreation.

 
Portland, OR – On August 22, 2017, the Forest Service issued a draft decision consenting to exploratory drilling in the Green River valley, just outside the Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument. A coalition of over 20 conservation and recreation groups opposes the project, claiming mining exploration and development will significantly harm wild steelhead populations in the Green River, destroy recreational opportunities in the area, and pollute the water supply of downstream communities. The draft decision begins a 45-day objection period.
“Tens of thousands of people have expressed opposition to this proposal due to its impacts on clean water, native fish, and recreation in and around our most treasured National Monument. Yet the agencies continue to advance this dangerous proposal,” said Matt Little, Executive Director of the Cascade Forest Conservancy. “Allowing mining activities in a pristine river valley alongside an active volcano is simply ludicrous. We will do all we can to stop it.”
 
Drilling permits would allow a Canadian mining company, Ascot Resources Ltd., to drill 63 drill holes from 23 drill pads to locate deposits of copper, gold, and molybdenum. The project would include extensive industrial mining operations 24/7 throughout the summer months on roughly 900 acres of public lands in the Green River valley, just outside the northeast border of the Monument. The prospecting permits allow for constant drilling operations, the installation of drilling-related structures and facilities, the reconstruction of 1.69 miles of decommissioned roads, and pumping up to 5,000 gallons of groundwater per day.
 
Some parcels of land in question were acquired to promote recreation and conservation under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA). In a previous lawsuit filed by the Cascade Forest Conservancy (then the Gifford Pinchot Task Force), a federal judge invalidated Ascot’s drilling permits and held that the agencies violated the LWCFA by failing to recognize that mining development cannot interfere with the outdoor recreational purposes for which the land was acquired. The decision by the BLM and Forest Service to once again issue Ascot drilling permits follows the release of a modified EA earlier this year, prepared in response to this prior court decision.
“This project would severely impact recreation opportunities due to noise, dust, exhaust fumes, lights, vehicle traffic, the presence of drill equipment, and project area closures,” said Tom Buchele, Managing Attorney of the Earthrise Law Center. “I cannot fathom how the Forest Service could legally conclude that drilling would not interfere with recreation without violating the LWFCA.”
 
The pristine Green River flows through the Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument, passing through old growth as well as a unique post-eruption environment that provides habitat for a variety of native fish and wildlife. The Green River flows into the North Fork Toutle River and Cowlitz River, which provides drinking water to thousands of people in downstream communities. The city of Kelso recently passed a resolution against the mine because of impacts from leaking mine effluent and failed toxic tailings ponds that would result from locating a mine in an active volcanic zone.
“This prospecting is a threat to wild steelhead in the Green River and the rest of the Toutle and Cowlitz River system,” said Steve Jones, Director, Clark-Skamania Flyfishers. “Washington fisheries managers made the upper Green River a Wild Steelhead Gene Bank in 2014 because this habitat offered the best hope for sustaining wild fish in that system. This river drainage needs to be conserved, not exploited.”
“Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument is a national treasure that offers a unique recreational and educational experience for visitors in the Pacific Northwest,” said Kitty Craig, Washington State Deputy Director of the Wilderness Society. “Its borders are no place for an industrial mine that will jeopardize the free-flowing Green River, the drinking water of downstream communities, and the wide range of recreational opportunities these lands and waters provide.”

###

 
PROPOSAL DOCUMENTS:
Modified EA: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/52147/66795/72638/Goat_Mountain_MEA_20151217_FINAL.pdf
Cascade Forest Conservancy (GPTF) et al modified EA comments: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/FINAL-Goat-Mountain-MEA-Comments_2-4-16.pdf
Forest Service FONSI/Draft DN: http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai.com/11558/www/nepa/101692_FSPLT3_4050107.pdf
Senator Cantwell Letter to the Forest Service: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Cantwell-letter-to-Forest-Service-Goat-Mountain-Project_3-18-16.pdf
LEGAL DOCUMENTS:
Judge Hernandez’s Opinion: https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/17566-gifford-pinchot-mining-decisionpdf.
MAPS/PHOTOS:
Map of the Project Area: https://cascadeforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Map-of-Mt-St-Helens-mine-area-zoomed-in.jpg
VIDEO:
Cascade Forest Conservancy “Mount St. Helens: No Place for a Mine” : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjVk78cVNCk
 
[/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height=”35px”][vc_row_inner row_type=”row” type=”grid” text_align=”left” css_animation=””][vc_column_inner][vc_gallery interval=”0″ images=”164,161,145″ img_size=”full” onclick=””][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”yes” type=”grid” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=”” css=”.vc_custom_1465592094531{background-color: #96d1ae !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner row_type=”row” type=”grid” text_align=”left” css_animation=””][vc_column_inner][vc_empty_space height=”125px”][latest_post_two number_of_columns=”3″ order_by=”date” order=”ASC” display_featured_images=”yes” number_of_posts=”3″][vc_empty_space height=”75px”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]