Bark Issues of Concern: Roadless Area

  1. What the forest Service says: thin 850 acres for "Forest Health/Density Management" - largely lodgepole - to be logged due to dense conditions and to create huckleberry fields - fertilize 800 of these acres

    What Bark says: logging existing stands for huckleberry creation is ridiculous given the amount of existing clearcuts and young stands in the area - there is also no evidence that the forest service can manage an area for huckleberry production as past areas it has logged for that reason are not maintained as huckleberry fields - if we are to have huckleberry fields in the forest, it is time to create managed, designated huckleberry fields in areas already clearcut - we must stop logging to create new huckleberry fields - the fertilization is to make up for all the nutrients removed from the area during the logging process, so why not just skip the logging and save the expense of fertilization?

  2. What the forest service says: thin 15 acres within riparian reserves - due to dense conditions - no logging within 30 to 150 feet of the stream depending on slope - using skyline and ground-based harvest systems

    What Bark says: If this is as harmless and as helpful as the forest service claims, why limit it to outside 30 to 150 feet from the streams - the fact that they will not go within this closer riparian area undermines any claim that this action is beneficial - especially when they plan to use land-based logging systems (tractors) which cause extreme damage to the forest through compaction and general ground disturbance

  3. What the Forest Service says: Shelterwood 220 acres of mature lodgepole for lynx habitat - lynx eat snowshoe hares and snowshoe hares like young lodgepoles - the area is too mature (i.e., old-growth lodgepole) for the hares, so the area must be cut down and then burned so young lodgepoles grow back -

    What Bark says: there are so many flaws here, here are just a few - first, the area is already covered with existing clearcuts and young stands - second, even if there isn’t enough suitable snowshoe hare habitat within the area, why cut down more mature stands when plenty of younger areas could be rehabilitated into snowshoe hare habitat - third, since when is the Forest Service so concerned about the lynx - fourth, how will new road construction in the area help lynx habitat (hint: it won’t) - fifth, management for a single species is an outdated, ineffective, and inappropriate method of forest management in this era when the forest service is talking "ecosystem management" - and sixth, show us the study that proves snowshoe hare only like young lodgepole stands

  4. What the Forest Service says: rehabilitate riparian area within Stone Creek Rock Pit - includes partial restoration of riparian area within Stone Creek Rock Pit

    What Bark says: sounds good, but why only "partial" restoration?