Columbia Highlands proposal explained
You may have seen all the press around the public launch of the Columbia Highlands Initiative last week. We couldn't be more pleased with quality of the coverage. Both Becky Kramer (The Spokesman Review) and Craig Welch (The Seattle Times) did a good job of boiling down the elements of a fairly complex proposal that includes both public and private land conservation. Still, we've been hearing a few questions that warrant some clarification. Here is a look at the Columbia Highlands Initiative proposal in greater depth.
The Columbia Highlands Initiative builds from a decade of community collaboration to create a balanced plan for wilderness, recreation, restoration, and forestry on the Colville National Forest.
You may have seen all the press around the public launch of the Columbia Highlands Initiative last week. We couldn't be more pleased with quality of the coverage. Both Becky Kramer (The Spokesman Review) and Craig Welch (The Seattle Times) did a good job of boiling down the elements of a fairly complex proposal that includes both public and private land conservation. Still, we've been hearing a few questions that warrant some clarification:
What will an increase in logging look like on the Colville National Forest?
The Times article missed some important nuance in describing a tripling of logging on the Colville National Forest. Our proposal does include about 400,000 acres in active forestry, enough that -- using the quality forestry standards we have agreed to -- it could sustainably produce over 80 million board feet per year, a level that is perhaps three times what the Colville was logging when it was gridlocked in controversy and lawsuits.
Conservation Northwest worked with scientists to develop a set of rigorous guidelines for this active forestry zone. We are involved in every project to make sure that these guidelines are followed (including no new roads in roadless areas, no net increase in roads, no cutting of old growth (no cutting of trees more than 21 inches in diameter, max), good buffers on streams and protection of endangered species habitat, etc.
There is an additional zone, comprised of over 400,000 acres (a quarter of which is inside the national conservation area), in which only restoration-based forestry is to occur, with the primary objective of recreating old-growth forest conditions. In this zone, logs are only a byproduct of ecological objectives.
We support such logging projects on this acreage because it provides a national example of good forestry. But we are not including targets for acres logged or volume in our legislative proposal. Instead, we have addressed those commitments through direct agreements with our collaborative partners, leaving a clean wilderness bill that stands alone on its own merits.
How much wilderness is being proposed?
Our proposal is for 215,000 acres to be designated by Congress as wilderness, though 33,000 of those acres would be delayed from designation for up to a decade to address some needs on the ground.
We also propose a 140,000 acre national conservation area containing four inventoried roadless areas (totaling 36,000 acres) that would be managed to near wilderness standards. The balance of the national conservation area would be managed similar to the restoration zone described above. In sum, almost two-thirds of the landscape is dedicated to conservation objectives.
Are the areas on the map in brown all "logging areas" as mentioned in the Times?
The Times oversimplified our map, showing in brown both restoration areas and active forestry areas -- combined. Logging is allowed in restoration areas as part of ecological objectives, such as the thinning of small trees to restore old-growth conditions.
The commercial forestry areas are in the more highly roaded, managed landscape closer to communities. Management here includes reduces fire risk near homes and communities, still focusing on thinning small diameter trees (under 21 inches) and avoiding the building of new roads.
