DOCSLIB.ORG

Stewardship in the Siuslaw National Forest Whole Watershed Restoration for Ecological and Economic Benefit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stewardship in the Siuslaw National Forest Whole Watershed Restoration for Ecological and Economic Benefit Stewardship in the Siuslaw National Forest Whole watershed restoration for ecological and economic benefit The end result of stewardship and restoration in the Siuslaw National Forest is healthy forests and restored fish and wildlife habitat. History of Stewardship on the Siuslaw What is Stewardship Contracting? Home to Oregon’s fastest growing trees and threatened Stewardship contracting began in the Siuslaw in 2001 as a salmon, spotted owls and marbled murrelets, the Siuslaw “pilot project” for new federal authorities. In 2003, Congress National Forest on the Oregon coast saw some of the most authorized stewardship contracting for 10 more years. bitter battles over old-growth logging in the Pacific North- west twenty years ago. Stewardship contracting is a suite of authorities and con- tracting tools that are intended Action needed After the Northwest Forest Plan went into effect in 1994, to help the Forest Service and forest planners were required to preserve more old-growth Bureau of Land Management The success of 10 years of and riparian habitat for wildlife. Managers at the Siuslaw meet both land management stewardship contracting in National Forest saw an opportunity to advance forest stew- objectives and rural community the Siuslaw highlights the ardship and meet restoration, conservation and economic needs. The blending of these importance of gaining per- goals through new “Stewardship Authorities.” This provided objectives makes stewardship manent authorization from an opening to pursue a new type of management and to work contracting unique. Congress before the existing in cooperation with diverse partners, including local interests. law expires in 2013. Stewardship regulations en- Today, the Siuslaw is a model for the entire region, working courage strong collaboration between the federal agencies with local collaborative groups designing successful restora- and a diverse mix of local and regional interests to achieve tion projects, generating funds to accomplish restoration improved forest health, water quality, fish and wildlife habi- work, and focusing on projects and work that translate into tat, and to meet hazardous fuels reduction goals. local jobs and economic benefits. Stewardship allows for money generated through steward- Award-winning partnership ship timber sales, called “retained receipts,” to be reinvested in forest and watershed restoration projects within the local Efforts in the Siuslaw were awarded the 2010 Two Chiefs’ area - on both public and private* land, taking a whole wa- Partnership Award, presented by the Chiefs of the U.S. tershed approach to restoration and forest management. Forest Service and the USDA Natural Resources Conser- vation Service to recognize exemplary partnership efforts in * Through the Wyden authority, federal funds may be allocated to non-federal conservation and forest stewardship. projects if those projects benefit National Forest resources. Stewardship: A win-win for forests and communities Under stewardship authorities, timber harvest contracts can This work includes 48 restoration projects on non-federal be bundled with other forest and stream restoration activities land adjacent to the Siuslaw National Forest, where Stew- - such as placing large wood in streams or replacing culverts ardship Fund dollars have been matched by more than $1.2 to benefit fish - allowing for efficiencies and assurance that million of non-federal dollars or services to achieve these this important works gets done. These authorities also allow ends, highlighting the strong public-private partnerships and contracts to be awarded based partially on their local job and support that has been developed for such work. economic benefits. Benefit to local economy On the Siuslaw National Forest, multi-party monitoring is Stewardship contracting, and the forest and watershed resto- also conducted to evaluate the biophysical accomplishments ration work it generates, contributes significantly to the local and economic impacts of stewardship projects. This ensures economy. Provisions in the law allow priority to be given accountability for stewardship goals, provides measurements to local contractors, keeping most dollars and jobs closer to for long-term learning, and involves the public in ensuring home. desired benefits are being accomplished. Jobs in stewardship range from traditional timber thinning Restoring forests, watersheds, and harvests and road improvements to prevent erosion, to tree wildlife habitat planting and stream restoration - all contributing to the From 2001 to 2011, stewardship contracts on the Siuslaw restoration goals of the Siuslaw National Forest. have resulted in more than 2,000 acres of commercial thin- ning in plantations, yielding 25 million board feet to local For example, in Fiscal Years 2008-2010, an average of 6.942 mills. “Retained receipts” from these stewardship timber MMBF (million board feet) was harvested each year under sales* are placed in a dedicated Coast Range Stewardship stewardship contracts*. The table below shows the economic Fund. Over the past 10 years, more than $3 million of these impacts of this harvest and associated restoration work. retained receipts have been invested in projects that restore Stewardship Contracting Economic Impacts: FY 2008-2010 threatened fish and wildlife habitat, improve water quality, and build working relationships between rural landowners Forest Forest Non- Total Service Service federal and the managers of neighboring public land. steward- retained retained Funded projects include non-commercial young stand ship timber receipts receipts contracts projects projects thinning, noxious weed control, road repair for water qual- ity, meadow restoration, underplanting for diversity, culvert Jobs 79.9 2.48 2.75 85.13 replacement and repair, snag and large woody debris creation, (FTE) wood placement in streams, native tree planting in riparian State taxes $347,416 $8,611 $8,928 $364,955 areas, and removing trash to improve water quality. paid * Only a portion of National Forest timber sales are stewardship contracts. g g g 9 Restoration at work ning, road and culvert improvements, In the 20th century, most of the old-growth forests in the native plantings, and other restoration Siuslaw were logged, putting fish and wildlife at risk and activities add diversity and natural diminishing other public resources. Dense replanting of structure back into the forest and gives clearcuts with a single species led to monocrop tree planta- wildlife habitat a boost. tions devoid of ecological diversity. These restored forests provide clean Now, restoration crews thin the dense forest using steward- water, carbon storage, vital wildlife ship contracts - providing jobs and timber and accomplishing habitat, and improved recreational op- associated watershed restoration tasks. Variable density thin- portunities. Stewardship Groups: Collaboration for effective restoration Founded in 2001, the Siuslaw Stewardship Group has led Projects championed the nation in using stewardship contracting authorities that by stewardship groups promote forest and watershed restoration and local economic include: benefits. • Neighborhood This group of stake- outreach in the Marys holders has developed Peak Stewardship area, a common vision for led by Marys River restoration within the Watershed Council, Siuslaw watershed resulting in restora- that improves fish and tion of fish habitat and wildlife habitat and riparian vegetation the rural economy, and across multiple owner- avoids the controversies ships in the Greasy of the recent past. Creek subbasin; This model of man- • Stream channel agement offers a reconstruction, noxious weed control, sustainable future for and native vegetation reestablishment our public lands, and to benefit salmon habitat on private demonstrates what land along Roache Creek, through can be accomplished when dedicated agency personnel and a partnership of the Siuslaw Soil & community members come together to identify problems and Water Conservation District and the Siuslaw Watershed Council within the Siuslaw Stewardship area; create solutions. • Stream stabilization and fish habitat restoration on Canal The success of the Siuslaw Stewardship Group has encour- Creek in conjuction with the Alsea Watershed Council, aged similar efforts across the region, and led to the forma- rural landowners, and the Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wild- tion of three more groups on the Siuslaw National Forest life in the Alsea Stewardship area; and since 2005 - in the Alsea and Marys Peak watersheds, and in the Hebo Ranger District. • Improving stream and riparian habitat conditions on Bear Creek with the guidance of the Salmon-Drift Each Stewardship Group brings together diverse organi- Creek Watershed Council in the Hebo Stewardship area. zations and individuals to collaborate with Forest Service staff on the development, prioritization, and Diverse groups Through these cooperative efforts, strong community partnerships and increased trust monitoring of stewardship and restoration working together projects. The groups also recommend use have been built between the Forest Service, community groups, and private landowners; of the Coast Range Stewardship Fund for Participants in stewardship opportunities for watershed restoration are specific projects either on National Forest groups include: better understood; and many projects have lands or on non-federal land (as long as they • federal and state agencies been successfully implemented. benefit National
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Botany, Invasive Plants, Native Plants, Genetics
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest FY-16 Region Program Accomplishments Calochortus umpquaensis, Umpqua mariposa lily, is found only in the Umpqua River watershed of Botany southwestern OR. A big "anthophorid" bee is tucked into the flower. Invasive Plants Native Plants Genetics U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bill to Designate Certain National Forest System Lands in the State of Oregon for Inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for Other Purposes
    97 H.R.7340 Title: A bill to designate certain National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Weaver, James H. [OR-4] (introduced 12/1/1982) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 12/15/1982 Failed of passage/not agreed to in House. Status: Failed to Receive 2/3's Vote to Suspend and Pass by Yea-Nay Vote: 247 - 141 (Record Vote No: 454). SUMMARY AS OF: 12/9/1982--Reported to House amended, Part I. (There is 1 other summary) (Reported to House from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with amendment, H.Rept. 97-951 (Part I)) Oregon Wilderness Act of 1982 - Designates as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System the following lands in the State of Oregon: (1) the Columbia Gorge Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (2) the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (3) the Badger Creek Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (4) the Hidden Wilderness in the Mount Hood and Willamette National Forests; (5) the Middle Santiam Wilderness in the Willamette National Forest; (6) the Rock Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (7) the Cummins Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (8) the Boulder Creek Wilderness in the Umpqua National Forest; (9) the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness in the Umpqua and Rogue River National Forests; (10) the Grassy Knob Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou National Forest; (11) the Red Buttes Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou
    [Show full text]
  • THE Easrsrne Group
    Group One: THE NORTHERN IU Alaska ~ <, 1 Port Houghton-Cape Fanshaw 2 East Kuiu 3 Cleveland Peninsula 4 Upper Tenakee Inlet British Columbia 5 Great Bear Rainforest 6 Randy Stoltmann Wilderness Group Two: THE OwL REGION Washington 7 Pompey 8 Paradise Creek 9 Little Huckleberry Mountain Oregon 10 Salmon-Huckleberry 11 Hardesty Mountain 12 Smith-Umpqua Divide 13 Mount Bailey 14 Copper /North Fork Elk River California 15 Dillon Creek/Siskiyou 16 Orleans Mountain Group Three: THE EAsrsrnE Washington 17 Long Draw/Long Swamp 18 Devil's Gulch Oregon 19 Aldrich Mountain/Dry Cabin 20 North Fork John Day/Elkhorn/Greenhorn 21 Sky Lakes/Pelican Butte 22 Deadhorse Rim/Coleman Rim Northern Great Basin Oregon 23 High Steens/Little Blitzen Gorge 24 Trout Creek Mountains Oregon-Idaho 25 Owyhee Canyon Group Four: NORTHERN RocK1Es Idaho 26 Deadwood 27 French Creek/Patrick Butte 28 North Lochsa Slope 29 Cove-Mallard 30 Mount Jefferson Montana 31 Great Burn 32 Ninemile Valley ROADLESS AREAS AT RISK A Ca~cadia Sampler project, which would have built 93 miles of chum salmon. Goose Flats River, on the inlet's What's at stake: The Stoltmann har• road and cut 123 million board feet of timber south side, harbors brown bear, mink, marten bors the southern limit of North America's from the area, was withdrawn as the result of and Sitka black-tailed deer and draws large coas ta I grizzly bear population. a lawsuit. A new draft EIS is in the early plan• numbers of migrating waterfowl. Beautiful Status: Only 20 percent of this wilderness is ning stages.
    [Show full text]
  • OR Wild -Backmatter V2
    208 OREGON WILD Afterword JIM CALLAHAN One final paragraph of advice: do not burn yourselves out. Be as I am — a reluctant enthusiast.... a part-time crusader, a half-hearted fanatic. Save the other half of your- selves and your lives for pleasure and adventure. It is not enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it. While you can. While it is still here. So get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious still- ness, the lovely mysterious and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to the body, the body active and alive and I promise you this much: I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those desk-bound men with their hearts in a safe-deposit box and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this: you will outlive the bastards. —Edward Abbey1 Edward Abbey. Ed, take it from another Ed, not only can wilderness lovers outlive wilderness opponents, we can also defeat them. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (sic) UNIVERSITY, SHREVEPORT UNIVERSITY, to do nothing. MES SMITH NOEL COLLECTION, NOEL SMITH MES NOEL COLLECTION, MEMORIAL LIBRARY, LOUISIANA STATE LOUISIANA LIBRARY, MEMORIAL —Edmund Burke2 JA Edmund Burke. 1 Van matre, Steve and Bill Weiler.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-328-June 26, 1984
    98 STAT. 272 PUBLIC LAW 98-328-JUNE 26, 1984 Public Law 98-328 98th Congress An Act June 26, 1984 To designate certain national forest system and other lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes. [H.R. 1149] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Oregon United States ofAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act may Wilderness Act be referred to as the "Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984". of 1984. National SEc. 2. (a) The Congress finds that- Wilderness (1) many areas of undeveloped National Forest System land in Preservation the State of Oregon possess outstanding natural characteristics System. which give them high value as wilderness and will, if properly National Forest preserved, contribute as an enduring resource of wilderness for System. the ben~fit of the American people; (2) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation (RARE II) of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have identified areas which, on the basis of their landform, ecosystem, associated wildlife, and location, will help to fulfill the National Forest System's share of a quality National Wilderness Preservation System; and (3) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have also identified areas which do not possess outstand­ ing wilderness attributes or which possess outstanding energy, mineral, timber, grazing, dispersed recreation and other values and which should not now be designated as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System but should be avail­ able for nonwilderness multiple uses under the land manage­ ment planning process and other applicable laws.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for Big Game and Hunters Are Looking Much Better Than They Were a Year Ago
    2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for big game and hunters are looking much better than they were a year ago. Back in August of last year, 100 percent of Oregon was in severe drought and 50 percent in the even worse category of “extreme drought.” While parts of NE and SE Oregon are still experiencing a severe drought, conditions have improved across the state. “We had normal winter precipitation and a wet spring,” says Autumn Larkins, ODFW Assistant District Wildlife Biologist for Harney County. “Water availability is much better this year.” It’s a similar story in northeast Oregon. “The weather is much better suited to deer and elk production as opposed to last year’s record drought,” said Mark Kirsch, ODFW District Wildlife Biologist in Umatilla County. The increased water also better distribute animals during hunting season, rather than cluster them around fewer water sources. It should help distribute early season hunters, too— especially those pronghorn and bowhunters who crowded around the few water holes to set hunting blinds in recent years. The conflict between hunters over blind placement has gotten so bad that ODFW and BLM recently put together a flyer reminding hunters of the rules and good etiquette Now wildlife biologists are crossing their fingers for rains in September. These early fall rains green up forage and help big game put on weight, so animals head into breeding season in good body condition and fit to reproduce. Despite the increased moisture, fire is still a threat throughout Oregon. Most forestlands will have restrictions (such as no campfires) during fire season, and some private lands will be closed to public access entirely.
    [Show full text]
  • Eg-Or-Index-170722.05.Pdf
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Burns Paiute Tribal Reservation G-6 Siletz Reservation B-4 Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Reservation B-3 Umatilla Indian Reservation G-2 Fort McDermitt Indian Reservation H-9,10 Warm Springs Indian Reservation D-3,4 Ankeny National Wildlife Refuge B-4 Basket Slough National Wildlife Refuge B-4 Badger Creek Wilderness D-3 Bear Valley National Wildlife Refuge D-9 9 Menagerie Wilderness C-5 Middle Santiam Wilderness C-4 Mill Creek Wilderness E-4,5 Black Canyon Wilderness F-5 Monument Rock Wilderness G-5 Boulder Creek Wilderness C-7 Mount Hood National Forest C-4 to D-2 Bridge Creek Wilderness E-5 Mount Hood Wilderness D-3 Bull of the Woods Wilderness C,D-4 Mount Jefferson Wilderness D-4,5 Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument C-9,10 Mount Thielsen Wilderness C,D-7 Clackamas Wilderness C-3 to D-4 Mount Washington Wilderness D-5 Cold Springs National Wildlife Refuge F-2 Mountain Lakes Wilderness C-9 Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Newberry National Volcanic Monument D-6 C-2 to E-2 North Fork John Day Wilderness G-3,4 Columbia White Tailed Deer National Wildlife North Fork Umatilla Wilderness G-2 Refuge B-1 Ochoco National Forest E-4 to F-6 Copper Salmon Wilderness A-8 Olallie Scenic Area D-4 Crater Lake National Park C-7,8 Opal Creek Scenic Recreation Area C-4 Crooked River National Grassland D-4 to E-5 Opal Creek Wilderness C-4 Cummins Creek Wilderness A,B-5 Oregon Badlands Wilderness D-5 to E-6 Deschutes National Forest C-7 to D-4 Oregon Cascades Recreation Area C,D-7 Diamond Craters Natural Area F-7 to G-8 Oregon
    [Show full text]
  • Siuslaw National Forest FY 2013 Monitoring Report
    Monitoring and United Evaluation Report States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Siuslaw National Forest Region Fiscal Year 2013 Bailey Creek ii July, 2014 Thank you for taking the time and interest in reviewing the results of the Siuslaw National Forest 2013 Monitoring Report. The report focuses on key monitoring activities and findings since the previous publication in September, 2013. It also summarizes some of our most successful restoration projects. As you read the report you will see where we are using our past successful restoration projects to build upon and improve restoration projects in the future. The Forest still remains diligent in restoring fish and wildlife habitat including resident and anadromous fish species, northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and snowy plover habitat. In the last several years the Forest built and maintained several partnerships, started and completed several successful restoration projects. In this report you will be able to review the outcome of this work. Until we begin Plan revision, it is my commitment to keep you informed of the results of monitoring through this report; however if you would like more information, feel free to contact the Forest or visit our website at http://www.fs.usda.gov/siuslaw. Your continued interest in the Forest Plan is just one way for you to stay current with activities on your public lands. Sincerely, Jeremiah C. Ingersoll JEREMIAH C. INGERSOLL Forest Supervisor Siuslaw National Forest iii SIU-14-07 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Northwest Wilderness
    pacific northwest wilderness for the greatest good * Throughout this guide we use the term Wilderness with a capital W to signify lands that have been designated by Congress as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System whether we name them specifically or not, as opposed to land that has a wild quality but is not designated or managed as Wilderness. Table of Contents Outfitter/Guides Are Wilderness Partners .................................................3 The Promise of Wilderness ............................................................................4 Wilderness in our Backyard: Pacific Northwest Wilderness ...................7 Wilderness Provides .......................................................................................8 The Wilderness Experience — What’s Different? ......................................9 Wilderness Character ...................................................................................11 Keeping it Wild — Wilderness Management ...........................................13 Fish and Wildlife in Wilderness .................................................................15 Fire and Wilderness ......................................................................................17 Invasive Species and Wilderness ................................................................18 Climate Change and Wilderness ................................................................19 Resources ........................................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Inside FORMER EMPLOYEES SPEAK out for BOUNDARY WATERS WILDERNESS / ARIZONA COPPER MINE MOVES FORWARD / FSEEE 2018 ANNUAL REPORT
    The Newsletter of Forest Service Employees For Environmental Ethics Summer 2019 A Rigged System HOW THE SCALES ARE WEIGHED IN FAVOR OF OIL AND GAS ON PUBLIC LANDS Inside FORMER EMPLOYEES SPEAK OUT FOR BOUNDARY WATERS WILDERNESS / ARIZONA COPPER MINE MOVES FORWARD / FSEEE 2018 ANNUAL REPORT Photo Credit: pixabay.com/users/skeeze-272447 The Long Road to a Wilderness Win A dozen years ago, FSEEE launched its campaign affected ranger district), stopped 700 million board feet to protect one of our nation’s wildest and most remote of logging, then the largest logging injunction in U.S. old-growth forests. On March 12, I’m pleased to report history, surpassed later only by the northern spotted that Devil’s Staircase Wilderness became the latest owl lawsuit. addition to our nation’s system of protected lands. The Speaking of spotted owls, Devil’s Staircase is home legislative path was long and circuitous, culminating to the Coast Range’s highest numbers of these rare in President Trump’s signature on a public lands bill birds and the site of one of the decades-long spotted negotiated by a Republican-controlled Congress owl population studies. These studies provide much of (although the bill passed in 2019 its content had the scientific foundation for the Northwest Forest Plan, been hammered out in the earlier Congress). Devil’s which seeks to prevent the spotted owl’s extinction by Staircase was one of only two national forest wilderness protecting millions of old-growth forest acres. designations (and the only one with trees) in this As with most successful legislative efforts, credit massive 260-page bill.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Natural Areas in Oregon And
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Text errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. United States Department of Research Natural Areas in Agriculture Forest Service Oregon and Washington: Pacific Northwest Research Station Past and Current Research General Technical Report PNW-197 and Related Literature November 1986 Sarah E. Greene, Tawny Blinn, and Jerry F. Franklin I Authors SARAH E. GREENE is a research forester. TAWNY BLINN is an editorial assistant. and JERRY F. FRANKLIN is a chief plant ecologist. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Research Station. Forestry Sciences Laboratory. 3200 Jefferson Way. Corvallis, Oregon 97331. Foreword In 1971, I joined the Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Exper- iment Station as Station Director and, among other duties, be- came chainman of the Interagency Committee on Research Natural Areas. It was a chair that I held for 4 years, and it is a - - pleasure to reflect, more than 10 years later, on the progress that has been made. Oregon and Washington already had a vigorous program of preser- vation of Natural Areas for scientific and educational purposes in 1971. In preparation at that time were several publications important to identifying and protecting Natural Areas, including a description of natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington (Franklin and Dyrness 1973), an inventory of Federal Research Natural Areas in Oregon and Washington (Franklin and others 1972),1/ and a comprehensive inventory of Natural Areas rec- ognized by the Society of American Foresters (Buckman and Quintus 1972). The Interagency Committee, with participation from The Nature Conservancy and the States of Oregon and Washington then asked, "What should a well-balanced program of Research Natural Area preservation include?" This led to the publication, "Research Natural Area Needs in the Pacific Northwest: A Contribution to Land-Use Planning" (Dyrness and others 1975).
    [Show full text]
  • View the Nationwide List of Thomas Fire Cooperating Agencies
    THOMAS FIRE NATIONWIDE COOPERATING AGENCIES Alaska Alaska Fire Service Resources, Alaska Fire Service - Galena Zone, Mat-Su Area Forestry, Northern Region Office, Alaska Fire Service - Tanana Zone Arkansas Ouachita National Forest, Ozark & St. Francis National Forests Arizona Phoenix District, Flagstaff District, Tucson District, Arizona State Forestry - Central District, Arizona State Forestry - Northwest District, Avondale Fire Department, Alpine Fire District, Arizona Strip Field Office, Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, Arizona State Forestry Division - State Office, Beaver Dam / Littlefield Fire District, Bisbee Fire Department, Bullhead City Fire Department, Benson Fire Department, Buckskin Fire District, Buckeye Fire Department, Central Arizona Fire and Medical Authority, Central Yavapai Fire District, Casa Grande Fire Department, Coronado National Forest, Coconino National Forest, Colorado River Agency, Daisy Mountain Fire Department, Arizona State Forestry Division - Deer Valley Office, Eloy Fire District, Fry Fire District, Gila District Office, Globe Fire Department, Green Valley Fire District, Golder Ranch Fire District, Greer Fire District, Heber-Overgaard Fire Department, Highlands Fire District, Kaibab National Forest, Mayer Fire District, Mohave Valley Fire Department, Navajo Region Fire and Aviation Management, North County Fire and Medical District, Nogales Fire Department, Northwest Fire Rescue District, Patagonia Volunteer Fire Department, Peoria Fire Department, Phoenix District Office, Picture Rocks Fire District,
    [Show full text]