Forest Blog

Greenwood project approved by Forest Service

2/22/2018

This is an example of forest in the Greenwood project that was approved for oak woodland management.

By Jim Scheff, Director, Kentucky Heartwood

Our fight over the Greenwood project came to an underwhelming and, for the most part, disappointing conclusion at the end of October, 2017. Kentucky Heartwood worked for more than three years to see the project turn from a typical timber harvest toward a science-based plan that would support the restoration of relict, fire-adapted open forest communities as well as the recovery of large areas of old-growth. In July 2017, the Forest Service issued their Draft Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact – a preliminary approval of the project. Kentucky Heartwood then filed a detailed, 32 page predecisional objection (a formal administrative objection) detailing a wide range of issues, concerns, and failures in the Forest Service’s analysis. In October, we had a formal meeting with Forest Service officials to seek resolution to the concerns raised in our objection. The meeting was scheduled for two hours but stretched to four hours as we delved deep in to the issues. The meeting was somewhat constructive.

In the end, the Forest Service did agree to some small changes, and made overtures toward more careful planning in the future. While the Forest Service did not agree to go back and actually survey the project area for rare species and communities, they stated that they planned to receive increased training from the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC) on how to identify rare communities, would look for rare communities during project implementation, and adjust management accordingly. They also committed to consulting with KSNPC and Kentucky Heartwood in taking a closer look at management opportunities in the 751 Roadsides/Curt Pond Ridge area – a hotspot for Cumberland barrens remnants that are in desperate need of careful, active management, as well as possible remnant barrens sites in the Blue John area.

Another point of resolution that was addressed was the Forest Service’s prior unwillingness to provide clear targets for native versus non-native plantings in 75 wildlife openings covering 222 acres. The Forest Service has now formally clarified that they will manage for 35% in cool season grasses and grains, 20% in native pollinator mixes, and 45% in native grasses. While we would rather see all of the area managed for native vegetation, this is a clear improvement over the current condition and the vague statements made throughout the analysis. With regard to the proposed broadcast spraying of herbicides in wildlife openings, the Forest Service has agreed to apply herbicides only after vegetation has been cut down or is otherwise out of flowering in order to avoid impacts to native pollinators and birds, and to spray no more than 33% of the total acreage in a given year. Again, this is not what we wanted, but it is a meaningful improvement.

These changes are in addition to those that came about between the original 2014 scoping document and publication of the Environmental Assessment in early 2017. Those changes included reducing the amount of logging by about 600 acres (including eliminating logging that was planned at the trailhead to the Three Forks of Beaver Creek overlook) and the elimination of 26 miles of bulldozed firelines.

What is most disappointing, however, is that the Forest Service misrepresented forest conditions in many areas in order to promote logging. Several sites covering hundreds of acres that are now largely open-canopied as a result of the 1999-2002 southern pine beetle outbreak, and which have good floristic indicators of barrens or woodland type communities, will not be managed with fire or
otherwise. Meanwhile, intact, closed-canopy hardwood forests will be cut to “restore” open-canopied and pine forests, with 139 log landings cleared and compacted to facilitate the removal of timber on over 2,000 acres.

Over the coming years we will closely monitor implementation of the project. Some species and forest communities will likely benefit – particularly if the proposed fire management is implemented carefully for appropriate, site-specific ecological responses. However, there will certainly be negative impacts, disruptions, and trade-offs for years to come.

To learn more about the ecology of the Greenwood area and our efforts to affect change on this project, please see our Summer 2016 and Summer 2017 newsletters, as well as our comments and predecisional objection, all of which are available on our website here.

This article was published in the Winter 2018 edition of our Newsletter. Here is a link to our Newsletter archives.

0 Comments

Environmental Assessment released for Comment on Greenwood Project

2/10/2017

9 Comments

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Directions on how to submit your comments are at the bottom of this post.

The Daniel Boone National Forest on February 2nd released for comment the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Greenwood Vegetation Management Project. This is the largest timber sale proposed on the Daniel Boone in more than a decade. Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017.

The project, first announced in July, 2014, proposes extensive and varied vegetation management on over 12,000 acres of national forest land in the Stearns Ranger District in McCreary and Pulaski Counties. The project is predicated on legitimate goals for the restoration of fire-adapted forest communities, but is regrettably skewed toward commercial timber harvests at the expense of restoring ecosystems.

Large, old chestnut oak in a proposed woodland harvest unit

Among the proposed management actions are:

Commercial logging on over 2,000 acres
Broadcast spraying of herbicides across 222 acres of wildlife openings
10,627 acres of prescribed fire
Nearly 6 miles of road construction and reconstruction
Over 100 log landings
37 miles of machine-constructed firelines (and 45 miles of handline)
Midstory removals on 1,228 acres
Non-commercial “crop tree” releases on 2,347 acres

The Forest Service modified the proposal since originally proposed, with about 500 acres less of concerning timber harvests, 1/3 less prescribed fire, and half as many miles of machine-constructed fire lines. Still, this is a very large project that will have significant, long-term impacts.

Because of the complex nature and large scope of this project, we’re going to dig deep into the issues here to help you understand what is being proposed by the Forest Service, why restoration efforts can be important, and the problems and shortcomings of the Forest Service’s proposal.

Background

Between the Cumberland River and the Big South Fork, along U.S. 27 through McCreary and Pulaski Counties, is one of the more extensive areas of national forest in Kentucky. Based on limited historical accounts, occurrences of rare plants and other species, and current natural community structure, it is probable that this area historically had semi-permanent areas of open forest conditions supporting a wide diversity of wildlife and other species. While closed canopy, old-growth forests were no doubt a substantial, even dominant, part of the landscape, sections or corridors with more scattered trees and an understory of grasses and forbs were likely an important part of the landscape. The landscape also likely contained various scrubby, shrub-dominated areas that were referred to as “roughs” and “barrens” by American settlers – terms that have made their way in to modern day place names.

These natural communities likely persisted through a combination of fire (both human and lightning-caused) and browsing by bison. U.S. 27 follows what has been called the Great Tellico Trail, an ancient north-south game trail and trade route connecting the salt licks, cane, and grasslands of the Bluegrass with the plains of central Tennessee. This long coevoloution of the landscape was thoroughly disrupted through settlement, homesteading, logging, fire suppression, and the utter annihilation of the immense herds of bison that once ranged through the region. Restoration of what was will never be entirely possible, but some efforts using the tools at hand may be necessary to preserve some of the historic diversity of the landscape.

But will the Greenwood Project actually restore this landscape in any meaningful way? Or will it just be another timber sale leaving behind a legacy of roads, log landings, and invasive species? Some actions, if done right (like prescribed fire) could have significant benefits. But the Forest Service has not wavered from its emphasis on commercial logging, despite evidence and arguments that some of the most important restoration can, and should, happen without commercial logging.

Below we describe many of the proposed actions in the Greenwood Project, along with criticisms and concerns to help inform you in writing your comment letter. You can read all the project documents on the Daniel Boone National Forest website here. Directions on how to submit your comments are at the bottom of this post.

Example of an area with major pine beetle damage and resulting open canopy on Curt Pond Ridge

Pine restoration and the southern pine beetle

One of the main, stated purposed for the Greenwood Project is to restore shortleaf pine on 661 acres through commercial harvest of hardwoods and planting of pine. Between 1999 and 2002, the southern pine beetle (SPB) – a native beetle in southeastern forests – had a massive explosion in population leading to the death of most shortleaf and pitch pines on the southern Daniel Boone NF.

Across the 32,000 acres of national forest lands in the project area, the Forest Service has estimated that “10,468 acres of the project area lost, at minimum, 30% of their canopy to southern pine beetle mortality” where “stocking has been significantly reduced.” What this means is that there are thousands of acres of naturally thinned forests in the project area with mature hardwoods, like oaks and hickories, remaining in the canopy. Some of these stands lost only scattered pines, while others lost nearly all of their canopy.

The Forest Service’s proposal to “restore pines,” however, misses the mark. While the Forest Service has proposed pine restoration activities at some appropriate sites (where most of the canopy was lost to the southern pine beetle), several areas proposed for "restoration" are in fact mature hardwood stands that formerly had few pines. These mostly mature oak and hickory stands will be heavily logged and planted with pine, while large areas of degraded former pine forests are being left unmanaged.

For more than two years we have been asking the Forest Service to prioritize restoring pine on actual former pine sites instead of clearing mature oak and hickory forests to do so. They insist in the Environmental Assessment that this is impossible.

Forest proposed for clearing and pine planting for "pine restoration"

Woodland establishment harvests

The Forest Service has proposed harvesting about 50% to 80% of the trees on 674 acres of oak and hickory forests to establish woodlands (woodlands are low density, fire-mediated forests). However, as discussed above, over 10,000 acres of the project area were naturally thinned from the southern pine beetle leaving scattered mature hardwoods in the canopy. We’ve spent extensive time in the field with the Forest Service looking at these stands, and discussing how woodland management can and should focus on these already impacted, thinned areas. Regardless of the facts on the ground, the Forest Service states that “The purpose of the proposed timber sale would be to establish the low to moderate basal area,” insisting that no forests with low-density canopies exist in the project area. This is simply not true, and the Forest Service knows it. The reality is that they are focusing restoration on areas with better timber value.

An example where pine beetle damage and fire has begun to create open woodland conditions on Curt Pond Ridge. Near the site are several interesting or rare "prairie-type" plant species. Over the last several years, absent fire, saplings have begun to fill more open areas.

Other logging prescriptions

Other timber harvests are included in the project, including “Low thinning” on 409 acres to harvest about 30% to 60% of the canopy (focusing on trees lower in the canopy), “Two-aged shelterwood” harvests to cut about 90% of the trees on 74 acres, and “Shelterwood preparatory cuts” to remove about 50% of the canopy on 245 acres. Another 447 acres of moderate, commercial “Pine thinning” are proposed for young, pole-sized pine plantations, though we do not find this prescription objectionable.

Beautiful mixed forest with sugar maple, white ash, beech, white oak, and hickories with a cane understory near the mouth of Beaver Creek. This area is proposed for harvest to create "woodlands."

Log Landings and roads

To facilitate logging, more than 100 log landings will be built in the forest. Log landings are areas that are completely cleared to stockpile and load timber. The soil in landings is heavily disturbed and compacted, and prone to invasive species. While no new permanent roads are planned, the Forest Service will reconstruct 1.6 miles of system road and build 4.1 miles of “temporary road” bulldozed through the forest in 29 segments. While temporary roads are seeded and have erosion controls installed, they are not temporary and are already quite extensive through the forest. The impacts of landings and roads are why restoring the landscape by working with existing natural disturbance is a more sound ecological approach.

Typical log landing in the Brushy Ridge project.

Wildlife openings and herbicides

The Forest Service has proposed broadcast spraying of herbicides (glyphosate) on 222 acres across 75 wildlife openings maintained by the Forest Service and Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. The herbicides are proposed to kill non-native grasses like fescue and replant using no-till methods. While no-till agriculture can have benefits with regard to reducing erosion, erosion is not a major issue in these wildlife openings (they are mostly not very large, are in uplands away from stream channels, and are surrounded by forest). The Forest Service says that some openings will be replanted with non-native forage for game (like clover or corn), while other areas would be replanted with native grasses and pollinator habitat species. The Forest Service does not provide any information about how many openings will be planted with native vegetation, despite our asking this question several times over nearly two and a half years.

In another 286 acres surrounding the wildlife openings, more herbicide would be used to control invasive species but be limited to spot treatments and stump applications. The proposal also includes commercial thinning of forest around the openings to create a transitional zone that may include the planting of native soft mast species such as crabapple, persimmon, dogwood and wild plum.

Removing non-native species and establishing native species in and around openings could have significant ecological benefits. This needs to be balanced with considerations regarding the impacts of herbicide use. The adjacent London Ranger District recently proposed transitioning all 88 wildlife openings on that district to native vegetation without the use of herbicides. We feel that the Stearns Ranger District should consider this option for the Greenwood project.

Wildlife opening in Beaver Creek area.

Prescribed fire

An integral part of the Greenwood Project is prescribed fire across 10,627 acres in 37 burn blocks. Several thousand acres of other, previously approved burn units surround the Greenwood project area, and arson is also a common source of forest fire in this are.

Fire is an important part of this landscape, particularly in the drier upland forests, and we support its use in this project. Our main concerns relate to fire lines and return intervals (how often areas are burned). While the burn managers on the Daniel Boone are very conscientious, the project includes 37.4 miles of machine-constructed fireline. While reduced from the 64 miles originally proposed, it is still substantial. Another 45 miles of handline will be constructed, though those impacts should be minimal.

With regard to return intervals, the Forest Service has not provided any information about the intended frequency for fire. While this type of work is still experimental, it is generally agreed that to get a woodland understory that is rich in grasses and forbs (instead of a thicket of saplings and briars) the forest needs to burn every 1-3 years – at least initially. This is also true for natural shortleaf pine regeneration. Other important fire effects can come from more lengthy return intervals, but for the most specialized woodland and pine forest conditions (especially to address sprouting from cut maples), the fires must be somewhat frequent. The nearby, much smaller Freeman Fork Oak Woodland Restoration Project has prescribed two-year fire intervals. But most areas are being burned much less frequently, in large part due to resource limitations. Without the proper attention to sites in the Greenwood project area the results could be little different from a typical timber harvest.

Sugar maple, shagbark, and cane forest proposed for harvest near the mouth of Beaver Creek.

Midstory control and crop tree release

The Greenwood project includes extensive non-commercial timber cutting with limited impacts and several benefits. Crop tree release is proposed on 2,347 acres to thin dense forests that are recovering from clearcuts in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Many of these stands, which would have been dominated by oaks, hickories, and pines, are instead dominated by tulip poplar and stump-sprouted red maples. Thinning will help give a competitive edge to mostly oaks and hickories in the developing forests. Midstory control is proposed on 1,228 acres, much of which coincides with commercial harvest areas. This is a practice to cut and leave mostly red maples, which dominate the midstory in many stands. This is an important practice in restoring an open, fire-adapted forest structure. No herbicide is proposed for either treatment.

Picture: The area on the left has had midstory thinning and some fire, whereas the forest on the right has not. The forest on the left is proposed for some overstory harvest and more fire.

The area on the left has had midstory thinning and some fire, whereas the forest on the right has not. The forest on the left is proposed for some overstory harvest and more fire.

Hostility toward old-growth

While no old-growth is proposed for harvesting, the Forest Service has made alarming statements against allowing forests to grow older and develop old-growth characteristics. They assert that, without logging, “forest health would deteriorate throughout the project area.” They further insist that unharvested forests will decline in biodiversity, have reduced productivity (contrary to current science), will suffer nutrient loss (again, mostly not true), and suffer “widespread and severe disease.”

They also insist that, without logging, the forests across the project area will “become more homogenous” where even-aged forests are “underrepresented” and structural diversity is diminished. Again, this is nonsense. Nearly all of the of the forest in the 32,000 acre Greenwood project area is even-aged. The Forest Service has harvested about 3,600 acres since 1980, and the southern pine beetle created thousands more acres of young and disturbed forest. Nearly 10,000 acres are less than 60 years old. What is alarming about these statements is that they provide a window into an antiquated, commodity-based view of our forests. According to these statements by the Forest Service, the most healthy approach to forest management is rotations of even-aged harvests where forests are harvested before old-growth characteristics redevelop. But timber quality is not the same as ecological health. If old-growth forests like Lilley Cornett Woods and Blanton Forest were under U.S. Forest Service management, and evaluated by these same criteria, they would be considered unhealthy and in need of harvest. We don’t agree.

Old-growth pignut hickory in a proposed harvest unit.

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Comments should include “Greenwood Vegetation Management Project” in the subject line and be submitted to:

Tim Reed, District Ranger, 3320 Hwy 27 North, Whitley City, KY 42653

Email comments to: comments-southern-daniel-boone-stearns@fs.fed.us

9 Comments

Forest Service uses false information to justify timber management

5/5/2010

Kentucky Heartwood submitted comments to the Forest Service regarding the 7,000 acre Redbird Midstory Removal Project. The project documents can be seen here. The Forest Service used faulty information to justify the project, which they plan to implement with a Categorical Exclusion, circumventing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its standards of review. The project would force an unnatural one- and two-aged structure on this recovering forest to simplify future timber harvests and regeneration, rather than helping the forest to recover its native range of structures and functions. You can download and read our comments below.

rb_midstoryremoval.pdf
File Size:	192 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

Kentucky Heartwood comments on DBNF Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Proposal

8/4/2009

Kentucky Heartwood recently submitted comments for scoping on a proposal by the Daniel Boone National Forest to save some hemlock stands in the face of the Hemlock Woolly Adelgid. You can learn more about the Hemlock Woolly Adelgid and its effects on Hemlocks on the Save Kentucky's Hemlocks webpage.

To read the full Forest Service proposal, click here.

To read Kentucky Heartwood's comments, download the following file:

scoping_comments_hwa_forestwide.pdf
File Size:	100 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

Kentucky Heartwood Appeals Forest Plan Lawsuit to 6th Circuit

8/4/2009

For Immediate Release

Kentucky Heartwood Appeals Forest Plan Decision to Sixth Circuit

Claims faulty analysis ignored public sentiment, over-emphasizes commercial logging on Daniel Boone National Forest

(Lexington), KY - Kentucky Heartwood recently filed a Notice of Appeal to the 6th Circuit challenging the April 27, 2009 decision of federal judge Karl Forester. Forester ruled against Kentucky Heartwood and Heartwood in a lawsuit charging that the U.S. Forest Service had violated the law in implementing its revised forest management plan and the Morehead Ice Storm Recovery Project.

The forest advocacy organizations initially brought the suit to federal court on the grounds that public input was ignored; effects of herbicides were not analyzed; and the endangered Indiana Bat was not adequately protected. The appeal to Circuit Court charges that District Judge Forester failed to address the issues raised in the original complaint.

In its 2003 revision of the Forest Plan, the Forest Service contemplated several management scenarios for the 700,000-acre Daniel Boone National Forest in Southeastern Kentucky. Unprecedented public input during the planning process resulted in 1,109 letters and 2,658 petition signatures submitted for the Forest Service to consider on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) alone. Ninety-four percent of the individuals who submitted comments on the DEIS urged the federal agency to stop commercial logging on Kentucky's only national forest. The Forest Service considered 6 alternatives in detail; none of them represented a no-logging option.

During the course of the nine-year forest plan revision process, two citizens’ alternatives for managing the forest without commercial logging were submitted to the agency, which ignored them both. Despite the fact that places like Big South Fork and Great Smoky Mountains National Park are successfully managed without the use of commercial logging, the Forest Service attempted to characterize a no-logging option as non-management of the forest and deemed it unworkable without any analysis. Judge Forester accepted their argument without addressing the National Forest Management Act regulations that require the range of alternatives to respond to significant public concerns.

"The Daniel Boone National Forest and the people of Kentucky deserve a management plan rooted in a healthy, functioning forest ecosystem – not a patchwork of logging roads and subsidized commercial harvests. But the Forest Service says this is unworkable, without even taking a serious look at how to do it,” stated Kentucky Heartwood Director, Jim Scheff.

The 2003 Plan approves the use of herbicides across the forest. Kentucky Heartwood and Heartwood pointed out that the plan analysis failed to address the forest-wide impacts of herbicide use. The Forest Service claimed that analysis need only take place when a particular project is approved. The judge agreed with the agency without addressing the fact that at the project level the Forest Service continues to fail to consider the cumulative impacts of forest-wide herbicide use.

Chris Schimmoeller, boardmember of Kentucky Heartwood, stated, "At a time when the devastating effects of long-term, cumulative herbicide exposure are becoming well known, we are extremely disappointed that Judge Forester was fooled by the Forest Service’s shell game."

For more information:

Jim Scheff, Kentucky Heartwood Director

(859) 893-0262

quercusstellata@gmail.com

Jim Bensman

Heartwood Forest Watch Director

(618) 463-0714

jbensman1@charter.net

Chris Schimmoeller

Kentucky Heartwood Council Member

(502) 226-5751, ext. 3

###

Men welcome jobs clearing forest

4/16/2009

Reposted from http://www.kentucky.com/181/story/762526.html

By Andy Mead - amead@herald-leader.com

CLIFTY WILDERNESS — The federal stimulus package is at work in some of Kentucky's most rugged back country.

It's hard, sometimes dangerous work. But in Menifee County, where one of every five is out of work, a temporary job making $15.50 an hour clearing ice-storm debris from trails is a blessing.

Darrell Hess, who with his general contractor partner Leonard Brown hired the other three men in the crew, gives the rundown.

There is Bill Peck, who usually works in construction, then got a factory job, then got laid off. There is Walter Centers, who worked off and on for Hess for years, then left for a regular job a year ago — and was laid off. There is Dave Holdorff, who owns a welding business, but hasn't had enough work lately to keep the shop lights on.

Hess and Brown do all sorts of work: some logging, excavating, building fences, a little farming.

But, with the economy like it is, all those things had been slow.

"I'll be honest with you," Hess said. "I was glad to hear about this because I didn't know where my next job was going to come from."

The men were working Wednesday on Osborne Bend Trail, known to local horse riders at Powderhouse Trail, in the Clifty Wilderness. The 13,000-acre wilderness is part of the Red River Gorge in the Daniel Boone National Forest.

The Daniel Boone was one of the first national forests to get some of the $1.15 billion in stimulus money being funneled through the Forest Service. The Boone forest's portion was $550,000. The Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area in Western Kentucky, where damage from the January ice storm was more severe, got $3 million.

The Daniel Boone hired Swift & Staley, a Western Kentucky contractor that already had been approved to do work in Land Between the Lakes, and that company hired local subcontractors in Eastern Kentucky.

Five crews totaling two dozen people are clearing trails and roads in the gorge and other parts of Daniel Boone's Cumberland Ranger District.

Two crews with a total of eight people are clearing damage from a February wind storm from the Redbird Crest Trail in the Boone's Redbird Ranger District.

Most of the crews are using chain saws or whatever power equipment they need.

But because of rules governing a nationally designated wilderness, no motorized vehicles or tools may be used to clear trails that cross the Clifty.

You might hear them work before you see them, but you would have to listen carefully for the whinnying of a horse or the soft rasping of a cross-cut saw.

The men pack their tools, their lunch and themselves on four horses and a mule. They use cross-cut and bow saws and axes to clear trees and limbs that had been blocking trails since late January.

The work can be back-breaking — sawing through a thick red oak trunk quickly teaches why a 6-foot cross-cut saw is also called a "misery whip." But the men are all from Menifee County. Although they all needed the work, Hess said, more than just money is involved.

All the men had grown up running up and down the steep hills that now are the Clifty. They all ride horses on the trails, even when they aren't coming in to work.

And there's the larger economic picture. Hess's father runs a horse camp, and already people are calling from distant places, trying to make summer plans and wondering if the trails will be open.

"This part of the forest holds a great interest for tourists and for our local merchants and our community because a lot of people come to visit this area," he said. "This is an important project to a lot of people."

Standing on a ridge in the thick forest on Wednesday, when an overcast sky was keeping the men cool and the horses frisky, Hess also noted the advantage of working in a place where most people come to get away from it all.

"It's the most beautiful office I ever set in," he said.

Reach Andy Mead at (859) 231-3319 or 1-800-950-6397, ext. 3319.

Kentucky Heartwood

Greenwood project approved by Forest Service

Environmental Assessment released for Comment on Greenwood Project

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Directions on how to submit your comments are at the bottom of this post.

Background

Pine restoration and the southern pine beetle

Woodland establishment harvests

Other logging prescriptions

Log Landings and roads

Wildlife openings and herbicides

Prescribed fire

Midstory control and crop tree release

Hostility toward old-growth

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Forest Service uses false information to justify timber management

Kentucky Heartwood comments on DBNF Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Proposal

Kentucky Heartwood Appeals Forest Plan Lawsuit to 6th Circuit

Men welcome jobs clearing forest

Archives

Categories

Kentucky Heartwood

Greenwood project approved by Forest Service

Environmental Assessment released for Comment on Greenwood Project

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017​Directions on how to submit your comments are at the bottom of this post.​

​​Background

​Pine restoration and the southern pine beetle

​Woodland establishment harvests

​​Other logging prescriptions

​Log Landings and roads

​​Wildlife openings and herbicides

​Prescribed fire

​Midstory control and crop tree release

​Hostility toward old-growth

​Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Forest Service uses false information to justify timber management

Kentucky Heartwood comments on DBNF Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Proposal

Kentucky Heartwood Appeals Forest Plan Lawsuit to 6th Circuit

Men welcome jobs clearing forest

Archives

Categories

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017

Directions on how to submit your comments are at the bottom of this post.

Background

Pine restoration and the southern pine beetle

Woodland establishment harvests

Other logging prescriptions

Log Landings and roads

Wildlife openings and herbicides

Prescribed fire

Midstory control and crop tree release

Hostility toward old-growth

Comments are due by Monday, March 6, 2017