-
The Forest Service identified individuals who will be considered eligible objectors to the revised forest plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests, Friday.
After almost a decade of planning, the Forest Service released a revised Nantahala, Pisgah Forests management plan, but it was met with backlash with 14,000 objections received.
The Forest Service identified individuals who will be considered eligible objectors to the revised forest plan for the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests, Friday.
This comes as a 60-day objection period closed March 22, following the release of the revised forest plan and final Environmental Impact Statement in January.
The public had an opportunity to file an objection if they had concerns with some aspect of the revised plan and had engaged with the Forest Service during the process. The regional team has gone through all submissions and determined which are eligible.
The Forest Service reviewed all objections that were received. Of the nearly 14,000 received, more than 1,000 were submitted anonymously or submitted multiple times by the same individual. Additionally, several thousand form letter objections were submitted by individuals who had not previously commented and were therefore not considered eligible.
Most of the issues identified by non-eligible objectors are the same, or similar to, issues identified by eligible objectors, said Regional Forester for the Southern Region, Ken Arney.
“We greatly appreciate the time and energy you have taken to engage in this process,” Arney said.
The intent of the public engagement process the Forest Service has conducted in North Carolina over the past nine years was to listen to diverse public interests and incorporate them in the planning process as much as possible, said Arney. The purpose of public engagement is so that issues and concerns can be addressed prior to the objection process.
Those who are ineligible to formally object can still attend objection resolution meetings that are open to the public.
All eligible objections can be viewed on the forest’s website at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/nfsnc/nprevision
The Southern Environmental Law Center, which is sponsoring several objecting groups released a statement last week that talked about the Where and why logging happens is one of the most important issues addressed by the Forest Plan.
“The plan does not prioritize using timber harvests to restore forests degraded by past mismanagement, nor does it prioritize storing carbon to help fight climate change,” SELC said in their statement. “In fact, the plan doesn’t commit the Forest Service to any priorities except for cutting more trees and for the large majority of the landscape – 610,434 acres – it defines success as simply logging more. It proposes a major increase, not only in the amount of logging, but also in the places on the landscape where it will occur. Timber production is a legitimate use of our shared public lands, but it is not appropriate in the more-than 100,000 acres of existing old growth forests, state-recognized habitat for rare species, and backcountry areas that would be open to that use under the new plan.
“The Forest Service had a clear roadmap for a successful Forest Plan, which they chose not to follow. Over the last decade, the Nantahala Pisgah Forest Partnership – which is made up of a diverse group of conservation organizations, recreation groups, timber interests, hunting groups, and many others – created a set of consensus recommendations for the plan. This innovative collaborative effort led to recommendations that would have increased overall timber harvest levels but would have ensured that timber harvest is being used as a tool to restore degraded conditions without sacrificing rare and unique values, like rare species habitat and old growth.
Fortunately, it’s not a done deal. The “final” plan won’t truly be final for several more months, during which the Forest Service has one more chance to get it right.”
The objecting groups represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center include MountainTrue, the Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, and Defenders of Wildlife. Statements from each group are included below:
“Anyone who has spent time in the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests knows how special they are. These lands deserve a plan that lays out a clear vision for a better future. Unfortunately, the new plan is long on rhetoric but short on commitments,” Sam Evans, Leader of SELC’s National Forests and Parks Program, said. “Nothing in the new plan would prevent the kinds of harm we’ve seen under the old plan – including the loss of old growth and rare habitats we can never get back. This is a once-in-a-generation chance for the Forest Service to show that it can change course on its own, and we still hope that it will.”
“The Pisgah and Nantahala Forests are a keystone to preserving the unique natural values of the Southern Appalachian ecosystem and mitigating all the pressures that are now brought to bear by climate change on these natural systems. The Forest Plan presents an opportunity to give clear direction to those who will implement it, but this plan falls short. The objection gives stakeholders an additional chance to dialog with Forest planners and hopefully make the needed changes to strengthen protections for key components on the forest that help make them resilient in the face of the threats to come,” David Reid, Sierra Club National Forest Issue Chair, said.
“Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests are crown jewels of American public lands and nothing short of an excellent forest plan is acceptable,” MountainTrue Public Lands Field Biologist Josh Kelly said. “We hope the critiques and ideas offered in our objection will help to make the final plan as good as it can be. These forests and the American people deserve that.”
“The Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests are vital strongholds for rare wildlife that depend on these lands for their very survival. This plan is a squandered opportunity to proactively address biodiversity loss and the climate crisis. We stand with our partners, ready to redouble our efforts to gain a better outcome for our forests,” Ben Prater, Defender of Wildlife’s Southeast Program Director, said.
“The Forest Service’s Plan is a step backward for conservation in the face of climate change and the biodiversity crisis. The Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests were an opportunity to set the gold standard for how national forests should be managed. This gold standard would have required protecting key priority conservation lands, including old growth, state Natural Areas, and Mountain Treasure areas, while also providing a sustainable flow of forest products and wildlife habitat,” The Wilderness Society Senior Conservation Specialist Hugh Irwin said. “There was excellent collaborative stakeholder support for this win-win solution. Unfortunately, the Forest Service presented a Plan that will put key conservation areas and conservation values at risk. We are hopeful that the objection process offers a chance to get it right – the future of our forests depends on it.”
- From Staff Reports