Regional Ecosystem Office
333 S.W. First Avenue
P.O. Box 3623
Portland, Oregon 97208-3623
Website: www.reo.gov E-Mail: REOmail@or.blm.gov
Phone: 503-808-2165 FAX: 503-808-2163

Memorandum
Date: February 2, 2002
To: Interagency Advisory Committee (see distribution list)
From: Stephen J. Odell, Executive Director
Subject: November 2001 IAC Meeting Notes

Enclosed please find notes briefly summarizing the discussion and decisions reached during the meeting of the Interagency Advisory Committee (IAC) on November 1, 2001. In particular, the notes include issue summaries on the following topics that were addressed during the meeting:

Several individuals were recognized for their manifold and valuable contributions to the NWFP, the RIEC, and REO over the years. Curt Loop is returning to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and was recognized for his yeoman service and leadership in support of the Northwest Forest Plan, particularly as acting REO Executive Director for many months; Ginger Erwert has accepted a new job with the Forest Service and was recognized for her stellar performance as REO Administrative Officer over the last three years in that position; and Bill Walters, Deputy Regional Director, National Park Service, who has accepted a position as Assistant to the National Park Service Director in Washington, D.C., was praised in absentia for his dedicated service in support of the NWFP, particularly in the early years after it was first adopted.

If you have any questions or concerns about the enclosed meeting notes, please do not hesitate to contact me or Kath Collier, REO Management Analyst, at 503-808-2179. Thank you for your ongoing participation in providing valuable input and advice to improve NWFP implementation.

Enclosure

• November 2001 IAC Meeting Notes

cc: REO, DFOs

1693/kc

2

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee Distribution List

California
Mary Nichols, CA Resource Agency, State Representative
Maria Rea, CA Resource Agency (Alternate)
Francie Sullivan, Representative of CA Counties
John Wolley, CA Counties (Alt)

Oregon
Peter Green, Forest Policy Advisor, State Representative
Lance Clark, Resource Analyst, State Rep. (Alternate)
Rocky McVay, Representative of Oregon Counties

Washington
Robert Nichols, Senior Exe. Policy Assistant, State Rep.
Karin Berkholtz, State Representative (Alternate)
Albert McKee, Representative of WA Counties

Tribes
Merv George Jr., Tech. Spec., CA Indian Forest & Fire Mgmt Council
David Herrera, Fisheries Mgr, NW Indian Fisheries Commission
Bruce Davies, Policy Analyst, NW Indian Fisheries Com. (Alt)
Jim Anderson, Exec. Director, NW Indian Fisheries Com. (Alt)
Katie Krueger, Envir. Policy Analyst, Quileute Tribe (Alt)
George Smith, Intertribal Timber Council
Theodora Strong, Yakama Nation (Alt)
Gary Morishima, Intertribal Timber Council (Alt)

Federal Agencies
Anne Badgley, Regional Dir, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Steve Thompson, Acting CA/NV Op Office Mgr, FWS
Col. Randall J. Butler, Dist Engr, U.S. Army Corps of Engrs
Davis Moriuchi, Dep Dist Commander, U.S. Corps of Engrs
Art Eck, Deputy Regional Director, National Park Service
Kathy Jope, Natural Resources Team Leader, NPS
Jim Shevock, Associate Regional Director, NPS (Alt)
Harv Forsgren, Regional Forester, Forest Service, R-6
Nancy Graybeal, Deputy Regional Forester, FS, R-6
Jack Blackwell, Regional Forester, FS, R-5
Bernie Weingardt, Deputy Regional Forester, FS , R-5
Bob Graham, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Anne Kinsinger, Regional Biologist, USGS Western Region
Ronald E. Kirby, Director, USGS Ecosystem Science Center
Robert Lohn, Reg Adm, National Marine Fisheries Service
Mike Crouse, Acting Asst. Reg Adm, NMFS (Alt)
Thomas J. Mills, Station Director, Forest Service, PNW
Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, Western Ecology Division, EPA
Robert Lackey, Western Ecology Division, EPA (Alt)
Dave Powers, Environmental Protection Agency
Stan Speaks, Area Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs
Dave Renwald, Portland Area Office, BIA (Alt)
Ron Jaeger, Area Director, Sacramento Area Office, BIA
Elaine Zielinski, State Director, OR/WA, Bureau of Land Mmgt
Ed Shepard, Deputy State Director, OR/WA, BLM
Michael Pool, State Director, CA, BLM (Alt)
Paul Roush, Wildlife Biologist, BLM, Arcata, CA

Updated 01/20/2002

ISSUE SUMMARY

REO Contact/Phone: Ken Denton (503-808-2175)
Topic: Public Comments
Issue Statement: To receive comments from the public on issues regarding implementation of the NWFP, with two members of the public offering comments: Tom Kitchar, Waldo Mining District, and Jim Nolan, Friends of Freedom/People for USA, Illinois Valley Chapter
Summary of Discussion:
  • Tom Kitchar expressed concern that the NWFP Standard & Guideline MM-1 requires mining operations within Riparian Reserves to have an approved Plan of Operations, and he described the adverse effects this has had on mining in the Siskiyou National Forest, particularly with respect to prospecting and small-scale mining. He provided information regarding differences in implementation between the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, and compared the MM-1 Standard and Guideline to agency regulations. He provided recommendations and asked that the agencies address this issue.
  • Jim Nolan expressed concern that NWFP implementation has not reflected a proper balance of economic, ecological, and community needs, particularly within certain ranger districts on the Siskiyou National Forest. He provided information about factors which have resulted in less Matrix timber volume than projected and about the adverse effects this has had on the local community, including the possibility that southern Oregon was about to lose its biggest sawmill. He asked that the agencies address these issues and explore opportunities to obtain timber volume from Late Successional Reserves while meeting ecological objectives.
IAC Response: The IAC expressed appreciation for the highly informative presentations, and indicated that the statements would be taken into consideration during the small group discussions on future direction of the NWFP scheduled for later during the meeting.
Next Steps (who/what/when): Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management staff will work together to review the information provided on both topics and prepare any appropriate responses. Copies of responses will be distributed to IAC members for their information.
 

ISSUE SUMMARY

REO Contact/Phone: Steve Odell (503-808-2166)
Topic: Future Direction of Northwest Forest Plan
Issue Statement: To discuss and solicit input from the IAC on the future direction of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP), with a particular focus on potential changes to the present course of implementation to more effectively achieve all of the plan's principal objectives.
Summary of Discussion: Steve Odell provided a brief substantive background and overview of the process that would be used during the day to collect feedback in four NWFP areas:
  • Aquatic Conservation Strategy
  • Survey and Manage
  • Cumulative procedural requirements and processes
  • Interrelationship between conservation and commodity output strategies

Steve also noted that IAC feedback was collected on another NWFP substantive area under consideration for changes, Adaptive Management Areas, at the May 2001 IAC meeting.

Elaine Zielinski and other executives illuminated "The Big Picture" by presenting an overview of the present course of NWFP implementation, recent congressional hearings, and the gradually increasing level of interest in the NWFP in the agencies' Washington offices.

Committee members then self-selected two of the four substantive areas on which they wished to provide small-group input during the meeting, the result of which was that Survey and Manage dropped out due to a lack of interest. A summary of notes from each small group discussion was collected on each of the other three areas and synthesized at the end of the meeting, with the syntheses and discussion questions for each area set forth below:

  1. Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS)

Small Group Discussion Questions:

  • Should greater discretion be provided regarding activities allowed within reserve boundaries so long as such activities are consistent with ACS objectives and/or terrestrial species objectives?
  • Should agencies attempt to build greater flexibility into the process for modifying Riparian Reserve widths?
  • What should be the role of Watershed Analysis? Should it include recommendations and if so, what should they focus on?

Synthesis of IAC comments:

  • IAC expressed an openness and general support for changing the ACS, expressing a preference for changes that are science-based, make better use of the information being gathered through monitoring and other means, and are equitable in terms of their effects
  • There is general support for providing greater discretion to accomplish ACS objectives, but concern over potential unintended consequences (e.g., loosening S&Gs for adjusting riparian reserve widths may diminish benefits of habitat protection for riparian dependent species)
  • There is a need to clarify the role of Watershed Analysis in the agencies' planning process
  • Look at NWFP's documentation requirements with an eye toward determining whether they impede or discourage change, and adjust requirements as needed
  • Remember the connections among the components of the NWFP in considering changes

2. Cumulative procedural requirements and processes

Small Group Discussion Questions:

  • Is there a need to further examine opportunities to develop criteria to exempt certain actions from RIEC/REO reviews?
  • In general, what kinds of NWFP issues warrant interagency review, if any, and at what level?
  • What is the appropriate balance between regional consistency and field-level discretion in NWFP implementation processes and analyses (e.g., Late-Successional Reserve Assessments and Watershed Analyses)?

Synthesis of IAC comments:

  • IAC would like more information on NWFP processes and procedural requirements, and feedback from the field would also be useful
  • Each process should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and in context, focusing primarily on the extent to which the process adds value to NWFP implementation decisions
  • Opportunities for exemption criteria should be pursued, with level of process, review, and documentation set to match the level of controversy and significance ("stop light" analogy)
  • There is a role for reviews and decision-making on all levels, but there should be a balance among the levels, with decision authority generally being pushed down to the most local level possible so long as substantial decisions and outcomes may be tracked in a feasible way

3. Interrelationship between conservation and commodity output strategies

Small Group Discussion Questions:

  • Should modifications to the NWFP be considered in light of the difference between the timber outputs originally anticipated and those actually being achieved over the past several years?
  • Should the Standards and Guidelines underlying the present Probable Sale Quantity (PSQ) under the NWFP be reconsidered?
  • Should the present mix of Land Allocations and/or the land base available for commercial timber harvest be reconsidered in an effort to better satisfy timber objectives of the NWFP?

Synthesis of IAC comments:

  • The NWFP reflects a social contract that recognizes the importance of timber outputs and IAC wants to better achieve the balance among all of the objectives set forth in the NWFP
  • All five of the fundamental principles underlying the NWFP need to be met
  • The IAC expressed an openness to looking at a variety of ways to more effectively meet the NWFP's objectives (e.g., adjustments to Land Allocations, shorter rotations, etc.)
  • The focus should be on outcomes with greater discretion given to the local manager, but with an overall need to keep the "whole picture" of the NWFP in front of us
  • Examine NWFP standards and guidelines to see if they contribute to or hinder achievement of anticipated and desired outcomes
  • Recognition of the need for public support of any changes to NWFP, which will require education and communication
  • There is a need to rebuild support for the NWFP overall, both internally and externally
Next Steps (who/what/when): RIEC will consider IAC comments in its future deliberations on potential changes to the NWFP, and REO will facilitate further development of non-Federal IAC input on these issues as they continue to be discussed and evaluated.
 

ISSUE SUMMARY
RMG Contact/Phone: Dave Busch /503-808-2192
Topic: Northwest Forest Plan Monitoring Program Activities
Background: The Interagency Monitoring Program is focused on producing a 10-year report dealing with implementation and effectiveness of key aspects of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP). Modules dealing with NWFP implementation monitoring (IM) and effectiveness monitoring (EM) focused on Late Successional Old Growth forests (LSOG), the Northern Spotted Owl (NSO), the Marbled Murrelet (MAMU), and Aquatic/Riparian systems (AREMP) are currently being implemented. EM modules for social/economic factors, tribal relations, and biodiversity are at various stages in planning or testing.
Summary of Topic: Jon Martin, Interagency Monitoring Program lead, outlined the 10-year interpretive report that will cover data, analyses, and findings from the above-mentioned monitoring modules. The presentation focused on AREMP, particularly on opportunities for state and tribal involvement to coordinate the implementation of this monitoring program.

Feedback from the IAC indicated that each of the states is planning to conduct watershed monitoring and that AREMP provides a logical connection with these efforts. In response to a question about possible industry involvement, it was pointed out that there has been little up to this point but such involvement would be welcome. Several IAC members expressed their desire to see options for pursuing State-Federal collaboration developed further. Working with the Interagency Monitoring Program, REO will facilitate a meeting between State and other interested IAC members to assist in the development of such options.

 

ISSUE SUMMARY
RMG Contact/Phone: Dan McKenzie /503-808-2190
Topic: Thinning of Dense, Young Stands in Late Successional Reserves
Background: The REO and RMG were directed to facilitate an interagency work group to develop this issue and prepare a report for RIEC consideration. The workgroup has identified and analyzed the current acreage of young stands and primary factors relevant to the issue of thinning in Late-Successional Reserves (LSRs) and outlined a set of adaptive management options. The RIEC has previously made a general recommendation that the management agencies proceed with increased emphasis on thinning young dense stands in LSRs on this basis. A RIEC subcommittee has been authorized to oversee the workgroup's final tasks and has directed that a final report be completed as expeditiously as possible.
Status/Update: The current draft of the final TMOD Report is nearly complete, but a few key staff have been unable to devote adequate time to completing the report due to competing agency priority assignments. The final completion date for the report is difficult to establish, but it is unlikely to be completed until December 2001 at present staffing levels.

Numerous requests for the information and technical publications have been filled by the work group and agency staff. The Forest Service and BLM have initiated workshops and meetings to provide the information to the field level, along with submission of budget requests to fund additional thinnings in LSRs. A non-Federal member asked about potential volume that might be available through commercial thinnings in LSRs. It was explained that no reasonably based current estimates are available and that any volume produced would simply be a by-product of stand density management done for ecological objectives in LSRs.

 

HOT TOPICS NOTES

NWFP-Related Litigation - Steve Odell provided a brief overview of the recent Alsea Valley Alliance decision issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon and explained some of its potential implications on the various court rulings in the series of PCFFA v. NMFS cases.

Organizational Learning: Adaptive Management for Salmon Conservation Conference - Dr. John Calhoun, Director, Olympic Natural Resources Center, University of Washington, shared information on an upcoming conference scheduled December 2-4, 2001 in Bellevue, Washington. Additional information on the conference can be found at www.cfr.washington.edu/Outreach/adapt/index.html.

STATUS REPORTS & HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS

Status Reports: A question was asked about the Status Report on the FY2002 Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations conference report regarding how deep any budget cuts might be for agencies in the region. Harv Forsgren explained that no decisions had been reached on allocations among Forest Service regions, but that sufficient funding should be provided for the NWFP.

Meeting Attendees:

Intergovernmental Advisory Committee & Alternates
Badgley, Anne Representative U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Benson, Gary Acting Representative Forest Service, Pacific NW Research
Buffington, Doug Acting Representative USGS, Western Region Research
Clark, Lance Acting Representative OR Dept. of Forestry
Crouse, Mike Acting Representative (a.m.) National Marine Fisheries Service
Forsgren, Harv Representative Forest Service, R-6
George, Merv Representative CA Indian Forest & Fire Mgmt Council
Green, Peter Represenative State of Oregon
Herrera, Dave Representative NW Indian Fisheries Commission
McKee, Albert County Commissioner WA Counties
Odell, Steve Executive Director Regional Ecosystem Office
Powers, Dave Representative Environmental Protection Agency
Shevock, Jim Representative National Park Service
Smith, George Representative Intertribal Timber Council
Sullivan, Francie Representative California State Counties
Whistler, Alex Acting Representative Bureau of Indian Affairs
Zielinski, Elaine Chairperson Bureau of Land Management, OR/WA

Regional Ecosystem Office
Busch, Dave Acting Representative US Geographic Survey
Collier, Kath Facilitator/Mgmt Regional Ecosystem Office
Denton, Ken Representative Forest Service
Erwert, Ginger Adm Officer Forest Service
Guenther, Dale GIS Administrative Forest Service
Kirchner, Bill Representative Environmental Protection Agency
McKenzie, Dan Representative EPA Research
Pietrzak, Debbie Representative Bureau of Land Management
Watson, Jay Representative U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Ystad, Laurie Secretary Forest Service

Other Attendees
Anderson, Kathy Forest Service
Branson, Tom Bureau of Indian Affairs
Brown, Susan Jane Gifford Pinchot Task Force
Calhoun, John Olympic National Resources Center, UofWA
Golightly, Chris Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
Kitcher, Tom Waldo Mining District
Knudsen, Monty U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Martin, Jon FS, R6
Mohney, John Dept. of Interior
Nolan, Jim Citizens of Illinois Valley
Repp, Pamela U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Roush, Paul Bureau of Land Management
Young, Don Waldo Mining District