Wildlife needs limited thinning of USFW properties in NC, biologist says

Proposed openings in North Carolina's two national forests will result in the growth of grasses and other understory vegetation that is beneficial to many wildlife species.

Warburton says criticism of plan by environmental groups is baseless

Gordon Warburton, a biologist with the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, said criticism of a preliminary U.S. Forest Service proposal to allow limited timber harvests in the state’s two largest national forests is misleading and misses the mark by a wide margin.

“A Southern Environmental Law Center press release is full of misconceptions and misinformation,” said Warburton, who has worked for the Commission for 32 years.

The USFS, which has allowed almost no timber-thinning or habitat management in national forests since the 1980s, has held several public hearings this year to get input about its plan. It is also accepting on-line comments regarding the Pisgah-Nantahala Forest Plan Revision. Comments will be accepted through Jan. 5 at NCPLanRevision@fs.fed.us.

“It’s critical for sportsmen and other people to comment to the Forest Service in the next 30 days,” said Warburton, who explained that the Commission is working with the USFS on parts of a timber-thinning plan that would benefit wildlife by creating more and better habitat for plants and animals and provide more food and shelter than currently exists in the mountains.

After the USFS announced the preliminary plan, the SELC, representing The Wilderness Society, Wild South and the Western N.C. Alliance, issued a news release that charged it would result in “industrial-scale logging.” Warburton said that claim was wrong.

“When you say ‘logging,’ it has an implication of going out and whacking down trees with no purpose and doing it commercially to line the pockets of industrial giants,” he said. “That is absolutely not what the U.S. Forest Service intends. This isn’t about industrial logging. Besides that, (USFS) doesn’t have the budget to do ‘massive logging,’ even if it wanted to.”

Warburton said an early USFS news release noted that 700,000 acres were in play, but that figure referred only to the reviewable acres in the Pisgah and Nantahala proposals, he said, not that the entire forests would be logged. And, he said, 250,000 acres already are off the table. Those acres are permanently untouchable and include Wilderness Areas, Wilderness Study Areas and Roadless Areas created during the Clinton Administration.

“So 25 percent of North Carolina’s two national forests, 1.1 million acres in actual size, is in remote backcountry areas, roadless areas, areas preserved for their solitude, and others for old growth,” Warburton said. “The (Commission) supports those types of areas. Those places won’t change because our No. 1 model for wildlife is (habitat) diversity.”

“The 700K figure was a misnomer. Just as with the previous plan, the Forest Service didn’t go out and cut every square inch (of timber) on 800,000 acres.”

Warburton said the USFS said it has cut just 1,500 acres per year over the past 10 to 15 years, with the total annual areas logged varying between 600 and 700 acres per year.

“That is less than 1 percent (of the USFS acreage),” he said. “So how is the Forest Service going to log 700,000 acres over 10 to 15 years at that rate? It’s impossible.”

The SELC news release also said new roads would be cut to provide access for logging equipment, roads that would destroy “sensitive, unspoiled backcountry areas.”

Hugh Irwin, conservation planner for The Wilderness Society, said: “Not only is that destructive and disruptive, it’s also fiscally irresponsible. The agency shouldn’t be expanding its road system when it can’t even afford to maintain the roads it already has.”

The SELC report said USFS has “less than 13 percent of the funds needed to maintain its existing roads, leading to safety and water-quality problems. Several popular roads remain closed due to unrepaired washouts.”

Warburton said those statements are false, except for the lack of monetary support for new roads.

“The Forest Service won’t build more extensive road networks,” he said. “The recommendation is for road management a reasonable distance from existing roads or to make short roads to reach specific areas. (The USFS) isn’t capable of building an extensive network for new roads. It just ain’t gonna happen. What is planned are temporary, not ‘system’ roads, that later can be converted to wildlife openings, and (the Commission) can grow green stuff for wildlife.”

Warburton said the Commission’s long-held position is that habitat diversity is the key to having thriving wildlife populations, and those depend upon understory plants as food sources, especially in the mountains, where winters can be brutal, and especially if hard-mast crops such as acorns fail.

“The trees in the national forests are approaching 70 to 80 years of age,” he said. “We need to open up some areas to trees of different sizes so animals can have soft mast (grapes, weeds, grasses, tubers) to eat and not just depend on acorns. A lot of species use young forests.

“What happens if we have a poor mast year? We get bears in Asheville — and wandering across super highways — looking for food. It’s not a good situation for us or the bears.”