Flathead rolls out forest plan

Flathead National Forest’s revision of its forest plan is being released today for public comment. 

The forest plan revision is designed to provide a blueprint for 15 years’ worth of management on the 2.4-million-acre Flathead Forest. The forest’s current plan dates back to 1986 and was only intended to have a lifespan of 10 to 15 years.

“Right now, the point is to get the public’s feedback,” project leader Joe Krueger said during a  meeting Thursday with the Daily Inter Lake Editorial Board. “This is a starting point.”

Preparing the latest revision began in late 2013, based on a 2012 planning rule that requires forest plans to equally incorporate ecological, social and economic sustainability.

The revised plan recommends 188,206 acres of new designated wilderness, largely in the Jewel Basin area east of the Flathead Valley and the Tuchuck-Whale Creek area in the North Fork. The Flathead Forest already has 1,072,219 acres of wilderness.  

The plan calls for about 28 million board-feet of timber production each year, part of a total of 30 million to 34 million board-feet for all wood products. Currently the Flathead Forest produces between 27 million and 30 million board-feet of wood products per year.

The release of the plan today kicks off a 60-day period for public comment that includes a series of public meetings from March 17 to April 15.

Timber production lands, occupying 30.8 percent of the total area of the forest in the revised plan, are divided up into three categories, corresponding to the degree of wildlife habitat protection. The highest levels of timber production could take place on 169,068 acres, mainly in the Salish Mountains to the west.

Krueger said planners paid extra attention to accommodating existing backcounty uses, which account for over one-eighth of the total forest acreage. The plan designates 148,323 acres for nonmotorized, year-round use, 97,743 acres for snowmobile use and 50,160 acres for motorized year-round use on designated routes.

The plan proposes a change in snowmobiling areas by expanding access between Canyon Creek and Big Creek up the North Fork while reducing snowmobile use in the Sullivan Creek, Slide Creek and Tin Creek areas.

Other recreation areas, such as mountain biking trails, would occupy 33,360 acres.

A major component of the plan is a proposed amendment that directs management of grizzly bear habitat in anticipation of the animal’s eventual delisting. 

Currently, grizzlies are a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act, but the recovery of grizzly populations in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem has opened up the possibility of a delisting by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Rob Carlin, a resources, planning, fire and staff officer with the Flathead Forest, said the management strategy will allow the Forest Service to begin implementing conservation measures if the bears are delisted. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service could begin work to delist the species once the draft environmental impact statement is rolled out. 

Krueger spoke highly of the collaborative process used for the development of the plan, in which a broad cross-section of stakeholders was invited to participate in talks beginning in 2006.

“We didn’t reach a grand bargain ... but we did find out what they didn’t like, and that was very helpful,” he said.

By forging some compromises, the Forest Service hopes to avoid lawsuits, which are frequently lodged against the agency when it approves a new plan or project. Those protracted court battles are costly and can hold up projects for years.

“There’s also a ripple effect of litigation that affects all of our projects,” Carlin said. He provided the example of a court determination that the agency misinterpreted habitat requirements, forcing forest officials to revisit other projects to ensure the same mistake is not repeated.

Krueger added, “You have to be very sharp in knowing the legal landscape as a planner, when you’re not a lawyer.”

Krueger singled out Ron Cron, a Kalispell mechanic and mountain bike enthusiast, as “one of the big winners” who participated extensively in the planning process and offered constructive ideas. Cron has for years been trying to establish a mountain biking trail system at Crane Mountain. The new revision incorporates portions of his project.

As federal funding for national forests continues to dwindle, partnerships are growing in importance as sources of revenue. Krueger said a private company has already agreed to bankroll a “hut-to-hut” system of backcountry shelters near Tally Lake. 

Krueger noted the onerous cost of developing the forest plan itself, which he said comes in at about $800,000 per year. In part, this pays for a team of local experts including a recreation specialist, wildlife biologist, silviculturist and aquatic specialist.

Public comments received during the next two months will be used to develop alternatives by June. Krueger anticipates releasing a draft environmental impact statement by January 2016, followed by a 90-day comment period.

“For that process, we are required to formally respond to each comment,” Krueger said, adding that failure to make relevant corrections to the plan could wind up costing the agency in court if the plan is litigated.

From there, the agency hopes to release the final environmental statement by January 2017 with a final decision coming in June.

And while that might not exactly seem like a fast track, Krueger said it is an ambitious schedule compared with other forest plans.

“It’s not a quick process, but we’re doing it faster than anyone I know,” he said. “No one’s done this in the time frames we’re predicting.”

The proposed action for the revised forest plan can be accessed online at www.fs.usda.gov/goto/flathead/fpr.

Reporter Samuel Wilson can be reached at 758-4407 or by email at swilson@dailyinterlake.com