On December 12, 2022, the U.S. Forest Service (FS), National Forests and Grasslands in Texas (NFGT), met with the Texas Conservation Alliance (TCA), and Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club (Sierra Club).
Several concerns/issues were discussed, particularly collaboration which deals with implementation of the 1996 Forest Plan for proposed projects and activities on the NFGT.
Much of the discussion related to collaboration about proposed projects and how this hadn’t been implemented well, which affected other concerns/issues. It was agreed that additional discussion was needed with the NFGT Forest Supervisor periodically. There wasn’t enough time to talk about all concerns/issues and additional meetings will be helpful. The FS looks forward to dialogue with the Sierra Club and TCA and this would be an ongoing process that all concerns/issues will not be resolved at once.
TCA referred to the need for responsiveness in expectations and consistency for collaboration. We need a common vision about what collaboration is, how it works, and how to gage its’ success. For some FS projects, although collaboration is very important, it wasn’t done.
TCA referred to two steps that make up collaboration. These steps are the process and the product. We need to meet early and often, build consensus, avoid conflict, and avoid objections. Implementation must include what’s agreed upon in collaboration.
The FS suggested that an Implementation Team be created for each project that was approved so that collaborative agreements would be remembered and implemented.
An important concern/issue is that scoping letters have little substance. At a minimum, included with the scoping letter should be stand maps/data. This used to be done but isn’t anymore. There is so little information about a proposed project that it’s hard to respond to it.
Responsiveness to concerns/issues is important. The Sierra Club said that the FS must tell it and the public how much it’s going to collaborate. If the FS isn’t going to collaborate or isn’t going to do certain collaboration actions, like field trips, the Sierra Club must be told so it doesn’t spend time waiting and getting ready for collaboration that doesn’t occur.
The Sierra Club said there needs to be discussion and feedback on concerns/issues brought up in comments. There are three types of feedback: agree with the concern/issue and address it, disagree with the concern/issue, and concerns/issues where compromise gets part of what was sought.
TCA said, heavy, intensive thinning, where more than 30% of the trees are removed at one time, is much more environmentally significant and has more impacts than thinning that removes less tree density. The FS has tried to ignore the Forest Plan and its’ limit of 30% tree removal for Red-cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) habitat. TCA referred to several studies which indicate that more intensive forestry has more environmental impacts and is more significant.
TCA and the Sierra Club stated that the Forest Plan must be adhered to and that standards and guidelines, like old growth inventory/analysis/designation and trail corridor analysis must be implemented.
The FS said that we must have collaboration since it’s FS policy. The question is how much and what kind. Consistency of how to deal with collaboration and concerns/issues is very important.
TCA said that we need to focus on substantive issues and the FS must recognize that what TCA and Sierra Club want aren’t favors but recognition and response to legitimate issues.
TCA said that purpose/need statements in proposed projects equate restoration with pine silviculture. This isn’t true. The Sierra Club stated that Shortleaf Pine Ecosystem restoration is more than planting Shortleaf Pine trees. There must be other indicators of Shortleaf Pine Ecosystem restoration than just planting Shortleaf Pines.
TCA said that inventorying/monitoring should document changed conditions. Sierra Club said there is a need for some form of pre-scoping, perhaps 60-90 days before a scoping letter is released so the public can visit the proposed project site and provide feedback that might change the proposed project. TCA said that pre-scoping can help resolve public issues before the proposed project is scoped.
It was agreed that another meeting would be planned for March 2023.