In our graduate school days we wrote about communities built around working forests.  A bazillion years later, looks like it is beginning to happen!  www.wenatcheeworld.com/business/new-grant-program-conserves-community-forests/article_18bfb394-d348-11ea-bd18-735bd1ad07f3.html

Not is the time to think about defensible space.  We need to all stay safe.

Never in our lifetimes did we think we would see such a rapid change in our daily lives.  Even after September 11, 2001, we were able to hug each other, eat out, play basketball, grieve and worry as a community.  Now, we shelter in place and avoid contact in order to stem the viral transmission of a fairly lethal virus.  But like nature recovering from a natural "event," we too will grow even more resilient, stronger, and have a greater capacity to be a community.  Right now, in our opinion, it is important to care give for yourself, your family, your friends.  But if you can, look forward.  Think about what we want this world to look like when we all open our doors and windows to see each other.  And also, don't forget that while this virus seems scary and horrible, we also still need to worry about other natural events like wildfire.  Spend this time thinking about defensible space around your homes, water access, and prepare.  Last, don't forget to spend time outside.  Nature is healing, curative, a balm in this time of high stress and anxiety.  

If you want to see how this will impact you, please reach out.  

Very interesting take on the impacts of climate change and how communities need to be thinking about climate change impacts and the valuation of real property assets for residents of the community: www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/climate/federal-reserve-climate-financial-risk.html?searchResultPosition=4

Recent research by the US Forest Service confirms much of what forest ecologist have been saying for over two decades.  In the West, prior to fire suppression efforts in the early 20th Century, wildfires were common.  However, these were "low intensity" fires, usually "cleaning out" brush and downed woody debris.  Environmental historian Nancy Langston in her book Forest Dreams, Forest Nightmares: The Paradox of Old Growth in the Inland West, wrote eloquently about how early European settlers arriving in southeast Washington and the Oregon Willowas, saw park-like stands of Ponderosa pine, where you could distinctly see through the forest because tree density was not as intense as it is nowadays.

While we all love Smokey Bear (I have a lot of Smokey Bear memorabilia in my office), the science around fire suppression was, well, wrong.  Adding to fire suppression, silviculturalists who understood the role of fire in regenerating stands of Douglas fir, attempted to mimic fire by clear-cutting stands hoping to enhance the natural regeneration and planting.  All of these methods have led to the fuel that burns.  Enhanced by even minute shifts in climate over time, and where there is fuel, there will be fire as long as there are sparks.

An even greater issue is the human dimension of this issue, which is the zoning codes that permit, or even encourage, development in wildfire prone areas.  It has reached a point where, in some areas, almost all human development is in a fire prone area (who would have thought, 15 years ago, that the California wine country in Napa and Sonoma counties could be a wildfire prone area?).  Human development puts our wildfire fighters at enormous risk defending homes, businesses, and whole communities, when perhaps, the best ecological thing we can do is to let the fire burn.

So what do we do?  One thing is to continue supporting government led studies to understand wildfires.  A second thing is if your home is in a wildfire area, make sure you have had a defensible space assessment done and follow the recommendations.  Essentially insulating your structures from the fire path, limbing trees near the structure, creating a break between any grass and the structure, and even placement of the structure if you are just beginning to build.  Now is the time to think about defensible space.  Give us a call, we can help.

High Country News published an article about the Bundy trials in Nevada, where once again, the militias and individuals who pointed guns and refused to pay grazing fees as required by contracts with the Federal government, were released from the indictments.  The analysis relies on court testimony and the Federal judge's decision that employees of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) abused their powers.

What the analysis doesn't emphasize sufficiently, is that the militias, the Bundys, and others threatened, bullied, intimidated not only government employees, but essentially have disrespected the millions of American citizens who all follow laws and own federal lands.

As we have discussed earlier, there is a movement by a small minority of people who want to re-create a land where they can run roughshod over anyone who believes public lands belong to all of us, not just a cattle grazer or a miner.  It is like they see the world as 1871 not 2018.  

Regardless what happened in court, it is up to all of us to make sure we are not transported back in time by this ideology of extraction worship.  Their twisted interpretation of the Constitution and belief that "it's theirs," can only be won if we allow them to win.

Public lands are out lands.  

Several weeks ago there was a thoughtful piece in the New York Times.  The author is originally from eastern Oregon and returned to seek an understanding of rural concerns post-Bundy takeover of the US Fish and Wildlife Service wildlife refuge at Malheur in 2015.  

More than anything about that article, we were struck at the polarized ways of seeing nature.  We were trained as foresters and in that training, we can look at forests and determine stands, board feet, valuation, carbon offsets....or, we can see wildlife habitat, watershed protection, beauty.  More than anything, we see beauty.  It is rare that a forester, these days, looks at a forest and only sees dollar value or value to humans.

What struck us about the article was a quote toward the end.  A mother and daughter from eastern Oregon, proponents of a hard line belief that all federal land really belongs to the archers, loggers, miners who value the land for its resource, visited Yellowstone.  The crown jewel of our National Parks and federally owned public lands.  In addition to complaining that the trees needed to be logged, the mother said this: "I was looking at the buffalo and just seeing steak."  

And so this is the divide between us.  Those of us who believe that the natural world is valuable of itself, not for extracting and selling.  Then there are those who look at every tree, animal, rock, and rangeland as useless unless it is being cut, shot, mined, and grazed.  Apparently they also believe that the federal government has no right to own or manage lands that it does own.  

We have watched some variation of these attitudes for a long time.  Sage Brush Rebellion, property rights movement, Blue Line Movement.  It comes down to seeing nature differently than the majority of people.  These so-called "movements" try to pitch their beliefs as rural versus urban, or liberal versus "family values."  But it really is about seeing nature differently.  They may think they have a utilitarian sensibility, but after you have shot all the bison, logged all the trees, destroyed watersheds, endangered fish, mined or drilled every inch of land, there is no utility left but open space.  A true family value is looking at nature as a family member.  Something to nurture, love, appreciate, value, sustain.  

​When we go to Yellowstone we see bison.  

Yesterday we spent the day in our state capitol.  We have been volunteering to work on reforming our state's laws and regulations having to do with suction dredge mining in streams and rivers that are critical habitat for salmon, steelhead, and Bull trout.  Yesterday was a presentation in front of the department of fish and wildlife commissioners.  

The mining community has been very assertive in opposing any change.  All of our neighboring states have requirements for discharge permits, invasive species checks, no dredging on critical habitat, but our state lags behind and seems to be in "regulatory capture" with the mining community.  

Among many of the tactics some of miners use is something they perceive to be the tough guy strategy.  At the briefing they called those of us involved in this movement to reform the mining laws "ecojihadists."  Then there is one miner in particular who focuses on us.  Later in the day he posts slanderous comments about us.  For the most part, many of the miners have addressed us with civility, but there are a few who adopt an ugliness that is indicative of their anger.

It seems to be the pattern in civil discourse these days that if you don't agree with someone you focus on their lives or label them or call them names.  They hide behind ideas such as "free speech" and all the bandwidth the Internet provides to spew their hate-filled anger.  The man who posted about us has a long history of posting racist, homophobic, sexist rants.  

Tough guys don't do that.  In reality tough guys face the issues with their opinions on the issues.  They talk, debate, argue, plead their case.  But name calling and bullying is a sign of weak people.  Weak people.

It's the crazy season.  State legislatures are in session, particularly here in Washington state.  After a number of months of eventful natural resource disasters (fires, aquaculture pens breaking, few wild steelhead returns), the legislature is full steam ahead wanting to fix "what is broke."  We have been in this business for a long time and know how sausage is made.  One thing we ask of our policy makers, is to look at "low hanging fruit."  Big fixes for wild anadromous fish crashes or wild fires or the demise of the South Puget Sound orcas usually ends up not working.  But there are low hanging fruit, things that can be done to help fish, mitigate climate change, and protect our forests.

The picture above is a suction dredge.  These are machines, essentially shop vacuums, that are used to suck up a stream, run the water and sediment through a sluice, and discharge the sediment.  All of this is done in Washington state without a discharge permit under the clean water act and in areas of critical habitat for anadromous fish, there are no incidental take permits under the Endangered Species Act.

Everyone from ranchers to orchard owners to municipal water districts to property owners are making sacrifices to help salmon and steelhead.  Reforming the non-existent regulations on suction dredge mining in Washington is not a big deal.  It's low hanging fruit.  But in a season of silliness, it would be a good thing to do one thing that might actually help.