Roadless Rule Re-instated!

it's about time, 20.09.2006 13:16

In a major, sweeping decision, a federal judge in California today reinstated Clinton-era protections of 58.5 million acres of national forests.

*NOTE* This story is being made a feature on Rogue Indy in recognition of all the hard work done by forest defenders here in Southern Oregon and throughout the region we call the State of Jefferson --Rogue IMC Volunteer

(See message below from KS Wild)

Wednesday, September 20, 2006
FORESTS: Calif. judge reinstates Clinton roadless rule
Dan Berman, Greenwire senior reporter

Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco sided with four Democratic attorneys general and 20 environmental groups in reinstating the Clinton rule and throwing out the Bush administration's roadless petition plan. The Clinton rule put 58.5 million acres of national forest off-limits to roadbuilding, logging and other development.

Idaho Gov. Jim Risch (R) is scheduled to announce his state's roadless petition today along with Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey, but it is unclear how Laporte's ruling will play out. "Defendants are enjoined from taking any further action contrary to the Roadless Rule without undertaking environmental analysis consistent with this opinion," Laporte said.

Forest Service spokesman Dan Jiron said the agency will review today's decision. "We still believe the state petition rule is a viable way to protect roadless areas."

The states, who filed their challenge last September (Washington joined this February), claim the Bush administration failed to conduct an environmental analysis of removing the Clinton roadless protections as required by the National Environmental Policy Act. The state petition plan that provides no guarantees that a governor's wishes will be followed.

Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath (D) and Maine Attorney General G. Steven Rowe (D) have filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the plaintiffs.

Meanwhile, the environmental groups, who filed their suit in October, also charge the Forest Service violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service on the potential effects to threatened and endangered species of the roadless petition rule.

The Clinton rule was opposed by many Western Republican lawmakers and the timber and oil and gas industries who felt the rule was overly restrictive and arbitrary. The motorized recreation lobby also opposes a return to the Clinton-era standard and several groups have filed to intervene in the case on behalf of the federal government: the American Council of Snowmobile Associations, BlueRibbon Coalition, California Association of 4 Wheel Drive Clubs and United Four Wheel Drive Associations. The Silver Creek Timber Co. has also intervened in the case (Greenwire, Aug. 1).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A message from the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center:

You may recall that the Bush administration installed its own watered-down rule in 2005 that required a cumbersome state petitioning process and afforded no protections to roadless areas. The ruling yesterday reinstates the 2001 rule, protecting nearly 60 million acres of public land across the country from logging and road-building, including 2 million acres of roadless lands in Oregon and nearly 4.3 million acres in California. The ruling does not protect roadless areas in the Tongass National Forest in Alaska.

The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest was the first in the nation to begin logging roadless forests since the 2001 rule. Sadly, before the legality of Roadless Rule was determined, the Mike's Gulch logging sale in the South Kalmiopsis Roadless Area was clearcut this summer, and nearly half of the Blackberry logging sale in the North Kalmiopsis Roadless Area has been cut. Attorneys are currently working to clarify what this ruling means for the Kalmiopsis Roadless Areas of southwest Oregon.

A huge thank you to everyone who took a moment over the years to call and write to government officials about roadless area protection. Because of our efforts, we were able to get our elected officials to take a stand to protect our legacy roadless forests.

The court case that prevailed yesterday was two consolidated cases against Bush's repeal, one filed by the states of Oregon, California, Washington and New Mexico, and the other by 20 environmental groups including KS Wild.

KS Wild website:  http://www.kswild.org/

Download this article in pdf format >>

Add this article to your pdf newsletter selection >>

Checkout and Download your PDF-newsletter selection >>

Email this article to someone >>

Make a quick comment on this article >>

Good decision 21.09.2006 - 09:28 Encouraging, hopefully work will be halted, not holding my breath. USFS in the back pocket of industry and both are reluctant to let go of the gold. Zork> Action vs. Policy 21.09.2006 - 13:25 Someone needs to explain to Laporte the difference between 'action' and 'policy'. I'm guessing it will be the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that sets her straight. Any bets on how long it takes for her decision to get overturned? I say 6 months, max. Moon Muffin> Oh yeah, 21.09.2006 - 21:20 USFS is really in "industry back pocket"! Thats why region 6 went from 4 billion to almost zero in less than 5 years. What planet you been living on "Zork"....? Before you open you yap why don't do a reality check? Curious> clearcuts and extinct salmon runs don't lie 21.09.2006 - 22:21 because the BLM and Forest Service blatantly over cut in the 1970's and especially in the 80's is why they or their timber baron masters had nothing left to cut. These good ol boys were all too willing to sell out to their timber baron masters and corporate theives back then and they finally got caught and slapped back before they destroyed every salmon run in the Northwest and most species that depend on intact native forests. You are not going to get me to feel the least bit sorry for the thieves who almost took the whole ecosystem from the people in the Northwest who love and depend on it. In fact some of them who stole untold millions upon millions (maybe billions) of board feet from public lands without paying a dime for it should be in jail for their crimes against the american people. You and yours can't have it all. We won't let you destroy all life on this planet. We won't let you! lemming not> Ahem 22.09.2006 - 00:07 Curious I'm sorry to break this news to you but the USFS is headed up by a former industry shill. To deny a long history of Forest Service collusion with industry is to stick one's head in the sand like an Ostrich. Maybe you have feathers and real long legs? Guys like you are proof industry snuggles up to the freddies constantly. Zork> The 22.09.2006 - 10:34 Federal Government is the largest land owner in the state of Oregon. Almost all of this land west of the cascades is timber land. To say that the "industry" has a vested interest in what managment activities take place on this land is not an incredible leap of deductive logic. Or as my father was fond of saying...."no shit". The owners of the companies that are in the busines of manufacturing wood products care about how the United States of America manages or does not manage this incredible resourse. They care about their employees, they care about their communities, and if they don't care about the bottom line they will not exist into the future to provide anything for the first two. As much as you would have us believe otherwise they care about the health of the forests. Are their bad opperators? You bet, but I wouldn't call people that burn offices, spike trees, damage equipment, or block and destroy culverts, like they did at Warner Creek encampment, sterling examples or even mainstream examples of mainstream anti management thought. By the way the protesters mid winter distruction/blocking of the culverts destroyed whole sections of the road and did more silting in of the Willamette River then the small amount of Heli logging ever could have. MARK REY WAS A LOBBIEST. He worked for the timber industry. He believes in and worked for active management (including SOME harverst) on federal lands. He still holds those beliefs. Once again it is not a secret, you have not discovered/disclosed anything that is not known by any one that knows anything about the makeup of the USDA. Or to quote my daughter "Duh, ya think". Get over it, he sees the world differently than you do. All that said, what have been the results? The reality is we cut less federal timber now, than we did 20, 10, of even 8 years ago under Clinton/Clinton/Gore. Your stating that Industry is in bed with the agency is just not reality. Do industry folks want more harvest? You bet. Do they promote more harvest? You bet. What are the results of those desires? Not much. Curious> We both knew that 22.09.2006 - 18:17 "The owners of the companies that are in the business of manufacturing wood products care about how the United States of America manages or does not manage this incredible resourse" Translated from your top secret industry speak that would mean yes they do indeed have an interest in getting the cut out and seeing as much money flow into their pockets via the federal timber sale program. Yes big Mark is a former "lobbiest" or what I'd call a "shill" or "mouthpiece" and we all know he's alot more concerned with the wants and desires of the resource extraction industry and alot less concerned with the desires of the whole of the citizenry-that made him the perfect man for a job in the Bush Admin. What does 10 yr old incidents at Warner Creek have to do with anything other than the activists succeeded in preserving an area that was quite capable of regenerating itself and is doing so quite nicely? Shows you'll try anything to discredit those who would oppose your typical industry "managment is best" outlook. Sounds like you agreed with much I said though so thanks for confirming what I already knew. Zork Native Oregonian> * * * * 22.09.2006 - 18:44 "The reality is we cut less federal timber now, than we did 20, 10, of even 8 years ago under Clinton/Clinton/Gore. Your stating that Industry is in bed with the agency is just not reality. Do industry folks want more harvest? You bet. Do they promote more harvest? You bet. What are the results of those desires? Not much. Curious> If we let industry and the USFS/BLM run unbridled on federal land they'd cut it all. Harvests are way down from the record slaughters in the 80's despite industry/federal agency's eternal comfy little relationship. The NWFP stipulated environmental surveys had to be done so industry/DCTO's whined until their bushbuddys decided to help them out and declare Survey and Manage "too cumbersome", it interfered with getting the cut out. And you have the nerve to tell me there's no bedbuddy relationship? Sorry I was born at night, not last night. I worked many federal reforestation contracts back in those days (80's) and saw firsthand what was happening stunk. Why do you think I became a enviro? You should be aware alot of us greenies have worked in the woods and based our attitudes on what we've seen out there. Including our attitudes on salvage logging. I've been to Warner Creek and I've been to Shady Beach(salvage logged) across the street. I prefer Warner Creek thank you. Zork> Just for the record 22.09.2006 - 20:54 Personally, I'm OK with protections for Roadless Areas and I do see the value in them. However, I still am in favor of being able to salvage log those Roadless Areas by helicopter, as long as the process improves the land. In truth, Roadless Rules are a non-issue, in most cases, to me. Many Roadless Areas don't have any timber worth extracting, otherwise there would have been roads in them long ago. Here's something new on the eco-front. Just how far will the eco-litigious, green anarchists go to further their own twisted greed?!? On my own salvage project, they intervened to stop the cutting of hazardous snags on certain roads. Only the roads where standard sedans can drive are worthy of being made safe. Hmmmmm, I wonder what percentage of forest users drive only on those roads in standard sedans??? Is it OK to let those roads with waterbars have dangerous snags looming over them? Is it OK to let those roads become blocked with snags, keeping emergency traffic from driving on them? Is it OK to let those roads' culverts become blocked with sticks and debris, resulting in catastrophic erosion?(It happened last year, with impacts off private timberlands affecting our Forest Service roads) And, finally, is it OK to stop loggers from paying us to remove such hazards, and instead, force the Forest Service to PAY someone a healthy fee to fell the trees and treat the slash?!? Seems were already paying a lot to put out the fires, spending 5 times more money than is budgeted for fuels reduction projects. This years fire season will result in a new record for acres burned and a new record for costs to suppress those fires. AND, we have red flag warnings over a wide area of the West and weeks left in the fire season. Let's shoot for 10 MILLION acres burned this year!! Hotfeet> Bottom Line.... 23.09.2006 - 14:59 Since the "Bottom Line" is what reality is, truly, even the preservationist talk about the bottom line...Well I challenge the Zork Mister, who sounds much like a UW spokeswoman, to show us all the stats on the growth of timber in the National Forest vs. the Harvest. What are the real "acreage" numbers including the charred remains of old growth forest in the Northwest. What percentage is being burned each year vs. the acreage being harvested and renewed. As for the idea that there is a connection between the Federal Agencies and Industry it was so aptly put earlier, "DUHH". How many mills does the federal government own? Should we pay the government to manufacture the lumber? How much do you think a 2x4 would cost then? The reality is that it has nothing to do with "destroying" the forest, it is all about capitalism vs. socialism. The wackos think that destroying 10 million acres and a large percentage of the species that called it home, is better than logging 80 acres at a time with reserves surrounding the units and very few if any species being killed, get real. The idea that salmon runs are being damaged even half as much by logging, when compared to entire basins being fried, is great rhetoric but the general public isn't buying off on it any more. Maybe it is time to put together video from the last two years showing the charred remains of deer, elk and other animals and plaster the media with the same crap that the wackos use to over inflate reality. PS> Take a look at the "Unified forest defense campaign" web site and view the biscuit pictures to see all the natural regen in the harvest units. Interesting how the pictures used to point out one aspect seem to negate another. Chane Sau> Hey Pam, oh, I mean chane sau, curious, etc 23.09.2006 - 19:20 So Pam, how does your daughter feel about how much time you spend on line calling us whacko? Loved the last stuff here: "Maybe it is time to put together video from the last two years showing the charred remains of deer, elk and other animals and plaster the media with the same crap that the wackos use to over inflate reality" I say we play videos of Pam at public meetings, refusing to answer direct questions the public asks, and instead goes in another direction to waste everyone's time. Seen this over and over. Forests and critters getting fried? How about some agency responsibility for supressing fire for 100 years, for leaving slash all over the place...geez, u think we're stupid? another observer> Hmnnn 23.09.2006 - 20:23 Go ahead and duck my comments about collusion on the Survey and Manage issue. It is undeniable that behind doors meetings between DCTO's and the Feds with enviros left out qualified as a bedroom arrangement. Just one of many, many examples. I can see you think federal management of our forests involving a serious lean towards the interests of industry is fine and dandy. It's not just me that thinks that little arrangement stinks like a rotting corpse, thousands of other citizens do too-you know, the OWNERS of PUBLIC land. Zork Native Oregonian> Secret Deals 24.09.2006 - 11:48 You want to talk about collusion? Gee, wasn't Survey & Manage a deal between the Clinton Admin. and preservationists that was hatched between closed doors? Hmmm, I seem to recall that it was. I seem to recall it being added to the NWFP at the very last minute, even at the objection of many who worked on the NWFP. While we're talking about closed door deals, why don't I bring up the NWFP itself? This plan was created by 'The God Squad' behind ... you guessed it ... closed doors! Clinton basically gave the preservationists a bottle of booze and the keys to the forest and said, "Have fun ... let me know when you come up with something." As for industry working with the administration to remove S&M ... well DUH! Moon Muffin> voice from forest "we want to be counted!" 24.09.2006 - 13:22 You gotta be kidding, is all I can say moon muffy, oh what the heck, I'll find a few words anyway. You say: "As for industry working with the administration to remove S&M ... well DUH!" I say: As for enviromentalists working with the administration to include S&M ... well DUH! So what if some "preservationists" met with Clinton people to discern a way to save a bit of something alive on our sweet green earth - how can meaningful S&M be wrong? How is it not reasonable to discern who lives in a particular forest before deciding what action, or lack there of, is appropriate? Cause then you have to face the fact you need to stay the fuck out? Like your boys didn't also meet with Clinton people to push your dreck? Without S&M the NWFP would have been just another timber give away. And if people who belive in and work for this ethic are the "God Squad" I wonder what that makes you? oh, what the heck, the "Devil Squad?" yuk yuk yuk I sure did enjoy the comments from that leader from way way down south who called Bush a Devil recently. And funnier even, how upset people got over it, how fast they forget history -- that it was fundamentalist christian (white people's) beliefs crammed down Mr. C's throat all those years ago that is at the base of his current belief, and how millions of amreican fundamentalists agree with him, and are jus waitin around for the armegeddon and the rapture..And just about everything else he said hit the mark pretty well, heck, the guy reads Noam Chomsky. irony irony irony, as nature is destroyed, Well since I've floated off topic, see ya later by, a fly fly> Just a reminder 24.09.2006 - 15:34 If ya'll ain't too young to remember, the NWFP was supposed to be a COMPROMISE and not a ban. Yes, S&M was slipped in at the last second, and can be considered a major coup by the preservationists (knowing all along that for many of those species, no survey protocol ever existed). Yes, the preservationists probably pushed Clinton for S&M, seeing a way to stop logging on even the Matrix lands. Yes, the timber industry should know that there's a huge likelihood that there WILL be endangered species in Matrix lands where they want to cut old growth. Yes, destructive logging of old growth SHOULD be stopped where many endangered species are to be found. Yes, some species on that NWFP list should NOT be there. YES(!), some form of S&M SHOULD be in place over all lands. Yes, forest restoration projects that involve cutting of merchantable trees SHOULD happen on ALL lands needing thinning. Not just on Matrix lands. Finally, we need to do what is right for the ecosystem and not what is right for the humans, on both sides of the issue. Hotfeet> Hey Zork Mister 24.09.2006 - 17:28 I love the idea that you think I'm "Pam", evidently you are either new to the show or as usual just unobservent, either way it's the typical wrong road, but consistency is good. See there is a positive to every thing. Now who the heck is DCTO? Do you mean Douglas Timber Operators? How about the number of acres already set aside from Timber Harvest? Do the answers to these questions elude you in you fact filled journey? The problem with this whole debate on harvest or management is really quite clear ..... It is capitalism vs. socialism, as I stated before. The proof is also here, read the debates, regardless of the compromise, the bottom line is that the timber industry should cut trees, period. We compromise on clear cuts and go to thinnings, not good enough, we compromise on thinnings, not good enough, we go to understory removal, not good enough, we go to helicopter logging, not good enough, we go to salvage of already dead trees, not good enough. Where was the outcry for Kerr's harvesting of healthy green trees? Where is the outcry when those of your own community use horses exerting over 100 psi to log there own timber without any S&M? Have you ever seen the skid roads from the early days of logging? The fact is if there was an interest in having a healthy Forest there would be compromise and it would involve management, since that is how to best serve the health of the forest and the people that live in this Country, the evidence is all around. If a plan was derived to not profit from the harvest and give the money to the welfare rats then I can't help but think that there would be no protest from the preservationist, the reality is that those who sit on their butts and protest have no real desire to actually work or really provide for anyone but themselves. The preservationist aren't the ones that provide employment to hundreds of thousands who are willing to work for a living, they definitely aren't the ones who helped make this Country strong nor are they the ones defending the freedoms that they themselves abuse. Chane Sau> Commies behind every doorway 24.09.2006 - 17:58 I love the idea that you think I'm "Pam", evidently you are either new to the show or as usual just unobservent, either way it's the typical wrong road, but consistency is good. See there is a positive to every thing. Now who the heck is DCTO? Do you mean Douglas Timber Operators? How about the number of acres already set aside from Timber Harvest? Do the answers to these questions elude you in you fact filled journey? The problem with this whole debate on harvest or management is really quite clear ..... It is capitalism vs. socialism, as I stated before. The proof is also here, read the debates, regardless of the compromise, the bottom line is that the timber industry should cut trees, period. We compromise on clear cuts and go to thinnings, not good enough, we compromise on thinnings, not good enough, we go to understory removal, not good enough, we go to helicopter logging, not good enough, we go to salvage of already dead trees, not good enough. Where was the outcry for Kerr's harvesting of healthy green trees? Where is the outcry when those of your own community use horses exerting over 100 psi to log there own timber without any S&M? Have you ever seen the skid roads from the early days of logging? The fact is if there was an interest in having a healthy Forest there would be compromise and it would involve management, since that is how to best serve the health of the forest and the people that live in this Country, the evidence is all around. If a plan was derived to not profit from the harvest and give the money to the welfare rats then I can't help but think that there would be no protest from the preservationist, the reality is that those who sit on their butts and protest have no real desire to actually work or really provide for anyone but themselves. The preservationist aren't the ones that provide employment to hundreds of thousands who are willing to work for a living, they definitely aren't the ones who helped make this Country strong nor are they the ones defending the freedoms that they themselves abuse. Chane Sau> "I love the idea that you think I'm "Pam", evidently you are either new to the show or as usual just unobservent, either way it's the typical wrong road, but consistency is good" Reread the thread Sherlock, I wasn't the one who insinuated you were El Pamo. "The problem with this whole debate on harvest or management is really quite clear ..... It is capitalism vs. socialism, as I stated before" Wrong wrong wrong..........that debate only exists in your mind. The debate in reality is actual science vs. industry's junk science. You are quite aware of the volume of legitimate science supporting the value of natural regeneration within the Biscuit. And also the value of S&M surveys for listed species. But that stuff gets in the way of you folks lining your pockets. " we compromise on thinnings, not good enough, we go to understory removal, not good enough, we go to helicopter logging, not good enough, we go to salvage of already dead trees, not good enough" You got that right, you guys have run roughshod for too many decades, now you'll soon end up with zero cut on public lands and no commercial timber sale program whatsoever. That can't come soon enough for me. "If a plan was derived to not profit from the harvest and give the money to the welfare rats then I can't help but think that there would be no protest from the preservationist, the reality is that those who sit on their butts and protest have no real desire to actually work or really provide for anyone but themselves" Welfare rat angle worth a shot again for you today huh? As I said before I was out on a whole bunch of the lovely 200 acre clearcuts the USFS provided for us back in the 80's. Yeah you guys created your own green monsters now back to haunt you. "The preservationist aren't the ones that provide employment to hundreds of thousands who are willing to work for a living, they definitely aren't the ones who helped make this Country strong nor are they the ones defending the freedoms that they themselves abuse." Why don't you tell us the percentage of Oregonians currently employed in the timber industry/wood products industry. Then go ahead and tell us the REAL reason numbers are down so far? Let's hear it. Zork> More 24.09.2006 - 18:04 "Yes, the timber industry should know that there's a huge likelihood that there WILL be endangered species in Matrix lands where they want to cut old growth. Yes, destructive logging of old growth SHOULD be stopped where many endangered species are to be found." Agree with that part. You're starting to come around, leave out the other parts and you could probobly get on with one of those big green groups. Zork thorn in the side> Come on Francis 25.09.2006 - 08:36 You have litigated every damn one of those things and you know it. You have repeatedly named each of these activities be it on thinning, Heli, understory and on and on and on and on and on...in your cases. You saying you didn't is a load of crap. If you and yours are not protesting and saving us from the boogeyman you don't have a job. Yeah we all know about the Red Rockets, the Hoedads, and the rest of the planting coops. So what. This is the sum of your experiece in forestry. Forestry isn't static, it isn't just the recently treated slash of a harvest unit and public land managment certainly doesn't look anything like it did when those tree planting coops were thriving. Get over it and try doing something with your life other than sitting on the sidelines and making a living out of picking apart the work of somebody who is actually trying to get it right. Quite simply if you don't have this fight you have nothing. Tired of the lies> Nope 25.09.2006 - 18:37 I am certainly not Francis and could never even approach her level of dedication and success. I hope she continues to advocate for our forests for many, many years to come and hopefully she will continue to be a thorn in the side of those who carelessly exploit our public lands for a long time. Zork Thorn in Your Side> First appeal 25.09.2006 - 22:49 Timber Company Appeals Roadless Ruling: September 22, 2006 GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) - An Oregon timber company has filed the first appeal of this week's court ruling that reinstated Clinton administration roadless area protection. The notice of appeal was filed in federal court in San Francisco by Silver Creek Timber. The company has been logging trees burned by the 2002 Biscuit fire in two roadless areas of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest in Southern Oregon. Conservation groups have been trying to stop the logging, but repeatedly failed. The ruling earlier this week by a federal judge in San Francisco reinstated protection for nearly 60 (m) million acres of roadless areas in national forests. The Bush administration is still considering whether to file its own appeal. Mr. X> What's new 27.09.2006 - 08:05 Well I'm glad see that if the Zork Mister isn't Francis then at least she has a gummby. Maybe "it" will be the next one she sends in to stand behind a 12"dbh tree as the cutters fall 36"dbh trees towards "it". She is one of the few twisted ones that leads the unknowing to slaughter. I'll see if I can find the photos of her being put into a police vehicle after knowingly giving false statements to law enforcement during one of her escapades, a picture is truly worth a thousand words. But we digress, the facts and science still remain. You say that management is not good and that the species depend on unmanaged stands to sustain themselves, paraphrased I know, if this is so then explain why the big push to stop logging on the Elliot and Tillamook State Forests? Both of these forests originated from large fires, both were salvaged by methods much harsher then presently in practice, both are heavily managed, both have abundant T&A species, both are enjoyed by the public, both are roaded as a result of the original salvage and subsquent management, and both have been identified by the preservationist as necessary for habitat. Now I ask, "How can all these things happen on managed forests, if what you are professing is true?" Which part of the above statements are not true? Chane Sau> Hey, check out 3 foot tall trees in Biscuit 27.09.2006 - 10:24 Hey Chane sau or Curious and.. Did you go to this Biscuit burn area with the 3 foot reprod yet? I gave you exact legals. If not, why not? If you call someone a liar you should back it up by at least refuting such statements with some fact instead of conjecture or empty rhetoric. eco advocate> want truth? 30.09.2006 - 23:28 I'll tell ya what's true chane sau, you are an asshole. nevermind> Wow 01.10.2006 - 13:03 I'm impressed, "Nevermind" only took 3 days to formulate that profound revelation......welcome to the list, one that is long and low. Chane Sau> I said when 01.10.2006 - 18:38 time allows I will go. Time does not allow. You have not made any point or discovery that would make me drop every thing and rush to Agnes and beyond. I will not make a special trip, I visit the area often enough for other reasons. 1)From your own picture those pines look to predate the fire. They were either planted or older naturals that just happen to survive. 2)They are not representative of the whole. 3)I question whether they will survive the competition. Again when time allows I will look. I will make a point to follow their progress in years to come. Curious> Not worth the trip 05.10.2006 - 09:34 Yes there are a few trees that are doing well, yes they are planted and appear to have been shortly after the fire. On either side of the ridge that they sit on is a fine example of the bigger picture. This area that is very selective is sitting on a large flat with a wonderful little hike up from the access road. The brush is doing better than most of the trees and if you look around you will find several trees that have already been beat. On the way down the east side back to the trail you will see how wonderful the brush is coming back, this area will be a brush and tanoak forest for the next 100 years if it doesn't burn up prior to that. I give it about 15 years and mother nature will "do it" again. The bright side is there are several nice bucks left in the area for those that desire that kind of thing, as well as lots of bear sign to the west and north. The GPS coordinates are N42 30.706 W124 0.741, maybe I wasn't in the right spot????? Chane Sau>