After the alternatives were presented, the audience used adhesive backed note
paper to stick comments on each of the four alternatives which were taped to
the walls of the conference room.
Comments ranged from letting nature take its course to returning the forest to
full, productive health.
"The existing stand is a result of neglect and gross mismanagement," read a
note attached to Alternative one. "This is what happens when public opinion was
substituted for professional management." Other comments were more favorable.
Sisters Forest Service Officials will use the comments to refine and clarify
the alternatives leading to the completion of the Environmental Impact
Statement and a decision on a preferred alternative in May.
The three purposes driving all four alternatives are to reduce the risk of high
intensity, large-scale wildfire; to move closer to historic range of conditions
including a more diverse forest; and to restore the views along the Santiam
highway.
Alternative one calls for no action. The possibility of a high intensity fire
is likely under this choice. The second alternative calls for 3,000 acres of
harvested timber and 1,500 acres of firewood, poles, posts and other
non-commercial uses depending on funding.
Alternative three calls for a harvest of 1,800 acres and the same 1,500 acres
of non-commercial uses. The fourth alternative includes 1,200 acres harvested
and 200 acres of non-commercial use.
A low to moderate intensity fire is likely under Alternative two. That choice
includes creating a fuel break on the north and west sides of the project area.
Alternatives three and four project a moderate to high intensity fire with the
fuel break of Alternative two included in choice three. Alternative four
proposes a fuel break surrounding the recreation areas of Suttle and Blue
Lakes.
Alternative two was favored by comments from members of the woods products
industry. "This is the best of the alternatives presented," stated one note.
"It still doesn't do enough to increase forest health. This should be the
preferred alternative."
Another comment on this alternative asked about the "unacceptably high" impact
of this choice on the spotted owl habitat and standing old growth timber.
"This is just picking at the scab," read one comment on Alternative three, "so
why waste manpower and tax dollars." Another reaction asked what happens if the
harvest units do not attract bids from the woods products industry.
In answer to that question, Inga Petaisto, Sisters District silviculturist,
said the project team plans a field trip April 22 for sampling of the timber
quality in the management area.
Before the alternatives were presented, Rick Dustin, Forest Service landscape
architect, said 96 percent of the 112 comments the district has received
favored removing all the dead trees. "The overwhelming response is "we want you
to cut the dead trees along the Santiam,' " he said. "I'm surprised there were
no hands off comments."
The timeline for the Santiam Corridor project includes analysis of the effects
of each alternative from now until about the middle of April, taking into
account the posted public comments from Tuesday's meeting.
The Environmental Assessment will be completed in mid-April followed by a
20-day period of public comment. The decision notice is expected the end of
May.
"Depending on how long it will take to mark and cruise the units," Petaisto
said, "we feel we will have the sale ready for auction by the middle of summer,
about the end of July. If we sell it, the purchaser would want to start as soon
as possible."
The public is welcome to look at the detailed maps of the four alternatives
including computer generated pictures of how each management action will appear
on the landscape by contacting the Sisters Ranger District office at 549-2111.
Forty-four citizens posted 30 reactions Tuesday night to four alternatives for
salvage logging in the 7,000 acre Santiam Corridor.