FOREST-WIDE

Maureen Hyzer, Forest Supervisor
George Washington & Jefferson National Forests,
5162 Valleypointe Pkwy., Roanoke,Va. 24019
(540) 265-5100
http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/gwj/

updated April 15, 2008

CURRENT AND UPCOMING

The Forest Service officially launched the forest planning process for the 1.1 million acre George Washington National Forest on February 15, 2007. It is expected to continue until 2009 or 2010. After a temporary delay of over one year, the public involvement process is expected to resume in 2008. On April 11,2008, Jo Beth Brown of the Forest Service announced that the Forest Service "will resume the process of revising the George Washington Forest Plan." The Forest Service expects to start having meetings "early this summer." The agency has not formalized its schedule of public meetings yet. The plan revision will determine the next ten to fifteen years of management on the GWNF…. for GOOD or BAD. If you want to see a better GWNF for yourself, or your children, or your grandchildren, then you need to get involved today.

The George Washington National Forest will be one of the very first forests to develop a plan under new regulations adopted by the Bush Administration in 2005. (See http://www.virginiaforestwatch.org/national.shtml )

Environmentalists are wary of the new regulations which no longer require an Environmental Impact Statement to be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The NEPA process insured broad public participation in the development of the plan, required a consideration of alternatives approaches to managing the forest, provided for an assessment of the cumulative impacts of activities on the forest and allowed for legal challenges. The new regulations significantly weaken these elements of the planning process.

The Bush Administration’s rationale for removing forest planning from the full NEPA process is that only actual, site-specific projects affect the forest, despite the fact that forest plans govern the overall management of the forest for 10-15 years, including, for example, setting timber targets. Since the new regulations also encourage these new plans to avoid setting enforceable standards and guidelines, it is especially important for citizens to hold the agency accountable by insisting it adopt firm, enforceable standards to protect natural resources.

Without the safeguards of the National Environmental Policy Act, forest protection activists are preparing for the new planning process by reaching out to diverse groups to inform them about the value of the George Washington National Forest as an environmental and recreational resource. One objective of forest advocates in this planning process is to encourage restoration of the ecological health of the forest.

If you know of an organization that would like to learn more about the George Washington National Forest and how to protect it from commercial logging, natural gas development and large scale commercial recreational development, let us know!

The environmental organizations engaged in this effort at this time include Virginia Forest Watch, Wild Virginia, Virginia Wilderness Committee, Southern Environmental Law Center, Wildlaw, Southern Appalachian Forest Coalition, The Wilderness Society and the Sierra Club.

For more information, please contact Sherman Bamford (see http://www.virginiaforestwatch.org/contact.html for contact information) and visit our George Washington National Forest Plan Revision Page


Wind Power Proposals, Jefferson National Forest Renewable sources of energy, like wind and solar power, are needed to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels in Virginia, but may be just a drop in the bucket if conservation of energy does not become more widespread in our society. Neighboring states like West Virginia and Maryland have seen an upsurge in permit requests for large-scale wind power projects, many on prominent ridgetops and other sensitive areas. Even with advances in turbines, there have been mass kills of migratory birds at some Central Appalachian wind power sites. Virginia's mountains may also see its first wind farm proposals soon. We need to find alternative energy sources without compromising firm protection of public lands, scenic ridgetops, and wildlife. Look for more updates on this issue later.

RECENT

Jefferson National Forest Plan Revision – In 2004, Wildlaw and Southern Environmental Law Center appealed the Jefferson National Forest (JNF) plan revision on behalf of Virginia Forest Watch and other groups. In the 1990s, when the plan revision process for the JNF began, it appeared that the agency would listen to the public and take environmental concerns seriously. However, after 2000, the plan revision took a change for the worst. In the final plan, logging levels were increased, watersheds and roadless areas received inadequate protection, road levels were increased. In spite of this, Virginia Forest Watch is determined to protect the clean water, forests, wildlife, and outstanding recreational opportunities of the JNF with all the tools at its disposal. For more information, see: 2004 Press Release. See also a newspaper article on conservation groups’ responses to the Forest Services final approval of the plans in August 2006.

American Electric Power 765 kV line, Eastern Divide Ranger District (formerly New River R.D.), Jefferson National Forest. This approved powerline cuts a wide swathe across public and private lands across Southwest Virginia and W.Va., including areas in and around Longspur roadless area, Kimberling Creek wilderness area, and the famed caverns of Skydusky Hollow. The Forest Service approved this powerline in April 2003, but citizens across Virginia are not giving up.

Dominion and Patriot Gas Pipelines, these projects that could affect a host of other private and public lands throughout southwestern Virginia

RESOURCES

July 25, 2005: "And Still They Fall" - A Report on Old Growth Logging in the George Washington National Forest released by Virginia Forest Watch, WildLaw, Southern Appalachian Biodiversity Project, Wild Virginia and the Sierra Club. The report addresses the failure of the Forest Service to conserve and restore old growth forest communities in the Southeast, highlighting the Hoover Creek Timber Sale as a case study.