Conservation, timber groups debate alleged logging violations in national forest

A conservation group and an organization representing the timber industry remain in a dispute over alleged logging violations in the Chequamegon Nicolet National Forest. 

Last month, the Examiner reported on a letter sent by the Environmental Law and Policy Center (ELPC) to Jen Youngblood, the national forest’s supervisor. The environmental group alleged that operations in the forest that are part of the controversial Fourmile logging project had violated terms of a government  contract by conducting work when the ground was unfrozen and illegally clearcutting parts of the forest with mature and old growth trees. 

The ELPC requested that the project be halted while U.S. Forest Service officials conduct a review of the operations to determine if old growth trees were being cut down. In a visit to the site, ELPC staff found a harvested tree that was estimated to be more than 140 years old. 

In a response to the Examiner’s reporting, officials at the Great Lakes Timber Professionals Association dispute the allegations of violations, calling them “ludicrous.” 

“We take our mission very seriously and know that many of our members have been major players in helping make the forests of the Great Lakes Region some of the healthiest in the nation for decades,” GLTPA president Troy Brown and executive director Henry Schienebeck write in a letter to the Examiner. 

Brown and Schienebeck contest the ELPC allegations, saying that the sections of the site that had been clear cut were younger aspen stands that needed to be better managed and noted that when the young aspen grows back, it will quickly work to sequester carbon in the atmosphere. 

“If the same picture is taken late next summer you will see a flush of regenerating three to four foot tall aspen sprouts that are sequestering carbon at very high rates,” they write. “All forests are ‘vital for climate security’ not only ‘possibly old growth trees.’”

The industry representatives also dispute the allegations that operations took place on unfrozen ground. The contract requires winter operations to take place on frozen ground because the ruts created by heavy machinery on wet, soft ground can damage the soil health and destroy habitats. During an unusually  warm winter, ELPC used satellite imagery to determine when logging took place while temperatures rose above freezing. Brown and Schienebeck write that just because the air temperature is higher doesn’t mean the ground has thawed. 

“As any forest practitioner knows, just because the temperature rises above freezing this time of the year does not mean the ground is not frozen,” they write. “We contend the logger did not operate on unfrozen ground as the ground continues to remain frozen in many areas of northern Wisconsin even without snow present.”

Earlier this week, ELPC issued a response, noting that their complaints aren’t about frozen ground conditions across northern Wisconsin but the state of the ground on the Fourmile site when logging was underway. 

The response, from ELPC policy analyst Andy Olsen and retired U.S. Forest Service Deputy Chief Jim Furnish, also notes that frozen ground has a specific definition under the contract: “12 inches of compacted snow and/or 6 inches of frozen ground.” Olsen and Furnish question how those conditions could have been met with the unseasonably warm temperatures in northern Wisconsin throughout December, January and February. 

“ELPC monitored the logging via satellite images, and provided these images with the complaint, along with Eagle River temperatures,” the response states. “We provide some here, at the end of this letter, along with temperature and precipitation records. Locally, it was unseasonably warm from December, 2023 through February, 2024, with almost no precipitation. GLTPA cannot explain how, under such conditions, the ground would freeze to 6 inches deep and/or accumulate 12 inches of compacted snow. Andy Olsen visited the site February 9 -10, and witnessed the wet mud, the many equipment tracks, the standing water, the lack of ‘12 inches of compacted snow and/or 6 inches of frozen ground.’ The snow present was a light dusting. The ground was thawed and muddy, not frozen.”

ELPC also questions why Brown and Schienebeck focused on aspen harvesting in their letter, noting that the project prescriptions list just 2% aspen harvesting in one of the project’s two timber stands and no aspen in the other. 

“GLTPA addressed aspen trees extensively, however, as shown by CNNF timber sale documents, there was little aspen in these stands, about 2% in one stand and none in the other (according to the silvicultural prescriptions),” Olsen and Furnish write. “What’s more, the forest plan goal was not to replace these interior hardwood forests with aspen but with diverse hardwoods. They are way off-topic and rebut nothing.” 

Olsen and Furnish add that the timber industry is clearly being affected by climate change, with warmer winters shortening the window in which frozen ground allows winter operations. They conclude that  the timber industry should evolve to become more sustainable and innovate to help Wisconsin become better at conserving carbon in its northern forests. 

They also state it’s not “ludicrous” to expect loggers to abide by the terms of their contracts with the Forest Service. 

“If GLTPA really suggests that loggers need not obey contractual requirements to protect forests,” they write, “it casts strong doubts on their claims to support sustainability — they should clarify.”