Kahler Dry Forest Restoration Project
Umatilla Forest Collaborative Group field tour to planning area, 29 May 2014
Attendees: Rex Storm, Kathleen Cathey, Ray Osipovich, Stan Boatman, Lindsay Warness,
Mike Billman, Gavin Smith, Starr, Tim Garber, Brian Spivey, Debb Bunch, Ian Reid, Mark
Stern, Jeff Mabin, Steve Cherry, Gary Miller, Veronica Warnock, Dave Powell, jaimmarch,
Anne Niesen, Gunnar Carnwath, Dennis Perelli, Mike Townsend, Kevin Hancock, John
Buckman, Kristen Marchal, Laurie, Ed Farren, Mike Rassbach, John Evans, Randy Scarlett,
Bob Brown, Bill White, Vince Naughton, Scott , Elaine Eisenbraun, Brian Kelly, Megan Smith,
Terry Tallman, Mike Hayward, Scott Schwartz, EJ Davis, Star Yeo, Kevin Martin, Jim
Archuleta, two guys from Timberline Helicopters in ID
Summary:
 The Forest Service is developing alternatives and we need to be ready to respond to
them
 ICO (Individuals, Clumps, Openings) method will be used to restore historic
conditions where appropriate, such as in even-aged stands. There will be significant
basal area reductions, depending on the units. The low end of the residual basal area
for one unit that we looked at (unit 90) is 30, and it ranges up to 55-65 in other units
(like unit 79).
 Removal of some large, young fir using Van Pelt guidelines (over 21” diameter but
under 150 years age) will also occur on about (? acres, need to clarify). The FS team
did extensive coring and GPSed all trees to test the guide.
 There will be some treatment of RHCAs (680 acres total; we visited unit 57A), using
75 and 100 ft buffers where hand felling but no mechanical is allowed, and avoiding
sediment from activities. No dragging/ground disturbance will be allowed. Goal is to
manage RHCAs for natural fire regime within dry forest landscape. Possible effects
were modeled.
 They propose a Forest Plan amendment related to work on elk habitat—(need to get
clarifying details on this and bigger picture of elk in the area)
 About 800 acres will be helicopter units where there is no feasible road access. They
will be by themselves as payment units so they can be dropped out of timber sales
and done as stewardship if needed. (Not clear if there will be hand or mechanical
cutting on the ground?)
 After all other treatments, prescribed fire will be the final treatment, and safely
returning fire to the landscape is a major goal
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
1
Introduction:
See as much as possible, will move along quickly, can focus on most pertinent items.
Kevin M: This will be opp for checking where we are on Kahler, Layout is underway,. Can
talk about the proposals. Seek common ground around proposals with needs of landscape
and communities intermixed. Great turnout, lots of Forest Service people here that can
answer questions.
EJ: Since 2011 we have been working on Kahler. There is a rough time line handout to see
past dialogues. Let’s try to put our conversation in context with those and with existing
purpose and need.
Ann: Collab asked for a dry forest restoration project and how we think about that is a little
different trying to produce timber in long term with a high resilience. As a result of this
restoration, there is a lot of timber products.
Safety Talk
Stop 1: ICO Unit:
Scott – Kahler unit 90 at east end of 100 acres.
This is leave tree mark with orange paint. Stand age is 100 -110 and even 9: - 20” is
same. This is close to even age structure. Implementing the marking with ICO method. It
stands for individual clump, opening. Refers to leave trees leaving clumps, openings,
singles. It sounds like variable density marking, but more quantitative. We use this
because across the way in 57A and said mark all pine over 21”, it would be simple. Here,
that would take everything else. Three trees here over 21”. In ICO we are trying to use
existing spatial conditions to revert to historic spatial conditions. This is what we think it
would look like with insects, fire, etc. We mapped the old trees. We try to recreate the
history. We are trying to estimate the number of individuals , small clumps and big clumps
by percentage. We think we have a good method. Marking guideline present. Here,
marked 35% individuals, 30% & 35% clumps big and small. Mark 1400 individuals, 350
clumps, etc. so instead. Marker comes out and chunks out by acre. Starting at corner, we
do a square acre at a time: 209 feet per side. Hangs flags at acre corners. In that acre, basal
area targets are existing 120-125 and drop to 35. We got to 35-40. Marker has to mark 13
individuals (one that stands alone 22 feet from neighbor), 3-4 small clumps (2-4 trees per
clump where bases are together, or anything 6 meters or 18-20 feet together), 1 medium
clumps 5-9 trees, large clump 10-15 trees (one every three acres) super clump (one every
15 acres) – over 15 trees.
Will apply this only to even aged stands. That’s where it shines.
Vince: Why not go out 1,000 feet, to have better skid length.
Bill: Why so interested in clumps?
Scott: We think that based on fire intervals, and insects this is how trees would have grown
in mother nature’s plan. Trying to break up landscape. It is a restoration project. Helps
wildlife: hiding cover- key feature for wildlife.
Gunner: Some evidence of fire resistance.
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
2
Rex: How many acres to be burned in Kahler? Answer: About 10% (is this correct—check
below)
Mark: Does it take longer?
Scott: We talk about that. It seems easier. The crews can mark it down real tight with these
marking standards.
Helicopter guy: What will board feet be.
Scott: Taking 80 sq ft, and average diam is one sq foot, so taking 80 11 inch trees, to figure.
Koen: Roughly 5,000 to 6,000 per acre.
Vince: How about 3,000.
Koen: Think pushing 6,000.
Brian K: is the age cohort an old fire?
Scott: It is some disturbance around 1900.
Brian K: Burning after?
Scott: yes
Helicopter guy: Are tops going out?
Brian K: Tops on ground?
Kristen: 31,000 in Kahler. 19 units planned for prescribed fire 31,000 acres and almost
entire planning area. All logging units will be treated. The basal area helps. Discuss
leaving it low or high. Prescribed fire is final treatment, so we want to leave a few extra
trees for fire kill and wildlife and a varied stand with snags. There will be some mortality
from the burn. 5% of large trees and 20% of small trees.
Scott: Low end of BA is 30.
Brian: Will be 10-15% skips and gaps in addition.
Heli guy: Is there operation details like season of harvest?
Brian: No winter range restriction, so wide window
Ed: Want dry and or frozen conditions.
Vince: What is now?
Ed: It is dry.
John B.: What will look like in next 100 year? What intermediate intervention.
Dave: In near term, perpetuate the same mgt regime 40-60 years. Not a regen rx but maybe
a thinning. With some of gaps, we will plant to direct the seed source and spp mix.
Kristen: After initial burn we rotate with semi-frequent maintenance burn.
Dave: We will have fire on all sites on 10-20 cycle. Factoring into composition, structure,
and species.
Stop 2: Class IV riparian treatments, Unit 57A
Ed Faren; An important part of this project is treat in Rip areas which haven’t don’e
since 1990. Endangered spp involved with streams. Propose to harvest in class 4 streams
in riparian areas. This is class 4. With Pacfish and amendment of 90s we wouldn’t have
ground based equip within 100 feet. Of class 4 which has evidence of scour and , but
flows intermittently through year. There is water in it at snow flow – intermittent stream.
Further down stream is steelhead, so this is the headwaters of fish habitat. So part of FP
amendment pacfish, allows ecological restoration using silvicultural methods to restore an
ecosystem. This is a dry forest. Jim Arch and I modeled sediment from ground based
equipt and harvest. There is little impact from timber harvest within 100- from removal of
overstory canopy and there is little impact from fire as it relates to sediment. We figured
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
3
equipt ground based could come in to 75 where they can reach into the riparian area with
cable or claw.
Jim: Because we recognize it is intermittent and no temperature issue, we could remove
some canopy and we used the modeling and the slopes and ranges in a GIS exercise
(mapped) and entered into model taking into account the soil type and texture, amount of
ground cover, slope, in treatment area and buffer. In harvest limits we had to push beyond
actual to get sediment. We saw sediment detrimental effects when skid trails were closer
than 75 feet. Depending on slope and valley form it is sometimes 100 feet. Also, longer
skid trail builds more head and has more sediment. So shorter skid trails allow us to get
closer. No slopes over 35%. There were slight increases in the sediment as skid trails get
closer. We are in RHCA and have to have no effect, so limited to 75 buffer.
We all walked in her on a skid trail and it’s been here a long time. There are lasting
effects. Any trails have the potential to produce sediment. The model tells the likelihood.
When we started to see an increase in sediment, we shut down. Model is a 50-50 accuracy.
It shows a trend, not a quantitative model. Talking with logging systems guys, with
directional felling and reaching, we can get it.
Ed: For skyline and helicopter, there is no ground disturbance. So you can get in closer
with heli. With skyline, you create a skyline trail which is different. Each logging system
has different practices. We will have ground based falling and mechanical fallers in the heli
area.
Brian K: With heli, could have a person on ground and heli picks up?
Brian S: There will be no pre-bunching in the riparian. There may be some bunching
outside riparian.
Brian K: Within riparian will there be any skidding, or will forwarder reach in?
Jim A: Look at hand out. A zone of 75-100 feet allows no mechanical. So can fell, but not
skid.
Brian S: Trees will be directionally felled, to reach better.
Jim A: Skyline will want full suspension, but ground based can do some dragging, but based
on there is no concentrated continual pulling in any one point to create a nick point.
Vince: Could distance change to height of merch log? Then border would vary., but may be
too complicated.
Jim: Tried to figure out that manipulation of buffer, but became so complicated in layout,
we want to keep it simple.
Kevin: So proposing in class 4, how many acres are we looking at?
Ed: Was 800 acres, but now it is less. Class 4 RHCA treated, out of 32000 acre project area.
Dave P: Now at 680 acres proposed action in this category.
Ed: Larger class 1,2,3 streams are not treated.
Class three is perennial, non -ish bearing. Class 1 2 are anadramous fish bearing or
resident fish bearing.
Brian: in this unit, no fish.
Brian K: It could skip some classes?
Ed: Yes. Just this side of the highway is some steelhead habitat.
Brian K: Will you go to where the stream becomes perennial?
Ed: There are gaps. We picked dense dry forest stands and class 4’s to select units.
Brian K: there are class 4’s that not proposed?
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
4
Jim: There are steep slopes and already disturbance areas don’t want to go into.
Gunnar: What are the rx’s goals?
Ed: Under act need to maintain or improve water quality. This is a dry forest project and
we are not degrading any water and in some places improving over some areas.
Jim: We are improving where there is juniper and high stocking that have fire danger that
burns hotter and is more susceptible to erosion.
Vince: There didn’t seem much erosion on the trail we came in, but a real hot fire could
allow erosion.
Gunnar: No goals for wildlife, or species diversity?
Ed: We may work some other things, but PN is focused on dry forest restoration
Jim: We have some opportunistic things like removing roads and cumulatively speaking
improving the RHCA
Ed: May get some better fish passage.
Dave P: Our main goal in some riparian thinning is to reestablish the natural fire regime. It
will allow us to more safely re-introduce fire.
State Forestry: Will you burn right up to stream?
Kristen: Some BMP;s in past for burning up to or in class 4 rhca. For this case we are
allowing some ignitions. On nice flat slopes where we’d like some fire to go in, it’s hard to
get it in unless we get some wind. 150 and 300 foot buffers in Class 3 & 2.
Jim: We modeled down to effective ground cover of 25-30 percent.
Kristen: We look at 50-75% black intermittently after a fire. There will be some soil
exposure. We design our rx to enable that.
Ed: Don’t want continued black.
STOP 3: Fir and removal of trees over 21 inches:
Brian S:
Rx 30-50 basal variable density thin
The Forest Service ran calculations and added some trees
Look at handout
We took an average between those classes to run calculations
This is more than we would normally do for a timber sale, this is a data collection to get our
heads wrapped around dry forest restoration
The basals that we pretty much have to leave
Looking around at some ribbons on the larger Doug fir, what we did is we marked Doug for
over 21 inches but under 150 years, basal of 3.9
There’s 122 acres in the unit
Doug fir—32 trees over 150 years
142 over 21 in and under 150 years
trying to use Van Pelt
been taking some research pictures
need to get spreadsheet with the numbers of GPSed trees
everything without paint could potentially be cut
across the unit 34.65 on the basal per acre
mandatory leave of Doug and fir over 21” and 150 years old
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
5
Dave Powell: I think this is really cool. It’s an unusual situation for us. Especially 57 A. They
have cored and GPSed every large tree in this unit. We don’t typically do that. Part of the
reason is the Dry forest restoration guide. It adds quite a bit of time and is not a viable
option for all dry forest units, but we are trying to do some different things. And ICO and
Van Pelt.
Van Pelt is a series of characteristics for aging trees based on knots, plate width, width of
fissures, depth. All used in a key for each species. Then you come up with a score which
gives you a prediction if tree is over 150. Hope this will get us to the point where we don’t
have to core as much, just for validation.
We are proposing to amend the Forest Plan to remove some Doug and grand fir from the
upland forest units, through ICO, to allow some of the young large to be removed. Not all of
them. The wildlife concerns will affect which ones are retained. 150 has been used in all the
versions of the Wyden bill I’ve seen. So it has been around for a least 6 years in terms of
widely accepted.
Our work so far has found that the p pine and larch keys are strong and Doug fir pretty
close, grand fir not good. James Johnston working on this. Has a lot of promise. I know some
people were not happy with the rigor of his first work he put out but we need to keep
working on it. It’s a big thing that we need some help on.
Lindsay: what criteria do wildlife use for leaving trees 21” and under 150?
Answer: Depends on tree. A lot of cavity excavators need large trees with damage, broken
limbs, boles. This is a north facing unit and has a little more grand fir so we might have a
higher basal area here. Don’t want to just leave large trees here. Need smaller trees coming
up. Can also possibly girdle or drop large trees for downed structure.
Elaine: who is chewing on the Doug fir?
Dave: not sure, might be having a little tussock moth getting started. The last big one was in
Baloney Canyon in the late 1990s. we have a long history of outbreaks evey 8-12 years.
Veronica: do you anticipate doing more boring on grand fir since the key is weaker?
Dave: yes. Can you talk about leaving old pine that is less than 21”? we are leaving some 16
in diameter pines that are obviously more than 150 years old.
Randy: we aged some of these. My only concern is some units have a lot of over 21 in pine
then you have the under 21 in but old pine, then you hit your target basal area.
*Dave: we would probably like to talk with you about the value of the small old pine and
how that factors in. I’m not saying we’d trade them off for large young fir but maybe we
could have that conversation about a few units.
Brian K: thanks for boring so many trees, that’s impressive and essential. It’s a lot of work
to bore and use the guide to calibrate yourself and estimate. I’m looking around at a clump
of p pine here and I think that whole clump should be retained. I think one of the goals is to
increase pine and decrease fir, so that is where my mind is going regardless of the age.
(marked pine in the clump is 88 years old.)
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
6
Brian K: that clump is what I have in mind for a vision of where we want to be. I’m not so
concerned about basal area. Residual is pretty low in my experience. I know it will be
variable, but those pine clumps I see as a good thing.
Stan: but if you’ve got a bunch of them around, some of them have to go according to the
guide.
Veronica: do you have a sense of the average age of the large young Doug fir?
Randy: 143 down to 75.
Mike Billman: I’ve been involved with BMFP and Tim L and I worked on that. I got to
understand his perspective. Normally I speak on part of industry but when he was not
there I’d speak for him. Looking through Tim’s eyes, there will be a lot of removal and
really open with the fir gone. Some people in the conservation community would like to see
transition back to pine so some organizations would be looking at that clump as a viable
clump, not a single tree.
Lindsay: are we retaining some denser areas versus open? Is there a percentage?
Randy: still skips, 10-15% of total acres. Along 24 road, the wildlife protection buffer will
be heavier too. It’s a variable density prescription.
Ann: internally, we are wrestling with this. We try to focus on what is restoration, look at
what we are trying to get to and then flesh out all the diverse views about this issue. I was
looking forward to seeing what we found in this unit. I want to see this conversation
continue and it is what we struggle with.
Elaine: what is the question?
Ann: what’s important here? We are getting tugged in lots of different directions. Size,
wildlife, restoration goals for basal area, drought soils, what does it all look like? What is
the point back in time we are trying to move towards?
Rex: one problem is we look at the forest today, and think we want to perpetuate it into the
future. But what we see right here is more stocking and density than can be sustained. If we
want a more sustainable forest, we need to open it up. It’s not comfortable but it’s what we
need to see on this site.
Jim: we just found some new things out about soil. Passed out handout. We started to look
at the soil mapping that had occurred over the past few years. We are finishing the soil
survey for the Forest. We will focus on the molosols paper. Looking at diagram on there. In
Kahler there are actually 4 soil orders--the developmental changes that occur.
Within the planning area, the molosols are the most dominant soil order. We look at how
they develop, they are dark soft soils of grasslands. So this area with wide trees was
probably a savannah like situation that took thousands of years to develop a molosol. So
this helps give us part of the picture. It is good information to take into consideration.
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
7
Dave: climate change—I think we’re trying to pay more attention to that. I’m not saying
that will necessarily be a driver of discussions but I feel strongly that we need to pay
attention to if these forests will be resilient 50 years from now. I think it is real and has the
potential to really have a big influence.
Steve Cherry: we are talking a lot about stand health. I am struggling a little with, we have
to remember that we aren’t where we were as a society 150 years ago so there are other
things we need to be considering. When I look at it from a wildlife perspective, there are
bird species that mostly wouldn’t be affected by disturbance but some big game species,
our agency is supposed to manage for them and people like them, so if we go back to 150
years ago on this part of the ecosystem but don’t talk about disturbance….you have to
realize there are other wants and desires out on this landscape we need to think about as
well. I would think we would want to be talking about higher basal area here as opposed to
the first site, which has even ages. This site could have more escape, cover, etc for wildlife.
Kevin: I think we can talk about roads and security as part of the project.
Steve: I would like to see it more discussed. The other thing, Vince brought it up at the first
site, where there was a watershed boundary but we aren’t considering the impacts across
it. We’ve got an opportunity for example to mitigate cover loss adjacent.
Veronica: amendment for elk cover?
Tim G: we are below FP standards for cover. There are two kinds of cover. We are below for
satisfactory and total. FP says 10% for satisfactory and 30% for total. We are also below the
standard for HEI. So that is our existing condition for elk cover. In the E1 management area,
the west end of the project area had the Wheeler point fire in 96 so we are low on that in
that end. We would need a forest plan amendment to treat it there because we will take HEI
from 30 to 29, below the standard.
Part of this stand right here is a marginal cover stand.
We are looking at areas we are not going to log and closing some roads, a few additional
closures.
Brian K: so how would you characterize this stand right here for elk utilization through the
year?
Brian S: this is a pretty good cover stand. It gets used fairly heavily, there are some springs
at the bottom. So that is part of the reason that a skip was put down there.
Vince: hiding or thermal?
--HEI and FP is based on thermal cover. Elk are still using dense stands for security, escape,
hiding.
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
8
We walked into a skip
We are now in a skip of 16 acres. An area where nothing will happen. It is marked with
blue and pink ribbons.
We are at 12% in this unit for skips and we are shooting for 10-15%.
The only thing that might happen would be an underburn.
This is one of the bigger skips and thicker places. It has an abundance of larger downed
wood, more snags, white fir, higher density, good structure. Good defects in some of the
trees. Active pileated territory. Just above a water sources.
Stop #3A: bigger clumps
Two flagged trees are 148 and 150 years old. Most in group are likely the same age.
Ian: Do numbers represent ages?
Brian: No.
STOP # 4 Skyline unit:
Brian S:
Basal here will be = 30, Doug fir mistletoe. Leave mark. 15 acres. It is thick. Put a small
yarder here on the draw and tail trees on other side.
Bill: Full suspension?
Brian S: We will hang across draw
Steve: Is this class 3?
Brian: Yes, so no riparian entry.
Steve: Why lower BA?
Brian: It is just a little lower, it is up for discussion
Lindsay: What does leave trees look like?
Brian: We focused on leaving pine and get rid of mistletoe and some Doug fir to fill in.
Lindsay: So in 30 years we can expect some fill in.
Scott: There wasn’t enough BA in pine so leaving some d. fir and the best of them.
Heli guy: What is corridor spacing on skyline?
B: 100
Vince: Where are roads?
Brian: This is the end of the road just down here. We can’t go all way out due to creek
coming close.
Brian: the orange trees were all still skip as we walked down.
How do we treat the road after unit?
Laurie: Because it is a closed road and we want to re-close, we want to do as little as
possible, so a little pit run in the wet spot, then waterbar and debris to keep 4-wheelers
out. We will pull culverts.
Ann: How long has it been closed?
Brian: Probably since 50s or 60s. This was probably old Kinzua land.
Laurie: If we have enough KV money at the bottom of the road we’ll decommission to pull
old ditch relief culverts and there is reprod, so not recontour.
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
9
Heli guys: We might use the road again in the future.
Jim: There are various grades of decommissioning. In some places where fiscally sound we
just de compact and perhaps subsoil. Where feasible economically we can do more.
Stop 4A: Lower end of unit with skips/gaps.
Randy: This shows broken out top and weeping crack in grand fir for wildlife trees. These
are about 80 years old.
One is 96 years and 23 inches.
STOP 5: Helicopter unit
Kahler 79
A map was provided
56 acres (?)
Brian S: We took some basal area plots. 31 sq feet for pine over 21” alone. Our target is 3555(said 65 once too so not sure). There were only 2 Doug fir over 150 years (?)
There is an older pine overstory. The slope is 35 degrees.
Highway 207 is the bottom of the unit and there is no access from the top without major
construction of a full bench road. There is a closed road but it is not nearby enough.
Everything will be flown to the top, up and away from the highway.
We are considering pre-bundling (logs only, not tops and all)
Kristin: from a fuels perspective, bunching would really help. This is a scenic corridor so we
are limited in what we can do to remove fuels and have little leeway. Bunching
concentrates fuels rather than leaving them as slash across the unit. Also they are moister
and there can be more choice in burning time.
Question: how will the equipment come uphill?
Answer: probably lowboy a processor over to the corner of the unit, then go straight to the
top, turn and come down. Staying in straight ups and downs, one pass. One corridor. Soil
impacts will be minimized as the slash goes in front, and the machine runs on top of slash
and makes these straight passes. Soil displacement not compaction is the main issue here
given the slope.
Helicopter guys added: we would be able to use this for flight paths, without getting tangled
up in limbs/canopy. Recommend that FS “look up” when setting up this unit. If this is
mechanical, it can definitely work but if it is hand cut it could be risky.
More questions about the processor:
It is like a log loader with a head instead of grapples. It grabs, cuts, and cuts to required FS
length and can lay the product only in piles. Slash goes in in front. It rotates around and the
operator makes 6000 lb piles.
Kristin: This treatment will be followed by pile burning (fall) and then an underburn from
the top down (spring).
Question: How steep can the slopes be?
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
10
Answer: Up to 40%, FS standard is 35% for machines.
Anticipated volume is 5-6 mbf.
Brian K: it seems like this site is more productive that the last one, and so I would expect
the residual basal area to be higher.
FS: yes, it will be 35-55.
Gary: Will it pay?
Helicopter guys: no, but nothing pays in the heli industry at the moment. Fuel is killer. We
need log markets to be 5 and a quarter (?) to break even and that doesn’t include hauling. 6
to work right.
Question: how much does flying uphill versus downhill matter?
Helicopter guys: it makes a 30% difference in production
Question: how much helicopter is in this project now?
FS: it was 10% of the project and we have been re-analyzing so it has dropped to about 800
acres?
Question: Will volume be different in the heli versus other units?
FS: No, it is pretty much the same across the project.
Vince: cost is affected because we don’t have any good pine to help pay for it.
Gavin: these could be stewardship units.
Ann: that is the intent.
Brian S: we could do it as a timber sale but it could be marginal. So we plan to have the heli
units by themselves as payment units so that they can be dropped out and turned around
as stewardship if need be, so we would not need to readjust volumes on the sale.
Helicopter guys told cautionary tale of TriCon mill in St. Regis, who bought mixed heli and
other units against advice from others.
Rex: I encourage you to look at the costs of a road and cable system to see the tradeoffs
with heli.
Laurie: many of these roads are rocky and very hard to put to bed.
Ann: I feel confident that we took a hard look at the project and we brought skyline back in
where we could. We are trying to accomplish restoration here. And I get specialist reports
on Friday. So I have to be firm about this, sorry. It is moving on.
Vince: Has it changed since we saw the maps?
Brian S: you are looking at the timber shop of Heppner right here and we just threw
together those initial maps without a chance to check them. It has changed because we
have been able to ground truth this all through a real look. Units with bull pine will be
dropped out because they don’t pay.
EJ: further questions? Thanks to Ann and her team for all the work they put in. (applause)
Any particular topics we want to discuss tomorrow?
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
11
Brian K: I wanted to talk about the big picture of the elk habitat, and also about the Forest
Plan amendment for the lookout although we did not discuss that today.
UFCG Kahler field tour, 29 May 2014
12