Assiting Migration of Trees in the Northwest

Associated Press reports on a large-scale Canadian project to plant 16 tree species in areas that may be more suitable to them as climate change. The project involves several planting sites in British Columbia and the Northwestern United States. Geneticist Gregg O'Neill, who heads the project, notes the need to plant trees that can thrive over the next 80 years while the climate changes. British Columbia has also relaxed its elevation restrictions on re-planting by timber companies in an effort to facilitate adpation of tree species to climate change. The assisted migration project's website is here.

In other forest news . . .

After my post on the WOPR withdrawal, I came across this much less publicized news item on administration logging decisions. On the same day as the WOPR withdrawal, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsak approved a 381 acre clear-cut of primary forest (the Orion North timber sale) in a roadless area of the Tongass National Forest in Thorn Arm, near Ketchikan.

This decision represents the first approval under Vilsack's May 2009 memorandum reserving decision-making authority to approve or disapprove timber contracts in roadless areas. This policy is the latest turn in the evolution of the 2001 Roadless Rule, which was permanently enjoined by a 2008 Wyoming District Court decision roughly 18 months after the District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined the Forest Service from taking any action contrary to the 2001 Roadless Rule, leaving the Forest Service in a bit of a quandary.

Vilsack's May 2009 memorandum reportedly drew some praise from environmentalists and democrats, apparently banking on Obama's campaign promises to support the roadless rule. The decision to move forward with the Orion North sale has drawn sharp criticism from environmentalists and others. For example, the Environmental News Service quotes Carol Cairnes, president of the board of the Ketchikan-based Tongass Conservation Society: "The day when this kind of timber sale made sense is long gone. . . . Cutting these trees will not even bring in half the money the Forest Service will spend building a road to get to the trees." The sale will require building or updating eight miles of roads, which Tom Waldo of Earthjustice (which was challenging the Orion North sale prior to Vilsack's decision) states will cost four times as much as the profit from the sale. According to the Juneau Empire, the approval was driven by the secretary's recognition of "how much people in the area needed the jobs and the economic boost."


In reporting the Orion North sale, MongaBay.com reports: "The U.S. has the world's seventh highest rate of primary forest loss in the world. Between 2000 and 2005, the United States lost an average of 831 square miles (215,200 hectares) of "primary forest" -- defined as forests with no visible signs of past or present human activities." The website, an exceptional source of biodiversity-related news, then notes the high biodiversity levels found in primary forests, as well as their priority place in conservationists' agendas. Indeed, primary forests frequently provide irreplaceable services (see here for a freely-available study of tropical forests reaching this conclusion).

The Orion North sale tempers my enthusiasm at seeing the WOPR withdrawal, and gives me concern for the future of "balancing" irreplaceable remnants of national forests against temporary and questionable economic benefits. Hopefully, the 2001 Roadless Rule will be re-instated, or the administration will otherwise move toward a uniform approach to logging that favors primary forest preservation and works to concentrate logging in secondary forests without particularly important ecologial benefits and to existing timber plantations.

Withdrawing the WOPR

Interior Secretary Salazar withdrew the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR) today. The Department of Interior news release begins: "Because the previous Administration failed to follow established administrative procedure before leaving office, its plan to intensify logging in western Oregon – known as the Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR) – is legally indefensible and must be withdrawn."

The WOPR was adopted by the Bush administration in late 2008 to dramatically increase the amount of logging that would be allowed under the Northwest Forest Plan. The Northwest Forest Plan grew out of the extraordinarily contentious spotted owl controversy during the Clinton administration. Environmental groups fiercely opposed the WOPR. In creating the WOPR, the Bush adminstration disregarded Endangered Species Act consultation requirements (for posts on another Bush administration consultation action see here).

Withdrawing the WOPR is a significant step in favor of environmental protection on the part of the Obama administration because it supports preservation of the spotted owl, Pacific salmon, and the remaining old-growth forest of Oregon. Further, the administration is seeking to vacate a 2008 critical habitat revision for the spotted owl. The moves are particularly notable endorsements of environmental protection considering the strong condemnation to be expected from timber-dependent communities that have been hard-hit by the logging reductions of the 1990s and the current economic recession.

At least equally important, the WOPR and the critical habitat revision were tainted by the involvement of Julie MacDonald, the Bush-era Deputy Assistant Secretary found to have been "heavily involved in . . . reshaping scientific reports" despite her lack of a scientific background, among other things. Further, the WOPR's allowence of increased logging was in contrast to the majority of the 30,000 comments received and over 250 formal protests submitted.

Salazar's announcement included a promise to engage the community and follow legal process requirements in developing a new plan revision. This aspect of the announcement, at least, is welcomed by even timber industry representatives, some of whom joined a lawsuit based on concern that the WOPR was vulnerable to legal challenge. It is also yet another welcome change from the prior administration.

Law And Neuroscience In Italy

The European Science Foundation will be holding a fascinating research conference on law and neuroscience this fall. The conference is entitled "LAW AND NEUROSCIENCE: OUR GROWING UNDERSTANDING OF THE HUMAN BRAIN AND ITS IMPACT ON OUR LEGAL SYSTEM", and its aim is

to establish a dialogue between neuroscientists, legal practitioners, researchers in sociolegal studies and social scientists, to further mutual understanding and make some realistic evaluations of the potential developments at the intersection of neuroscience and law.

A star-studded cast of law and neuroscience scholars address fascinating issues in one of the most important emergent fields of law, including:

* The legal and societal impact of recent neurobiological research on aggression, impulsivity and anti social conduct;
* The impact of brain imaging technologies on the criminal justice system. Impact of neuroscience on criminal responsibility, sentencing and punishment;
* Evidence from current cases in criminal and civil law on the impact of neuroscience on witness credibility and the rules of evidence. Problems, possibilities and perils of neuroscience based lie detection;
* The implications of the use of neuroscience for screening, risk prediction and preventive interventions;
* Challenges to law and regulation in Europe posed by the neurosciences.

The conference has the additional benefit of taking place in Acquafredda di Maratea, Italy. Abstracts may be submitted until July 16, 2009, and conference will take place from October 26th-31st, 2009. Full details, including the preliminary program, lodging options, and application forms are available at the conference website.