NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN SCIENCE SYNTHESIS

2018 Science Forum | June 26, 2018

February 15, 2017

OVERVIEW

The draft Northwest Forest Plan science synthesis was made available online last fall. Because the science synthesis is a highly influential science assessment, it is receiving an independent peer review under guidelines from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (http://www.fs.fed.us/qoi/peerreview.shtml). Peer review of the synthesis report is being managed independently of the U.S. Forest Service by the Ecological Society of America (ESA).

 

​The Forest Service provided two options for the public to provide input on the science content of the synthesis to the group of independent peer reviewers: 1) Provide written input (upload letters or type input directly) on the draft science synthesis through January 20, 2017; or 2) Provide oral input at a public forum and webinar held on December 6, 2016 in Portland OR (or via broadcast webinar).  According to the OMB guidelines peer reviewers may consider this public input as they prepare their reviews. The authors of the synthesis and the Forest Service managers will not be responding to the public input.

A third party contractor, MacKenzie Marketing Group, hosted the public forum and webinar to allow for oral and written input on the science content of the synthesis. The input has been compiled and will be provided to the peer reviewers for their consideration as they prepare their written review comments for the authors of the synthesis. The peer reviewers will direct their comments only to the authors according to standard peer review procedures and are not required to respond directly to the public comments.  The peer review process is expected to conclude in March 2017 when the peer review comments are submitted by ESA to the authors of the synthesis, who will use them in revising their chapters.

MacKenzie Marketing Group provided instructions on their public input webpage on how to submit public input and instructed submitters to clarify what chapters their comments pertained to so they could be compiled by chapter.  The following outlines the process MacKenzie Marketing Group used to compile the Public Input on the Draft Northwest Forest Plan Science Synthesis:

  1. Public input was compiled verbatim and was not edited by the contractor.  This means that all comments were included with no attempt to remove comments that may not relate to the scientific or technical aspects of the synthesis.  Chapter 0 includes General/Unclassified Public Input.  Peer reviewers are asked to consider the comments in this section in its entirety since they may contain comments relevant to the chapter they were assigned to review.

  2. If public input specifically listed a chapter that was the focus of their input, that information will be found as an excerpt within each chapter section; submitter information precedes each comment. If they did not reference a chapter for their input it will appear in Chapter 0 General/Unclassified Public Input.

  3. All uploaded and USPS mailed letters are being provided in their entirety as a link on the webpage immediately following the Public Input Chapters. The full letters are available at http://www.mmg-insights.com/nwfpsspublicinput.

  4. Every effort has been made to assign input where specified by submitter. If input relates to more than one chapter, it may be found in multiple locations.  Some public input was also submitted to multiple chapters.

  5. Footnotes, if provided, can be found as endnotes after each input submission.

  6. A resource library of all additional submitted materials (mostly reference materials) can be found on the attached table of contents and at http://www.mmg-insights.com/nwfpsspublicinput sorted by submitter name.

  7. All website links, references and/or citations are included as provided. No guarantee is made to the validity of the links or references.

  8. Software tools such as scanning, OCR (optical character reading), and word processing software have been used to convert and compile input from all sources including .pdfs, USPS mail, etc. Every effort was made to deliver input with original formatting integrity wherever possible.

  9. Organizational affiliations to submitters are provided if that information was included. Affiliation was not a requirement of registration or uploading of input and may not be present for all submissions.

  10. If redundancy is seen, it is a result of multiple uploads or inputs by different organizations or individuals. All redundancy is included to reflect the direct input of the individual or organization and provide a complete record of all submissions

 

If peer reviewers have any questions about the process used to compile this document, please contact Lisa MacKenzie at lisam@mackenzie-marketing.com.

 

Questions about the Forest Service draft science synthesis can be directed to Becky Gravenmier by email at bgravenmier@fs.fed.us.

PUBLIC INPUT (click to view) ​

Chapter 0: General/Unclassified Comments

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Climate, Disturbance, and Vulnerability to Vegetation Change in the Northwest Forest Plan Area

Chapter 3: Old Growth, Disturbance, Forest Succession, and Management in the Area of the Northwest Forest Plan

Chapter 4: Northern Spotted Owl

Chapter 5: Marbled Murrelet

Chapter 6: Other Species and Biodiversity of Older Forests

ORIGINAL LETTER SUBMISSIONS

Organization Name

American Bird Conservancy

American Forest Resource Council

 

Associated Oregon Loggers

 

Association of O&C Counties

 

B&G Logging & Construction

 

Benton Forest

 

California Farm Bureau

 

California Forests

 

Cascadia Wildlands

 

Coast Range Association

 

County of Del Norte

 

County of Siskiyou

 

Curry Citizens For Public Land Access

 

Decker Tree Fram

 

Douglas County

 

EPA, Region 10

 

ESA

 

Forest Service Employees for Environmental

Ethics

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Geos Institute

 

Klamath Bird Observatory

 

KS Wild

 

Mendocino County Farm Bureau

 

Natural Resource Economics

 

Natural Solutions

 

NOAA

 

Northwest Forest Workers Center

 

Pacific Crest Trail Association

 

Rocky Mountain Elk

 

South Fork Trinity Up-River Friends

 

The Tualip Tribes

 

The Wilderness Society

 

Tillamook County

 

Unaffiliated

 

Unaffiliated

 

Unaffiliated

 

Unafilliated

 

Wild Earth Guardians

REFERENCE LIBRARY

Organization

City of Susanville

County of Siskiyou

Geos Institute

Geos Institute

Geos Institute

Geos Institute

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

KS Wild

South Fork Trinty Up-River Friends

Unaffiliated

Wild Earth Guardians

Wild Earth Guardians

Wild Earth Guardians

Wild Earth Guardians

Wild Earth Guardians

Wild Earth Guardians

Chapter 7: The Aquatic Conservation Strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan—A Review of the Relevant Science After 22 Years

Chapter 8: Socioeconomic Well-Being and Forest Management in the Northwest Forest Plan Area Communities

Chapter 9: Understanding Our Changing Public Values, Resource Uses and Engagement Practices

Chapter 10: Environmental Justice, Low Income and Minority Populations, and Forest Management in the Northwest Forest Plan Area

Chapter 11: Tribal Ecocultural Resources and Engagement

    

Chapter 12: Science that Underlies the Northwest Forest Plan

 

 


File (click to view)

American Bird Conservancy.pdf

American Forest Resource Council.docx

 

Associated Oregon Loggers.pdf

 

AssocO&C.pdf

 

B&G Logging.docx

 

Benton Forest Coalition.pdf

 

CA Farm Bureau.pdf

 

CA Forests.docx

 

Cascadia Wildlands.pdf

 

Coast Range Association.pdf

 

County of Del Norte.pdf

 

County of Siskiyou Input.pdf

 

Curry Citizens.docx

 

Decker Tree Farm.docx

 

Douglas County.pdf

 

EPA Region 10.docx

 

Chad Roberts.pdf

 

Forest Service Employees.pdf

 

 

Geos Chapter 1.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 2.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 3.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 4.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 6.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 8.pdf

 

Geos Chapter 12.pdf

 

Klamath Bird Observatory.pdf

 

KS Wild.pdf

 

Mendocino County Farm Bureau.pdf

 

Natural Resource Economics.pdf

 

Natural Solutions.docx

 

NOAA.pdf

 

NW Forest Worker Center.pdf

 

Pacific Crest Trail Assoc.pdf

 

Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.pdf

 

South Fork Trinity.pdf

 

Tualip Tribes.pdf

 

Wilderness Society.pdf

 

Tillamook County.pdf

 

Adam Raymond Cpt 3.docx

 

Dale McCullough.doc

 

Ray O Sims.pdf

 

Kelly Burnett.doc

 

Wild Earth Guardians.pdf

File (click to view)

City of Susanville.pdf

County of Siskiyou.pdf

Chapter 12, Appedix C1

Chapter 12, Appedix C2

Chapter 12, Appedix D1

Chapter 12, Appedix D2

Al-Chokhachy_et_al-2016-Restoration_Ecology.pdf

anlauf et al 2011TAFS140.pdf

Anlauf et al. 2009 coho sediment coastESU2009.pdf

Brown et al. 1994.pdf

Bryce Lomnicky Kauffman 2010 EPA biologically based streamb.pdf

Churchill 2016ICO-Manager-Guide-version-3.pdf

Coleman et al. pyrolysis for biochar-1.pdf

Colombaroli and Gavin 2010.pdf

Croke & Hairsine 2006 Surface erosion sediment delivery wat.pdf

Ebersole et al 1997 Restoration as Re-Expression of Capacit.pdf

FEMAT_ 1993 Report.pdf

Firman Burnett COHO roads 2011 TAFS-1.pdf

Folz et al. 2009 Runoff Sediment delivery increases reopeni.pdf

franklin et al 2007 natural disturbance gtr_nrs19.pdf

Frissell et al. 2014 ACS-Finalreport-35pp-0804.pdf

Frissell and Nawa 1992 Incidence and causes of failure of ar.pdf

frissell et al 1997 changing the measure of salmon manageme.pdf

Harvey Lisle 1999 scour of redds.pdf

HarveyLisle1998.pdf

Hicman and Shively 2003streamline_vol7_no3_art2.pdf

Katz, Moyle, quinonesSalmon Extinction in Calif.pdf

Korb et al.burn_pile_rehab.pdf

Litschert & MacDOnald 2009 sediment pathways to streams for.pdf

luce& black_1999 Sediment production forest roads OR coast .pdf

Newcombe Jensen 1996_Suspebnded sediment_Impacts Synthesis.pdf

NMFS 2014 cohosalmon_soncc.pdf

NMFS 2015 proposed_recovery_plan_for_coho_salmon.pdf

ODFW 2014 CMP_main_final.pdf

Pollock 2003 Beaverdameffectspaperfinal.pdf

quinones et al hatchery practices.pdf

Rashin_2006_sedmt_tim#57225 copy.pdf

Reeves et al 2016 intitial eval. options manage ripar resvs .pdf

Sada et al 2001 BLM TR_1737-17-springs.pdf

USDA Forest Service 2007 FINAL_Ground Water Technical Guide_.pdf

USDA Forest Service 2012 GDE_Level_I_FG_final_March2012_rev1.pdf

USDA_USDA1994 NW Forest Plan ROD.pdf

USDA_USDI 2006_SerpentineFen-CA_6-2006.pdf

USDI BLM 2012 RMP Evaluation Report.pdf

USDI BLM RMP planning criteria.pdf

Wagenbrenner MacDOnald et al 2015 Post-fire salvage skid tr.pdf

SFT Chrysolepis Chrysophylla.pdf

Anita_Halpern.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment A.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment B.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment C.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment D.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment E.pdf

Wild Earth Guardians Attachment F.pdf