By Gary Corsair
Staff Writer
The U.S. Forest Service’s proposed land management plan for Pisgah and Nantahala forests is under revision — yet again — after thousands of objections, including concerns voiced by Clay County Commissioners.
The forest service has been under fire since January, when it released a long-awaited plan to manage millions of acres of national forest in western North Carolina, including thousands of acres in Clay County.
The plan was supposedly based on analysis of years of public input that began in 2013, but Clay County leaders contend that they have been ignored through the years.
In a letter to forest service officials, Clay County Commission Chairman Dr. Rob Peck noted that Clay County representatives have “declared our objections” at six public meetings and a private meeting since March 5, 2013, yet, “To our knowledge these objections have not been recorded in the Forest Plan meetings and we would like to request that they be.”
Specifically, the county objects to “designation of additional wilderness areas or wilderness study areas.” Peck noted that approximately 40 percent of Clay County is already designated Nantahala National Forest Land. “It is sufficient that the existing forest vegetation conditions overlaying those designated lands could achieve over time ‘old growth characteristics’ per revised plan. No more,” Peck wrote.
The main sticking point is old-growth forests. In a nutshell, the forest service wants to designate an additional 54,000 acres of western North Carolina as “old-growth,” which would impact the economies of affected counties. The forest service presently identifies 256,000 acres as “old growth.”
The forest service wants to prioritize the largest and most important patches of old-growth timber. How? By trading newly-discovered patches of quality old-growth trees for old-growth timber of lesser value as long as a 256,000-acre of old growth forest is maintained.
Clay County commissioners don’t think much of the idea. “Clay County does not support old growth management/networks in lands outside designated wilderness, research natural areas and corridors classed ‘wild’ or designated wild and scenic river areas in out county. We oppose further old growth management outside those lands,” Peck wrote. “The passive approach for old growth on additional wilderness areas of wilderness study areas remaining idled from active management ordains impact from natural forces of wild, wildfire, flood, native and non-native insects and diseases depredation.”
The forest service had set June 21 as the date to answer comments and objections, but that date has been abandoned as forestry officials continue to review comments from the public.
Further input will be received during an online public resolution meeting, August 2-4. That meeting is open to the public, but the forest service will only accept input from “interested parties” they approve.
Officials in Cherokee and Graham counties also sent strongly-worded objections to the U.S. Forest Service.
The original plan was conceived in 1987. It has been amended several times since 1994.
Learn more about the Pisgah and Nantahala forests plan at: www.fs.usda.gov/detail/nfsnc/home/?cid=stelprdb5397660
Note that any comments you may have will not be considered if you haven’t previously provided input. A statement on the forest service website states, “Individuals and entities that submitted substantive formal comments during earlier comment periods are eligible to file an objection.”