Editor's note: This document was provided by a Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign with permission to place on the QLG website.

From: Erin Noel XXXX@jps.net

<sierra campaign@friendsoftheriver.org>;xxxx@innercite.com <xxxx@innercite.com>; xxxx@nrdc.org < xxxx@nrdc.org>; xxxx < xxxx @psln.com>; xxxx xxxx@psln.com

Date: Friday, January 29, 1999 4:20 PM
Subject: QLG meeting update

Summary of 1/28 QLG meeting

1. The QLG has been discussing urging the FS to interpret CASPO in the following ways:

a. Implementing CASPO with very large units, so canopy closure/basal area could be averaged across units, and low density DFPZs could be made to be consistent with CASPO.

b. Pushing the FS to consider canopy closure/basal area/basal area-derrived diameter limits as flexible limits that could be exceeded in order to implement DFPZs and groups, even without invoking the adaptive management exception (which they say is too cumbersome.) As support, the QLG cites the CASPO recommendations allowances for "exceptions" (CASPO, at 22, recommendation 5), correllated portions of the CASPO EA, and the descriptive prescription mentioned by Kevin McKelvy in the PIP report.

Some members of the QLG (i.e., G. Terhune) thought that this exception could not resonably be interpreted to mean that larger diameter trees (larger than the basal-area derrived diameter limit) could be Fogged; Ed Murphy argued vehemently that there was no other way to interpret the exception except that it was intended to allow logging of trees larger than the basal area-derrived limit (but not larger than 30 inches).

The group named the Wheel project on the Plumas as one where a DFPZ could not be made in dense, even age, relatively even DBH stands due to the diameter limit. They said that due to the diameter limit, remaining cnopy closure was 70% in a young stand, which would not serve the purpose of a DFPZ. There was disagreement about how uniform this condition is across the QLG area, but many think that it will be an issue in the Plumas.

2. The QLG would like to do a workshop with the Forest Service on this issue, or get the Forest Service to put on a workshop. If the Forest Service does not want to do a workshop, they'd like to cosponsor one with Coop Ext., UC B, and invited us to cosponsor as well.

They would like the workshop to address group selection logging and DFPZs in relation to the CASPO guidelines and diameter limit. Some members wanted to get expert opinion from Kevin McKelvey or the like as to how the

CASPO exception ought to be interpreted. Some were strongly opposed to getting more information, and thought that the CASPO recommendations provided the authority for the Forest Service to make exceptions to guidelines.

I think we ought to consider cosponsoring this workshop, and broaden it to address, or identify fragmentation issues. Perhaps we should suggest a second workshop.

In addition, someone ought to attend the workshop and other meetings while I am gone.

3. Next Meeting

The next P2C2 meeting is 2/18; call Linda Blum or check website to make sure the meeting is still on. I am not sure when the next QLG meeting is; I think John P. noted it in his report.


Sunday, January ,(, /),( 0(:,(:,( AM