| Click the button below to search for articles... View News Items from prior months... June 2021 July 2020 June 2016 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 July 2013 June 2013 March 2013 February 2013 November 2012 October 2012 August 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 November 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 February 2010 January 2010 | Study released on impacts of conifer removal to restore aspen stands VALLEJO, Calif., Feb. 18, 2014 -A recent collaborative research project by the University of California, Davis and the U.S. Forest Service found that conifer removal to restore aspen stands can be conducted without degrading aquatic ecosystems. The study (conducted by Bobette E. Jones, Monika Krupa, Kenneth W. Tate, http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0084561) which took place from 2003-2010 and was published in the journal PLOS ONE in December 2013, detected no adverse effects to water quality, temperature or aquatic insects when mechanical equipment was used to restore aspen stands adjacent to streams. Aspen provide many ecological services, including high species and landscape diversity, higher water retention, wildlife habitat and forage for livestock and wildlife. Since aspen provide so many ecological services, there is concern about their decline in the Western U.S. Aspen trees are shade intolerant and without regular disturbance (fire), conifers eventually shade them out and reduce the ecological services that aspen stands provide. Over 90 percent of aspen stands in forested areas of California have some level of conifer shading. Removing conifers using mechanical equipment to increase sunlight to aspen is an effective technique to restore stands, but there have been concerns with using this approach adjacent to streams. Other scientists lauded the report. "For years aspen stands have declined in vigor and sometimes died because of pressures from encroaching conifers," said Malcolm North, Research Scientist with the U.S. Forest Service's Pacific Southwest Research Station in Davis. "Reluctance to thin out the conifers because of concern for stream water quality has contributed. This study demonstrates that those impacts are negligible." This long-term study was designed to identify if there would be any negative consequences to aquatic ecosystems when using timber harvest techniques. The study evaluated two aspen restoration projects adjacent to perennial mountain streams on the Lassen National Forest. The research began prior to any treatments, with continued data collection occurring two to seven years following treatments. Soil scientists, hydrologists, fish biologists, foresters, ecologists and University of California, Davis specialists identified key aquatic and soil attributes. These traits included stream temperature, water quality, stream shade, overstory tree canopy cover, aquatic insects, soil compaction and soil moisture. UC Davis researchers analyzed the data and found that water quality did not change following timber harvest implementation. In fact, more than 80 percent of all stream water samples analyzed were below the detection limit, with some meeting drinking water standards. The timber harvest treatments did reduce canopy cover which resulted in an increase of solar radiation reaching the streams, but there was no corresponding increase in stream temperature. The aquatic insects also confirmed the water quality results, with the highest percentage of pollution tolerant species detected prior to treatment implementation. Finally, soil moisture availability increased in treated aspen stands compared to untreated stands. This demonstrates that restored aspen stands would be more resilient in drought years. Some previous studies indicate that timber harvest activities were found to impair water quality and aquatic ecosystems. The findings of this study, however, concur with recent research in which partial harvesting of areas near streams and rivers can be conducted without damage to aquatic ecosystems. Land managers can use this study to assist their future decisions for restoration activities near stream areas. # USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Published: 02/20/14 LETTER OF INTEREST FROM LOYALTON CITY COUNCIL: Kenneth Cutler, Sierra County Health Officer Elizabeth Morgan, Director of Environmental Health Re: Site Security and Assessment of Loyalton Hotel Burn Site Dear Kenneth Cutler and Elizabeth Morgan: This letter is a response to your letter requesting the City fence the public sidewalk in front of the hotel burn site and retain a Certified Asbestos Consultant to determine if the ash and debris is hazardous waste. The City retained Asbestos Science Technologies, Inc. The attached report states that all samples taken on the public sidewalk came back containing no asbestos. The samples were analyzed using Polarized Light Microscopy as required under EPA guidelines. The City was notified that the property owners also requested that the hotel burn site on their lot be tested. The City has received a copy of a second report by Asbestos Science Technologies that states all samples taken on the hotel burn lot came back containing no asbestos. Your letter contains several factual inaccuracies. You assume the age of the hotel building is all the same. While the original structure was constructed in the 1920’s, the hotel was partially remodeled with a new porch across the front extending into the City’s sidewalk between 2000 and 2005. The ash and debris on the public sidewalk in front of the hotel burn site is from the new porch and would not contain hazardous materials. The fire was so hot that the porch fiberglass shingles melted and stuck to the City sidewalk. Your letter also alleges the demolition of the hotel building occurred after the fire. This is not correct. The building demolition occurred during the fire. After initial fire suppression, the 17,000 square foot concrete and wood structure was deemed unsafe for entry by firefighters to complete fire extinguishment and overhaul due to the possible collapse of the burned out walls. An additional safety concern was the possibility of firefighter falling into hidden void spaces under the hotel containing burning material. Acting to protect the safety of the firefighters and the safety of the public, the Loyalton Fire Chief made a brilliant decision to extinguish the fire during the overhaul phase using heavy equipment. I, as City Mayor concurred in this decision. The entire city is proud of our Volunteer Fire Department saving downtown Loyalton. A retired Reno fireman said that the Reno Fire Department could not have done a better job. I agree. Sincerely, Brooks Mitchell Mayor, City of Loyalton Published: 02/13/14 |