Residents appeal proposed timber sale

January 27, 2006
Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (AK)
By Darrell L. Breese

MAT-SU -Residents of the Trapper Creek area who object to the state's planned timber sale on West Petersville Road filed appeals Tuesday with state Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Mike Menge.

More than a dozen appeals were filed by residents, the Trapper Creek Community Council and Trout Unlimited, each requesting the state to reconsider a plan that would allow for the clear cutting of nearly 1,300 acres just off Petersville Road near Kroto Creek.

Now it is up to Menge to review the appeals and determine whether to move ahead with the plan or to put the sale on hold.

Geoffrey Parker, an attorney representing the Trapper Creek Community Council, Robert Gillam and several others, drafted an appeal that states the sale must be reversed because it does not conform with state law.

“Basically there are two errors with the final finding by the state,” Parker said. “There is no identifiable administrative record and the final finding fails to meet the requirements set forward in a previous case against the Department of Natural Resources.”

Trout Unlimited, the nation's largest cold-water fishery conservation group, believes the sale will have an adverse affect on protected trout fisheries and salmon beds in the adjacent Deshka River and tributaries, Moose and Kroto creeks.

“It would be nice to have an environmental impact study to review, but the Division of Forestry doesn't have one,” Parker said. “That is the administrative record that is missing. I requested the state to produce consultation with Fish and Game and other agency reports that led to their final finding and they said they don't have any.

“There is no paper trail that someone can review to determine how the decision was made and what grounds there might be for an appeal,” he continued. “Absent of adequate administrative review, which is required by law, any decision that was reached is arbitrary and unreasonable.”

Parker said the only documents the state could produce included a five-year timber sale plan, the final-finding decision, comments from the public and some newspaper articles.

“The state needs to take a hard look at habitat and soil issues as a result of the scarification that will occur because of the sale,” Parker said. “These are important studies that are mysteriously missing from the process.”

Trapper Creek resident Richard Leo, who is included in the appeal filed by Parker, also submitted a separate appeal objecting to the use of the 1985 Susitna Area Plan to justify the sale.

“It's a document drafted over 20 years ago and public comment is maybe 24 years old,” Leo said. “At the time of the plan, the only logging discussed was small scale and local use. There was no mention of the possibility for such a large-scale logging project in the area.”

Leo also believes the timber sale does not comply with the Susitna Forestry Guidelines, which were adopted by DNR in 1991 to ensure that state forest lands continue to contribute to the quality of life and economy of the Susitna Valley. It also calls for the preservation of mature trees.

“The average tree in the sale area is 9 inches in diameter,” Leo said. “But the timber sale calls for the removal of all trees over 6 inches, leaving no mature trees behind.”

Other issues raised in the appeals include an apparent disregard for the public input from area residents, a clear lack of economic benefit to the community, harm to the area's growing tourism industry and a possible loss of money to the state as a result of the sale.

Parker went on to say he believes the Division of Forestry simply copied the findings for the TIN timber sale in Houston and changed the name and a few phrases.

According to Rick Jandreau, with the Mat-Su office of the Division of Forestry, the commissioner has 10 days allowed for a response.

If the appeals are denied, Parker said his clients are willing to take their appeal to the state Superior Court.

Date: 1/27/2006