Protect Scotchman for future generations

There has been a lot of negative publicity about the proposed Scotchman Peak Wilderness lately. In my opinion, the arguments I have read from those opposing it seem to be based on a narrow, current use driven perspective and less on researched facts.

I understand that there is a LOT of passion on both sides of this issue. Wilderness designation is NOT a bad thing, it is a protection given to the most pristine and unspoiled wildlands where there are no roads or development. These officially designated wilderness areas are the last remnants of the wild landscapes that once existed in this country. These areas are protected for us and future generations as a reminder what an untouched landscape looks like.

It is my opinion (and I admit I am not a hunter) that wilderness designation would be a great asset for hunters. Most animals avoid human disturbance in general and elk in particular perhaps more so than any other game species. Motorized disturbance has a greater impact on elk than foot or horse traffic although heavy human pressure of any kind can drive elk into more secluded areas. In other words, you would think that elk would love areas that are designated as wilderness where there is no motorized traffic and little human impact to disturb them.

I found an interesting article in the Idaho State Journal written by George Wuerthner, May 25, 2017, titled “Wilderness protection reduces wildfires”. He writes about a study that was published in the Ecosphere Journal, where they researched the topic “Does increased forest protection correspond to higher fire severity in frequent-fire forests of the western United States?”.

The researchers looked at 1,500 wildfires in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forests across the West. They discovered that, contrary to popular opinion, the protected areas, which presumably have higher biomass and fuels loads, had lower-severity fires than forests that were actively managed. The author continues to explain that this is not surprising if one understands why and how forests burn. And I am directly quoting his article now;

“First, what burns in forest fires are primarily the fine fuels such as needles, small branches, grass and shrubs. That is why in the aftermath of a fire, there are snags. The tree boles themselves seldom burn.

Logging and thinning tends to put more fine fuels on the ground and promotes the growth of things such as grasses and shrubs.

Secondly, thinning/logging opens up the forest to drying and wind penetration. These are the primary ingredients that promote fire spread. Fuels do not drive large fires, rather extreme climate/weather conditions. When you have low humidity, high temperatures and, most importantly, high winds, wildfires roar through all forest stands.

Active forest management may reduce the amount of biomass, but often increases the fine fuels and enhances the conditions for fire spread.

Plus, since most wildfires are human-caused and often occur along roads, keeping roadless lands free of logging roads, also reduces overall fire starts. Thus, one of the additional benefits of setting aside large acreage of wilderness is a net reduction in high-severity fires.”

The proposed Scotchman Peak Wilderness area deserves to be protected and anybody that has ventured deep into the heart of these unspoiled mountains know why.

JOLANDA VAN OOYEN

Sandpoint