All things about Whitebark Pine

[PAL]

I could care less about your rating system of trolling.
He knows what went down now because you have been talking about now for a long time. So now we all know what went down according to you and it is factual, I am sure. It's good you reported it. But you rake Jim over the coals because you don't like what he calls Thrump.

We are back to you wanting to moderate what is said and how it is said on this BB. Jim, like most humans respond emotionally from time to time.
So what?

[Fun CH]

Chris, why are you slaying Jim? You paint him as a slouch. He did the best he could at the FS. 35 yrs with the FS, he should have a medal. Stop belittling him.
Do you need something to do?
Ah, you like the lively exchange and I will probalby get it from you now too.

Pearl, I dont hear you speaking out when Jim lays out one of his infamous derogatory attacks against people who disagree with him here or when he belittles members of our community who support Trump, so why are you so concerned when I push back against his BS?

The way he was talking about the NCH 2012 environmental damage, I wrongly assumed he was working at the forest service at the time and knew what he was talking about.

Now I know he has zero first hand knowledge concerning how it all went down and seems content in presenting semantic arguments . Is that an attempt to downplay the seriousness of that illegal environmental damage or discredit the actual witnesses? Only Jim knows his motives.

One thing is for certain, I don't like veiled threats and will push back on that everytime. Why do not speak out against that here Pearl?

BTW, You get a 10 on that troll.

[PAL]

Chris, why are you slaying Jim? You paint him as a slouch. He did the best he could at the FS. 35 yrs with the FS, he should have a medal. Stop belittling him.
Do you need something to do?
Ah, you like the lively exchange and I will probalby get it from you now too.

[Fun CH]

This all happened on Jim's watch, so course he's going to defend his former employer by trying to down play the issue and try to discredit anyone willing to speak out.

This is not just a mis-statement or an exaggeration, it is a 100% false statement. All the ‘whitebark’ events described in this thread happened long after I retired.

It is not the first time this has happened, either. You have ascribed responsibilities and accomplishments to me that I was not responsible for, and placed me in employment positions that I have not held.

I spent 35+ years in public service here. I was recognized for that service by my peers and by the public. And I still get thanked by people in this community, years on, for my work. I wont stand for you to continue to mis-represent my work. Or to fabricate lies about it. Especially not in order to bolster some petty, two-bit, bull*** argument of yours.

You need to stop. First, last and only warning.

.

That sounds like a threat Jim.If you can't handle someone pushing back against your repeated harassment and derogatory name calling attacks, then just don't respond to my posts with your nonsensical arguments.

But really, You weren't around in 1981 when the FS authorized Heli-ski motorized use in a pristine roadless area?

You weren't around for the 2002 environmental assessment that doubled the number of heli-ski user days and expanded the scope and use of that operation?

You weren't in the FS when they put out forest fires that lead to our current fuel load situation?

[just-jim]

This all happened on Jim's watch, so course he's going to defend his former employer by trying to down play the issue and try to discredit anyone willing to speak out.

This is not just a mis-statement or an exaggeration, it is a 100% false statement. All the ‘whitebark’ events described in this thread happened long after I retired.

It is not the first time this has happened, either. You have ascribed responsibilities and accomplishments to me that I was not responsible for, and placed me in employment positions that I have not held.

I spent 35+ years in public service here. I was recognized for that service by my peers and by the public. And I still get thanked by people in this community, years on, for my work. I wont stand for you to continue to mis-represent my work. Or to fabricate lies about it. Especially not in order to bolster some petty, two-bit, bull*** argument of yours.

You need to stop. First, last and only warning.

.

[pasayten]

You and Jim do keep things interesting around here...

[Fun CH]

Perfect picture for the whitebark pine continuous whining...

These were originally in the Hydrogen project thread...
I moved them here to keep the original thread off rabbit trails...

keep in mind that Jim just rekindled the issue by using it as an attack in the hydrogen thread and now he says I'm the one beating a dead horse.

It's a bigger issue than just cutting down white bark pine trees (which were federally listed as a sensitive species at the time and now on the endangered species list has threatened).

It's about how if you are a corperate partner of the Forest Service, the FS will apparently sweep unlawful activity on the National Forest under the rug. No one can cut down ANY live tree on the NF without permission. It's simply against the law.

It was also clearly stated on their special use permit that NCH could not establish new heli-ski landing sites without permission. However that's just a permit violation when NCH did so at multiple locations. But remember the owner's admitted to participating in cutting trees along with the heli pilot who was the only one who faced Forest Service law enforcement repercussions.

This all happened on Jim's watch, so course he's going to defend his former employer by trying to down play the issue and try to discredit anyone willing to speak out. His tribal tactics are very clear.

Meanwhile, if you're Joe Schmo out cutting firewood in the wrong area or don't have a parking pass or snowmobile registration or ride your bicycle or snowmobile in the Wilderness or a heli pilot cutting trees and get caught, the full weight of the law will hammer down on you.

I guess if you're OK with that double standard then all that is a non issue to you. Just don't read it, but why try to defend it or discredit it like Jim is doing?

I can see now that I should post the documents and pictures related to this.

[pasayten]

Perfect picture for the whitebark pine continuous whining...

These were originally in the Hydrogen project thread...
I moved them here to keep the original thread off rabbit trails...

[just-jim]

.

.

[Fun CH]

But seriously Jim you tend to respond emotionally about everything here just look at your Donald Trump posts and the derogatory language you've directed towards others here including me. That's all emotion. Use your big boy facts.

That’s so incredibly rich and comical - coming from someone who has lashed out at, cast aspersions on, and forecast the future obvious nefarious actions of…the ACQUAINTANCES and FRIENDS of the SPOUSES of some folks involved in a dispute that is over a dozen year in the past.

But, keep on ….keeping on…..
.
IMG_1499.jpeg
.

another emotional response. Thanks for proving my point.

When you call illegal activity on the National Forest, that your former FS employer seemly swept under the rug, a "dispute" that kind of says it all.

Now you come onto a thread discussing hydrogen fuel research and try to use emotional arguments to spread fear propaganda. Great work Jim.

[just-jim]

But seriously Jim you tend to respond emotionally about everything here just look at your Donald Trump posts and the derogatory language you've directed towards others here including me. That's all emotion. Use your big boy facts.

That’s so incredibly rich and comical - coming from someone who has lashed out at, cast aspersions on, and forecast the future obvious nefarious actions of…the ACQUAINTANCES and FRIENDS of the SPOUSES of some folks involved in a dispute that is over a dozen year in the past.

But, keep on ….keeping on…..
.

.

[Fun CH]

And I am not sorry to be tired about it... after 3 or 4 times, the story becomes repetitive and monotonous... When you become monotonous, your subject matter is not advanced. Just becomes a white noise in the background and ignored...

don't read it than. We just spent a week on a semantic argument. I agree that is monotonous.

Hopefully Jim is done with his obfuscation, since he can't or wont answer the critical question. At least he's not calling me every name in the book these days. I got that a lot discussing these facts online over the years.

[pasayten]

And I am not sorry to be tired about it... after 3 or 4 times, the story becomes repetitive and monotonous... When you become monotonous, your subject matter is not advanced. Just becomes a white noise in the background and ignored...

[Fun CH]

Sorry, not sorry, if speaking truth to power bothers you Ray. This issue has not been resolved. So not 10 years ago.


https://www.americanforests.org/article ... bark-pine/


"The whitebark pine is like a grizzled prizefighter that keeps hanging on for one more bout. Pummeled by chilling, sub-alpine winds, wounded by blister rust fungus and subsisting in a harsh, unforgiving environment, it still lives to a ripe old age, sometimes up to 1,000 years.

“The West holds a collective magical space in the imagination of our nation, and whitebark pine really is an iconic species that exists within those iconic spaces,” Pansing adds. “If you think about Glacier National Park, if you think about Yellowstone National Park, if you think about any high-elevation ecosystem throughout most of the western United States, you are coming face-to-face with whitebark pine.”

[pasayten]

10 years ago sure makes me snooze... Put it in ONE thread and be done with it.

[Fun CH]

The continual recitation of your narrative from 10 years ago isn’t helpful. But, I’ll stop here…you either don’t get it, or don’t care to.

isn't helpful to who?

The public is asked to comment on many FS proposals for public land use.

Knowing the facts about how the Forest Service has managed public land in the past helps to inform the public in that process, don't you think?

Imo this is especially important for issues ripe with potential conflict. For example, the Silver Star snowpark that was supported by and benefits FS corperate partners which was placed in close proximity to federally designated Mountain goat habitat (excluded from motorized use but not enforced). That project received a categorical exclusion and therefore no public input was required. Why?

So once again please tell me Jim, why do you think a corporate partner of the Forest Service, who admitted to cutting trees, including one designated sensitive species type that was being considered for ESA protection, is apparently immune from law enforcement repercussions?

At one of our BC skier group meetings with the District ranger, when other previously undisclosed (by NCH) additional unauthorized cutting sites were reported to the FS by concerned citizens, we were lead to believe that FS law enforcement would investigate those sites. That never happened. Why?

Do you Think that challenging me on the semantic argument somehow invalidates these concerns?

[just-jim]

"Listing Species Under the Endangered Species Act
Before a species can receive the protection provided by the Endangered Species Act, it must first be added to the federal lists of endangered and threatened wildlife and plants."

It is only a ‘semantic argument’ if you want to believe words don’t have specific meaning. In this case words like ‘listing’ and ‘threatened and endangered’ have a defined legal meaning. ‘Sensitive’ does not. It is the difference between words defined in law and those used in mere policy or agency direction. ‘Listing’ has a specific meaning that you have not used properly.

And, words don’t matter if you want to continually present a situation as being worse than it is by using inaccurate language.

Your quote shows my point, exactly; “Before a species…..it must first be added….”, occurred in 2022. Not before. Adding a species to some administrative list called ‘sensitive’ - or something else - is not the same.

The continual recitation of your narrative from 10 years ago isn’t helpful. But, I’ll stop here…you either don’t get it, or don’t care to.
.

[Fun CH]

Again, you are presenting a semantic argument.

"Listing Species Under the Endangered Species Act
Before a species can receive the protection provided by the Endangered Species Act, it must first be added to the federal lists of endangered and threatened wildlife and plants."

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national ... ng-process?

That point is however irrelevant in this case because it is against the law to destroy any trees in the National Forest without a permit to do so. No administrative semantic ambiguities there.

The fact that NCH cut many types of trees including one type federally listed as a sensitive species without a permit to do so is against the law, yet only the heli pilot was held to account by FS law enforcement.

The NCH owners were held responsible under an administrative procedure violation ie, a special use permit violation. Surely a permit violation can also be a violation of law, yet in the case of the owners it wasn't treated that way.

Other additional cut sites were not disclosed by NCH to the FS or the FS LEO at the time the first cut site reported by me and a friend who witnessed the environmental destruction first hand.

After more NCH cut sites were found by concerned citizens and reported to the FS, I requested a full FS law enforcement investigation.

That first cut site was investigated by FS law enforcement but not other sites where multiple trees were cut, including White Park pine trees. Why?

At the time FS LEO Dave Graves told me sometime about not tying up the courts with this issue, even though an investigation request was repeatedly made by a concerned citizen.

This whole issue has the appearance of the Forest Service going out of his way to protect one of it's private corporate partners who had already admitted to cutting trees.

[just-jim]

.
Again, not disputing the cutting of trees was not allowed….but do continue to try to put me in that position, ok?

Saying ‘federally listed’ conveys a specific meaning…one usually associated with ESA. ‘Federal listing’ has a very specific and exact meaning under ESA, and ‘listing’ brings on a whole host of public efforts by the FWS and a complete suite of specific protections for the species (and sometimes - but not always - specific habitat). There is NOT a category of ‘Sensitive’ under ESA.

I can post a similar link to FS policy as you did to the BLM policy. Again, this is an administrative classification - it is policy direction from a higher office to those in the field about how to manage ‘species of concern’….ones that are not yet listed under ESA. It is not LAW. Appearing on such a list DOES not convey any protection under ESA, the classification has NOT been through a public process like under ESA, and the species in question has no special protection under law as under ESA.

You cant cite someone into court or issue a fine based on violation of policy. You are confusing the issue by using a term you don’t understand. By doing so you make it appear that whitebark pine had some special protection prior to 2022. It did not.

I guess we COULD say that because SilverStar Snopark or Harts Pass Trailhead appear on a ‘list’ - of some type, somewhere - that they, too, are ‘federally listed’. Technically, that would be correct. “I drove on the federally listed Twisp River road to the federally listed North Creek trailhead, then hiked the federally listed North Lake trail to federally listed North Lake. I camped there, then climbed some federally listed mountains.”
.

[Fun CH]

.You made it sound like the species had some protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) prior to 2022. It did not. The FS uses the term ‘sensitive’. It is an administrative classification by the FS, rather than one under the ESA.

I have never stated that in 2012 white bark pine trees were listed under the endangered species act. You are obviously caught up in a semantic argument.

In 2012 white bark pine trees were listed as a sensitive species by the Feds.

"Sensitive species are those species requiring special management consideration to promote their conservation and reduce the likelihood and need for future listing under the ESA"

"Sensitive species are managed as special status species, along with Federally listed and proposed species, which are automatically treated as special status species."

https://www.blm.gov/policy/ca-im-2010-008

And as I have previously posted, and you have also posted, white bark pine trees are now listed under The endangered species act as threatened.

So now Jim please tell me how guide/ outfitter owners (who admitted to cutting trees) and holding a special use permit on the National Forest can cut trees without authorization and against specific terms of their federal license (permit) and not receive a Forest Service law enforcement citation?

Why are they apparently above the law?

[mister_coffee]

We need a special topic of "all things about white bark pine" thread... 56 posts... they are spread throughout this BB...

That's okay. I like whitebark pines. There are (or were, because some were burned in a fire) some very impressive ones on the S side of Quartz Mountain.

[pasayten]

We need a special topic of "all things about white bark pine" thread... 56 posts... they are spread throughout this BB...

[just-jim]

.
I don’t dispute the cutting of trees at all…..only your incorrect statement about ‘listed species’. I am well aware of what is in their Special Use Permit.

The USFWS has three categories; Endangered and Threatened. In addition, candidate species’ - those which warrant additional study. Only Endangered and Threatened species are considered ‘listed’ and provide any special protection. Such listing, as Threatened, began in 2022 for Whitebark pine. You made it sound like the species had some protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) prior to 2022. It did not. The FS uses the term ‘sensitive’. It is an administrative classification by the FS, rather than one under the ESA.

AS for snowmobiles, yes, a FS LEO might issue a ticket. When they do so, they are acting in their authority under State Law, as I stated. Such action is not a Federal violation, it is a violation under State law. There is, I believe, ONE person who may issue such a ticket…as David and I stated.
.

[Fun CH]

Whitebark Pine was not listed as a threatened species until 2022. It had no special protection at the time the incident referred to occurred.

Jim, All trees on the National Forest are protected. Imagine the fine and or jail time you or I would face if we just went in and started logging any tree we wanted to without a specific permit. The NCH permit specifically prohibited them from cutting down trees without authorization to do so.

White Park pine trees were federally listed as a sensitive species* at the time of the NCH illegal cutting.

The NCH pilot received a warning ticket for the illegal cutting while the NCH owners did not face any law enforcement repercussions even though both NCH owners Paul and Ken admitted to participating in cutting trees.

Did the Forest Service ignore the NCH illegal tree cutting activity under the guise that NCH held a special use permit even though it did not authorize cutting trees to create new heli landing zones with permission from the FS?

Jim, I'm sure you know that destroying any tree in the national Forest without a permit to do so is against the law. But hey, nice obfuscation.

Also, the FS has jurisdiction along highway 20 beyond the closure point. They allow permanent seasonal parking of snowmobiles there. FS law enforcement will issue you a ticket or a warning if you do not have proper registration on your snowmobile. FS law enforcement regularly patrols the snow park and Hwy 20 on a snowmobile.

"18 U.S. Code § 1853 - Trees cut or injured

Whoever unlawfully cuts, or wantonly injures or destroys any tree growing, standing, or being upon any land of the United States which, in pursuance of law, has been reserved or purchased by the United States for any public use, or upon any Indian reservation, or lands belonging to or occupied by any tribe of Indians under the authority of the United States, or any Indian allotment while the title to the same shall be held in trust by the Government, or while the same shall remain inalienable by the allottee without the consent of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

*"Sensitive species are rare species that are threatened by human activities. If we do not manage for them, they could become the next species proposed for listing."

[just-jim]

.
Whitebark Pine was not listed as a threatened species until 2022. It had no special protection at the time the incident referred to occurred.

The Snowpark program in WA is a State run program. The State designates the areas, sets the rules, receives the funds, disburses the proceeds and writes violations for the rules. Not the FS. (There are several FS folks who can write ‘tickets’ for petty offense misdemeanors – but only for federal regulations).
As David notes, there is just one FS Law enforcement person in the valley who may have the ability to write violation notices for State infractions; but only if they are “cross-deputized” by the County Sheriff to do so, under State Law. Example; Dave Graves was…not sure whether the ‘new’ FS LEO is or not. WDFW law types can and do enforce those Snowpark regs, as do County Deputies. State Patrol could, but I think they have bigger things to worry about.

If such a rule like Jingles is proposing did exist, then enforcement adjacent to the Snowparks along Hwy 20 would be up to State or County deputies, since it isn’t a FS road.

Equating robbery of a convenience store being OK, since Joe Schmo got off with too light a sentence for murder, is called a false equivalency.
.