http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOC ... 384816.pdf
The documents specifically state that the burns provide the USFS with the right to use chain saws in the Wilderness -- and not for trail maintenance. Nothing is said in the documents about rebuilding trails damaged, nor is it clear that funds have been budgeted for fire-related trail work.
The burn plans slipped past my radar and the radar of an academic forest ecologist I know. He normally keeps abreast of these matters. Apparently the "test" plots were chosen for other than general research purposes, since there is no sign in the documents that academic (independent) ecologists were asked if they might want to study the impacts. I am not sure there were hearings -- the planning seems to have been rather stealthy. The first burn may be this month or next.
One of the two initial sites is obviously designed to protect the Mt Bachelor Ski Area. The burn is intended to include the timber to the top of the main climbing route on the South Sister, all the routes to Green Lakes from the south, and the area south of and southwest of Broken Top. (Crown fires are expected over parts of the areas, so some trees will die.) The burn area map is here: http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOC ... 384814.pdf
It is as though the first uses of the technique were designed to affect as many Three Sisters Wilderness users as possible: Sparks Lake on the south end and the Frog Camp area on the north end (Scott Butte). One paragraph in the documents is to me quite alarming , particularly in the absence of academic observers comparing plans with results:
Due the size of the project, and the remote, limited access to the areas, fuels specialists propose to use helicopters equipped with Aerial Sphere Dispensers (ping-pong balls) or a heli-torch to accomplish prescribed fire ignitions.
The proactive fire project's page is: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/willamett ... rdb5383417 When you read the reasons given for the project, protecting wilderness values is obviously a tacked on afterthought. The burns are intended to protect resources outside the WA so Wildernesses can be allowed to burn unchecked.
I do not believe that the criteria for WA modification should be non-WA values. What's your opinion, pro or con?
About the South Sister climbing route/ Green Lakes/ Broken Top as an initial burn area/learning device as opposed to a more compact less intrusive site: what are your thoughts?