Paul Thomas Richards 
Big Nose Karma
Tools for Maintaining a Rural Zen Practice
By Paul Richards
Boulder Valley, Montana
Introduction:
Montana and the Northern Rockies Ecosystem are lands of many spaces. That’s good!
My home is 167 miles away from my “Sangha,” or organized spiritual community. How to maintain a rural Zen practice, in the absence of frequent in-person visits to a Sangha gathering?
It’s easy! I’ve got a dog, Karma (see picture), who takes me for walks. A mile down the road is a river I can listen to. I watch the clouds and the sunsets. I love wildlife viewing. And, gradually, I am learning how to occasionally do nothing.
There is much support available to rural people like me. It really helps to have an Internet connection, although it is not essential. Here are some of my favorite sources, with contact information for those with or without ready access to the Internet and the World-Wide Web.
Is Zen Complicated?
No.
In both East and West, intellectuals try their utmost to make Zen unnecessarily complicated, inaccessible, and even masochistic.
In stark contrast, this article highlights media that provide easy to understand, loving, and fun approaches to Zen and Buddhism .
This article also focuses on Vietnamese Zen master Thích Nhất Hanh , also called “Thây” (pronounced “Tie”) – an affectionate Vietnamese term meaning “teacher.”
By teaching directly from the heart, Thích Nhất Hanh avoids the cerebral traps common to many Buddhist experts, scholars, interpreters, teachers, and practitioners. Thây’s writings and spoken words are refreshingly simple, forthright, and honest.
Even though it is his third language after Vietnamese and French, (Thây is also fluent in Chinese, Sanskrit, Pāli, and Japanese), Thích Nhất Hạnh has mastered writing and speaking in English. His words, written and spoken, are wonderfully comprehensible for readers, viewers, and listeners of all ages, educations, cultures, and persuasions.
Tricycle:
Every day, I look forward to the “Daily Dharma,” concise and cogent quotes about Zen and Buddhism from the fine folks at Tricycle Magazine. Here is one of my favorites:
Watermelons and Zen Students
grow pretty much the same way.
Long periods of sitting
till they ripen and grow
all juicy inside, but
when you knock them on the head—
to see if they’re ready—
sounds like nothing’s going on.
Essential Zen (Harper Collins)
You can sign up for your free “Daily Dharma” at: http://visitor.constantcontact.com/manage/optin/ea?v=001uxu9h741ik0LIOgRSyiOAQ%3D%3D . Each “Daily Dharma” contains a hyperlink, if you want to learn more about the author or book quoted.
Tricycle Magazine bills itself as “the independent voice of Buddhism.” The home page of its Web site, located at: http://www.tricycle.com/ , is full of incredibly compelling and educational articles, audios, videos, and on-line discussions.
You can join the Tricycle on-line community for free at: http://community.tricycle.com/ .
A subscription to this excellent magazine is $24 a year at: https://subscribe.pcspublink.com/magazine/Trym/subscribeFormPD3.asp?track=JC49&pub=TRYM&term=4 .
For $30 a year, you can become a “Sustaining Member” and receive the print edition of Tricycle, Tricycle’s digital edition, unlimited access to the Tricycle archives (two decades of Buddhist wisdom), and free access to paid on-line programs and teachings. Just go to: https://subscribe.pcspublink.com/magazine/Trym/subscribeFormD.asp?track=JCOM30&pub=TRYM&term=4 .
Those who lack ready Internet access, can contact Tricycle: The Buddhist Review at 92 Vandam Street, New York, NY, 10013. For subscriptions, call: 800-873-9871. For other inquiries, call: 212-645-1143.
Why “Tricycle?” Buddhism itself is often referred to as the “vehicle to enlightenment,” and the tricycle’s three wheels allude to the three treasures: 1. The Buddha, 2.The Dharma, and 3. The Sangha; or: 1. The enlightened teacher, 2. The teachings, and 3. The community. The wheels also relate to the turning of the wheel of Dharma, or skillfully using the teachings of the Buddha to face the challenges that the circle of life presents.
Shambhala Sun:
Another amazing resource is the Shambhala Sun, whose home page is located at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/ . It, too, is very rich with incredible articles, audios, videos, and on-line discussions.
You can sign up for the Shambhala Sun newsletter for free at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25&Ite&Itemid=341 .
Subscribing to this exceptional publication costs $19.95 for one year or $34.00 for two years at: https://subscribe.pcspublink.com/magazine/Ssun/subscribeForm.asp?track=JECOMM&pub=SSUN&term=6 .
If want to save money and/or trees, you can browse much of the most current issue on-line at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=114 .
Ample free on-line archives are available at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2837&Itemid=260 .
Dozens of audio clips featuring teachers and practitioners from around the world are available at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/sunspace/?tag=audio . These clips are usually from five to ten minutes long.
For the latest in Buddhist videos, go to: http://www.shambhalasun.com/sunspace/?p=11402 . If you have a sense of humor about your practice, check out Arj Barker’s Buddhist rap video, about what it means to be the “sickest” Buddhist, kicking Buddha-Butt.
A special “Spotlight Section” on Thích Nhất Hạnh is located at: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=226 .
And, for the latest Buddhist news, go to: http://www.shambhalasun.com/news/ .
Those without ready Internet access can subscribe by calling the Shambhala Sun, toll-free, at: 877-786-1950. For general inquires, call: 902-422-8404. The Editorial and Business Offices of the Shambhala Sun are located at: 1660 Hollis Street, Suite 701, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1V7. The U.S. subscriptions mailing address is: P.O. Box 469095 Escondido, CA 92046-9095 USA.
The Mindfulness Bell:
Another outstanding magazine is The Mindfulness Bell, located at: http://www.mindfulnessbell.org/ . The Mindfulness Bell is an inspiring resource for those practicing mindfulness in daily life. Each issue features Vietnamese teacher Thích Nhất Hanh, whose teachings about “engaged Buddhism” and Zen are particularly accessible.
The Mindfulness Bell Web site has easy access to Thích Nhất Hạnh’s Five Mindfulness Trainings at: http://www.mindfulnessbell.org/5mt.htm and his Fourteen “InterBeing” Mindfulness Trainings, located at: http://www.mindfulnessbell.org/14trainings.htm .
Subscriptions to The Mindfulness Bell can be ordered on-line at: http://www.smartcart.com/ubcgateway/cgi/search.cgi?terms=Mindfulness_Bell::&category=Mindfulness_Bell . It costs $24 for one year, $45 for two years, $63 for three years, or $18 for a one-year low income subscription.
If you lack ready Internet access, you can subscribe by contacting: The Mindfulness Bell, c/o David Percival, 745 Cagua SE, Albuquerque NM 87108-3717, or by calling: 505-266-9042.
Thích Nhất Hạnh:
Thích Nhất Hạnh – Poet, writer, “Dharma” teacher, “Sangha” builder, speaker, peace advocate, and human rights activist – is one of the best known and most respected Zen masters in the world today.
Nhất Hạnh was born Nguyễn Xuân Bảo in Thừa Thiên (Central Vietnam) in 1926. At the age of 16, he entered the monastery at Từ Hiếu Temple near Huế, where his primary teacher was Master Thanh Quý Chân Thật.
The Vietnam War confronted Buddhists with questions of whether to adhere to contemplative lives and remain meditating in the monasteries, or to offer help to farmers and villagers suffering from the targeted destruction of their agricultural and community infrastructures, invasions and massacres, strafings and bombings, aerial spraying of Agent Orange and other toxins, conscriptions, rapes, religious oppressions, forced relocations to “strategic hamlets,” diseases, and malnutrition and starvation.
By emerging from the cloistered confines of monasteries and committing themselves to social activism in defense of the Vietnamese people, Nhất Hạnh and a handful of others founded the “engaged Buddhism” movement.
Nhất Hạnh and his “Sangha,” or spiritual community, responded to and addressed the suffering they saw around them, seeing this work as part of their meditation and mindfulness practices, not apart from it.
Since then, the term “engaged Buddhism” continues to apply to Buddhists who seek to apply insights from meditation practice and Dharma teachings to situations of social, political, and economic injustice.
Because he helped all those in need regardless of ideologies, Nhất Hạnh was condemned by the United States, its South Vietnamese puppet government, indigenous Viet Cong guerillas in South Vietnam, and the Communist governments of North Vietnam, Soviet Union, and China.
After visiting the United States and Europe on peace missions, he was banned from returning to Vietnam in 1966. Nhất Hạnh changed the course of history when he helped the noted African-American civil rights leader and practitioner of non-violent civil disobedience, Dr. Martin Luther King, understand the immorality of the Vietnam War.
As a result, Dr. King’s courageous public opposition to the Vietnam War was one of the most important factors reversing domestic pro-War sentiment and turning American public opinion towards the peace movement.
In a January 25, 1967, letter to the Nobel Institute in Norway, Dr. King nominated Nhất Hạnh for the Nobel Peace Prize. “I do not personally know of anyone more worthy of this prize than this gentle monk from Vietnam,” King wrote. “His ideas for peace, if applied, would build a monument to ecumenism, to world brotherhood, to humanity.”
Thích Nhất Hạnh is pronounced “Tick N’yat Hawn.” His name is sometimes misspelled as Thich Nhat Hahn, Thich Nhat Han, and Thich Nat Han.
For more information about Thích Nhất Hạnh, go to: http://www.parallax.org/about_tnh.html or: http://buddhistlinks.org/ThichWorks.htm ; or: http://www.plumvillage.org/thay.html .
Engaged Buddhism has grown worldwide, with prominent figures including: Robert Aitken Roshi, Joanna Macy, Gary Snyder, Alan Senauke, Sulak Sivaraksa, Maha Ghosananda, Sylvia Wetzel, Anthony Stultz, Diana Winston, Fleet Maull, Joan Halifax, Tara Brach, Natalie Goldberg, Stephanie Kaza, Sister Chan Khong, Noah Levine, Albert Low, Caitriona Reed, and Leila Seth.
Parallax Press:
Thích Nhất Hạnh has written more than 100 books, with about 40 currently available in English. Parallax Press is the outfit that publishes most of his books. Parallax Press has a dynamite Web site, located at: http://www.parallax.org/ .
All of Thích Nhất Hạnh’s books are delightful and well worth reading. Although you will find certain themes repeated, “Thầy” is never boring or dogmatic.
You can view Thích Nhất Hạnh’s many books at: http://www.parallax.org/cgi-bin/shopper.cgi?search=action&category=BOOK&keywords=hanh .
For audio resources, go to: http://www.parallax.org/audio.html .
For videos, go to: http://www.parallax.org/video.html .
For contact information for Parallax Press, go to: http://www.parallax.org/contact_staff.html . For additional inquiries, you can e-mail Parallax at: info@parallax.org .
You can subscribe to Parallax Press’s free monthly newsletter at: http://www.parallax.org/about_news.html .
For a free Parallax Press catalog, go to: http://www.parallax.org/catalog.html .
Those lacking ready Internet access can order the Parallax Press catalog or books by calling, toll-free: 800-863-5290, or by writing: Parallax Press, P.O. Box 7355, Berkeley, CA 94707. For inquiries, call: 510-525-0101.
Amazon:
For more about Thích Nhất Hạnh books, kindles, audio books, calendars, CDs, and DVDs, and MP3s, go to: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords=Thich+Nhat+Hanh&x=20&y=17/buddhistlinks-20 . Those lacking Internet access, can utilize Amazon’s toll-free customer service by calling: 866-216-1072. Amazon will call you right back.
Powell’s:
If you prefer independent book stores, Powell’s in Portland, Oregon is hard to beat! Their Thích Nhất Hạnh materials are located at: http://www.powells.com/s?header=Search+Form&kw=Thich+Nhat+Hanh . Those without Internet access can call Powell’s, toll-free, at: 800-878-7323.
Other Special Sites (North America, Alphabetical):
Blue Cliff Monastery
The home page of the Blue Cliff Monastery in Pine Bush, New York, is: http://www.bluecliffmonastery.org/ .
Buddhist Peace Fellowship
The Buddhist Peace Fellowship is located at: http://www.bpf.org/ . This Web site contains an Action Center, links to Turning Wheel Magazine, and a sign up form for free Buddhist Peace Fellowship newsletters.
To view Thích Nhất Hạnh’s “What Is Engaged Buddhism?” go to: http://www.bpf.org/socially-engaged/what-is-socially-engaged-buddhism .
Deer Park Monastery
The home page of Deer Park Monastery in Escondido, California, is: http://dpweb.org/ .
Oprah Winfrey
Oprah Winfrey talks with Thích Nhất Hạnh at: http://www.oprah.com/spirit/Oprah-Talks-to-Thich-Nhat-Hanh/2 .
Other Special Sites (International, Alphabetical):
European Institute of Applied Buddhism
The home page of the European Institute of Applied Buddhism in Waldbröl, Germany is located at: http://eiab-maincampus.org/EIAB_Germany/Home.html . You can sign up for e-mailings from the European Institute of Applied Buddhism and the Unified Buddhist Church on this Web page.
International Network of Engaged Buddhists
The International Network of Engaged Buddhists includes individuals and organizations from more than 20 countries. Out of this diversity, an understanding of engaged Buddhism has emerged which integrates the practice of Buddhism with social action for a healthy, just, and peaceful world.
This network trusts compassion, non-violence, and co-existence as revealed by the Buddha. Patrons include the Venerable Thích Nhất Hạnh of Plum Village, France, and Tenzin Gyatso, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, temporarily living in exile from Chinese-occupied Tibet in Dharamsala, a city in the state of Himachal Pradesh in northern India.
Contact the International Network of Engaged Buddhists at: http://www.inebnetwork.org/web/ .
Kids’ Web Sites in Four Languages
Children and parents are encouraged to visit: http://mindfulkids.wordpress.com/ .
Plum Village, France
The home page of Thích Nhất Hạnh’s Sangha in France is located at: http://www.plumvillage.org/ .
Vietnamese Religious Freedom
To support religious freedom in Vietnam, you can sign the petition located at: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/6/religious-freedom-in-viet-nam .
Young People’s Network
Wake Up, located at: http://www.wkup.org/ , is a world-wide networking Web site for young Buddhists and non-Buddhists practicing the living art of mindfulness. There are plenty of links to writings, audio, and video.
Even More Information!
The above is just a start.
To explore other Zen and Buddhist teachers and philosophies, go to: http://buddhistlinks.org/ .
This Web site has more than 7,000 links!
****************************************************************
Editor’s Notes:
1. This article utilizes colored underlined “hyperlinks” known as “Uniform Resource Locators” or “URLs.” A URL is also known as a “domain name” or an “Internet address.” To fully activate and utilize these URLs, just go to the hyperlink and push down on your “Ctrl” or “Control” button on our keyboard and left click your mouse.
2. This article is written by Paul Richards, a professional editor, researcher, writer, and the owner of PR Media Consultants®; Public Interest Media Since 1968; 30 Brown’s Gulch Road; Boulder, MT 59632; www.PRMediaConsultants.com and www.Richards2006.us . A former newsman with The Associated Press, Mr. Richards is a specialist in resource issues and politics of the western United States.
3. For reprint permission, to commission other projects relating to this subject matter, or for additional researching, writing, or editing assignments, please e-mail Mr. Richards at: Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com .
Karma in the Sunset
Dispatches from the Wildlands™ ©2010, Paul Richards
Paul Thomas Richards Keeping It Wild!
In Defense of America’s Public Wildlands
United by our common understanding that Montana’s wild country is its greatest treasure;
And, that once degraded or impaired, this wild country can never be restored or replaced;
And, cognizant of Thoreau’s belief that “In wildness is the preservation of the world;”
And, schooled by Aldo Leopold who long ago warned that wilderness can only shrink and not grow;
And, keenly aware of the definition of wilderness in the Wilderness Act of 1964 as being “untrammeled by man,” where “man himself is a visitor who does not remain;”
And, fully recognizing that the Northern Rockies ecosystem is the only functioning ecosystem in the lower 49 states where all native species still reside;
And, being of one mind in our desire and determination to protect and preserve what remains of our public wildlands to the greatest extent possible;
We hereby state our intention to work together to achieve the most inclusive and comprehensive protection under the law for all remaining publicly-owned de facto wilderness in Montana.
In full affirmation of the above and, after having been unsuccessful in our earnest efforts to improve Sen. Tester’s so-called “Forest Jobs and Recreation Act,” or “S. 1470,” we must now unanimously oppose this bill.
The bases for our opposition are exhaustively catalogued in separate analyses and papers, but we submit this foundational document to concisely articulate our chief objections. They are as follows:
1. The Tester bill specifically eliminates from mandated protection large portions of the late Senator Lee Metcalf’s wildlands legacy, Congressionally designated as Wilderness Study Areas in 1977 by his farsighted bill, S. 393. By eliminating this protection, the Tester bill opens these priceless public wildlands for road building, logging, and other development.
2. The Tester bill undermines the overwhelmingly popular Clinton Roadless Rule and Obama Roadless Initiative. Over one million acres of federally-inventoried roadless wildlands protected under the Roadless Rule and the Roadless Initiative would be classified as “Timber Suitable or Open to Harvest.” (See map).
3. The Tester Bill surrenders decisions about our National Forests to a handful of local bureaucrats and extraction-oriented corporations, thereby promoting fragmentation of America’s national public lands legacy into locally controlled fiefdoms.
4. The Tester bill undermines the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by imposing unrealistic and arbitrary requirements that preclude the Forest Service from accurately assessing environmental impacts of road building, logging, habitat loss, water degradation, weed infestation, and other costs of developing public wildlands.
5. The Tester bill mandates unsustainable logging quotas regardless of environmental costs, thereby jeopardizing safeguards provided public lands by the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, Wilderness Act, and Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
6. In its effort to isolate decisions to log wildlands from national attention, the Tester bill disenfranchises public lands stakeholders, by overriding legitimate science-based forest planning that involves full public information and participation. It deprives the public of our rights to be included in irreversible decisions concerning our own land.
7. The Tester bill mandates cutting at least 100,000 acres over 10 years. It dictates at least 7,000 acres be logged per year for 10 years in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest. In recent years, the Forest Service has set its sustainable cut level for the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest at 500 acres per year. In past years, when the Forest Service was dedicated to “getting the cut out,” an average of 3,213 acres per year was logged, from 1954 to 1996, in the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest. On the Three Rivers Ranger District of the Kootenai National Forest, Tester’s bill mandates logging of 3,000 acres per year for 10 years in fragile Yaak grizzly bear habitat, already severely damaged by decades of overcutting. While logging at least 100,000 acres would be compulsory, the Tester bill contains no accompanying mandates for restoration, leaving all post-logging reclamation and forest restoration optional.
8. The Tester bill fails to address at least $100 million in costs to U.S. taxpayers that would be incurred by the Forest Service for subsidizing “below-cost” timber sales and power plants for the few specially-privileged timber corporations involved. The bill interferes with free enterprise, by mandating that five favored private mills be subsidized with perpetual supplies of National Forest trees, at huge economic costs to taxpayers. The bill ignores the financial realities that the United States currently face: Economic crises and a lumber “depression,” with new home construction down 70 percent and demands for lumber down 55 percent.
9. By forcing unsustainable industrial-scale logging upon our public lands, the Tester bill would irrevocably harm essential habitats of species that characterize the wild nature of the northern Rockies, such as the gray wolf, bull trout, cutthroat trout (Montana’s official state fish), otter, mountain goat, mountain sheep, elk, arctic grayling, northern goshawk, boreal owl, pileated woodpecker, ferruginous hawk, Montana vole, sage thrasher, wild bison, peregrine falcon, bald eagle, pine marten, fisher, lynx, wolverine, and grizzly bear (Montana’s official state animal).
10. The “wilderness” areas in the Tester bill are fragmented and unconnected islands of largely “rocks and ice,” with limited biological integrity and no potential for sustaining biodiversity. The minimal “wilderness” designated in the bill fails to protect different elevation habitats and their dependent species with core areas, buffer zones, and connecting biological corridors. The bill promotes numerous abuses that are clearly in violation of the 1964 Wilderness Act, including motorized access into and through “wilderness,” military aircraft landings in “wilderness,” possible “wilderness” logging, and other intrusions that violate the principles of Wilderness.
Due to these severe deficiencies, we intend to see that the Tester bill is not endorsed by Congress. Instead, we will constructively stand for a scientifically-sound, ecologically-based Wilderness Bill that preserves the greatest amount of our priceless and rapidly-vanishing public roadless wildlands in Montana.
We, the following members of the Last Best Place Wildlands Campaign, are conservation organizations and citizens dedicated to wildlands protection, Wilderness preservation, and the sound long-term management of our federal public lands legacy.
Our coalition includes small-business owners, scientists, educators and teachers, health care practitioners, hikers and backpackers, hunters and anglers, wildlife viewers, outfitters and guides, veterans, retired Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management officials, ranchers and farmers, craftspersons, and community leaders – all stakeholders committed to America’s public wildlands legacy.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Editor’s Notes:
1. This “Keeping It Wild! In Defense of America’s Public Wildlands” Declaration, detailed analyses, and extensive commentary on the Tester bill are located at: http://testerloggingbilltruths.wordpress.com/ .
2. This Declaration has been endorsed by more than 55 grassroots conservation groups that comprise the Last Best Place Wildlands Campaign. For the latest listing of groups, further information, or to sign up your group, go to: http://testerloggingbilltruths.wordpress.com/ .
3. Individuals can sign this “Keeping It Wild! In Defense of America’s Public Wildlands” Declaration by going to: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/keeping-it-wild-in-defense-of-america39s-public-wildlands .
4. Tester, the timber industry, and “conservation” collaborationists have used so many terms for this bill, the public has no idea how to refer it. Due to this plethora of names, the bill’s purposefully obfuscatory text, and its many loopholes; confusion is rampant. The Tester bill is suffering accordingly.
The Tester bill’s official number is “S. 1470.” Tester, the timber industry, and Big Green (or Gang Green) “conservation” collaborationists have interchangeably used: “Tester Forest Jobs and Recreation Act,’’ “Forest Jobs and Recreation Act,” “Tester Forest Jobs Bill,” “Forest Jobs Bill,” “Forest Jobs and Stewardship Bill,” and the “Tester Forest Jobs and Stewardship Bill.”
Editors and reporters, who should know better, mistakenly call it the “Tester Wilderness Bill.” This is a grave misnomer! Tester himself is very clear that his legislation is NOT a wilderness bill!
“Because there are many components to the legislation, calling it a ‘wilderness bill’ is a mischaracterization,” writes Tester. “It is a ‘forest jobs and stewardship’ bill.” Editors and reporters have also called S. 1470 the “Tester Forest Management Bill” and the “Tester Public Lands Legislation.”
Grassroots conservationists have leaned towards more truthful monikers, such as “Tester Logging Bill,” “Tester Logging-Without-Laws Bill,” and “Tester Wildlands Logging Bill.”
“Tester Logging Bill” is now the term most utilized by the general public, with the more accurate “Tester Wildlands Logging Bill” preferred by grassroots wildlands supporters.
5. After securing input from Last Best Place Wildlands Campaign groups, Paul Edwards, a Montana rancher who, years ago, wrote episodes of the television series “Gunsmoke,” penned the first 516-word draft of this Declaration.
6. With continued participation from Last Best Place Wildlands Campaign, Paul Thomas Richards, a professional writer and editor from southwestern Montana’s Boulder Valley, wrote two dozen subsequent drafts, including this final 1034-word “Keeping It Wild! In Defense of America’s Public Wildlands” Declaration.
Dispatches from the Wildlands™
©2010 Paul Thomas Richards
Paul Thomas Richards Restoring Indigenous Wildlife Species to All National Forests
National Forest Management Act
New National Forest System Planning Rule
Editor’s Notes:
The Forest Service was established in 1905 and is an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Forest Service manages 193 million acres of public lands in National Forests and National Grasslands throughout the country.
On December 17, 2009, the Obama Administration announced that it was taking the first step toward adopting new regulations to govern National Forest System planning and management. The four-page scoping notice was published the next day in the Federal Register (74 Fed. Reg. 67165-67169, Dec. 18, 2009) and is available on-line at: http://fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5110264.pdf . The new agency planning rule will guide public land managers as they develop, amend, and revise land management plans for all 155 National Forests and 20 National Grasslands in the National Forest System.
The 60-day public comment period on the scoping notice ended on February 16, 2010. The U.S. Forest Service expects to publish the “Draft Environmental Impact Statement” for the new planning rule in December 2010, the “Final Environmental Impact Statement” in October 2011, and its “Record of Decision” in November 2011. For further information, contact: Larry Hayden at: 202–205–0895 or: lhayden@fs.fed.us .
Below are testimonies concerning restoring indigenous wildlife species to all National Forests submitted to Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell, Region # 1 Forester Leslie Weldon, and Gallatin National Forest Supervisor Mary C. Erickson by Paul Richards and endorsed by former Deputy Regional Forester Bill Worf.
Brief Biographies:
Bill Worf. Former Deputy Regional Forester for the U.S. Forest Service, Bill Worf of Missoula, Montana, worked for agency for 33 years. Worf was born in 1926 on an eastern Montana homestead. As a Marine during World War II, Worf fought in the fierce battle for Iwo Jima, immortalized forever by Joe Rosenthal’s iconic photograph of the raising of the U.S. flag on top of Mount Suribachi by five Marines and one Navy Corpsman. He is one of only a handful of Iwo Jima survivors still living.
Tom Tidwell. Currently Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, Tom Tidwell grew up in Boise, Idaho. He has 32 years’ experience with the Forest Service, working as District Ranger, Forest Supervisor, Legislative Affairs Specialist, and Deputy Regional Forester for the Pacific Southwest Region. Tidwell then served as Regional Forester for the Northern Region, with responsibilities for all National Forests and National Grasslands in northern Idaho, Montana, North Dakota and portions of South Dakota. His official biography, located at: http://www.fs.fed.us/aboutus/chief/ , says Tidwell supports providing “protection for the values of unroaded landscapes.”
Paul Richards. Boulder, Montana area businessman Paul Richards is a Helena native, former member of the Montana House of Representatives, and former candidate for U.S. Senate. Biographies available at: www.PRMedaConsultants.com or: www.Richards2006.us . Contact Richards at: 30 Brown’s Gulch Road, Boulder, MT 59632, or at: Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com .
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–
From: Tom Tidwell <ttidwell@fs.fed.us>
Date: February 17, 2010 6:09:15 AM MST
To: Bill Worf <wworf@bresnan.net>
Subject: Re: NFMA Planning Rules: PLEASE enact mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” throughout entire National Forest System.
Thank you Bill.
Tom
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–
From: Bill Worf <wworf@bresnan.net>
Sent: 02/16/2010 05:40 PM
To: TOM TIDWELL <ttidwell@fs.fed.us>
cc: fspr@contentanalysisgroup.com
Subject: NFMA Planning Rules: PLEASE enact mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” throughout entire National Forest System.
Dear Chief Tidwell;
Pasted below are comments for consideration of the NFMA Planning Rules prepared by Mr. Paul Richards. I have studied them in detail and endorse them completely.
Chief, I spent 30 plus years as an active member of the Forest Service. I believe it is crucial that, if we are to meet the intent of Congress when it passed the Organic Act establishing the National Forests, followed by the Multiple Use/Sustained Yield Act, we must base our management in the principle of maintaining the indigenous wildlife species. Please consider the views expressed by Mr. Richards as also those expressed by Bill Worf.
William A. Worf
Still Forest Service.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–
From: Paul Richards [mailto:Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com]
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 9:37 PM
To: (ttidwell@fs.fed.us); (fspr@contentanalysisgroup.com); (R1@fs.fed.us) (lweldon@fs.fed.us)
Cc: (Gallatin@fs.fed.us); (mcerickson@fs.fed.us)
Subject: NFMA Planning Rules: PLEASE enact mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” throughout entire National Forest System.
U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell
Forest Service National Planning Rules and Regulations
Region # 1 Forester Leslie Weldon
Dear Chief Tidwell, Forest Service National Planning Officials, and Region # 1 Forester,
I hope this note finds you all happy and well.
On December 17, 2009, the Obama Administration announced that it was taking the first step toward adopting new regulations to govern National Forest planning and management. The four-page scoping notice was published the next day in the Federal Register (74 Fed. Reg. 67165-67169, Dec. 18, 2009) and is available on the internet at: http://fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5110264.pdf .
The 60-day public comment period on the scoping notice ends on February 16, 2010. Please fully integrate this scoping comment.
Please refer to the detailed comments below concerning restoration of indigenous wildlife species on the National Forest System. These comments, wholly applicable to the new planning rule for the entire National Forest System, were first submitted on November 6, 2009, to Mary Erickson, Supervisor of the Gallatin National Forest. The current Gallatin National Forest Plan mandates that the Forest Service “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species.” I am a strong supporter of mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” and I believe these mandates should be implemented throughout the entire National Forest System through this new planning rule initiated by 74 Fed. Reg. 67165-67169, Dec. 18, 2009.
Look what mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” would do for the Northern Rockies Ecosystem, for example — the ONLY functioning ecosystem in the lower 49 states where all native species still reside. These mandates would protect remaining habitat of at-risk and secluded species that characterize the wild northern Rockies, such as the bison, gray wolf, bull trout, otter, mountain goat, mountain sheep, elk, arctic grayling, northern goshawk, pika, boreal owl, pileated woodpecker, ferruginous hawk, Montana vole, sage thrasher, sage grouse, peregrine falcon, bald eagle, pine marten, fisher, lynx, wolverine, cutthroat trout (Montana’s official state fish), and grizzly bear (Montana’s official state animal).
Mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” would ensure the survival of crucial almost-extirpated forest carnivores, such as: Wolf, lynx, wolverine, fisher, grizzly bear, and pine marten – all key indicators of forest health and all dependent upon undisturbed mature-to-old growth forests.
Throughout our western National Forests, this indigenous wildlife species language will help the: Peregrine falcon, bald eagle, boreal owl, flammulated owl, black-backed woodpecker, ferruginuous hawk, northern bog lemming, Western big-eared bat, mountain plover, Preble’s shrew, Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus Clarki Bouvieri), and westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus Clarki Lewisi)
The few remaining pure westslope cutthroat trout and bull trout populations are threatened by domestic stock pollution, excess silt and turbidity, stock overuse, lack of bank vegetation, and lack of spawning habitat. Many of these populations are limited to two kilometers or less distribution. Only a few populations are distributed over a stream length of ten kilometers.
Mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” will protect key “management indicator species,” such as:
Hairy woodpecker (overall forest management indicator species);
Goshawk and three-towed woodpecker (old growth management indicator species);
Western jumping mouse (meadows management indicator species);
Belted kingfishers and willow flycatchers (shrub riparian management indicator species);
Northern water shrew and warbling vireo (tree riparian management indicator species);
Montana vole (grasslands management indicator species); and the
Sage thrasher (shrublands management indicator species).
Mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” would ensure the survival of the Yellowstone bison. Yellowstone’s bison are genetically and behaviorally unique – the ONLY herd with continuously wild ancestry from the days when 50 million bison migrated freely across the Great Plains. After the government-sponsored holocaust of these bison and the Indigenous Peoples that depended upon them, only 23 wild bison survived, taking refuge in Yellowstone’s remote Pelican Valley.
Now, Yellowstone’s tattered remnant herd is all that remains of 50 million wild bison! This herd is America’s ONLY free-roaming, wild, genetically-pure, unfenced population. With mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species,” the Forest Service and the National Forest System could encourage this herd to naturally migrate to publicly-owned habitat adjacent to Yellowstone National Park so essential for this herd’s prosperity.
These are just a few examples of how nationwide mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” throughout our National Forest System would restore biological health to our public lands. This could be the most significant improvement in public lands management since Congress established the National Forest System in 1897.
In conclusion: PLEASE incorporate mandates to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” in all future planning, rules, and regulations for all units of the National Forest System. Please refer to my below November 06, 2009, e-mail to the Gallatin National Forest for more information and details.
Thank you for your consideration. Please keep me informed concerning all of these rules and regulations that will ensure the biological integrity of our priceless public lands legacy.
All my best,
Paul Richards
30 Brown’s Gulch Road
Boulder, MT 59632
Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com
——————————————————————————————————————————————————–
—–Original Message—–
From: Paul Richards [mailto:Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 5:12 AM
To: (mailroom_r1_gallatin@fs.fed.us); (mcerickson@fs.fed.us)
Cc: Paul Richards (Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com)
Subject: PLEASE retain current Gallatin National Forest Plan to “Provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species.”
November 6, 2009
Mary C. Erickson
Forest Supervisor
Gallatin National Forest
10 East Babcock
P.O. Box 130
Bozeman, MT 59771
Ph: 406-587-6701
Fax: 406-587-6758
E-mail: mcerickson@fs.fed.us
Dear Supervisor Mary Erickson,
I hope this note finds you happy and well.
PROPOSED GALLATIN NATIONAL FOREST FOREST PLAN “CLEAN UP” AMENDMENTS:
I have heard that the Gallatin National Forest is considering many new “Proposed Gallatin National Forest Plan ‘Clean Up’ Amendments.” I looked on your Web site for these proposed amendments, but could not find them. If these proposed amendments ARE somewhere on your Web site, I hope you will e-mail me with the URL of their location. Thank you.
I am concerned about one “Proposed Gallatin National Forest Plan ‘Clean Up’ Amendment” in particular. The current Gallatin National Forest Plan mandates that the Forest Service “provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species and for increasing populations of big game animals.”
Your proposed “Proposed Gallatin National Forest Plan ‘Clean Up’ Amendment” would drastically diminish this mandate, by removing the current Forest Plan’s language to “provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” in its entirety!
This is hardly a “Clean Up” Amendment!! By deleting the protection of “viable populations for all indigenous wildlife species,” this so-called “Proposed Gallatin National Forest Plan ‘Clean Up’ Amendment” would, if adopted, cripple the Forest Service’s management mission and severely weaken the Gallatin National Forest’s commitment to wildlife.
The proposed “Clean Up” Amendment would “replace” the current language (“provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species and for increasing populations of big game animals”) with the following weakened and immaterial language: “Habitat for big game will be managed to help meet management goals of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP).”
FOREST CARNIVORES:
This abandonment of a much-needed public lands management emphasis for all indigenous wildlife species does not bode well for non-big-game species. What about forest carnivores such as wolf, lynx, wolverine, fisher, grizzly bear and pine marten? They are all key indicators of forest health. All are dependent upon undisturbed mature-to-old growth forests. Forest carnivores are threatened by the cumulative effects of development and human intrusion, effects you must now consider, under the indigenous wildlife species provisions of your Forest Plan.
Forest carnivores are secluded species that require large blocks of undisturbed land. Forest carnivores also need different types of wildlands. Lynx, for example, need enough mature and old growth to provide cover for their kittens and dens, yet they also need enough new growth to provide food for the snowshoe hare, the lynx’s principal prey.
So little is known about wolverines, which may have territories of hundreds of miles, that scientists have not yet been able to estimate wolverine populations. Viable wolverine populations are found only in Idaho and Montana in the lower 49 states. Actually, some scientists no longer consider these populations “viable” – ever the more reason to manage our remaining public wildlands, including the Gallatin National Forest, for their viability.
What about pine marten? They have an extremely narrow range of habitat, requiring late successional stands of moisture-loving conifers and lots of woody debris near the ground. In the winter, pine marten spend much time beneath the snow, hunting voles and other small mammals. How does this affect forest management? Pine marten, their prey, and the prey’s vegetative food are all extremely vulnerable to artificial compaction of snow layers by snowmobiles. If we follow the current Forest Plan and manage for “viable populations” of pine marten, we’ll eliminate this deadly motorized compaction.
With the current “provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” Forest Plan mandate, recreation management in the Gallatin National Forest must take into account the special needs of the secluded forest carnivores mentioned above. These secluded forest carnivores can not handle the stress and harassment of very loud high-speed machinery. Some of these animals have less than 4 percent body fat. There is absolutely NO surplus with which to deal with undue torment during the winter.
WITHDRAWING PROTECTION FROM OTHER NON-BIG-GAME SPECIES:
How about other non-big-game species? If you change your Forest Plan emphasis away from indigenous species, what will happen to the peregrine falcon, bald eagle, boreal owl, flammulated owl, black-backed woodpecker, ferruginuous hawk, northern bog lemming, Western big-eared bat, mountain plover, Preble’s shrew, Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus Clarki Bouvieri), and westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus Clarki Lewisi)?
Now, apparently there is debate concerning actual distinctions between Oncorhynchus Clarki Bouvieri and Oncorhynchus Clarki Lewisi. I don’t really understand this debate, because I am not an ichthyologist. What I do understand is that, east of the Continental Divide, the westslope cutthroat trout has been reduced to 7 percent of its historic range, with genetically pure populations down to about 1 percent of historic range, according to both the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (1996). Historically, there were approximately 3,600 streams that supported westslope cutthroat trout populations in the Upper Missouri River Basin. By the late 1980s, this figure had dropped to approximately 80 streams. Individual populations recently have gone extinct in five streams.
The few remaining pure westslope cutthroat trout populations are threatened by domestic stock pollution, excess silt and turbidity, stock overuse, lack of bank vegetation, and lack of spawning habitat. Many of these populations are limited to two kilometers or less distribution. Only a few populations are distributed over a stream length of ten kilometers.
An assessment of the extinction risk for westslope cutthroat trout in the upper Missouri Basin indicates, of the 144 remaining populations with genetic purity greater than 90 percent, 103 or 71 percent of the 144 populations have a very high risk of extinction or very low “probability of persistence,” 27 or 18 percent were assigned a high risk of extinction and 14 or 10 percent were assigned a moderate risk of extinction. Both the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have found no populations with a low rate of extinction.
In this light, your staff’s proposal to eliminate the Forest Plan’s indigenous species management mandates flies in the face of the scientific reality of the precarious situation of the westslope cutthroat trout. If the indigenous species Forest Plan mandate is continued and re-emphasized, Gallatin National Forest management would ensure no further stream degradation, protection of all existing westslope cutthroat trout populations, and sizeable habitat enhancement to allow for more creek segments with increased westslope cutthroat trout populations.
MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES:
If you eliminate the current Forest Plan’s management emphasis for indigenous species, what will happen to critical “management indicator species” that gauge the overall health of forest ecosystems? If you replace the Gallatin National Forest Forest Plan’s indigenous species mandate with “Habitat for big game will be managed to help meet management goals of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP),” what would that spell for the future of:
Hairy woodpecker (overall forest management indicator species);
Goshawk and three-towed woodpecker (old growth management indicator species);
Western jumping mouse (meadows management indicator species);
Belted kingfishers and willow flycatchers (shrub riparian management indicator species);
Northern water shrew and warbling vireo (tree riparian management indicator species);
Montana vole (grasslands management indicator species); and the
Sage thrasher (shrublands management indicator species)?
HABITAT FOR AMERICA’S LAST REMAINING MIGRATING HERD OF WILD BISON:
By eliminating the current Gallatin National Forest Forest Plan’s indigenous species mandate, you could engender the ultimate extinction of America’s last remaining migrating herd of wild bison. Yellowstone’s bison are genetically and behaviorally unique – the ONLY herd with continuously wild ancestry from the days when 50 million bison migrated freely across the Great Plains. After the government-sponsored holocaust of these bison and the Indigenous Peoples that depended upon them, only 23 wild bison survived, taking refuge in Yellowstone’s remote Pelican Valley.
Yellowstone’s tattered remnant herd is all that remains of 50 million wild bison! This herd is America’s ONLY free-roaming, wild, unfenced population. The Gallatin National Forest needs to do everything it can possibly do to encourage this herd to naturally migrate to public lands adjacent to Yellowstone National Park.
The Yellowstone bison have naturally migrated to the public lands now contained within the Gallatin National Forest for millennia. To escape the mindless slaughter by Montana Department of Livestock cowboys, the Yellowstone bison desperately need access to our National Forest lands.
PUBLIC LANDS MUST BE MANAGED FOR PUBLIC WILDLIFE:
Supervisor Erickson, I hope you strongly agree that public lands must be managed for public wildlife. The current situation of the Montana Department of Livestock slaughtering every bison that strays across the boundary of Yellowstone National Park is clearly untenable.
America’s public lands deserve a vibrantly healthy migrating herd of wild bison. If you adhere to the current Gallatin National Forest Forest Plan’s management mandate to “provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species,” you will take appropriate administrative actions to promote the migration of Yellowstone bison onto and into the Gallatin National Forest and to provide the publicly-owned habitat so essential for this herd’s prosperity.
If you allow for this common sense solution – a solution that worked perfectly for tens of thousands of years – the genetic strength and population of the Yellowstone bison herd (both now rapidly diminishing due to SEVERE trauma caused by the Montana Department of Livestock’s unconscionable slaughter) could again become tenable. This would be a success story heralded worldwide, perhaps as much as the creation of Yellowstone National Park itself.
You hold the future of these bison and of all the other non-big-game species mentioned above in your hands. For God’s sake, PLEASE retain your current Gallatin National Forest Forest Plan’s language to “provide habitat for viable populations of all indigenous wildlife species” and studiously manage our public lands to fully realize this mandate. Thank you.
THE NECESSITY OF BIODIVERSITY:
As I am merely a stakeholder committed to the necessity of biodiversity on our public lands and not a scientist, I could be mistaken concerning some of the above aspects. I welcome any corrections and/or suggestions you may have for further exploration and development of these issues.
Please acknowledge, via e-mail or snail-mail, your receipt of these comments.
Please include these comments in any and all public comment files, comments on the current Forest Plan, comments on the proposed Forest Plan, comments on the “Proposed Gallatin National Forest Plan ‘Clean Up’ Amendments,” comments on the management of all the species mentioned herein, and all land use decisions by the forest supervisor and the five district rangers affecting all the species mentioned herein. Thank you.
Please also place me on all of your mailing lists for all future forest planning information from your supervisor’s office and from the five district ranger offices.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully yours,
Paul Richards
30 Brown’s Gulch Road
Boulder, MT 59632
Paul@PRMediaConsultants.com
(Editor’s Note: This original e-mail, specifically requesting acknowledgment via e-mail or snail-mail of receipt, was sent November 6, 2009, and subsequently followed up by two more e-mails also requesting written acknowledgment. Neither Gallatin National Forest Supervisor Mary C. Erickson nor her staff has yet to reply or respond in any fashion to any of these three e-mails. Although this document requested placement on Gallatin National Forest mailing lists for all future forest planning information, as did the two follow up e-mails, to date (May 11, 2010), Richards has received no information of any type from the supervisor’s office or from the five district ranger offices.)
Dispatches from the Wildlands™ ©2010, Paul Richards
