Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Haines Borough to engage on proposed Haines State Forest management changes
Summary
Multiple residents and advisory-group representatives told the Assembly the state’s proposed Haines State Forest management plan will open previously protected areas to logging and urged formal consultation with elected officials and tribes.
Several residents used the Assembly public-comment period to ask the borough to take a more active role in the Alaska Department of Natural Resources’ proposed revisions to the Haines State Forest management plan.
Mark Soggy (code reviewer/committee speaker) and others said the DNR is preparing to allow timber harvest on lands previously designated for wildlife habitat or recreation and that the DNR’s consultation process has been narrowly framed and insufficiently inclusive of elected officials. Soggy said DNR’s scoping questions and outreach did not provide adequate substantive information for local leaders to evaluate the impacts.
Lynn Canal Conservation representative Eric Holly asked the borough to insist that any plan rely on the best available forest science — particularly for carbon-sequestration calculations — and offered to share a 2014 Nature paper on tree-size carbon accumulation. Several commenters said opening more state forest land to timber harvest would harm recreation and wildlife values codified in the forest’s enabling legislation.
Action requested: several speakers asked the Assembly to insist on a meaningful consultative process between DNR and elected officials, to seek detailed data from state staff, and to elevate local participation in the planning timetable.
Quote: “DNR is pretending to have conveniently forgotten this as they strive to redefine what the purpose of the Haines State Forest is,” Mark Soggy said. “I hope the borough assembly will ask DNR for a substantive consultation with our community representatives.”
Next step: the Assembly did not take formal action on the state forest item during this meeting but several members encouraged staff and the Assembly to pursue stronger consultation and to continue the discussion in upcoming meetings.
