FOGS

Announcing.... Volume 1, Issue 1, of

FOGS

An occasional newsletter, for the entertainment of forestry activists.

FOGS are Gems of the First Order, from CDF's old First District (The Editors trust that the Cascade side has escaped infection from the First).

The acronym is doubly apt, since these Gems fog up whatever their authors are allegedly discussing, as well as the English language.

It is inspired by Gray's "Elegy in a Country Churchyard," which included the following lines:

Full many a gem of purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear,
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen
And waste its sweetness on the desert air.

We are thus resolved that some of the gems we see in Timber Harvest Plans shall not be wasted on the desert air (CDF). We even fantasize that this publication will produce some blushes, even unseen ones.

The Editors find that Gems of the purest ray occur often and serenely in the Cumulative Impacts sections of THPs, with the Visual Impacts section being a particular favorite. One of our all-time favorites was the statement that change in the scenery, resulting from removing most of a roadside stand's bigger trees, didn't count, because the locals were so busy going down the dirt road that they didn't take time to look at the scenery anyway.

A recent case: visualize a stand of truly old-growth redwood, rearing majestically way up above everything else alongside the County's designated Scenic Highway, with nearly every big tree being marked for cutting in the THP, and no trees capable of screening in front. The THP remarked, "Little change in the visual setting will be viewed by the public as a result of vegetation removal."

Come on, guys, what's with this positively Victorian euphemism? Can't you SAY, "with most of the trees cut"? Or maybe trees aren't vegetation? But, fundamentally awkward wording aside, this statement is just irritating nonsense, at best.

Another current Gem, referring to the Russian River, with its threatened Coho and Steelhead and its endangered freshwater shrimp: "It would be anticipated that in the event that the sediment enters the Russian River, the large volume of water, occurring during the winter in the lower reach of the Russian River, will mitigate any small amount of sediment coming off this THP." Would it now -- be anticipated? By whom? *Was* it anticipated? *Is* it anticipated? How does possible anticipation weigh against demonstrable fact, even in a THP? Is there a rule in the Forest Practice Rules requiring the use of subjunctives, the third person, and the passive voice? The Editors can't find it, but it must be there somewhere. Flood victims must be comforted, knowing about this fortunate mitigation.

FOGS and the Clueless. The following question was posed to CDF staff in a letter from an RPF -- an RPF who during a THP review orated upon his "years of professionalism":

" I do not know what LWD is. Can you give me a clue?"

Clue: LWD is "large woody debris." The phrase occurs often in the Forest Practice Rules, particularly in the section on cumulative impacts, and the acronym is standard.

To Be Continued...