Summer 2002 Volume II, Number 2
By Phil Wagner, IDNR Division of Forestry
IDEM is currently revising the rules of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Rule 5 of this program regulates construction activities in an effort to minimize soil erosion. The rule is aimed primarily at construction contractors and land developers. The current Rule 5 exempts forestry practices along with other agricultural land uses. The Division of Forestry has been working with IDEM to keep the forestry exemption in the Draft Rule5. We think we will be successful in this effort. However, we can look for additional efforts in the future to eliminate the forestry exemption. As of this writing, IDEM is proposing the following language for forestry activities:
(b) The requirements under this rule do not apply to all persons who:
(1 ) are involved in agricultural land disturbing activities; or (2) are involved in forest harvesting activities.
(c) The requirements under this rule do not apply to the following activities, provided other applicable permits contain pro-visions requiring immediate implementation of soil erosion control measures:
(1 )Landfills that have been issued a certification of closure under 329 IAC 10.
(2) Coal mining activities permitted under IC 14-34.
There are also some people and groups in the forestry community who think that the language is too vague and still leaves IDEM too much room for interpretation. However, this language is very similar to the current Rule 5, which reads:
(1 ) "Agricultural land use" means use of land for the production of animal or plant life, including forestry, pasturing or yarding of livestock, and planting, growing, cultivating, and harvesting crops for human or livestock consumption.
To my knowledge, no timber-harvesting job has ever been cited for non-compliance with the current Rule 5. We would look for that situation to continue.
IDEM has been revising Rule 5 for quite some time. The second public comment period began September 1, 2001 and ran through October 1, 2001. We're not sure when the first comment period occurred, but one thing is sure, the forestry community was not aware of these potential changes until March of 2002. At that point, the Division of Forestry began to participate in the process with the goal that forestry activities be included with agricultural land disturbing activities. The Division of Forestry had several meetings with IDEM to discuss the issues. We presented the following information:
1 ) Forestry activities have historically been associated with agriculture. The forest is a crop that grows to maturity, is harvested and regenerated in a manner similar to other agricultural crops. Forestry operates on a much longer timeframe, but the basic agricultural principles still apply.
2) Forestry activities are temporary disturbances usually lasting from a few weeks to a few months. When the harvesting is completed, roads, skid trails, log yards and other land disturbances are seeded or allowed to regenerate naturally. These areas receive little use until the next timber sale fifteen to twenty-five years in the future.
3) The Division of Forestry received a Section 319 Grant from IDEM to develop forestry Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Lake Monroe watershed. These BMPs were
developed in a series of facilitated meetings. Representatives from government, industry, land owners and environmental groups participated in the process. The primary purpose for developing BMPs was to institute a voluntary compliance program that would accomplish the goals of Rule 5 without the regulatory burden. These forestry BMPs are now in a publication for statewide use titled "Logging and Forestry BMP's for Water Quality in Indiana"(published 1998).
4) The Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) is just now taking off in Indiana. A State Implementation Committee is up and running. Cutter training, skidder training, and BMP training are the primary focus of the Logger Training Program. This is industry's chance to regulate itself and avoid the expensive and time-consuming process of complying with Rule 5. A "bad actor" provision will also be part of SFI. IDEM agreed with the logic and, as you can see from the new draft language, reinstated the forestry exemption.
What the future holds
The forestry debate will not go away. If anything, the debate will become more intense and polarized. There are many groups and individuals who, for religious, emotional, philosophical or political reasons oppose tree cutting. These folks are more than happy to impose their value system on your property use.
There are several steps that we can take as individuals or through organizations that will help protect our ability to practice forestry.
1 ) Stay informed. Keep up with proposed changes in local ordinances. Visit the IDEM web site and check out pro-posed regulatory actions and rules revisions. Question candidates for political office about their views on resource management.
2) Use the services of a professional forester who is trained in the proper use of Best Management Practices.
3) As part of your timber sale contract, insist that the successful bidder use a logger trained in the Sustainable Forestry Initiative core curriculum.
4) As part of your timber sale contract, insist that the logger properly use Best Management Practices in your woods.
5) If you are part of the primary or secondary wood using industry, insist that your loggers be trained in the Sustainable Forestry Initiative core curriculum and monitor that the training is applied on the logging job.
6) Insist that loggers delivering gate wood to your mill be trained in the Sustainable Forestry Initiative core curriculum.
We also need to demonstrate in a statistically accurate way that BMPs are being used and that they are effective in keeping soil out of our streams. In future meetings with IDEM, we would like to say that the forestry community randomly selects a percentage of timber sales each year and monitors those sales for compliance with BMPs. And that the BMPs really work to keep soil out of our streams. The Division of Forestry has a monitoring system in place for state forest properties. A similar system could be developed for private lands but requires a level of cooperation that is difficult to achieve. We would encourage you to look at the regulatory requirements of Rule 5. You may decide that cooperation is cheaper and easier than regulation. Without hard data to show our voluntary programs work, holding off regulation will be increasingly difficult.