Government agencies and non-profit corporations joined forces to rehabilitate a Chichagof Island river, damaged by past logging practices.
The Sitkoh River, located about 12 miles west of Angoon, is scheduled to benefit from a $318,000 rehabilitation project.
“The goal is to restore the river’s capacity to produce salmon, steelhead, Dolly Varden and cutthroat trout,” according to a Forest Service press release.
The U.S. Forest Service Tongass National Forest division, Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Trout Unlimited and the Sitka Conservation Society are working together on the project.
The Tongass National Forest provides world class fishing opportunities, Paula Dobbyn, spokeswoman for Trout Unlimited, said. Tongass watershed restoration benefits everyone, she said.
“Local sport and commercial fishermen and sport fishermen from all over the world,” Dobbyn said.
The restoration project is part of the Forest Service transition efforts.
The Forest Service’s Transition Framework explores and supports “economic diversification and job creation in Southeast Alaska,” according to the Tongass National Forest website.
The Sitkoh remains productive, according to the Forest Service. Past timber harvest and road construction impacted the river.
“Projects such as the one at Sitkoh are a key component of the economic transition in the Tongass National Forest,” according to the Forest Service. The transition puts priority on young-growth timber management and restoration of salmon habitat. The Forest Service transition also focuses on job creation in emerging and established industries including ocean products, visitor services, timber and renewable energy.
Phase 1 of the restoration project reroutes 1,800-feet of the Sitkoh, which flows down an old logging road. Phase 2 adds large, woody debris to the river to create fish habitat.
• Contact reporter Russell Stigall at 523-2276 or at russell.stigall@juneauempire.com.
Comments (7)
Add commentKeep TU busy
Keep Trout Unlimited busy so they're not pimping Sealaska clearcuts on S.730 or landless
Creek rescue
I note that among those joining forces to restore that nice little creek the entity that participated in its destruction is not listed.
No logging company help. No corporate entity that might have contracted with the logging company is listed as joining the effort.
Inn other words: NONE of the people who wrecked the stream in the first place are now pitching in to bring in back.
Jeepers, you'd think if if was going to benefit your lifestyle and income you might have some modest interest in helping wouldn't you?
Ahhhhhh.......just as I thought.
Hmmm?
"The Sitkoh remains productive, according to the Forest Service." Does anybody know what the ADF&G thinks is productive? If the Sitkoh River remains productive then it is quite possible that the $318K might be better spent somewhere else...
This is more about the Forest
This is more about the Forest Service justifying their existence in southeast, than it is about rehabilitating anything. Interesting that the government agency that is promoting logging, wants to be the cleanup specialist also, wasting more tax-payers money.
The way this rolls, is that the forest service picks a stream that has had some, in their opinion, logging degradation. They decide they are going to fix it. They notify fish and game, who manages the fish in the stream, and tell them their plans. Fish and Game then gives their opinion. If fish and game doesn't like the idea, it doesn't really matter. the fs gets precedence because the stream is federal land. When they did the Harris river on POW a few years back, the local biologist who manages the Harris, was not even notified of the operation. While flying over the Harris to check escapement, he was alarmed to find a large backhoe working amongst about 10,000 pre-spawn pink salmon. Just another example of federal jack booted thugs slowly taking over Alaska.....
A few answers...
@birchwood, the folks bidding on the restoration contracts for this and other projects are the same companies that bid on the road construction contracts or are subcontracted by the logging companies for timber sales today. So, yes the timber industry and its support industries are partners in this project. Part of the need for this project is to move the stream out of the road so thinning crews can access the managed timber stands back in the valley. Unfortunately the FS and TU press releases don't mention these things. I wish they did so the general public had more of the picture.
@dennyh, good question. Restoration needs are prioritized by both the FS and ADF&G. Those priorities don't always match up, but in the case of the Sitkoh River (which is actually an unnamed stream at the head of Sitkoh Bay, NOT Sitkoh Creek that flows from Sitkoh Lake) there was broad agreement that this project was a high priority.
@Grabber5, the Division of Habitat within ADF&G manages construction/development/equipment in our fish streams (regardless of upland ownership). The FS had a valid fish habitat permit to complete the work in the Harris River. If the Division of Habitat doesn't agree with the proposal, the project is changed or doesn't happen. The biologist you're referring to was with the Commercial Fisheries Division of ADF&G, and you're correct that he was not made aware of the projec ahead of time. When that error was realized, everybody went out on the ground together to work out his concerns. The FS isn't taking over our fish streams:-)
Sitkoh
So you're saying they make money when they go in and lay waste to the stream in the name of corporate profit and then make money again when they are contracted to return and clean it up?
State and Federal governments and private non-profits are involved in restoration but WHERE are the Corporate folks who approved/overlooked/condoned the rip and run logging tactics in the first place. WHERE is their contribution. Oh....I get it: they get to bid on the contracts to FIX what they did!!
Silly me.
Not so negative as that
@birchwood, largscale commercial logging really got going on the Tongass in 1954-1955. Logging on the Tongass, as with any industry, operated under current laws. Through the decades those laws changed. Logging down the the banks of a salmon stream legally occurred on the Tongass, approved by the USFS, until the Tongass Timber Reform Act of 1990. So the governement should shares just as much of your ire as the timber industry, I would argue, for the existing condition now be restored by the new generation of timber industry and USFS employees. One last note, back in the 1970s the UFSF included "stream cleaning" in their contracts. They thought they were doing good by clearing out the large wood to improve pink salmon migration. Now they are contracting the industry to put wood back in the streams. It's not right or wrong, it's just the result of changing policies based on the best available science.