From the Arkansas Ozarks.. The cross quarter of Imbolc nears. The days lengthen and begin to warm, though we’ve seen little cold or snow as winter fades. Premonitions of a hot, dry summer haunt these temperate days. After last years record heat, hopes are that this year will not be a repeat.. or worse. But we all know the data and the trends.. floods followed by droughts, getting worse instead of better. Unless.. says the Lorax.

Public land managers are gearing up to burn record levels forested acres in the Ozark and Ouachita National Forest. The smoke some days is so thick it is difficult to see or breathe. Smoke and soot in the air seems to reduce the light spring rains. The burning itself favors some species while harming others. Agencies are quick to report what wildlife benefit; the harmed species go largely unnoticed.

The decision whether to continue the disastrous project known as “Bearcat Hollow” is now in the hands of the US Forest Service, but the debate over the merits of prescribed burning and introducing Western elk on the Ozark National Forest is far from over. The population of the introduced herd has grown to over 500 head, primarily in the woods and pastures along the Buffalo National River. If the USFS and Ar Game and Fish Commission (AGFC) have their way, the herd will soon become a permanent fixture in the Ozark National Forest as well.

The archeological record for elk in the Ozarks indicates no Western elk ever roamed here, and Eastern elk were few in number when and where they occurred. In the 2001 Arkansas Game and Fish Commission report, “Evidence for Elk in the Prehistoric Record of Arkansas, author D.R. Angelo states that the Cleland Study found an occurrence of 16% faunal remains for elk vs. 22% for bison and 96% for deer in Ozark archeological sites.

Western Rocky Mountain elk cannot survive in the Ozarks without high quality pasture. An AGFC administrative report drafted by wildlife biologist Larry Pharris entitled “Literature Review on the Feasibility of Rocky Mountain Elk Introductions into Arkansas” states, “the crude protein content of forage species native to Arkansas is 2-4 times lower than preferred forage species of elk in western states. Historically, the eastern elk in Arkansas were found on the more fertile alluvial soils along the states’ major rivers”.

A huge dedication of energy and resources is directed to maintaining the elk herd in the region. This will substantially increase if the USFS plows ahead with approval of the Bearcat Hollow Project.This is an area of the Ozark National Forest that has unique qualities found nowhere else in the United States. Until recent land clearing activities were initiated by the United States Forest Service, Richland Creek and the surrounding forest were among the largest tracts of unbroken, mature, hardwood forest left in the Ozark National Forest. Mature stands and mixed groves of ash, oak, hickory, gum, and other species provide critical habitat for a wide range of species. Rare neotropical songbirds, rare amphibians, insects, and mammals thrive in these closed canopy forests. Water quality is exceptional due to the relative absence of heavy equipment, logging, burning, and road building. The core of the climax forest ecosystem is Richland Creek Wilderness Area and Wild and Scenic River. The forested lands adjacent to the wilderness area were originally designated for non-invasive management protocols, which protected the integrity of the existing natural ecosystem surrounding the wilderness. (Richland Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan – USDA Forest Service 1996). That is, until recent USFS management decisions approved massive landscape modifications to implement the forest plans’ “woodland restoration”.

In 2007, massive logging, burning, herbicide applications, and bulldozing pasture for an introduced species of large game were approved in this watershed via Phase 1 of the Bearcat Hollow Project. The results have been disastrous. Landslides, forest kills from burning, and landscapes poisoned with herbicides are found across the project area. Adding insult to injury, Phase 2 of the project (the subject of this comment) has been expanded from 16,000 to 38,000 acres in three counties. The entire watershed for the project drains into Richland Creek and the Buffalo National River, which were up to this point, two of the most pristine rivers remaining in the Ozarks.

The National Park Service has been burning and maintaining pasture along the Buffalo river for many years. Arkansas Game and fish Commission employees have further expanded elk pasture in the Gene Rush WMA using the tried and true methods of logging, burning, poisoning, and planting newly made pastures there. Further AGFC purchases include a 2761 acre purchase of bottom lands along Richland Creek costing 8.2 Million dollars in public funds. But why stop at the Forest Service boundary? According to the US Forest Service, no reason whatsoever. Pass the torch, start the bulldozer, and we’re off to the races.

With the bureaucratic weight of the USFS, and the money that the AGFC gained from leasing Wildlife Management areas for fracked gas drilling, no one thus far has been able to halt the expansion. But let us not talk falsely. The hour is getting late. Use of herbicides, large scale prescribed burning in any season, and, forest clearing for timber production and to create “wildlife ponds and openings” for introduced elk are neither the ends nor the means of forest restoration.

Heartwood, along with the Newton County Wildlife Association, The Ozark Water Protection Alliance, The Arkansas Chapter of the Sierra Club, The Ozark Society, The Ouachita Watch League, and both the Newton and Searcy County Quorum Courts are on record opposing the project. Hopefully, there will be enough collective resolve to assure the project is dropped before any more damage is done to the area.

- Shawn Porter Newton County, AR Jan 27, 2012
-