Northern California in the late 1980's was in the middle of a battle known as the timber wars. Timber workers, blaming the environmentalist for destroying their livelihood by opposing timber sales in national forests, fired rifles into office windows and harassed pedestrians from their trucks. The economies in these communities, heavily dependent on the timber industry for jobs and for a tax base, were also in a battle to survive. In November of 1992, prompted by these concerns and frustrated by years of conflict between environmentalists and timber interests, Bill Coates, a Plumas County Supervisor, set up a meeting with Tom Nelson, Director of Timberlands for Sierra Pacific and Michael Jackson, a local environmental attorney and an active member of the Friends of Plumas Wilderness. Resulting from this informal meeting was an agreement to begin a collaborative process with representatives from all community interests to find solutions to forest management.

Meeting at the Quincy Library because of its neutrality, these men agreed on three ground rules for future discussions: (1) in an attempt to avoid grandstanding, no reporters would be allowed into meetings; (2) exclusion of the US Forest Service (USFS) in all meetings because they would aggravate frustrations, and; (3) to focus future meetings only on areas of agreement.

Named the Quincy Library Group (QLG) because of the location of meetings, this assemblage quickly grew to 175 members (30 core members) by early 1993. QLG focused its attention on three California national forests: Lassen, Plumas, and parts of Tahoe, an area encompassing 2.5 million acres. Early in the process of trying to find solutions to stabilize the local economy and maintain a healthy forest, the group agreed on the idea of selective logging to decrease the risk of forest fires and used this as a key principle to begin discussions. The group also realized further compromise was possible from a 1986 forest management proposal sponsored by a coalition of local environmental groups. This proposal protected old-growth and roadless areas but also recommended an amount of board feet per year that would have almost tripled the amount presently being logged. Although rejected at the time by the USFS because it did not allow enough logging (pre-spotted owl days), both the environmentalists and timber industry agreed with aspects of this proposal and believed it could be used as a starting point for future discussions.

The collaborative process of the QLG brought many different views to the table and many heated discussions. Many times, members stormed out of the meetings with tempers flaring. However, as time passed, relationships began to grow and trust was established. The major issues were old growth forest and the threat of forest fires, stabilizing the economy, and maintaining a health forest.

For the next several months, the QLG continued to meet on a regular basis. There were times when the group understood no agreement was possible so they agreed to disagree and move on to other discussions. In July of 1993, the QLG completed a five-year interim forest management plan for the Feather River Watershed known as the Community Stability Proposal.

This proposal was developed to help stabilize the local economy through reasonable timber harvest while preserving ecological integrity and forest health. According to Bill Coates, objectives of the Community Stability Proposal included:

• An aggressive fuels reduction plan, including salvage of bug-killed trees, that seeks to reduce the threat of "stand-destroying fires;"
• A timber rotation of harvest cycle of more than 100 years;
• On going monitoring;
• Establishment of a "working circle" that requires a percentage of the timber harvested to be processed by local sawmills to preserve local employment and community stability;
• Establishment of a network of riparian habitats and a watershed restoration program to protect fisheries and watershed health; and
• Exclusion of timber harvests in certain "sensitive" areas.

Late in February of 1994, 43 members of the QLG went to Washington DC and presented the Community Stability Proposal to USFS Chief Jack Ward Thomas, Congressional delegates, and Undersecretary of Agriculture Jim Lyons. The QLG members were complimented for their collaborative approach and the USFS agreed to begin implementing the plan when funding became available. The Clinton Administration also praised the work, calling it a model for conflict resolution.

Funding for the plan first came in November of 1994 when the USFS allocated $1 million dollars for the Community Stability Proposal. A year later, Dan Glickman, US Secretary of Agriculture, pledged an additional $4.7 million to the USFS for programs such as, fuel reduction and watershed restoration. Slowly, the USFS began experimenting with a few of the QLG's recommendations. Although a September 1996 USFS In Brief stated it was currently involved with the QLG in several areas (amendments to forest plans, Barkely fire salvage sale, forest health and forest projects in off-base areas) tensions between the USFS and the QLG began to grow. Frustrated by the perceived lack of effort by the USFS, the QLG began to take another approach.

Early in 1997, the QLG lobbied US Congressman Wally Herger (R-CA) to introduce the Community Stability Proposal as a bill to congress. Rep. Herger agreed and authored the Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery and Economic Stability Act of 1997 (H.R. 858). If passed by both the House and Senate, this legislation would force the USFS to implement the QLG's forest management plan. Before being introduced into congress, US Congressman Don Young (R-AK), by request of US Congressmen George Miller (D-CA), added amendments to bring the bill under compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Management Act. This bill passed the House of Representatives on July 9, 1997 by a vote of 429 to 1.

Passage of the bill in the Senate was expected to go quickly and smoothly. Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced the Senate's version of the QLG bill (S-1028) in October to the Resource Committee where it passed by a voice vote. The Legislative session ended before the bill reached the Senate floor, and the bill was considered dead until the Senate reconvened in January of 1998. While congress was out of session, opposition to the bill began to grow.

With the passage of HR-858, the opposition began to get more organized and more vocal. Many national environmental groups mounted an aggressive attack on the bill for several reasons. The Sierra Club opposed the bill because of their no cut policy in national forests and their belief that it sets bad precedent for future forest management plans. The Sierra Nevada Forest Protection Campaign, a coalition of 44 California environmental groups, opposed the cost to implement the bill ($83 million) and feel the QLG's strategy for fire risk reduction could actually increase the risk of forest fires.

The National Audubon Society disagreed with the legislation for three reasons: (1) it undermines environmental laws such as NEPA; (2) it leads to inconsistent public participation and needless legislation; and (3) the QLG bill mandates questionable logging activity.

Although national and regional environmental groups opposed the QLG bill, local groups such as the Plumas Audubon Society (local chapter) participated actively and supported the legislation along with several other local environmental groups. Supporters of the QLG bill believe the strong opposition from national environmental groups is due to the lack of voice they have in the collaboration process and because their fundraising efforts could be aversely affected if contributors placed more money into grassroots groups.

Another source of opposition is local ranchers, who dislike the QLG bill because it gives the USFS extended powers to ban grazing privileges. The source of this new authority is a 1993 report by a Scientific Analysis Team (SAT) led by Jack Ward Thomas entitled, " Viability Assessments and Management Considerations for Species Associated with Late-Succession and Old Growth Forests of the Pacific Northwest." Included in the QLG bill, this report calls for the adjustment of grazing practices to "eliminate adverse effects of domestic and wild ungulates on riparian resources." If adjustments are not successful then the report calls for the elimination of grazing until it can be shown that the ten objectives of Riparian Management (also included in the report) can be achieved. The problem, according to the ranchers is that the Riparian Management Objections are so vague any one could be used as a rationale to end grazing in the Lassen, Plumas, and Tahoe National Forests.

The SAT report also threatens access to water in grazing areas with the establishment of Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCA). RHCA's are buffer zones (depending on the source of water can extend up to 300 horizontal feet) set up to protect ecosystems in aquatic areas. According to SAT guidelines, only activities that contribute to the improvement and preservation of aquatic habitats will be allowed in the buffer zones. Ranchers are concerned that the establishment of RHCA's will interfere with their water rights since grazing is not considered an acceptable activity within the buffer zones.

This growing opposition concerned Senator Boxer, who withdrew her sponsorship of the bill asserting that the legislation does not offer enough environmental protection and sets a poor precedent for national forest management. The Clinton administration also reconsidered the issues and withdrew their support claiming the bill heavily favors timber industry interests and because legislating national forest management creates inflexibility.

When Congress reconvened in January, the bill was attached to the Indian gaming bill and the battle for passage began. In May, Barbara Boxer, along with Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Paul Wellstone (D-MN), placed a legislative hold on the bill, indicating they would wage a floor fight if the bill was brought to the floor. Unsuccessful in passing the QLG bill with the Indian gaming bill, sponsors in October attempted to attach it to the Agricultural Appropriations bill but backed down due to overwhelming opposition. Later that month however, the QLG bill was successfully attached and passed as part of the Omnibus Appropriations Bill becoming the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act 1998.

The first step in implementing the QLG Act is to complete an Environmental Impact Statement on the pilot project. The USFS is developing interdisciplinary teams in preparation for the upcoming EIS. With congressional staffers overseeing the entire project, the EIS must be completed within 300 days of enactment of the bill.
 

The QLG as of January 2002

At its regular monthly meeting in November of 2001, members of the Quincy Library Group voted to suspend customary public meetings to allow the group more time and energy to focus on processes that will improve the Pilot Project's chances of getting put into action.  The Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (SNFPA) has caused problems with the implementation of the Pilot Project.  The QLG claims that the SNFPA does not comply with the Heger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Forest Recovery Act of 1998, and has filed an appeal.   

Within the framework of the appeal, the QLG states that the SNFPA fails to comply or be consistent with many other environmental acts as well.  The Organic Act of 1897, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the Resources Planning Act of 1974 are all examples listed within the appeal.  Due to the inconsistencies with other acts and the barriers preventing the Pilot Project from being implemented, the QLG is concerned with the environmental and economic effects the SNFPA will have on areas in Northern California.

The QLG is currently waiting for a decision concerning the appeal.  The group will continue to push for the implementation of the Pilot Project, and maintain the approach of collaborative resource management.  Monthly meetings suspended but not permanently  cancelled, although at this time it is not known when they will be resumed.    

Christensen, John. & Diane Sylvain. Everyone Helps a California Forest - Except the Forest Service. High Country News, 1996. (17 Nov. 1998)

Coates, Bill. Finding Common Ground: Restoring a Small-Town Economy and National Forest to Health. The Quincy Library Group. 1998. (16 Nov. 1998).

Feinstein, Diane, Statement of Senator Diane Feinstein. The Quincy Library Group. 1998. (17 Nov. 1998).

Fitzgerald, Tim. Quincy Library Affair. PERC Reports. 1998. (18 Nov. 1998).

Geddes, Pete. Building Trust and Respect in the West. Gallatin Home Page. 1996. (20 Nov.1998.)

Jacobson, Louis. Forest Plan Shows Limits of Cooperative Approach. SPSS in Government. 1998. (18 Nov.1998).

Little, Jane Braxton. Boxer blocks Feinstein bill on Sierra Forest project. The Sacramento Bee. 1998. (17 Nov. 1998).

Little, Jane Braxton. Quincy alliance spawns forest bill. The Sacramento Bee. 1996. (17 Nov. 1998).

McLeod, Andy. Quincy Library Group sets great example: Federal policy must fully intergrate local direction. California Resource Agency. 1997. (16 Nov. 1998).

Moore Debra. Who is the Quincy Library Group. The Quincy Library group. 1997. (18 Nov. 1998)

Ridenour, David. The Quincy Library Group: so-called 'consensus' Forest Plan lacks consensus, Violates Rights. National Center for Public Policy Research. 1998. (20 Nov. 1998)

The QLG Bill - What it does. The Quincy Library Group. 1998. (17 Nov. 1998).