On behalf of our nearly 7,000 NWTF members in Virginia, I would like to take this opportunity to provide comments and input in the initial stages of the George Washington National Forest (GWNF) Land and Resource Management Plan revision.

Our members are, of course, interested in the conservation of our wild turkey resource, but their interests reach far beyond that single species. Managing habitats for generalist species such as wild turkeys has benefits for the suite of species associated with the various habitats utilized by wild turkeys. In addition to their interest in turkeys, our members often are involved in hunting other species and in camping, angling, hiking and birding activities that take place on the forest.

Lands under federal jurisdiction within the GWNF/TJNF complex represent the largest block of public lands on which management actions can take place within this Commonwealth. Historically the GWNF has provided wood products and recreational opportunity for citizens of Virginia and the rest of the country. Since the late 1930’s the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has worked cooperatively with Forest Service personnel to provide a diversity of wildlife habitat types within the forest by creating and maintaining herbaceous openings, developing linear brood habitats, and establishing water holes. These widely accepted wildlife habitat improvement techniques have helped to make the GWNF an attractive area for both wildlife and hunters. The GWNF not only attracts Virginia hunters and anglers, it brings others from outside the commonwealth as well. The influx of hunters, anglers and others attracted to the forest for recreational purposes is critical to the economies of rural communities surrounding the forest. Wildlife related activities are usually concentrated in areas with the greatest diversity, however, when habitat diversity is limited, heavy use of those limited areas by wildlife enthusiasts will result in diminished quality of those pursuits.

Our involvement in the plan revision process in 1986 and again in 1993 has allowed us to observe trends that will clearly impact wildlife and forest management on the GWNF. The acreage of GWNF designated as suitable for timber management declined from 640,166 acres in 1986 to 330,000 acres in the 1993 plan. Recent preliminary work on the plan revision has identified 130,000 additional acres as Potential Wilderness Areas (PWAs), a designation that would further reduce the acreage deemed as suitable for timber harvest and management within the forest. In the 1993 GWNF Land and Resource Management Plan 290,000 acres or 29% were designated as Wilderness or Remote Highlands (Inventoried Roadless Areas). The current plan revision could possibly add another 130,000 acres to these designations, increasing the land area under restricted management prescriptions to 420,000 acres or 42% of GWNF.

The Members of the Virginia State Chapter of the National Wild Turkey Federation recognize the value of maintaining some Wilderness Areas on the GWNF. We support maintaining the existing designations but would recommend that few, if any additional acres be added to these designations. Currently the forest age structure is heavily skewed toward older age classes (88% of the forest is currently in excess of 70 years old). The acreage in older age classes would certainly increase under any plan revision adding more acreage to the unmanaged portions of the forest. The older age classes including old growth already provide significant habitat for species associated with mature forest such as northern flying squirrels, black and white warblers, ovenbirds, wood thrushes, cerulean warblers and others. The limited management currently conducted on the GWNF due to funding and project-level restrictions will assure that adequate older age classes of timber will continue to provide habitat for these species.

One of our major concerns about classifying additional acreage for limited or non-existent management is that many long-term wildlife habitat enhancement projects will be lost to natural succession. The Forest Service, VDGIF and private conservation organizations such as NWTF and the Ruffed Grouse Society have invested heavily in manpower and dollars to create and maintain habitat improvement projects. The Virginia State Chapter-NWTF and many of our local chapters have contributed significant resources to brood habitat projects on the forest since 1986 through our Hunting Heritage Super Fund. The projects provide quality brood habitat for wild turkeys, but also give the forest some early successional habitat and diversity essential to maintaining certain species of special conservation concern.

Examining the spring gobbler harvest trends on the GWNF since 1998 appears to bear out the concern for loss of potential management options. After the increase in acreage designated for limited management in the 1993 forest plan, spring gobbler harvests increased for the first ten years. Those increases were likely the result of suitable brood habitat remaining until successional changes reduced its value and the good spring weather conditions experienced in the 1990’s. Harvests peaked in 2001 and 2002 and have been in a general decline on the forest since. The decline in harvest is very likely due to a loss of quality brood habitat. Current harvest levels are less than half what they were early in the 21^st century.

The loss of quality brood habitat not only impacts turkeys, it results in declines in available nesting and foraging habitats for avian species linked to early successional herbaceous and woody habitats. Among the species likely to be negatively impacted are golden-winged warblers, prairie warblers, yellow-breasted chats, rufous-sided towhees, brown thrashers, gray catbirds, American woodcock and ruffed grouse. Loss of early successional forest habitat has been identified as the key component in the decline of these species.

Our chapter members have expressed concern over the potential loss of management options available should 130,000 additional acres be added to the PWAs. This action would affect a host of wildlife species, reduce the opportunities for managing the timber resources of the GWNF for future generations and affect the economies of rural communities. Loss of some 130,000 areas to scientific management would adversely impact hunting, angling and wildlife viewing opportunities on the GWNF.  Based on these concerns, our chapter members are opposed to creating additional PWAs, Wilderness Areas, National Scenic Areas and Remote Highland Areas on the GWNF.

 

Robin Clark

President - Virginia State Chapter