THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Frog comes before fuel thinning at Echo Lakes


image_pdfimage_print

The U.S. Forest Service won’t be thinning fuels near Echo Lakes anytime soon.

This is because a judge this week agreed more time is needed to determine the impacts to the yellow-legged frog.

The USFS has agreed not to thin trees in this area on Echo Summit until at least after Oct. 15. Consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will continue until then to determine the effects on the threatened frog.

Dennis Murphy, a UNR research professor who helped draft the Lake Tahoe Watershed Assessment for the federal government, filed a lawsuit against the USFS last fall claiming the Forest Service did not adequately consider the environmental impacts of the project.

No trees have been cut this year.

The court order is that no trees will be cut prior to Labor Day to protect the endangered frog.

Here is a copy of the latest court document.

— Lake Tahoe News staff report

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (12)
  1. Hard to understand says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    Same thing happened about 10 years ago on a road project in the Amador City to Sutter creek area in Amador County.
    For the protection of the Red Legged Frog, The Hiway project was stopped by 2 people from Amador City for the protection of the red legged frog and was 10 years before it was completed at a cost of 12 million dollars above the original Project bid, only to find out that the Frog did not live there but it was POSSIBLE that it could live there.

  2. Rhinopoker says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    What is the environmental impact to the yellow legged frog when the whole area he lives in is burned to the ground because of too many trees and ground fuels? Burnt frog legs for sure. What about the health of the forest, homes in the area and any potential injury to human life fighting a large scale fire.

  3. Gaspen Aspen says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    Liberals at their finest!

    Yes, what about the trees and homes?!?

  4. tony colombo says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    And after that forest burns, the Black Backed Winged Woodpecker will be the endangered species De Jour

  5. Gaspen Aspen says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    Dennis Murphy: After you slip and fall into the lake because a little frog got in your path….I will be sure to let you drown while I make sure the frog is OK. Humans over frogs?? Seriously??
    I will gladly lead the class action lawsuit that will be filed against you if any homes there burn.

  6. rock4taho says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    Please. The Yellow Legged Frog populations have dropped 90% in 100 years; give them a break. It isn’t fire that is killing them, it is introduced Trout and pesticides.

  7. rock4tahoe says - Posted: August 9, 2014

    Wow. Cut the Yellow Legged Frogs some slack. They have been living in the harsh Sierra winters for Eons. Then one hundred years ago we decide to stock Trout in the lakes, throw in some pesticides and then you have a population that is 10% of what it used to be.

  8. Forest Service Public Affairs says - Posted: August 11, 2014

    To clarify — not working in the area until after Labor Day is actually an agreement the Forest Service made with the recreation residence owners to allow them full enjoyment of their summer cabins, prior to the filing of Dr. Murphy’s lawsuit.

  9. go figure says - Posted: August 13, 2014

    I think its really telling of humanity when we play the humans over everything else card. I bet all of you folks out there that say how its all about what humans want/need and to heck with the little frog. What a bunch of selfish whiners…

  10. reloman says - Posted: August 13, 2014

    go figure, is not the thinning of trees more about a healthy forest? before the last 100 years forests naturally caught fire and went on until they burnt out, nature did not have people risking their lives(how selfish of them) to put them out. With the thinning it reduces the risk of fire which saves tousands of animals of all types not just the frogs.

  11. Moral Hazard says - Posted: August 13, 2014

    Go figure, don’t be afraid to think. The scientist used a technical device to thwart the NEPA analysis. How can cutting a tree on the upland effect a frog? Exactly, it cant, so I don’t think we should feel a great deal of self loathing in this.

  12. go figure says - Posted: August 13, 2014

    Actually, im in favor, mostly, of thinning and removing debris for fuel reduction. Its a great way of helping to change the fire hazards artifically created by stopping wildfires for the last 100 years. I was a wildland firefighter for about 20 years and I can personally say it is the scariest, hardest and most rewarding job I ever had. My feelings about the frog are based on my personal belief that I am equal to wildlife, not above or better just because im a human. The FS rep. That posted above said the thinning was postponed to appease the recreation and homeowners in the area for the summer recreation time, not because of the frog. I think the presence or potential of frog habitat is reason enough to proceed with caution but that dosent seem to be the case. I really dont give a **** what moraless hazard thinks