The Coos Bay Wagon Road land comprises approximately 5.5% of the 1,041,280 acres that make up Coos County. Approximately 244,488 acres or 23% that include the CBWR are under federal control, mostly through the BLM. Considering 66% of the county is already under private management/ownership with 83% deemed productive timber property it seems implausible to believe that aggressively logging this little sliver of federal timber can really make a difference in the county economy as a whole.

The tribe proposes to take over management of the CBWR lands from the BLM and split the gross receipts with the county much the same as the BLM does now. The difference, according to Brett Kenney and Tim Vredenburg of the Coquille Tribe is the management will be more aggressive falling somewhere between the plantation harvest approach of the Oregon Forest Practices Act and the more environmentally sensitive Northwest Forest Plan. Environmental groups are likely to challenge anything less than the NWFP and while the tribe asserts it will comply with NEPA and ESA it has not produced any metric or formula to support how it can stay in compliance and produce more revenue than the BLM.

No doubt both the tribe and the county commission have the best intentions and sincerely believe privatizing and logging federal timber will cure the economic malaise that permeates Coos County. Both argue in favor of local control versus federal oversight claiming the Coos Bay BLM cannot be compelled to manage these lands differently because they must answer to Washington bureaucrats. Even if local control of the lands is possible, relying upon resource extraction for revenue leaves the county vulnerable to market conditions well outside the influence and control of the local population.

Commissioner Bob Main wants to replace the lost federal payments of up to $6.9 million annually and believes the county’s 50% share of timber harvested through management of the CBWR by the Coquille Tribe will achieve that end but neither he nor the tribe can demonstrate how while still adhering to NEPA and ESA. The long forgotten SDAT report warned against relying too heavily upon resource extraction to drive the local economy in part because of the fickleness of the market. Cutting timber to meet an annual revenue target may flood the market at a time that lowers the overall value hurting everyone and forcing more cutting at a reduced price just to make ends meet.

The tribe and the county might be better served to find revenue sources less subject to global economic conditions like distributed energy where there is some control of the local market. Economic modeling is a powerful tool and I read studies and reports all the time but long term empirical studies often prove job creation numbers and economic impact projections are wrong. There are real world examples of communities that created long term family wage jobs and turned around their economy through local energy production and distribution and didn’t require an act of Congress. Remember, energy is an essential service, no manufacturing, or logging or food production or commerce can be done without energy.

Clearly we are not going to see any independent due diligence performed by the paid commissioners so it will be entirely up to the tribe and the public to vet the merits of this proposal or develop a proposal with the tribe that can meet the goals without wiping out a bunch of endangered species habitat.