Hastings and DeFazio Call For Drastic Increase in Logging to Fund Counties
Two proposals would return to clear-cut logging exempt from environmental laws
Portland, Ore—Oregon Wild, the state’s leading public lands and wildlife conservation organization, today voiced strong opposition to H.R. 4019, the “Federal Forests County Revenue, Schools, and Jobs Act of 2012”. The bill, which received a hearing in Congress this morning, would legally mandate that the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) log no less than 33.2 billion board feet per year—15 times greater than 2010 levels—to generate funds to support county budgets.
“Apparently, the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives believes we can clear-cut our way to prosperity,” observed Steve Pedery, Conservation Director for Oregon Wild. “It is like the DeFazio, Schrader, and Walden clear-cut logging plan on steroids.”
The brainchild of Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), H.R. 4019 mandates intensive logging, grazing, and oil and gas production in order to hit unrealistic revenue targets. To meet the mandated county funding goals, environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act would not apply to projects carried out under the legislation. Additionally, the right of American citizens to challenge the decisions of their government in court for these projects would be suspended.
Also released today, but notably missing from H.R. 4019 was the much-hyped proposal by Reps. Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader, and Greg Walden to put approximately 1.2 million acres of publicly-owned BLM land into a dedicated logging “trust”, where it would be similarly managed for industrial logging to generate revenue for some western Oregon counties. This proposal – titled the “O&C Trust, Conservation, and Jobs Act” – was developed in secret over the last six months and has generated intense opposition from Oregonians opposed to clear-cut logging and the likely effects on salmon and clean water.
Conservationists observed that neither plan would actually do much to solve the impasse over county funding.
“Under the Hastings bill, we would need to see a 1,500 percent increase in logging on America’s public lands,” said Pedery. “To generate the money needed to bail out county budgets in western Oregon at current timber prices, Reps. DeFazio, Schrader, and Walden would need to increase logging on public BLM lands by 400 to 500 percent. The public won’t stand for that kind of rampant clear-cutting, and Congress knows it. The House of Representatives seems more interested in posturing and creating false hope than in actually solving the problem.”
Both measures seek to re-frame the House of Representatives failure to consider a temporary extension of important county funding legislation as a “logging problem” rather than a failure of leadership. Sen. Ron Wyden and Sen. Jeff Merkley have been working to advance such a measure in the U.S. Senate.
During the logging epidemic that swept across America’s public forestlands in the 1970s and 1980s, county budgets received a share of logging sale revenues. While this generated an enormous windfall, it also polluted thousands of miles of rivers and severely damaged fish and wildlife habitat. Strong public opposition finally brought an end to rampant clear-cutting in the 1990s – and the money going to counties from timber sales shrank. Congress cushioned the fall by instituting Secure Rural Schools legislation, first passed in 2000, to help transition the counties away from dependence on federal timber receipts. These county payments expired this January.
Earlier this month, a coalition of six local, state, and national conservation organizations unveiled a balanced, three-pronged strategy to solve the looming county funding crunch. This “shared responsibility” approach, where county governments, the State of Oregon, and the federal government would each take responsibility for resolving a portion of the county funding problem, stands in stark contrast to the Hastings and DeFazio proposals being debated in committee today.
CORRECTION. There was some confusing information distributed by DeFazio’s office.
The bill would transfer the following acres into Timber Trusts to be clearcut under the grossly inadequate Oregon Forest Practices Act:
1.26 million acres of BLM O&C Lands
216-220,000 acres of Forest Service O&C Lands
53,000 acres of BLM Coos Bay Wagon Road lands
Grand total 1.53 million acres.
That is especially discouraging that so much land can logged under OFP. With regard to the Coos Bay Wagon Road land it is even more egregious because the county does not require much money to balance its budget. Thinning just as the BLM has been doing would be more than adequate
Thank you for the post Mr. Heiken.
I am very disappointed in Pete – these are sad days when the good ones sell out.
More and more and more, it takes a Democrat to do what no Republican did.
Vote third party, any third party, or vote “none of the above”.
It will take time, but right now? Hell, time is all we got, isn’t it?
I hope it was worth it to the Oregon Democrat Party. From the Gov, down to Arnie Roblan, the Democrats be doin the dirty work now.
Troubling Aspects of the DeFazio-Walden-Schrader OCTCJA bill:
1. We should NOT be splitting the baby (again), but even within that frame, it’s grossly unfair. The BLM-baby would be split 70/30 based on stand age. Seventy percent of the forest, made up of stands younger than 125 years old, would be clearcut by the timber trust, and 30% of the forests, those older than 125 years old would be transferred to the USFS.
2. The 70% managed by the new timber trust would be clearcut under the new “Timber Trust.” The Trust would have a fiduciary responsibility to the counties to produce “annual maximum sustained revenues” which will be interpreted to require clearcutting. The 125 year old stands to be clearcut are about 3 times older than the typical rotation on industrial forest lands.
3. The new Timber Trust will include 218,000 acres of National Forest land in addition to 1.48 million acres of BLM lands, for a total of almost 1.8 million acres of federal forest land. Assuming a small portion of those acres might be retained as stream buffers, we would still expect well over 1 million acres to be clearcut.
4. The bill relies on stand age data provided by BLM which is not accurate and lumps together natural stands with a variety of age-classes. Many “young stands” include within them an overstory of true old-growth trees that will be clearcut under the timber trust.
5. Only a portion of the forests >125 years old transferred to the Forest Service will be protected. A portion of the older forests will retain their existing “land allocation” which means logging may proceed as current plans allow.
6. Protection of trout, salmon, well over 1,000 miles of rivers and streams will be dramatically reduced. Buffers on large streams would be reduced from hundreds of feet currently required under the Northwest Forest Plan, to just 20 feet, and buffers on small streams would be reduced from >100 feet currently, to zero feet. This will pollute our drinking water and imperil our salmon.
7. Chemical use would dramatically increase in order to suppress native habitat and grow sterile tree farms. Unlike most FS land, the affected BLM lands are much more intermixed with rural residences and small private land holdings.
8. Peter DeFazio claims that the Trust lands will still be federal land but his bill says “actions on the O&C Trust lands shall be deemed to involve no Federal agency action or Federal discretionary involvement or control and the laws of the State shall apply to the surface estate of the O&C Trust lands in the manner applicable to privately owned timberlands in the State”. This is so they don’t have to follow bedrock federal environmental laws dating back to the Nixon administration.
9. Public involvement under the National Environmental Policy Act would be completely eliminated. NEPA is like the Bill of Rights with respect to public involvement in government actions affecting our shared environment.
10. Both the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act are partially waived. CWA permits would not be required for certain logging roads as the law currently requires. Minimal consideration of occupied spotted owl nest sites would be “deemed” compliant with the Endangered Species Act, even though federal requirements go much farther.
11. Only the O&C Counties are allowed to enforce the DeFazio legislation in court, while the courthouse door is slammed in the face of the general public.
12. A majority of the Timber Trustees would have a conflict of interest biased toward logging and revenue.
The Oregon Democrats will never get another vote from this former registered Dem, but that’s not who’s vote they’re gathering now is it?
Peter knows how to throw red meat as well as the rest of them.
bye bye Peter.
Isn’t this truly amazing?
Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act back in the 70’s. These laws have been consistently upheld and endorsed by the courts since then.
Congress has also allowed, endorsed, and facilitated the placement of 7996 political appointees as the leadership of the Federal management agencies.
When it comes to our timber situation, these political hacks have spent the last 30 years trying to evade the letter and intent of both NEPA and the ESA.
Now, when things have degenerated to a total mess as a result, what is the Congressional respone?
Instead of seeking ways to put science back into the decision process, they want to grant a Congressional exemption from the laws that Congress itself instituted 30 years ago.
It seems the things that have truly gone extinct are logic and reason in the Potomac basin.