Photo by Ellen Miller

Friday, December 21, 2012

Mount Hood logging disputes shift as clear-cuts decline and thinning projects rise

Mount Hood logging disputes shift as clear-cuts decline and thinning projects rise



By Scott Learn, The Oregonian 
on December 20, 2012 at 12:44 PM, updated December 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM
Email
CollawashRiver.jpgView full sizeThe Collawash River, a tributary of the Clackamas, in Mount Hood National Forest. 
The Jazz thinning project, a 2,000-acre logging plan near a Clackamas River tributary, features the type of selective tree cutting that's become the accepted approach for much of the Mount Hood National Forest.

But Mount Hood's main environmental watchdog group is fighting it, charging the Forest Service with using thinning as cover for potentially destructive logging.

Amid the criticism, the service has pulled back the previously approved project for a second look, upsetting logging interests who say Jazz is a far cry from the clear-cuts of the 1950s through 1980s.

It's a pitched timber battle, but also one that illustrates how Mount Hood's logging landscape has changed since the spotted-owl-driven logging wars fired up in the 1990s.

Disputes have become rarer, as new collaborative groups tamp down bickering and thinning projects supplant traditional logging throughout northwest Oregon's most familiar forest.

They've also become subtler, focused on the costs and benefits of thinning in often sensitive areas not slated for clear-cuts, and on the Forest Service's ability to monitor timber contractors for compliance with logging rules.

"Literally, nine of the 2,000 acres they're going to log are designated within the forest plan for that purpose," says Olivia Schmidt, program director for Bark, the Mount Hood watchdog group. "It just doesn't stand up to reason."

Thinning upsides
Logging groups and the Forest Service beg to differ.
Much of the forest is second-growth Douglas fir "plantations," planted roughly 8 feet apart after clear-cuts 30 to 60 years ago.

Thinning those stands helps the remaining trees set roots deeper and grow faster and healthier, they say, making them less susceptible to insects, disease and high winds. Forest undergrowth would increase, as would species such as western hemlock and red cedar, alder and noble fir.

Over time, the thinking goes, the forest would more closely resemble old growth stands. In drier eastside forests, it also significantly reduces wildfire risk.
Logging in Mt. Hood National Forest holds controversy for watershed
EnlargeThe Collawash River watershed includes roughly 600 streams and occasional ponds, making logging more of a challenge. The Forest Service says logging setbacks from streams help protect them. Environmental groups say their on-the-ground efforts find streams not identified on Forest Service maps. Scott Learn/The OregonianLogging in Mt. Hood National Forest holds controversy for watershed gallery (8 photos)
That's been the logging model for the last decade, says Mike Chaveas, the Clackamas River district ranger on the Mount Hood National Forest. Commercial thinning has accounted for 80 percent of logging from 2001 to 2010, he says.

Several cuts in the Collawash River watershed, home to the Jazz planning area, have followed the pattern.

Like Bark, the American Forest Resource Council, which represents timber interests, appealed the Jazz decision. But its objection was that the 2,000-acre planning area was too small. The Collawash watershed covers roughly 97,000 acres.

"It's thinning that our forests need," says Tom Partin, the group's president. "The equipment we use out there anymore is all high-tech, with a much lighter touch on the ground."

The 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, adopted after the northern spotted owl came under the Endangered Species Act, predicts annual sales from Mount Hood of 64 million board feet. Nowadays, it's coming in around 30 million board feet, with overall annual tree growth about 13 times harvest levels, the Forest Service says.

Over time, as timber sales are executed, the Jazz project could generate 15 million board feet, the service says, projected to support about 125 timber jobs and provide enough wood to build several thousand houses.

The Forest Service screened the project through the Clackamas Stewardship Partners, a collaborative group with timber and environmental representatives in place for eight years. No members of the group appealed.

But Bark dropped out of the partners group for a time, knowing it was likely to oppose Jazz. Oregon Wild stayed on and decided not to fight the project. Erik Fernandez, Oregon Wild's wilderness coordinator, said the group is focusing on other Mount Hood logging proposals outside the Clackamas drainage that it sees as more harmful.

Jeffrey Gerwing, an associate professor of environmental science and management atPortland State University, is part of the partners group.

The Jazz project's "variable density thinning" would help make a more complex forest, he says. Studies of other Northwest forests have shown increases in plant diversity, insect abundance and migratory songbirds after thinning.

Into the forest
Walking through the Collawash watershed, you see evidence for that point of view. Stands of spindly young Douglas firs, bark still chalky white, are common. Logged areas aren't clear-cut, with the "leave trees" left behind still marked in orange.

GS.61LOGG121-03.jpgView full size 
But the forest doesn't call to mind a plantation either.
It's steep and watery, with dozens of streams coursing through. Ferns, Oregon grape and hemlock trees cover much of the understory. Dead snags and fallen "nurse" trees, important to a natural forest, abound.

"There's a difference between planting trees and letting nature do its thing and the kind of industrial management you see in private forests," says Alex Brown, Bark's executive director.

Bark has more concerns about the Jazz project because its staff and 50 volunteers have scouted every acre, Brown says. They've found unusually steep slopes destined for logging, he says, unmapped streams and water features and more complexity than the Forest Service describes. Twelve miles of road, including seven reclaimed at taxpayer expense, would be reopened for the project.

The Collawash includes some of the most geologically unstable terrain in Mount Hood's forests and 168 miles of fish-bearing streams. Road building, logging truck traffic, skid rows and logging yards can increase erosion into those streams, threatening water quality.

Bark contends that the thinly staffed Forest Service doesn't have the personnel to make sure timber contractors are following "best management practices," or BMPs, that reduce erosion, particularly on a 2,000 acre project.

Since 1996, Mount Hood Forest Service staffing dropped from 400 permanent positions to 159, according to a 2010 report.

A Bark record request for Forest Service BMP monitoring documents returned evidence of just four units being monitored in two sales, and several of those documents showed problems. Bark says it has found skid trails too close to streams and large trees that were cut instead of spared.

"The Forest Service says they're doing the monitoring," Bark's Schmidt says, "but if they can't provide documents, then we're just taking their word for it."

Moving forward
Ranger Chaveas concedes the Forest Service doesn't have "rigorous documentation" of monitoring. The last overall review of BMP implementation came in 2004.

But timber sale administrators do regularly monitor activity, and can penalize contractors who don't follow the rules and properly reclaim areas after logging, he says. Forest Service scientists use their findings to improve requirements for subsequent projects.

On Jazz, some 400 acres of the 2,000-acre plan area are off limits to logging because of needs for stream and water quality protection.

Chaveas says loggers will stick largely to flat spots and logging trucks will avoid roads along streams and steep slopes to prevent erosion.

A Forest Service environmental analysis said the logging would create little increase in sediment runoff, a hazard to fish. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which oversees salmon and steelhead, signed off on it.

But Chaveas said the Forest Service did decide to take a second look at sediment issues after Bark's appeal. That could take several months.

Gerwing, of Portland State, said he'd like the Clackamas Stewardship Partners to work with the Forest Service on how BMP implementation and monitoring might be improved. After that, he hopes the project can move forward.

Scott Learn; Twitter: @slearn1

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Prevent legal quagmire for timber industry

Prevent legal quagmire for timber industry



The Oregonian Editorial Board
By The Oregonian Editorial Board 
on December 05, 2012 at 5:47 PM, updated December 06, 2012 at 4:36 PM
Email
logtruck.jpg 
























The nation's timber industry experienced a low moment before the high court on Monday when a last minute action by the Environmental Protection Agencycomplicated an effort to clarify a provision of the Clean Water Act. We wouldn't be surprised if the industry's lawyers and representatives downed a few drinks that evening while contemplating the possibility that Congress might soon be their best avenue for relief. 

The point of clarificationinvolves ditches and culverts that drain runoff, often muddy, from logging roads. Does the Clean Water Act consider these to be point sources of pollution, as if they carried toxic goo from factories, and require the appropriate permits? The EPA historically has not taken this view, thereby sparing foresters not only the significant burden of applying for such permits – the number of which would be huge – but also the inevitable challenges from environmental groups. 

Last year, however, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals laid a glue trap at the feet of the timber industry by ruling, as environmentalists requested, that the Clean Water Act doesn't say what the EPA says it does. Timber interests appealed, and on Monday the Supreme Court held oral arguments ... sort of. 

Problem was, the EPA had promulgated a rule just days earlier exempting logging roads from the permit requirement at issue. Ostensibly, this gives the timber industry exactly what it wants. In reality, however, the issue is far from settled. Rather than providing clarity, the new rule could create a legal "quagmire," says Dave Tenny, president and CEO of the National Alliance of Forest Owners

The Supreme Court may now punt rather than ruling on the merits in the case, Tenny says. Environmental groups will respond by challenging the EPA's new rule in court, and the legal wrangling, once again, will go on and on. 

Enter Congress. If the Supreme Court does, in fact, give the case the brush-off, Congress should act quickly on very targeted legislation introduced in both the House and Senate. The companion bills enjoy bipartisan support, including that of Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. Their passage would simply provide firm legal footing for long-standing EPA policy governing logging runoff. 

This legislation barely moves the needle on the controversy meter, and it would provide great relief to an important industry in Oregon and many other states. It deserves prompt passage.

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

U.S. Supreme Court may punt on Oregon logging road pollution case

U.S. Supreme Court may punt on Oregon logging road pollution case

Scott Learn, The OregonianBy Scott Learn, The Oregonian 
on December 03, 2012 at 5:43 PM, updated December 03, 2012 at 9:31 PM


LoggingbyRoss.jpg
The U.S. Supreme Court may decide to punt on an Oregon logging road pollution case that has already bounced through the federal courts since 2006, justices indicated today, a move that could spawn years of additional litigation. 
The justices' comments came after the Environmental Protection Agency issued a new rule Friday clarifying that polluted run-off from logging roads shouldn't be treated like "point source" run-off from factories and feedlots under the Clean Water Act. 

EPA's new rule was intended to be timber-industry friendly, directly contradicting a 2010 decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that the Supreme Court had decided to review. 

Instead, the change could end up prompting the court to decline to judge the case, leaving the 9th Circuit's decision in place for now or prompting a second round of lawsuits over the new rule. 

EPA's 11th-hour rule change "surprised" the justices, Chief Justice John Roberts said. Instead of discussing the substance of the case during oral arguments today, the justices focused on whether or not they should even consider it. 

Timber industry officials nationwide are hoping for a clear win in the Supreme Court. The underlying lawsuit says EPA is incorrectly interpreting the text of the Clean Water Act, as passed by Congress, so an EPA rule change may not resolve the legal issue. 

The 9th Circuit concluded that the text of the Clean Water Act indicates that loggers in western states, even on private lands, need stormwater permits for active logging roads that drain to streams through pipes, ditches and culverts. 

Timber groups say permits would stall logging, create regulatory chaos and foment a spate of lawsuits from environmental groups. State laws, including Oregon's Forest Practices Act, already require best management practices for logging roads, they note. 

The Portland-based Northwest Environmental Defense Center, which brought the original lawsuit in 2006, says permits would prompt better tracking of pollution and more road improvements. Sediment runoff from logging roads can harm salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act and other fish. 

Attorney Timothy Bishop, speaking for the timber industry and the state of Oregon, spent most of his time Monday arguing that the court should still review the case. 

"What we would like to do is to get sorted out once and for all here an argument that otherwise would drag through the courts for the next five or six years," he said, according to the court's transcript. 

Jeffrey Fisher, representing NEDC, said the justices should dismiss the case, deferring it to lower courts to study the issues raised by the new rule. 

The Supreme Court may signal soon how it intends to proceed. If it decides to consider the case, a decision might come by next spring. 

Meantime, Congress could prevent future lawsuits by amending the Clean Water Act to make it clear that logging roads don't require permits. U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, has been among those favoring that approach. 

-- Scott Learn; Twitter: @slearn1 

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Federal judge halts 11 Oregon timber sales over seabird nesting concerns

Federal judge halts 11 Oregon timber sales over seabird nesting concerns
The Associated PressBy The Associated Press 
on November 27, 2012 at 12:26 PM

murrelet.JPGA lawsuit in U.S. District Court contends logging in Oregon state forests harms protected marbled murrelets.
GRANTS PASS — A federal judge has put 11 state forest timber sales on hold while she considers a lawsuit contending they threaten the survival of the marbled murrelet, a protected seabird that nests in old-growth forests.

The preliminary injunction issued last week is a blow to the new endangered species conservation policy adopted by the state to produce more timber from state lands.
Besides the 11 timber sales, the order covers all stands occupied by murrelets on the Clatsop, Tillamook and Elliot state forests.

In issuing the order, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken in Eugene wrote that conservation groups have shown they are likely to win the lawsuit on its merits, and leaving the sales open to logging could cause irreparable harm.

At issue is whether the state's logging goals on the three forests violate the Endangered Species Act by destroying habitat for the marbled murrelet, a threatened species. The bird lives at sea, but it flies up to 50 miles inland to lay its eggs on the large, mossy branches of mature and old-growth trees.

"This ruling should send a signal to the leadership of Oregon that balanced forest plans are critically needed to truly protect the murrelet," Francis Eartherington, conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands, said in a statement. "The state of Oregon's forest practices are the most reckless in the Pacific Northwest and are pushing the marbled murrelet closer to extinction."

Earlier this year the state Department of Forestry withdrew the sales pending the outcome of the lawsuit, and planned instead to offer a smaller number of alternative sales elsewhere.

The Oregon Department of Forestry estimated the withdrawal of the 10 sales on the Elliott would cost the Common School Fund $9.85 million in lost income next year. Unlike other state forests, the Elliott is controlled by the State Land Board, with logging proceeds going to the Common School Fund. The 11th sale is on the Tillamook.

The state managed the Elliott for years by protecting habitat for threatened and endangered species like the murrelet but scrapped that approach last year after federal biologists refused to approve revisions that allowed more logging. Instead, the state adopted a policy used by private timberland owners that refrains from logging where protected species are actually living.

Oregon Department of Forestry spokesman Dan Postrel said the order was expected.
The governor's office and timber industry representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
-- The Associated Press

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Obama administration proposes dropping 'critical habitat' protections for threatened marbled murrelets


Obama administration proposes dropping 'critical habitat' protections for threatened marbled murrelets

By Scott Learn, The Oregonian 
on October 24, 2012 at 5:19 PM, updated October 24, 2012 at 7:53 PM
marbledmurrelet.JPG
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants to drop all 3.9 million acres of "critical habitat" for the marbled murrelet, a tiny, threatened seabird that nests in coastal forest in Oregon, California and Washington. 

Its proposal would partially settle a federal lawsuit brought by the American Forest Resource Council, southwestern Oregon's Douglas County and theCarpenters Industrial Council, who say the service inappropriately set aside habitat for the bird in 1996. 

The service says continuing coverage under the Endangered Species Act and the Clinton-era Northwest Forest Plan will protect the bird until the service's budget allows it to set a new habitat designation in 2018. 

But the proposed consent order, which the service frames as a compromise, has infuriated environmental activists, who point to declining West Coast murrelet numbers in recent years. 

Among other objections, they say removing the designation will reduce protection for marbled murrelets on at least a million acres of "unoccupied" forest -- land where the murrelet doesn't nest currently that could provide prime habitat for the bird. 

In a letter to President Obama Tuesday, the Audubon Society of Portland, theCenter for Biological Diversity and 19 other conservation groups said the "entirely voluntary" consent order comes as the lawsuit is still in its early stages. 

"It is extraordinary that the Service has simply given up," they wrote. 

Dropping critical habitat protection would limit the bird's prospects, the groups said, particularly on Bureau of Land Management forestland in western Oregon, where proposals to increase logging and related county revenues have gained momentum of late. 

Marbled murrelets, listed as threatened under the ESA in 1992, are robin-sized seabirds that forage in the ocean but nest in mature or old growth forests. 

West Coast populations of have declined because of logging, the groups say. A 2009 status review estimated that the population dropped to 18,000 birds in 2008, a 26 percent drop from 2002. 

Service officials declined to comment Wednesday, citing the ongoing litigation. In lawsuit filings, they said previous court rulings made it clear that the 1996 habitat designation is flawed. 

Most of the critical habitat is on federal land and is included under the Northwest Forest Plan as "late successional reserves," Gary Frazer, the service's assistant director for endangered species, said in an affidavit to the court. 

Birds in those areas will be protected from threats, Frazer said, including "major human impacts such as tree cutting." Removing the habitat designation "will not result in significant harm to the murrelet," he said. 

In other cases, courts have generally left habitat protections in place while errors are fixed, the conservation groups said. 

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates in Washington, D.C., must sign off on the consent agreement for it to take effect. The conservation groups want the Obama Administration to drop the agreement before a decision is handed down. 

-- Scott Learn; Twitter: @slearn1