Logging for spotted owls

Logging for spotted owls

Published: Thursday, July 26, 2012, 10:00 AM     Updated: Thursday, July 26, 2012, 10:52 AM

 By The Oregonian Editorial Board

View full sizeAP PhotoA spotted owl in the Deschutes National Forest near Camp Sherman, in 2003.
The latest research finding that logging can help the beleaguered spotted owl is certain to provoke controversy. The owl's protection collapsed federal logging on Oregon's forests over the past two decades, sinking many rural economies. Yet the owl continues to be in decline. 

Meanwhile, our under-harvested forests pile up with dead and diseased trees, brush and tinder that threaten to explode into catastrophic fire. That was the case with the Biscuit fire, which in 2002 consumed nearly a half-million acres in the Siskiyou National Forest in southern Oregon and northern California. While people and structures were threatened for days, at least a dozen known activity areas for the spotted owl were wiped out. 

Now comes a team from Oregon State University and Michigan State University arguing partial harvest -- call it heavy thinning but not clear-cutting -- acts to reduce fuel loads and set a forest up for improved habitat that will support more species, the spotted owl among them. But the result is not instant. 

John Bailey, an associate professor in OSU's College of Forestry, explained to The Oregonian that even limited logging operations act to clear the ground and open up the canopy prized by owls, temporarily creating unsuitable habitat while making the forest less fire-prone. But over several decades, "the balance flips," Bailey said, meaning the canopy closes up on a healthier, fire-resistant forest that is far more attractive to owls. 

What's this mean now? Oregon needs to get going in its forests. 

While no study by itself can be the ticket that opens forests up for heavy logging, the OSU findings suggest a middle-of-the-road sweet spot for logging levels that could serve several purposes: restore jobs in cash-strapped rural communities, reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire, and create healthier forests that eventually support more species such as the spotted owl. 

But not all forests are created equal when it comes to fire risk. Those east of the Cascades, situated in dry heat and more vulnerable to insect infestation and disease, become especially dangerous with the pileup of fuels. Yet several westside forests are considered dry, too, and they would be good candidates for stepped up harvests. 

It turns out a little thinning here and a little thinning there won't do. Computer models the OSU researchers employed calculated that at least 20 percent of any fire-prone landscape would need robust thinning to significantly reduce fire risk while creating, over time, more habitat preferred by spotted owls. 

Researchers in California previously demonstrated that not all fire is considered a threat to spotted owl habitat, and the new findings do not dispute that. But the OSU report at its simplest shows that big, clear-cut logging operations and big, explosive fire are bad things for bird habitat. 

Knowing only that much, it makes sense to launch more of the moderate harvest levels the OSU study finds will reduce fire risk in fire-prone forests while creating a happier home for the Northwest's signal species in decline. 

Timber must be part of economic mix for rural counties

Timber must be part of economic mix for rural counties

Published: Friday, July 20, 2012, 5:00 AM

 The Oregonian

By Paul Barnum 

In emphasizing market conditions, The Oregonian's Sunday editorial ("Timber's dead-end road," July 15) reduced the importance of the paper's previous support for increased management of federal lands for both timber and ecological benefits. 

On numerous occasions, the paper has stated that one solution to restoring rural economies and healthy, resilient forests is increased management of the state's 18.2 million acres of federal forests, which represent nearly 60 percent of Oregon's forest base. 

Two years ago ("The forest fire that changed everything," Aug. 31, 2010), on the 100th anniversary of what's known as the "Big Burn," The Oregonian stated, "Too much federal money and effort still goes to fighting fires, and too little to thinning forests and managing fire in more natural, constructive ways." Just this year ("A new timber policy or bust," Jan. 24), The Oregonian opined that "Oregon timber counties cannot prosper without more activity on federal forests." 

One month later ("A promising O&C forest plan," Feb. 21), the paper stated, "The ultimate solution has to include getting more logs, more jobs and more revenues out of the public forests that cover western Oregon." 

Public opinion and Oregon policymakers also support forest management that balances economic and environmental values. 

Polling by the Oregon Forest Resources Institute and the Oregon Department of Forestry in June 2010 showed that 77 percent of Oregonians favor thinning of dense, overstocked forests in eastern and southwest interior Oregon to reduce the risk of severe wildfire. The public understands the damage that hot, destructive fires can do to fish and wildlife habitat and water resources. 

Our elected leaders also understand that sustainable forest management, including responsible timber harvest and removal of biomass, is necessary for forest health. 

In testimony before the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee on Feb. 14, Gov. Kitzhaber said, "Management of Oregon's public forests is seriously out of balance. While our state forests account for 3 percent of Oregon's forest lands, they produce 10 percent of the timber volume in the state. Conversely, federal forests make up 59 percent of the forest lands in Oregon, but produce only 12 percent of the timber volume." 

He echoed those comments, along with the legislative leadership, in a letter to a state-led group on which I serve that is championing increased management of federal forestland. Signed by Sens. Peter Courtney, D-Salem, and Joanne Verger, D-Coos Bay, and Representatives Bruce Hanna, R-Roseburg, and Arnie Roblan, D-Coos Bay, the letter stated, "Active management on federal lands has declined to levels that put the health of Oregon's public forests, economy and communities at risk. The lack of management has left national forests throughout Oregon overcrowded, unhealthy and at risk of severe fire, insect outbreaks and disease." 

As The Oregonian noted, three Oregon congressemen, Democrats Peter DeFazio and Kurt Schrader and Republican Greg Walden, are working on a balanced, bipartisan solution to modestly increase harvest on O&C lands in western Oregon. In an OpEd column in The Oregonian ("Congressmen offer bipartisan solution to fiscal crisis," Dec. 18), they said, "Oregon's rural communities cannot afford another 20 years of gridlock in our federal forests. Without a new path forward, mills will continue to disappear, forest jobs will be outsourced, counties will be pushed off the budgetary cliff and forest health will continue to decline." 

Residents of rural areas recognize we will never return to past high volume harvest practices. Those days are over. But certainly, we can and should increase harvest volumes to a modest level – for timber value and to restore healthy, resilient forests. Keeping a focus on restoring public lands by using open, public collaborative processes is the way to do this. Economic diversification is important but not a panacea. More importantly, we should pursue a balanced approach that both protects natural resources and takes advantage of Oregon's world-class strength as a grower and provider of wood. 

Paul Barnum is executive director of the Oregon Forest Resources Institute. 

Oregon timber harvest jumps 13 percent, but still way below historic levels

Oregon timber harvest jumps 13 percent, but still way below historic levels

Published: Monday, July 09, 2012, 5:16 PM     Updated: Monday, July 09, 2012, 5:31 PM

 By Eric Mortenson, The Oregonian 
Follow

View full sizeThomas Boyd/The OregonianLog exports from private land have resulted in more timber cut on federal and state land, such as this section of the Clatsop State Forest in 2011.

Oregon's annual timber harvest jumped 13 percent in 2011, reaching 3.65 billion board feet. Large private forest owners, taking advantage of a continued hot export market to China and elsewhere, accounted for two-thirds of the harvest despite having only 19 percent of the state's timberland. 

Timber harvest on federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management increased 47 and 24 percent, respectively, as mill owners sought logs to replace what was being shipped overseas, said Brandon Kaetzel, economist with the Oregon Department of Forestry. By law, logs cut on federal land cannot be exported. 

Despite the increases, Oregon's timber harvest remains a splinter of what it was in the past. The total harvest on federal land, 539 million board feet, compares to the nearly 5 billion board feet cut on Forest Service and BLM land in 1988. 

The total harvest from all forests -- federal, state, large and small private land, tribal -- was less than half the 25 year high of about 8 billion board feet, Kaetzel said. A board foot measurement is a piece of lumber one-foot long, one-foot wide, and one-inch thick. 

Kaetzel said log exports, although strong, appear to be tapering off, while lumber exports are increasing. "That's a good thing," he said. "We'd rather export a finished product than a raw product." 

Oregon's logging companies and mills are heavily dependent of the U.S. housing market, which collapsed in 2008 and resulted in a 2009 harvest below 3 billion board feet.

--Eric Mortenson 

The Colorado fires: Is anyone paying attention?

The Colorado fires: Is anyone paying attention?

From Paul Barnum, Oregon Forest Resources Institute

The stories and photos coming out of Colorado are horrific: Eleven wildfires. Thousands forced to flee. Hundreds of thousands of acres scorched. Millions of dollars of property damaged.

The most destructive of the 11, the worst in Colorado’s history, is the Waldo Canyon Fire that charred 18,000 acres around Colorado Springs, destroying 346 homes and killing two.

Can it happen in Oregon?

This summer marks the 10th anniversary of the Biscuit Fire, which consumed a half-million acres in southwest Oregon. In the summer of 2002, major fires were already burning across Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico, and these drew firefighting resources away from the Pacific Northwest. Then on July 12 and July 15 a series of lightning storms in California and Oregon started dozens of small wildfires, five in the Siskiyou National Forest. These merged into a conflagration that took firefighters until after Christmas to fully contain.

Throughout the American West, millions of acres of federal forests are chock-full of excess fuels that under dry, hot and windy conditions need only an ignition source to blow up. The excess fuels are the product of more than a century of fire suppression and unsustainable harvesting and grazing policies.

For those who want more background on how we got here and what can be done, I recommend two educational videos. One is OFRI’s own “Federal Forestland in Oregon: Problems and Solutions in Dry-Side Forests.” The other is produced by a Grant County group and is titled “Saving Our Forests.”

The history of how we got here is interesting, but there’s little point in fixing blame. The more important question is, where do we go from here? OFRI’s research indicates that the majority of people want the forests managed to restore ecosystem health. In our statewide 2010 Values & Beliefs Study, 77 percent agreed somewhat or strongly that dense, overstocked forests in eastern and southwest interior Oregon should be thinned to reduce the risk of severe wildfire. That would be a terrific start.

I worry that the news is desensitizing us to disasters. What’s a wildfire compared to a tsunami, earthquake, tornado, hurricane or 500-year flood? But Oregonians better figure this out, and soon. The only thing more tragic than the destruction in Colorado would be to not learn from the past and take action to create a safer and more sustainable tomorrow.

For the forest,

Paul Barnum
Executive Director

Visit Your Pacific Northwest National Forest

Visit Your Pacific Northwest National Forest