Register Guard

GUEST VIEWPOINT

Forest policy requires a balanced approach

 

---

 

By Jim Geisinger

For The Register-Guard

JAN. 9, 2017

 

 

As the 40-year timber veteran cited in Andy Kerr’s Jan. 3 guest viewpoint, I am cautiously optimistic the next two years will offer new opportunities to bring balance to federal forest management.

With better management and proactive policy changes, our leaders have the ability to create and support family-wage jobs, conserve natural resources, maintain access to public lands, restore forest health and protect our drinking water. We believe it’s better to actively manage our forests for the future, for multiple uses and benefits, rather than locking them up and walking away. 

Far from being “Big Timber,” Oregon logging companies are predominately small, family-owned businesses. We are trained in the latest, science-based forestry practices and continually invest in cutting-edge equipment and technology. 

In fact, a large majority of Oregon’s municipal drinking water comes from actively-managed watersheds that utilize modern timber harvest and resource-protection methods. 

As loggers we are proud of what we do, and proud to work in an industry with an average annual wage of $49,200, compared to $45,000 for all Oregon employment. We’ll continue to provide the renewable and sustainable materials that support our communities and make civilization possible.

Yet Kerr is eager to re-ignite the timber wars. After all, that is good business for the environmental conflict industry, and useful for soliciting contributions from anonymous benefactors.

But replaying the 1990s will not fix the socio-economic problems in rural Oregon. 

It will not help rural counties that are on the brink of fiscal insolvency, nor will it meet the needs of our public lands. Oregon loggers do not cut more trees than what grows naturally. We don’t even cut “old growth” on federal lands, so maybe it’s time to leave Kerr and his tired rhetoric behind.

I am cautiously optimistic because our political leaders can no longer ignore the costs of hands-off forest management. The current approach has failed our citizens, forests and wildlife. Our federally owned forests have become overgrown and vulnerable to high tree mortality, which contributes to unnaturally severe wildfire, disease and insect infestations. Last October the Oregon Forest Resources Institute reported there are more than 350 million standing dead trees across 14 million acres of federally-owned forests within the state. 

According to OFRI’s data, forests in the National Forest system have a timber harvest rate of just 8 percent of total growth, but have a mortality rate of about 55 percent. 

Meanwhile, private and Native American forestlands, which have the highest timber harvest rate at 71 percent of total growth, have only 9 percent mortality.

More than 70 percent of the standing dead timber on federal lands is on non-reserved lands open to harvest. If Kerr chooses to sit in a tree to “protect” it, there’s a good chance that tree is already dead. And if the forest burns, the wildfire can emit up to 100 tons of greenhouse gasses, aerosols and particulates per acre. Most of Oregon’s forest sector companies, from logging to primary and secondary manufacturing, do not operate at capacity. The reason is not lack of demand. It now takes one tree every year for every man, woman and child to meet their needs for paper, packaging, fiber compounds, lumber and panel products.

Rather, it is because most companies cannot secure a long-term source of wood fiber. The real legacy of Kerr’s forest policy is to outsource timber jobs and products to other countries, rather than having locally sourced timber responsibly harvested and manufactured here at home.

A modest increase in timber harvests on federal land will enable companies to add shifts, invest more in equipment and technology, and create more opportunities for the scores of businesses that service the industry. A reliable fiber supply would also secure Oregon’s position as a leader in the development of advanced wood products.

For example, cross laminated timber, sourced from small- and medium-diameter trees, helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions by storing carbon and requiring significantly less energy to produce than concrete or steel. 

We need modern federal forest policies that are responsive to the needs of our ever-changing economy and environment. The Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service need the policies and resources to better manage our public lands, support wildlife populations and adapt our forests to drought and changing climate conditions. 

Bringing balance to federal forest management will also create family-wage jobs where they’re desperately needed in rural Oregon, and generate revenues to support basic public services such as law enforcement and health care. Kerr can continue to look to the past, but it’s time for our leaders to look forward with policies that recognize 21st century forest management.

Jim Geisinger is executive vice president of Associated Oregon Loggers in Salem.

Quiet Board Meeting Turns Feisty

Quiet Board Meeting Turns Feisty

What started as a fairly routine Board of Forestry Meeting on June 5, 2013 turned passionate and intense as the BOF reviewed a report from the Subcommittee on State Forests Financial Viability.

Following Department of Forestry Staff’s recommendation to accept the subcommittee’s report, BOF Chair Tom Imeson opened the meeting for public testimony. Chuck Bennett from the Confederation of Oregon School Administrators, COSA, and Mary Botkin from the Association of Federal, State, County and Municipal Employees, AFSCME, spoke to the vital need to increase timber harvests from all public forest lands, including State Forest lands.

Environmentalists from Northwest Oregon sought further restrictions on State Forest management. The timber industry responded with timber war veterans Jim Geisinger, Associated Oregon Loggers, Dave Ivanoff, Hampton Affiliates, and Chris Jarmer, Oregon Forest Industries Council.

Meanwhile, BOF member Sybil Ackerman tried in vain to get the presenter’s to focus on the narrow issue of State Forest Financial Viability. Mary Botkin responded with her long-time experience on the timber issue, including trips to Washington D.C. to encourage the Clinton Administration to try to solve the timber crisis that has decimated rural communities in Oregon.

Botkin reminded the BOF that the Clinton Administration’s Northwest Forest Plan was intended to solve the debate. Instead, the timber supply of the “compromise” has never been seen. Botkin also pointed out the most Oregonians that see dead, gray trees can’t decipher if the trees are on state, federal or private forests.

Eventually, the BOF accepted the subcommittee’s report and will continue to develop plans that will increase the financial viability of State Forests.

Ore. Forestry seeks more timber and more habitat

Ore. Forestry seeks more timber and more habitat

Capital Press

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) -- The Oregon Board of Forestry has taken on a tough job: figuring out how to produce more logs as well as better fish and wildlife habitat through logging on state forests.

The board voted unanimously Wednesday in Salem to embark on a new management plan for three state forests in the northwest corner of the state -- the Tillamook, Clatsop and Santiam.

There has been widespread dissatisfaction with the current plan -- including from the governor -- for failing to meet the statutory goals of producing economic, environmental and social benefits through active management.

Board Chairman Tom Imeson said in a statement that the current plan, from 2001, was based on the best information of the time, and he believes they can do better.

But conservation groups are skeptical that the forests can produce more logs while improving fish and wildlife habitat.

After national forests in Oregon, Washington and Northern California cut logging by 90 percent to protect habitat for the northern spotted owl and salmon in 1994, Oregon adopted a new vision for state forests, where logging would be designed to crate forests with old growth characteristics. However, the new policy did not satisfy the timber industry, which depends on state forests for logs, local counties, which share in state forest timber revenues, or conservation groups, which felt the forests were being thinned too heavily, and too many roads were being built.

The board increased logging and cut goals for older forests in 2009, but the dissatisfaction continued. In 2001, Gov. John Kitzhaber spoke to the board, urging it to find a new approach that makes state forests a model for resolving the conflicts between logging and fish and wildlife habitat that have beset the region for 30 years.

In that spirit, the board also created a new system to make it easier for the public to see just which state forest lands are dedicated to fish and wildlife habitat and conservation, rather than logging.

"Commitments to conservation -- and to economic and social values - will all be important outputs of the future state forest management plan we must achieve," State Forester Doug Decker said in a statement.

Jim Geisinger of Associated Oregon Loggers said the forests in Oregon's northwest corner are highly productive, and should be managed more intensively for timber than national forests.

"There is absolutely no reason they shouldn't be turning a substantial profit for the state and in turn for the counties," he said. "They need to be selling more timber -- recognizing their growth potential-- and be more efficient about selling those timber sales."

Bob Van Dyk of the Wild Salmon Center said the financial structure, where the Department of Forestry is directly funded by the sale of timber, gives the state an incentive to cut trees rather than protect fish and wildlife habitat.

"It remains to be seen whether such a solution is out there," where state forests can produce more logs and more habitat, he said. "We think the governor is going to need to come to the table with assistance to diversity revenue sources to diminish the incentive to just cut more to pay the bills."

Lawmakers Want To Crack Down On Logging Protests

Citing 'environmental terrorism,' Oregon House passes bills targeting tree-sitters, environmental activists

Lawmakers Want To Crack Down On Logging Protests

Print

By Yuxing Zheng, The Oregonian 
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on April 29, 2013 at 6:42 PM, updated April 29, 2013 at 6:48 PM

Email

View full sizeEnvironmental activists previously staged sit-ins, road blockades and protests at Elliott State Forest. Two bills passed in the Oregon House Monday target tree sitters and others who interfere with state forestland management.Thomas Boyd/The Oregonian

SALEM -- With talk about "environmental terrorism," the Oregon House approved two bills Tuesday that target tree sitters and other environmental activists who interfere with logging in state forests.

House Bill 2595, which passed 51-4, would create the crime of interference with state forestland management.House Bill 2596, which passed 43-12, would allow private contractors with the Oregon Department of Forestry to sue environmental protestors for the cost of damaged equipment, employee wages, attorney fees and similar costs. Both bills head to the Senate.

The legislation comes amid divisive efforts to increase logging in Elliott State Forest near Reedsport and proposals to increase logging in federal forest lands. Environmental activists affiliated with Cascadia Forest Defenders and Cascadia Earth First! staged protests at Elliott State Forest in recent years and at the Oregon State Capitol in May and June 2012, which led to arrests.

"They are known to overturn their vehicles on roads, chain themselves to trees, chain themselves to equipment, damage equipment, dig ditches in the roads, drive spikes in trees to cause injuries to workers, among other dangerous acts," said Rep. Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, who carried both bills. "This type of conduct cannot and should not be tolerated."

House Bill 2595 would allow district attorneys "to charge these terrorists with a crime and make them accountable," he said.

View full sizeEnvironmental protestors in June 2012 locked themselves together and refused to leave the offices of Secretary of State Kate Brown and Treasurer Ted Wheeler in the Oregon State Capitol. State police arrested six protestors.Oregon State Police

Krieger also cited protests at a State Land Board meeting in 2011 and sit-ins in the offices of Secretary of State Kate Brown and Treasurer Ted Wheeler in June 2012, when protestors locked themselves together. One protestor also urinated on the carpet in the offices of the treasurer, and protestors howled and made animal noises, Wheeler's spokesman said. State police arrested six protestors.

The bills passed despiteconcerns from environmental activists and the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregonthat they would infringe upon free speech rights of environmental protestors. Activists can already be prosecuted for disorderly conduct, trespass, property damage and criminal mischief, said Becky Straus, legislative director of ACLU of Oregon.

"House Bill 2595 is effectively criminalizing civil disobedience for one particular group, and we think it's really very dangerous to give this sort of discretion to law enforcement," Straus said. "It's taking conduct that can already be penalized under our criminal code and heightening the criminal penalties of the conduct, simply because of the content of the speech and the type of person who engages in the conduct."

Defendants convicted of interfering with forestland management for the first time would face up to a year in jail, a $6,250 fine, or both. Subsequent convictions would net a minimum of 13 months in jail and a $25,000 fine. The maximum penalty would be 18 months in jail and a $125,000 fine.

If House Bill 2595 becomes law, environmental activists vow to challenge it in court.
"I can assure you that as soon as this bill becomes law, we'll have as many people arrested and prosecuted under it as possible," said Jason Gonzales, a spokesman with Cascadia Forest Defenders. "There's no law that can stop somebody from acting on something they passionately believe in. There's not some level of punishment that will make us not want to do that."

View full size

Cascadia Forest Defenders has staged road blockades, tree sits and protests in Elliott State Forest in recent years. The group is opposed to an October 2011 decision to increase logging in the forest. Three environmental groups in May 2012 filed a lawsuit that said logging would threaten the marbled murrelet, a threatened sea bird.

Jim Geisinger, executive vice president of Associated Oregon Loggers, welcomed the passage of the two bills Monday. Although contractors can already sue for damages, current law is "a little vague and nebulous," he said.

"When protestors or obstructionist activities in the forest cause a contractor to go home, and they're unable to perform their duties, that costs money," he said. "The value of these bills is to put people on notice that there are consequences to their illegal actions."
-- Yuxing Zheng

Bill would increase penalties for timber protests

Bill would increase penalties for timber protests

JEFF BARNARD

Associated Press

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP) -- A tree farmer serving in the Legislature wants to put tougher penalties on people who chain themselves to equipment and block roads to stop logging on state forests.

"There's been a 30-year reign of terror by these people having no respect for the rights of others," Rep. Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, said Friday. "If they want to do civil disobedience, they can do that. It's part of the Oregon Constitution, and the federal. But when they go beyond that and start chaining themselves to trees, locking themselves to equipment, and laying down in the road, and in any way they impede access, then they have gone over the line."

His bill (HB 2995) would create a new felony charge of interference with state forestland management, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $25,000 fine. A companion bill (HB 2596) would allow loggers to sue protesters for lost income plus $10,000 up to six years after a protest.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Barker, D-Aloha, said the criminal charge bill won't pass out of committee until it is rewritten to overcome constitutional problems with impairing people's right to protest.

"There seem to be some pretty clear constitutional violations in it," Barker said. "I asked him to try to rework that to make some sense out of it."

Barker added that as written, the bill may also violate the rights of unions to picket on a state road used by loggers.

Krieger, a former state trooper and former member of the Oregon Board of Forestry, cited protests against logging on the Elliott State Forest in 2011 as the latest example of anti-logging protests that stretch back to the 1980s, when people began protesting logging old growth forests on federal lands.

Since the 2011 protests, a judge has blocked logging in Elliott stands occupied by the marbled murrelet -- a threatened sea bird that nests in old growth forests -- while a challenge from conservation groups moves through court.

Grace Pettygrove of Eugene, who was fined a couple hundred dollars on a misdemeanor charge of trespassing from the Elliott protests, said people would not be deterred by increased penalties.

"I don't think that is what the criminal justice system is for, to punish people for standing up for what they believe in, especially when they are standing up for ecosystems in danger on public land," she said. "The fact that this is happening actually shows that these timber corporations are worried about the impact public awareness and public protest will have on their operations."

The Associated Oregon Loggers testified in favor of both bills.

"The contractors who get damaged by these kinds of activities are small family owned businesses that employ eight to 10 people," said associated President Jim Geisinger. "If they think they will bring Wall Street to their knees by hindering a small business to conduct their affairs, they are wrong."

Jason Gonzales of Friends of Oregon's Forests said the companion bill allowing loggers to sue protesters for damages was a further attempt to intimidate people. He said loggers already had the right to sue for damages, but such lawsuits had not had much success in court.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Federal wildlife service will decide if 26 Pacific Northwest snails and slugs deserve endangered species designation

The Oregonian

Published: Tuesday, October 04, 2011, 8:58 PM     Updated: Wednesday, October 05, 2011, 5:49 AM

By Eric Mortenson, The Oregonian

View full size 

William P. LeonardThe Chelan mountain snail of Washington is among 26 slug and snail species considered for endangered species designation.

 

Northern spotted owl, we get it. Marbled murrelet, OK. But Masked duskysnail and Cinnamon juga?

They are among 26 rare slugs and snails will be studied for possible protection under the federal Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced Tuesday.

The decision, involving mollusks in Oregon, Washington and Northern California, does not guarantee listing under the act. Instead, it touches off a detailed biological review.

Unlike the 1990 listing of the Northern spotted owl, which led to logging restrictions, listing the mollusks as threatened or endangered won’t drastically change forest practices, said Tierra Curry, a conservation biologist with the Center for Biological Diversity. On federal forests, officials already must survey timber sales for slugs and snails and manage the sale accordingly, she said. “If they do get listed, it won’t keep projects from going forward.”

Jim Geisinger, executive vice president of Associated Oregon Loggers, said the cost of complying with restrictions that might follow a slug and snail listing could be astronomical. Issues include whether restrictions are extended to private timberland and whether the mollusks require “two-square yards or two-square miles” of protected habitat, he said.

“The potential is certainly there,” he said. “The devil is always in the details.”

The mollusks being studied include the Basalt juga, a river snail with three yellow bands on a white shell that lives in cold springs of the Columbia River Gorge, and the white-shelled Nerite pebblesnail, which lives in the Klamath River drainage in Jackson County. Others include the Masked duskysnail of the Wenatchee National Forest, the yellow-shelled Canary duskysnail of Northern California and the dark reddish-brown Cinnamon juga of the upper Sacramento River drainage.

All are susceptible to harm from logging, mining, grazing, pesticide and fertilizer use and water diversion, Curry said.

The creatures may not look appealing, but they are important to the forests and streams of the Pacific Northwest, Curry said. "They're part of the food web, they're important for nutrient cycling, they eat decaying matter and they're unique to the Pacific Northwest -- they're not found anywhere else," she said.

Officials with Portland's American Forest Resource Council, which often represents the timber industry's view on endangered species issues, were not immediately available for comment Tuesday.

The Center for Biological Diversity and other conservation groups reached an agreement with the Fish and Wildlife Service earlier this year to expedite decisions on 757 species, including the slugs and snails.

However, the process of listing creatures as threatened or endangered moves about as fast as the objects of the study. If wildlife officials decide listing is warranted, they will then solicit independent scientific review and ask for public input. It takes about a year to move from proposing a species for federal protection to arriving at a final decision, according to a Fish and Wildlife news release.

Among other options, the wildlife service could decide listing the snails and slugs is warranted, but defers work because other animals are at greater risk.

Also Tuesday, the Fish and Wildlife Service announced the northern leopard frog, found in 19 western states, will not be listed as threatened or endangered.

The service also reduced by nearly 190,000 acres the amount of forest designated as "critical habitat" for the marbled murrelet, a threatened seabird that nests in older forests along the Pacific Coast.

The removed areas are not essential to the conservation of the species and do not meet the definition of critical habitat for marbled murrelet, the wildlife service said in a news release. About 3.8 million acres in northern California and southern Oregon retains a critical habitat designation, however.

Designation as critical habitat doesn't establish a refuge or affect land ownership, the wildlife service said.

--Eric Mortenson

Governor Kitzhaber Speaks on Timber

Governor John Kitzhaber attended a meeting of The Oregon Committee, a coalition of Oregon businesses originally formed as a political committee, and now the Committee is focused on policy matters that impact businesses.  The Governor joined the meeting and spoke about the Budget he released yesterday, February 1.

Kitzhaber said he was going to “add-back” $6 million to restore the fire protection budget for a 50-50% split between forest landowners and the General Fund and to fund enforcement of the Forest Practices Act.  The Governor also said he was interested in a “discussion” of Natural Resource Agency consolidation and plans to restore the Natural Resource Policy Advisor Office in the Governor’s Office.  He is still two weeks away from announcing his selection for someone to head up his Natural Resource Office.

Jim Geisinger, Associated Oregon Loggers Executive Vice President, commented on the Governor’s transition team’s biomass recommendations.  Geisinger noted that the federal government owns nearly 60% of the forests in Oregon; and it is essential for the federal agencies to produce timber for sawmills, plywood mills and loggers in order to maintain the necessary infrastructure in Oregon’s rural communities if the biomass industry is to evolve as an economic force.  

Utilization of biomass is dependent on a viable logging and milling industry, Geisinger said.  Biomass for renewable energy can only be economically viable if it is tied to vibrant traditional industry infrastructure of sawmills and plywood plants.

The Governor responded by mentioning his “not very successful” Eastside forest planning effort.  Kitzhaber was encouraged by Sen. Ron Wyden’s effort to craft federal legislation to address the significant forest health issue in Eastern Oregon and he mentioned the collaborative efforts ongoing in southwest Oregon as a possible success story.

Governor Kitzhaber noted that times must have changed since John Shelk and Andy Kerr were now collaborating.  He said, “there must have been progress” or maybe it was a miracle…or as Geisinger noted “an act of desperation.”