Northwest Forest Plan: Goodbye? Spotted owl: Goodbye?
October 18th, 2007
With all the attention on Oregon’s Measure 49 (vote YES), it’s important to remember that there are still other major environmental issues in the West. Notably, the “Western Oregon Plan Revisions” which appear to be on the cusp of decimating much of the remaining old growth forests in Oregon.
This is complicated stuff, and I don’t claim to know the half of it. But the New York Times just published an article on this and sums it up this way:
Now the truce, the Northwest Forest Plan, is in jeopardy as one of the parties to it, the Bureau of Land Management, is rethinking its participation. It is proposing a threefold increase in logging on its 2.2 million acres in western Oregon, with greater increases in the old-growth stands that are the owls’ preferred territory. The land agency’s action would reduce by 10 percent the territory covered by the Northwest Forest Plan.
With the agency’s proposal, it seems that the timber industry, which never stopped pressing for access to more trees than the Northwest Forest Plan allowed, is getting what it had long sought in court.
How depressing.
And take a look at these graphics:
Notice the massive increase in lands available to logging compared to the “no action alternative”. And, sadly, since county funds are tied to logging revenues, rural counties (and politicians) are often in favor of these plans.
There’s already been a massive increase in logging in federal forests. (The Oregonian recently published an article on this, but I can’t find the link… help?) And this new plan is simply disastrous for forest ecosystems:
Jerry Franklin, a professor of ecosystem analysis at the College of Forest Resources at the University of Washington, said, “We are on the cusp of a point where the whole edifice could collapse.”
If the land agency’s share is taken out, the plan’s objectives in providing old-growth habitat for the owl cannot be met, Mr. Franklin said.
So, what to do?
Well, it’s SO important that you submit comments on this. Unfortunately, the BLM has made it EXTREMELY complicated to submit comments. It is almost as though they have tried to make it next to impossible to do so.
Okay, unless someone knows of an easier way, to submit comments you have to go to this BLM page (you can also view details of the plans here). Click on the middle icons and link. You will have to enter personal information and then view a complicated interactive map. There, you can view the amount of forest slated for logging (euphemistically noted as “timber management area”). Select “comment on alternatives” and individually select Alternatives 1, 2, and 3. For each, use the pop-up box to enter your comments. As part of your comments, consider focusing on the controversial aspects listed above, as well as these from the NYT’s article:
Bush administration officials in Washington suggested that a second option be prepared. As written, that option could allow for much more logging on the 2.2 million acres.
The new option sets aside no territory for the owl. Instead, it provides for ad-hoc decisions based on ongoing evaluations of the owl’s health. Crucial to both options was a determination that owls can thrive outside old-growth stands.
This summer, scientists, including those whose work was cited by the fish and wildlife agency, accused the service of misusing and cherry-picking the available science.
Incidentally, it is worth noting that Canada is pursuing an equally misguided approach to the spotted owl. Their solution is to capture all remaining owls and breed them. Hey, that way ALL lands can be logged and we can see the owls in the zoo!
Related posts: Interesting environmental stories..., Sustainable Ecosystems Institute?, Close OSU's College of Forestry!
2 Comments Add your own
1. edison | October 18th, 2007 at 2:29 am
Great post. Have you seen this: http://www.oregonheritageforests.org/citizenguide
Thanks
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed