News

Click here to see the original publication in the Capital Press

A proposed “habitat conservation plan” for protected species in Oregon’s state-owned forests has alarmed some counties that receive logging revenues from those lands.

Since 2017, the Oregon Department of Forestry has been evaluating an HCP for threatened spotted owls and marbled murrelets, nine protected aquatic species and several wildlife species that may be listed under the Endangered Species Act.

State forestlands are currently managed to avoid killing or harming federally protected species, while an HCP would allow some “incidental take” as long as the plan’s mitigation and prevention strategies are followed.

As the Oregon Board of Forestry prepares to decide whether to proceed with the next phase of the HCP process, preliminary forecasts of timber harvest have caused consternation among some members of the Council of Forest Trust Land Counties.

“This HCP does not reflect any concern or understanding of counties’ financial condition or needs,” said David Yamamoto, chairman of the council and Tillamook County’s board of commissioners, during an Aug. 14 online meeting.

Based on ODF’s modeling data, logging on state-owned forestland in Western Oregon would decline steadily from recent levels of about 250 million to 300 million board-feet a year to roughly 175 million board-feet in 2080, after which harvests would begin rising again, according to the Mason, Bruce & Girard natural resources consulting firm.

About 60-62% of 640,000 acres of state-owned forestland would become unavailable for logging under the HCP, compared to 49% under current management, said Mark Rasmussen, a principal at the consulting firm.

To compare, only about 44% of state-owned forestlands in Western Washington are unavailable for logging under its HCP, Rasmussen said. “Is Oregon being asked to give up more than other landowners who’ve pursued and achieved an HCP?”

The HCP should not replicate economic hardship that occurred in Oregon due to logging curtailments on federal lands after the northern spotted owl was listing under the Endangered Species Act 30 years ago, said Steve Zika, CEO of Hampton Lumber.

“Any kind of reduction of the ODF’s state harvest will have a dramatic effect on many businesses in Northwest Oregon,” Zika said, noting that an HCP would be acceptable as a concept if it were less financially burdensome.

“In order for us to support this HCP, Oregon’s commitments need to be more balanced and in line with other landowner HCPs,” he said.

Yamamoto, the council’s chairman, pointed out that forestry and logging jobs pay an average annual salary of $54,400 in Oregon, while wood products and manufacturing jobs pay an average annual salary of about $51,600 — compared to about $22,750 for jobs in leisure and hospitality.

“These are not living-wage, fully benefited jobs,” Yamamoto said of the tourism industry. “Tillamook is never going to be home to a Nike or a Columbia Sportswear or a Google. Small rural counties really depend very much on natural resource-based jobs.”

The most recent models for how the HCP would affect the ODF’s finances haven’t yet been finished but will be ready by October, when the Board of Forestry is expected to decide whether to undertake a Nation Environmental Policy Act analysis of the plan, said Liz Dent, the agency’s state forests division chief.

When asked why Oregon’s HCP would restrict logging on a larger proportion of land than Washington’s plan, Dent said the conservation areas were designed based on surveys of marbled murrelets and spotted owls conducted over two decades.

There would still be the opportunity to manage forestland within these conservation areas, she said.

“Each HCP is going to be different based on forest conditions, the species we are seeking coverage for, their distribution, (and) it depends who the landowner is and what the landowner’s objectives are,” Dent said.

The HCP is intended to bring regulatory certainty that would allow Oregon to continue managing its forests as “working forests,” but the decision whether to adopt the plan won’t be made until mid-2022, said Peter Daugherty, Oregon’s state forester.

“I don’t consider myself an adversary to the counties but a partner to the counties,” he said.

Click here to see the original publication in the Capital Press

Potential changes to Oregon’s forestry laws will be negotiated over the next 18 months now that lawmakers have passed a compromise bill between timber and environmental interests.

However, stricter notification requirements for helicopter spray operations and enhanced no-spray buffers around schools and streams are set to become effective as early as next year, even before additional revisions are hammered out.

Timber companies and environmental groups struck a deal earlier this year to pass the bill rather than try to persuade voters to pass competing ballot initiatives about forestry regulations. The timber industry feared the environmental proposals would have reduced logging on private lands by 25% by acreage.

However, the previous compromise bill died earlier this year when Republican lawmakers walked out of the Legislature rather than vote on controversial climate legislation that was strongly opposed by natural resource industries.

During the special session that concluded on June 26, though, the compromise was revived as Senate Bill 1602 and passed the House and Senate with overwhelming majorities.

Under the legislation, a landowner or timber operator must provide notification of a planned helicopter pesticide operation the day before spraying begins, down from about two weeks under current law.

Interested parties will learn of the spray operations through the Oregon Department of Forestry’s forest activity electronic reporting and notification system, known as FERNS.

Aside from this change, the operator must also initially provide the agency with a shorter 90-day window for when the treatment might occur, down from the current year, and complete additional post-application reporting requirements.

Spray operations in the forest are prone to being called off and rescheduled because they can only occur in narrow wind, temperature and humidity conditions, said Richard Zabel, executive director of the Western Forestry and Conservation Association.

“When you can’t spray, you’re essentially starting all over again,” Zabel said.

Similar notification requirements were opposed during past legislative sessions by the timber industry, which criticized them as being impractical and causing unnecessary anxiety among neighboring landowners.

Previously, technology didn’t exist that could efficiently provide such remote notification, said Greg Miller, representative of the timber companies involved in the compromise.

In 2020, “we found a way to get to yes” in light of technological advancements that “while still untested” are ready to be implemented at the Oregon Department of Forestry “and we hope that the notification reduces safety concerns for all involved,” Miller said in an email.

The new notification requirements would become effective on July 1, 2021 unless the Department of Forestry determines its system lacks the capacity at that point, in which case the agency would have another year to implement it.

New no-spray buffer regulations under SB 1602 will become effective even earlier, on Jan. 1, 2021.

Buffers around certain streams that are currently as narrow as 20 feet will increase to 75 to 100 feet, depending on stream type, while the buffers around schools and homes will increase from 60 to 300 feet under the bill.

While Oregon’s commercial forests don’t have many buildings compared to other land uses, the law also prohibits spraying within 300 feet of points of diversion for drinking water, which will probably be more consequential, said Mike Cloughesy, director of forestry for the Oregon Forest Resources Institute.

“There are a lot more water take-outs than there there are schools,” Cloughesy said.

Though much of SB 1602 imposes conditions on forestry operations, it also contains penalties for interfering with aerial herbicide spraying, with penalties of up to $5,000 for the “use of force, violence or action that impedes a pesticide application by helicopter to forestland.”

Interference doesn’t include “photography, videotaping, audiotaping or other creation of an electronic record” by someone on public property or private property where they’re allowed.

Click here to see the original publication in the Portland Business Journal

The big agreement between environmental groups and the forest industry that was waylaid by the Republican legislative walkout — remember that? — is still on.

Gov. Kate Brown put out the word in a news release Tuesday, wedged into a steady stream of announcements related to the COVID-19 response.

The parties had agreed in February on a process to develop forest-practice regulations that industry can live with while meeting federal standards to protect threatened and endangered species, including salmon.

As part of the memorandum of understanding, each side said it would drop competing initiative petitions once the 2020 Legislature passed a bill to create an aerial pesticide spraying notification system and buffer zones around homes, schools and water sources.

But Republicans blew up the Legislature with their opposition to a cap and trade bill, and the pesticide bill didn’t pass.

There was talk that it could be quickly included in a special session, but the pandemic soon became all-consuming.

Nonetheless, the signatories reaffirmed to Brown they will still move to withdraw the initiatives, which might have faced a signature-gathering challenge anyway, given restrictions on public activities. In a March 25 letter released by the governor’s office Tuesday, they wrote:

The MOU envisions coordinated actions by signatories, the Governor’s office, the Board of Forestry, and – importantly – the Legislature. We remain very committed to meeting the terms of the MOU, including legislation, at the nearest possible time that circumstances related to the coronavirus pandemic allow.

Given our mutual commitment to the key elements of the MOU, and also recognizing the priorities of Oregon at this time, we will make efforts to assist the respective petitioners with the formal withdrawal of the competing ballot measures.

Click here to see the original publication on the Governor’s website

Timber and environmental groups reinforce their commitment to February pact brokered by Governor Brown

Salem, OR—Governor Kate Brown today issued the following statement on receiving a reaffirmation of commitment from forest industry and environmental groups to work together on a science-informed policy development process related to forest practice laws and regulations.

In February, the signatories to the original memorandum of understanding agreed to drive a process to update the state’s timber practices balancing habitat and working in the woods, with the mutual goals of meeting the standards of endorsement from federal wildlife agencies; passing legislation on aerial spraying of pesticides to enhance spray buffer zones and notification practices; expanding stream buffers for salmon, steelhead, and bull trout streams; and sustaining Oregon’s critical forest products industries. Both sides agreed to drop all forestry-related initiative petitions and related litigation after passage of updated legislation addressing the areas of contention.

“Two short months ago, with the goal of creating a better future for Oregon, the state’s forest industry and major environmental groups were able to find common ground in a historic collaboration,” said Governor Brown. “Since then, all of our daily lives have changed dramatically, as our state has been dealing with the spread of COVID-19. Right now, my top priority is the safety and health of Oregonians. I am doing everything in my power to slow the spread of the virus and protect our front-line workers to keep people safe.

“Now we’re going to need to work together more than ever. I am pleased to have the partnership of industry and advocates to achieve the original goals of the memorandum of understanding, including legislation, as soon as circumstances allow for this very important work to resume.

“I, too, remain committed to our collective goals and to the long-term health of our state. Oregonians want healthy forests and fish, a vibrant forest sector, and prosperous rural communities, and I appreciate the continued collaboration to make this happen.”

Click here to see the original publication on KVAL

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Environmental groups and timber companies in Oregon, which have clashed for decades, on Monday unveiled a road map for overhauling forest practice regulations, a step that Gov. Kate Brown called “historic.”

The agreement came after the two sides quietly held meetings, facilitated by the governor’s office, in Salem and Portland over the last month to try to find common ground, instead of filing competing initiative petitions and lawsuits.

“I walked in on the first meeting, and I knew folks were serious when the timber industry folks had their shirt sleeves rolled up and enviros were in suits and ties,” Brown said at a news conference.Gov. Brown announces ‘historic’ agreement on Oregon forest management

The meetings resulted in leaders of around a dozen environmental groups, including Oregon Wild, the Audubon Society of Portland and Cascadia Wildlands, and of a dozen timber companies, including Weyerhaeuser, one of the largest forest products companies in the world, and Lone Rock of Roseburg, Oregon, signing a memorandum of understanding.

Oregon Strategy MOU (Final Executed) by Sinclair Broadcast Group – Eugene on Scribd

Oregon leads the nation in wood-products manufacturing, according to industry experts, even though environmental groups and the timber industry have been backing rival initiative petitions that seek to put measures on the ballot. They have also backed rival legislation and filed lawsuits.

Under the new agreement, both sides would complete a stand-down from pursuing changes through the initiative process, related legal actions, and legislative and regulatory proceedings.

The agreement represents a departure from 20 years of tension, said Bob Van Dyk, Oregon and California policy director for the Wild Salmon Center. He appeared with Brown at the news conference.Bob Van Dyk from environmental coalition

That animosity “results in a lack of trust, gridlock on forest policy and a growing public demand for broader reform,” Van Dyk said. “Today we’re starting a new approach … It’s a path of collaboration toward stronger conservation measures and more certainty for the timber industry.”

Greg Miller, a long-time timber industry executive and representative of the coalition of forest companies, told reporters he hopes the memorandum of understanding “sets Oregon up for the most comprehensive, forward-thinking forest policy in the nation.”

Both sides underscored that while it is a big moment, it is only a first step.

“Conservation of Oregon’s forests, and communities that live around them and rely upon them, is not guaranteed at the end of this process. It will require significant work over the next two years to modernize forest rules,” said Sean Stevens, executive director of Oregon Wild.

Under the agreement, both sides would support immediate legislation to establish helicopter pesticide application buffers, or no-direct application zones, around inhabited dwellings and schools and around streams.

Nik Blosser, Brown’s chief of staff, described in a telephone interview how the two sides came together. The seed was planted when a group of timber company CEOs met with Brown in January and asked her if she could broker a deal on all the litigation and initiative petitions.

Blosser then contacted the environmentalists, thinking that this was a long-shot effort.

“I called them and said, ‘Are you interested in sitting down and having this conversation?’ And they said, ‘Well, we’re not sure how serious they really are. And I said, ‘Well, I think they’re pretty serious, so why don’t we do one meeting and give it a try?,” Blosser recalled.

There wound up being four meetings, with five people representing each side, Blosser said. Everyone was fully engaged.

“Nobody looked at their phones, which is kind of remarkable in a meeting nowadays. Everyone was listening and everyone was acknowledging the other person talking and that what they said was sincere,” Blosser said.

The memorandum they agreed to sets up a process for overhauling the Oregon Forest Practices Act — a set of laws enacted in 1971 that made Oregon the first state to implement a comprehensive set of laws governing forest practices. It contains provisions for activities such as how timber harvests happen on private forest lands, providing riparian buffers along rivers and streams and the replanting of trees.

Both sides agreed the plan needs to be science-based, though debate is expected on what the science says, Blosser said. The aim is to arrive at a habitat conservation plan, or HCP — basically a certification from federal agencies that says the plan is consistent with the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act and is good for both species recovery while allowing maximum timber harvests agreed to in the HCP, Blosser said.

The memorandum calls for the final plan to be developed so that legislation implementing the agreements will be enacted on or before the February 2022 Legislative session.

“This agreement proves that we can build a better future for Oregonians if we work together with a willingness to compromise,” Brown said. “Healthy forests and a vibrant forestry industry are not mutually exclusive.”

A collaborative process called Forests & Fish in Washington State led to a similar outcome, with over 60,000 stream miles and 9.3 million acres of Washington forests being protected by an HCP, according to Brown’s office.

Click here to see the original publication on OPB

What has looked for months like an epic looming battle over Oregon’s forests has been called off under a new deal reached by environmental groups and logging industry players.

In an agreement announced Monday, conservation-minded groups have agreed to abandon a series of ballot measures aimed at stepped-up protections for forest waters, and at limiting aerial spraying of pesticides, among other things.

At the same time, timber industry players are planning to ditch their own ballot measures – filed in response to the environmental proposals – that would require landowners be compensated when state regulations curbed their ability to log, and alter the makeup of a state board that controls forest management policies.

The deal could result in the most significant changes to Oregon’s forest practices since the adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan in the 1990s.

“Healthy forests and a vibrant forestry industry are not mutually exclusive, and Oregonians need both for prosperous and sustainable communities,” Oregon Gov. Kate Brown said.

“The Cooperating Parties acknowledge that they have an incentive to reach a compromise on historically difficult issues without risking adverse outcomes in an election,” reads a memorandum of understanding signed by 26 groups – 13 on either side of the issue. The list includes environmental activists such as Oregon Wild, the Audubon Society of Portland, and the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, along with large timber outfits such as Stimson Lumber, Roseburg Forest Products and Weyerhaeuser.

Speaking on behalf of the forest industry coalition, Greg Miller, a former Weyerhaeuser spokesman, said the agreement would increase environmental benefits and provide certainty for the business community.

“This is the time, this is the historic moment where we can drive benefit for all Oregonians,” Miller said.

Another company signing the deal, Roseburg Forest Products, stood by its current practices and said the agreement was about setting aside differences.

“While we are confident in our current science-based forest practices, we recognize the need for a direct conversation about forest management,” spokeswoman Rebecca Taylor said. “The cooperative agreement announced today charts a path to provide greater assurances for a strong and vibrant industry and a healthy environment.”

Bob Van Dyk of the Wild Salmon Center, speaking on behalf of the environmental coalition, said the new agreement could bring Oregon up to date with environmental protections already adopted by its neighbors. Habitat conservation plans are already in place throughout forests, with the same ecology and many of the same landowners, throughout Washington state.

Oregon Wild Executive Director Sean Stevens, also a signer of the agreement, said that depends on the progress made over the next two years.

“This agreement is only a first step in a longer journey,” Stevens said. “Conservation of Oregon’s forests, and communities that live around them and rely upon them, is not guaranteed at the end of this process.”THANKS TO OUR SPONSOR:Become a Sponsor

Rather than engaging in an expensive and uncertain war to win over voters, both sides have agreed to participate in a mediated process of up to 18 months, according to the memo. The goal: to arrive at a federally approved “habitat conservation plan” for how private forests should be managed with an eye toward ensuring protection of vulnerable species and water resources.

In the meantime, timber industry players have agreed to support a bill in this year’s legislative session that would increase notification requirements for aerial pesticide spraying on private timber land, and increase buffers for such spraying around schools, homes and streams.

Aerial spraying has been a controversial practice for decades. It is a linchpin of industrial-scale forestry, as many timber owners consider spraying in the early years after a clear cut the most effective way to kill unwanted plants and regenerate a new crop of Douglas fir seedlings. It is also the subject of complaints from neighbors and environmental groups about potential drift or runoff into water. Multiple communities in Oregon’s coast range have claimed they were sickened by wayward pesticides meant to kill unwanted plants on private tree plantations.

The timber industry successfully fought additional no-spray buffers and requirements for notifying neighbors of aerial spraying during previous legislative sessions, but the industry also had indications those issues would be more vulnerable on the ballot than in the hands of lawmakers.

Voters in Lincoln County approved a ban on aerial spraying in 2016, which was later overturned in court. That was despite industry groups and other opponents of the ban outspending supporters $475,000 to $21,600.

Beyond that, the industry’s own polling also has shown that voters in coastal counties have widespread support for logging but are nonetheless “very susceptible to the idea of banning aerial pesticides,” according to a memo obtained by OPB and The Oregonian/Oregonlive through Oregon’s public records law.

The 2018 memo from the Oregon Forest & Industries Council, which represents large timber companies and many of the signatories to today’s agreement, outlined poll results from 500 likely voters in coastal Oregon.

The polling showed that, when given context about why companies use pesticides, between 55-57% of likely voters polled thought aerial spraying was “unnecessary” or “bad” and risked the spread of harmful chemicals through air and water. About a third of those polled considered the practice “necessary” or “good” for growing mature forests and supporting an important industry.

“Underlining the difficulty of this conversation,” the memo states, “voters who have immediate family employed in the timber industry or are employed themselves oppose aerial pesticides at the same rate as voters overall.”

The newly-announced deal also includes restrictions on stream-side logging in southern Oregon’s Siskiyou region, rules meant to protect fish. The region was exempted from those logging buffers, which are in place throughout the rest of the state’s coastal forests.

The mutual disarmament avoids what looked like a potentially bruising ballot fight later this year. And according to some players in the agreement, it creates a path by which Oregon could push forward protective policies long sought by environmental groups, while offering more certainty to property owners about how they can manage their land.

The agreement, brokered by the governor’s office, came together in four meetings held over the course of just two weeks, according to one participant.

While the deal calls for both sides to largely drop ballot proposals, it explicitly allows a legal fight over three of those proposals to continue.

The initiative petitions, filed with backing from the group Oregon Wild, all sought to step up protections against spraying and logging near forest waters and other sensitive areas. But all three were rejected by Secretary of State Bev Clarno, who found they were unconstitutionally overbroad.

Petitioners have challenged that opinion, and the case is currently before the Oregon Court of Appeals. The memorandum indicates the group intends to see the case “to final resolution.”

Click here to see the original publication on the Governor’s website

The memorandum of understanding will chart a new path for science-based forest management in Oregon

Salem, OR—Governor Kate Brown today announced a historic agreement between representatives from the state’s forest industry and major environmental groups to chart a collaborative course toward meaningful, science-based forest management in Oregon. The agreement takes a significant step toward a new era of cooperation, leaving behind the conflicts of the past.

“This pact proves that when we work together with a willingness to compromise, we can create a better future in Oregon,” said Governor Brown. “Oregonians want healthy forests and fish, a vibrant forest sector, and prosperous rural communities. These are not mutually exclusive goals. The conversations that brought forth this agreement, coupled with sound science, will bring certainty for everyone involved while protecting Oregon’s environment and endangered species.”

The signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) addresses three key issues. It will:

• Drive a process for Oregon to update its timber practices: For the first time, Oregon will strive for the endorsement of federal wildlife agencies, signifying that the state’s forest practices are protective of threatened and endangered species, including Oregon’s iconic salmon. Through this process, the state will seek a Habitat Conservation Plan, allowing Oregonians to continue their long tradition of working in the woods while honoring natural habitats.

• Support passage of new legislation for the 2020 session on aerial spraying of pesticides: A state-of-the-art system will build confidence with forest neighbors, who will be eligible to receive real-time notification that aerial spraying will occur. This first of its kind system will expand protected spray buffers around drinking water, homes, and schools.

• Expand forest stream buffers in the Rogue-Siskiyou region: New legislation will also expand forest stream buffers along salmon, steelhead, and bull trout streams, aligning forest practices in the area with those of the rest of western Oregon.
With this MOU, both sides have agreed that all forestry-related initiative petitions and related litigation will be dropped after the passage of the legislation this session.

“This MOU is shared recognition of the diverse benefits Oregon’s forests provide, and the need for more meaningful dialogue around forest issues across the state,” said Greg Miller, long-time timber industry executive and representative of the coalition of forest companies. “Oregon is one of the best places in the world to grow and harvest trees sustainably; we lead the nation in wood products manufacturing, and we are proud of our record of environmental stewardship.”

“Now as we move forward into a new era of cooperation and transparency, forest policy should continue to rely on the best available science,” said Miller. “The 60,000 Oregon families who work in the forest sector — indeed all Oregonians — expect that level of rigor and thoughtfulness when it comes to forest management. With this MOU, we are hopeful that we have found a pathway forward that meets those expectations and sets Oregon up for the most comprehensive, forward-thinking forest policy in the nation.”

“Today’s agreement is a critical step toward modernizing Oregon’s forest rules,” said Bob Van Dyk, Oregon policy director at the Wild Salmon Center. “Oregonians are rightfully proud of our forests and what they provide, including some of the best salmon runs in the Lower 48 and drinking water for most of the state. It’s our collective duty to make sure that a healthy timber industry doesn’t come at the expense of fish, wildlife, and public health.”

“This agreement is a genuine show of good faith from both sides,” said Van Dyk. “There’s still much work to be done for our communities and the healthy environment on which we all depend. There is a long road ahead, but this agreement is a big first step in the right direction.”

The complete MOU can be viewed here.