Senator Looks to Congress as Biscuit Fire Talks Fail
By Michael Milstein, The Oregonian
September 21, 2004

Closed-door talks last week failed to solve disputes over logging of trees burned in Southern Oregon's 2002 Biscuit fire, raising the chances that U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., will propose legislation requiring the cutting.

It is the latest stage in a fractious debate over what to do in the aftermath of one of the largest Oregon wildfires in memory. Loggers want access to the burned wood before it loses value, but activist groups have sued to stop some cutting they say will damage fragile older forests reserved for wildlife.

Smith said if the lawsuits now holding up certain timber sales were not settled, he would seek to exempt the logging from court challenges and direct that it proceed immediately. That would put an end to delays so the timber does not deteriorate and lose value, he said.

A gag order prohibited participants in last week's talks from revealing details of the discussions. But they said there was no settlement, no plan for further meetings and that the lawsuits would continue.

A spokesman said Monday that Smith is looking at legislation likely to pass the Senate soon that he might amend to include Biscuit logging language. His draft language would also add 64,000 acres to the Kalmiopsis Wilderness in the heart of Siskiyou National Forest.

"It's a matter of finding a good legislative vehicle," said spokesman Chris Matthews.

The threat of such a move has environmental groups drawing parallels to the so-called salvage rider of 1995, which prevented activists from contesting controversial logging projects in court. It ignited bitter protests across the Northwest.

Conservation groups said even before last week's mediation that Smith would undermine the talks by pursuing similar legislation to push Biscuit logging ahead. They said his proposal assured the timber industry that cutting would continue regardless of court action or public opinion.

"What incentive is there to compromise if you're going to get everything you want anyway?" said Steve Pedery of the Oregon Natural Resources Council.

Matthews said Smith's legislation is in its early stages and is not assured. He said it's wrong to criticize the industry when "they're not the ones seeking to delay the projects."

Less than 5 percent of the 500,000 acres encompassed by the Biscuit fire would be logged under current U.S. Forest Service plans. But the size of the massive blaze means that it would represent one of the largest sales of federal timber in recent decades.

Burned timber deteriorates quickly, and the Forest Service has accelerated some logging to salvage the trees before they lose all value.

"With each day, the value and the volume decline," said Chris West of the American Forest Resource Council, a timber industry group in Portland. "The sooner Congress considers the amendment by Senator Smith, the sooner we may be able to move ahead."

Timber groups say cutting burned trees is one step, along with actions such as replanting, in restoring the charred landscape. But environmentalists say the logging targets some of the most valuable and sensitive lands, including roadless reaches and reserves designated for wildlife such as spotted owls, which prefer older trees.

Environmental groups have not contested logging on acres designated for commercial logging by the Northwest Forest Plan, a 1994 blueprint that sectioned off federal lands for different purposes. Cutting is proceeding on those lands.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.

No Salvage Rider: Smith Should Withdraw Biscuit Salvage Proposal
A Eugene Register-Guard Editorial
September 16, 2004

It's hard for parties in any dispute to negotiate a balanced, reasonable compromise when one of them has a 500-pound gorilla standing behind it.

If court-ordered mediation fails to resolve legal challenges to logging of old-growth forest reserves burned in Southern Oregon's 2002 Biscuit Fire, a key reason will be the gorilla that is Sen. Gordon Smith's threat to introduce legislation that would summarily end all existing and future legal challenges to the Forest Service's salvage plan.

There is still time for Smith to reconsider this hamfisted, rights-trampling intervention in the Biscuit dispute. The Oregon Republican should announce that he will not proceed with his proposed salvage rider in Congress and will instead let the legal process, including mediation, run its proper course free of senatorial tampering.

That's not likely to happen, of course. It will be hard for Smith to resist an opportunity to deliver such a ripe plum to timber industry interests, one they'll be sure to remember when election time rolls around.

Smith's rider would rule out any and all administrative and legal challenges to Biscuit Fire salvage sales. It would declare that the final environmental impact statement issued earlier this year by the Forest Service "shall not be subject to judicial review by any court of the United States."

If approved by Congress, the rider would prevent anyone from appealing plans to log in roadless areas, old-growth reserves - or to appeal logging that might affect scenic rivers or vulnerable salmon runs.

The rider includes a sop that already has been dangled by the Forest Service - a proposal to set aside 64,000 acres in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Park as part of the Kalmiopsis Wilderness. This proposal is a sprig of fresh parsley on a rancid steak and does nothing to make the rider more palatable.

Smith's proposal came just before representatives from the timber industry, environmental groups and federal agencies were scheduled to begin mediation today in an effort to resolve litigation involving the salvage plan.

Even though Smith says he'll wait to see if mediation produces what he deems desirable results, his offer has undermined the process before it begins. Why should timber industry officials now negotiate in good faith with other parties at the table if they know Smith stands ready to give them the entire salvage plan tied up in a pink ribbon and free of any threat of appeal?

In a hearing Tuesday, Smith warned "radical environmentalists" that he will do everything in his power to move the salvage plan forward. Putting the inflammatory and outdated characterization of environmentalists aside, Smith seems to be suggesting that the entire salvage plan is being held up in court. That's not the case. Last week, a federal appeals court blocked six timber sales totaling 47 million board feet on 6,600 acres in old-growth forest reserves until a lawsuit brought by environmentalists is decided. The injunction does not apply to timber sales totaling 9 million board feet in matrixed lands - those designated for logging under the Northwest Forest Plan.

Smith's move fails to recognize the legitimate concerns of environmentalists, scientists and even the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Environmental Protection Agency, which have all argued against post-fire logging in old-growth reserves.

If Smith is seeking someone to blame for delaying the salvage logging, he might look in a mirror. After the Biscuit Fire, the Forest Service developed plans to log only within matrixed areas but then yielded to pressure from Smith and others to develop a new plan that included large-scale logging in protected areas such as old-growth reserves and roadless areas.

Smith's rider also flies in the face of public opinion. Tens of thousands of Oregonians submitted formal comments during the salvage planning process, and more than 90 percent opposed the Forest Service's plans as excessive.

Before Smith's intervention, there was hope that mediation might produce a more acceptable recovery plan, one that scales back or, better yet, eliminates plans to log in old-growth reserves and roadless areas.

Smith should immediately withdraw his rider proposal and let the mediation process proceed free of such radical interference.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.