For 35 years the federal Clean Water Act had properly governed the use of forest roads. That is, until the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals coughed up a bizarre ruling in 2011. A three-judge panel for the San Francisco court ruled that water runoff from forest roads must be regulated the same as runoff from factories, industrial parking lots and even sewage treatment plants. That meant forestland owners and logging companies would have to go through the lengthy and costly process of obtaining pollution discharge permits.Northwest politicians — Republicans and Democrats alike — understandably responded with outrage.
Fortunately, this contentious issue was set back upon its logical path Wednesday by the U.S. Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court ruling. Forest roads will be managed as “non-point sources,” as they were for three-plus decades under the Clean Water Act.
It’s important to understand the breadth of opposition to the 9th Circuit Court’s misguided ruling two years ago. As we pointed out in an editorial last year, 45 House Republicans, 17 House Democrats and President Barack Obama had supported the traditional forest roads regulations.
Among those were a Republican congresswoman from Camas, Jaime Herrera Beutler, and a Democratic congressman from Oregon, Kurt Schrader. Both had led the timber industry’s cause as it advanced to the highest court in the land. And now both are vowing to pass legislation that will leave no doubt about governing runoff on forest roads. Herrera Beutler said last week in a written statement: “Until we’ve put clear protections into law, forest roads are still susceptible to job-killing federal regulations that simply aren’t necessary to protect our forests and waterways.”
