Everyone agrees Washington’s forests are key to helping the state reach its climate goals. Thanks to the continuous cycle of forestry, which includes the planting, growing, harvesting and manufacturing of wood products, our working forests already achieve net zero carbon emissions. They also support thousands of green jobs and prevent the conversion of forests to nonforests.
Unfortunately, the Department of Natural Resources’ carbon-offset plan for state trust lands may have the unintended consequence of enlarging the state’s carbon footprint, because it discourages harvest of Washington-grown wood. This effectively promotes wood imports and greater use of concrete and steel.
The Columbian’s April 14 “In Our View” (“Franz’s carbon-offset plan balances concerns”) characterizes preserving 10,000 acres as a “small step” but that misses the bigger picture.
Nearly half of Department of Natural Resources trust lands in Western Washington are already unavailable for sustainable timber management due to conservation plans and past policy decisions. The DNR also has policies in place to conserve old and mature forest stands.
Also unaccounted are the hundreds of thousands of acres of federally owned forest lands that are set aside for endangered or threatened wildlife species, congressionally designated wilderness areas, and other areas that are off-limits to forest management under the Northwest Forest Plan.
These lands are burning up. Nearly half of the acres burned in Washington last year burned on land protected by the U.S. Forest Service.
State trust lands are managed under modern forest practice rules and a State Lands Habitat Conservation Plan that was intended to ensure a continuous timber supply while also providing for clean water, habitat for wildlife and recreation.
These rules and regulations were developed through a public process; the Department of Natural Resources’ carbon-offset plan was not.
Just because a plan draws complaints from all sides doesn’t mean it’s balanced or good policy. There are many unanswered questions of how it will work, whether it will lead to actual carbon emission reductions, and how it will impact state trust land beneficiaries and the rural communities that are likely to be impacted through reduced jobs, economic activity and access to public services.
Impacts
In addition to generating $180 million annually for counties, schools and other community services, Washington’s forest sector depends on a continuous and predictable supply of timber from DNR trust lands to stay in business, retain workers and invest in their facilities. Without this supply, the sector will lose more of the jobs and manufacturing facilities that are necessary to manage lands and compete in a global market.
The state’s sudden path toward nonmanagement is already having an impact. Timber harvests on public working forests in Western Washington will fall by more than 26 percent in this fiscal year and may fall further in future years.
Further reducing land available for timber harvest not only hurts public services, but it also threatens Washington’s ability to produce the only building material that is renewable, requires less energy to produce, and one that actually stores carbon.
Washington’s trust lands have traditionally been among the most well-managed public forests in the West, demonstrating that it’s possible to provide sustainable, carbon-storing wood products while conserving other important forest values. For this reason, the carbon-offset plan isn’t a small step toward sustainability, but a giant leap backward.
Nick Smith is Public Affairs Director for the American Forest Resource Council, representing Washington’s forest sector.
