No, this is not a repeat. But as the state Department of Natural Resources plans to harvest old-growth timber in Clark County, the issues sound familiar.
The agency is proposing the harvest of 156 acres on five parcels within the historic Yacolt Burn area. The acreage provides habitat for federally protected northern spotted owls, but a report from the Department of Natural Resources says the harvest will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment.
The mere mention of spotted owls likely resonates with many residents, calling to mind a debate that dates to the 1980s. Some four decades ago, efforts to protect the endangered species — and multiple court rulings — contributed to a sharp decrease in logging throughout the Northwest. Bumper stickers such as “Save a logger, eat an owl,” were a common sight.
So, it is not surprising that a proposal to log the old-growth forests that are the owls’ primary habitat would raise hackles. “It just signals a terrible direction for the Department of Natural Resources to be targeting these last, oldest forests, especially when the department itself has identified this a known spotted owl nesting habitat,” Joshua Wright, a Yacolt resident and youth activist with the Legacy Forest Defense Coalition of Washington, told The Columbian.
Officials with the Department of Natural Resources have said that their lands include adequate habitat for the spotted owl, allowing them to harvest what are deemed to be excess old-growth trees.
Judging from decades of history, the issue is likely to wind up in court. But it also provides an opportunity to assess the plight of the northern spotted owl, logging policies and forest management.
Efforts to protect the spotted owl have had limited success. While the harvest of old-growth forests has been limited, the species’ population has continued to decline for a variety of reasons.
One of those reasons is the invasive barred owl, which aggressively leaves the smaller spotted owls unable to compete for food and habitat. U.S. wildlife officials are considering a controversial plan to systematically kill up to 470,000 barred owls over a three-decade period in an attempt to preserve the spotted owl. As The Columbian wrote editorially earlier this year: “Rather than focusing on a proposal that might or might not work, policymakers should work on restoring healthy forests and building lush habitat for whichever species reside there.”
Indeed, forest health should be the focus of any harvest plan. And as HealthyForests.org writes: “Old-growth trees often have expansive root systems that help to hold moisture in the soil, and trees’ foliage helps keep forests shaded and temperatures cooler on the ground.”
That argues in favor of preserving old-growth forests whenever possible. But part of the Department of Natural Resources’ mission is to generate revenue, which has amounted to $200 million annually in recent years. That revenue benefits public schools and municipal governments.
As Clark County Council Chair Gary Medvigy wrote this week in a letter to residents, the department has been “a great partner on revenue generation for our schools by managing these stands for harvest pursuant to state law. I would like the council to keep that positive relationship.”
Strong arguments can be made in favor of and in opposition to the proposed harvest. But having professionals to weigh those arguments and act in the best interest of Washington lands and communities is the very reason our state has a Department of Natural Resources.
