Conservation groups propose solution for expiring safety net

Many proposals have been made for solving timber-dependent counties’ woes when safety net funding is expected to run dry in June, but the latest comes from environmental groups.

Drafted mainly by Western Oregon conservation groups, including Roseburg-based Umpqua Watersheds, the Western Oregon Old-Growth Protection and Rural Investment Fund would draw $98 million annually for counties made up of Oregon & California timber lands until the fund is depleted.

The proposal calls for transferring management of Bureau of Land Management lands in Western Oregon to the U.S. Forest Service and the creation of a one-time endowment for the support of education, public safety and other county programs.

Conservation groups say the transfer will save approximately $50 million a year in federal funding by reducing land managerial duties in BLM offices. In the proposal they point to a 1985 Reagan administration study that found such a transfer would save $45 million to $64 million.

The proposal goes on to say it “would be possible to achieve approximately 56 percent of the historic O&C counties’ funding level of $98 million annually, merely by the administrative savings that result (from) transferring Western Oregon BLM lands to the Forest Service.”

The endowment will be created by the cost savings from the transfer and a one-time contribution of $300 million from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund

Penny Lind, executive director of Umpqua Watersheds and one of the recommendation’s six main collaborators, said the proposal has been sent to congressional lawmakers.

“I don’t know what kind of response we’ll get from Congress,” she said last week.

So far, none of Oregon’s congressmen have commented on the proposal or said they have reviewed it.

Rep. Peter DeFazio’s press secretary, Danielle Langone, said her boss is solely concentrating on a one-year extension of the timber safety net before working on a long-term solution.

“That’s all we’ve been focusing on,” Langone said.

Congress has failed to reinstate the seven-year-old timber safety net, or Secure Rural Schools and Self-Determination Act, despite Oregon’s congressional delegation’s efforts.

The safety net, which compensates counties for lost logging on BLM and U.S. Forest Service lands, was computed based on a traditional average of annual timber receipts and meted out in payments to timber-dependent communities.

Douglas County and other O&C counties have split timber proceeds 50-50 with the BLM, which manages approximately 2.6 million acres in Western Oregon, more than 2 million of which are O&C lands.

On the other side of the timber-receipts coin, national forests returned to counties about 25 percent of gross sales during peak logging years. The national-forest side of the timber safety net was based on those peak years.

When the timber safety net expires, counties will still receive 25 percent of current logging revenues on national forests.

The timber safety net has pumped about $2 billion into Oregon and other states hurt by rules and regulations that restricted logging in the early 1990s.

Douglas County stands to lose about $53 million annually with the expiration of the safety net. That money goes to education, county operations and Title II and Title III forest programs.

Douglas County is the largest receiver of O&C funds with more than 600,000 O&C acres in its boundaries.

It currently receives about $3 million in O&C receipts annually not tied to the timber safety net.

There are 18 O&C counties in Western Oregon. In the late 19th century, Congress offered approximately every other square-mile of land in a 60-mile wide swath from Portland to the California border to the first railroad company to build a rail line in the corridor. The statute called for the lands to later be sold to settlers.

But most of the lands were never sold.

Congress took the lands back and in 1937 enacted the O&C Lands Act. The act called for management of public lands, with logging revenues going to counties affected by the loss of private lands and tax-based possibilities.

Because O&C lands have a strict mandate for management, and because conservation groups consider the BLM staff to be “old-growth logging advocates,” their proposal calls for all BLM lands to be transferred to the Forest Service, which is perceived to be more protective of old-growth forest.

Lind said the intent is to preserve old-growth forest that remains on BLM lands and thin the rest on a rotational basis.

Tree stands are generally considered old growth once they reach an age of 80 years or older.

The proposal says the “Forest Service of today generally concentrates on logging trees from second growth or fire-suppressed forests and is beginning to restore damaged watersheds and generally stays away from logging old-growth forests.”

BLM has not commented on the proposal.

Cheryl Walters, spokeswoman for the Umpqua National Forest, said the Forest Service is reviewing the proposal.

“We’ve shared it with other folks in the Forest Service and we’re waiting to see what the reaction to it is,” Walters said.

The proposal says the transfer would dissuade O&C counties “from being cheerleaders for clear cuts.”

Jim Geisinger, executive vice president of Associated Oregon Loggers Inc., which represents more than 1,100 loggers and businesses in Oregon, said the organization would not support the proposal. He added that it is also a proposal for Western Oregon and not other counties in the nation affected by logging cutbacks.

“It’s not a solution to the bigger problem,” Geisinger said.

Besides Umpqua Watersheds and Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Cascadia Wildlands Project, Oregon Wild, American Lands and the National Center for Conservation Science & Policy also collaborated on the proposal.

Vaile said the proposal is not yet finalized.