SUPPORTING OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND 1998 DEFINITION OF GREATEST PERMANENT VALUE
This petition had 238 supporters
ASKING TILLAMOOK COUNTY COMMISIONERS TO SUPPORT THE 1998 DEFINITION OF GREATEST PERMANENT VALUE: "HEALTHY, PRODUCTIVE, AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST ECOSYSTEMS THAT OVER TIME AND ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE PROVIDE A FULL RANGE OF SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT TO THE PEOPLE OF OREGON" (ORS 530.050)
WHAT IS A FOREST WORTH? The Linn County Class Action Law suit forces us to ask this question. The suit claims that the Board of Forestry mismanaged State forest land and owes the counties 1.4 billion dollars in back payment for trees they failed to harvest. The major purpose of the State Forests, the suit claims, is to provide revenue. Environmental and recreational “values,” it says, have undermined this purpose. By participating in this law suit, Tillamook County is assuming that timber harvest can be dramatically increased with no harm to the environment.
BACKGROUND: The State Board of Forestry was directed in 1941 to manage the lands “so as to secure the greatest permanent value of the forest lands to the state.” In the 90’s Oregon Department of Forestry actively promoted a management plan they called “Structure Based Management” which aimed at achieving a diverse stand across the landscape that they hoped would replicate the health and regenerative ability of the native forest. Integral to this approach was an analysis of the existing forest and landscape. Citizens were encouraged to comment on the plan. Many of us were involved in this discussion. Two scientific reviews were completed. The 1941 law which could be interpreted in multitude ways was subsequently amended in 1998 and the phrase “permanent value” was defined more specifically to include watershed protection, erosion control, and recreation. (Statute OAR 629-035-0020 ).
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF GREATEST PERMANENT VALUE? As provided in ORS 530.050, “greatest permanent value” means healthy, productive, and sustainable forest ecosystems that over time and across the landscape provide a full range of social, economic, and environmental benefit to the people of Oregon.
These benefits include, but are not limited to:* sustainable and predictable production of forest products that generate revenues; *properly functioning aquatic habitats for native fish; *habitats for native wildlife; *productive soil, and clean air and water; *protection against floods and erosion; and *recreation.”
HOW MUCH DOES THE STATE CURRENTLY HARVEST? The current State plan tries to strike a balance among many values—but leans strongly toward timber production. The current plan allows extensive clear-cutting (55%); even the oldest forests are not excluded from this—as evidenced by the recent clear-cutting of the 250 acre irreplaceable Homesteader forest along the Nehalem River. Another 18% includes thinning and road construction. Approximately 27 % is currently off limits—either too steep, too rocky, or home to threatened and endangered species.
HOW WOULD THE LAW SUIT AFFECT US IF IT SUCCEEDS? If this lawsuit succeeds, it will redefine the “value” of a forest, and likely lead to drastic increases in industrial style logging—more clear-cuts, more spraying. We already have one of the weakest Forest Protection Acts in the Northwest and minimal protection for our forest land and streams. An example in point, the State was denied Federal grant money this year because of failure to meet the standards for clean water in our streams.
CONCLUSION: We support the 1998 amendment to the Oregon Law that provides a balanced and scientific evaluation of the state forests for the best uses that benefit all—longterm. It is shortsighted and scientifically unfounded to promote more timber harvest, especially with the widespread clear-cutting in the county by the timber industry. We know more now about the environmental impact of these practices than we did when the initial agreements between county and state were made. The legal amendments defining “greatest permanent value” clearly state that the “value” of a forest is broader than revenue from timber harvest.
We the residents and friends of Tillamook County ask the Tillamook County Commissioners to opt out of the Linn County Class Action Suit and to support the 1998 definition of "Greatest Permanent Value":
Today: gwendolyn is counting on you
gwendolyn Endicott needs your help with “PETTION ASKING TILLAMOOK COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO SUPPORT THE 1998 DEFINITION OF GREATEST PERMANENT VALUE”. Join gwendolyn and 237 supporters today.