Heed science in future forest plans

Corvallis Gazette Times weighs in on the recent publication of the BLM Science Team report that questions the scientific soundness of the WOPR.

Environmentalists, sportsmen’s groups and others have been highly critical of the Bush administration’s plan to ramp up logging in the federal forests of western Oregon.

But outspoken activists aren’t the only ones finding significant fault with the Bureau of Land Management’s Western Oregon Plan Revision.

A team of scientists representing several state and federal agencies convened to advise the BLM on the plan has concluded that WOPR — also known as “Whopper” for its acronym — just doesn’t pass scientific muster.

According to a report by the team of scientists, WOPR suffers some critical problems. The team’s review, which examined all resources affected by WOPR, including wildlife, water, timber and socioeconomics, determined that the plan overestimates the amount of habitat that would be left for fish and wildlife and underestimates the environmental impacts of the proposed level of logging; that it used computer models without verifying accuracy, failed to incorporate social and scientific uncertainty into assumptions; and that it failed to utilize the best available science in its analysis.

And what did BLM officials do with this report from the scientists charged with advising the agency on WOPR? They essentially sat on it until an Oregon congressman called them out on the matter last week.

U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio, the Democrat who represents Oregon’s Fourth District, lambasted BLM for the way it handled the scientists’ report.

“I am shocked that the BLM appears to have quietly sat on the findings from its own science team,” DeFazio said. “Given the science team took issue with much of the findings in the WOPR, the BLM leaves the impression that it didn’t want this report to be widely known anytime soon.”

The WOPR is the result of an out-of-court settlement between the Bush administration and a timber industry group that brought a lawsuit claiming that the 1937 Oregon and California Act, which makes timber harvest a priority in federal forests in the two states, has not been appropriately considered in the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, which itself was created to resolve a lawsuit over habitat for salmon the northern spotted owl.

WOPR proposes big changes in forest management policies for public lands in 17 western Oregon counties, including Benton County. Among the most significant changes are increases in clear-cutting in the management of old growth forests. The plan’s bottom-line objective is to increase timber harvest revenues from federal forest lands.

DeFazio followed his rebuke with something of a threat: “If WOPR cannot stand under its own weight, it is time for Congress to step in and provide clear direction for these forests.”

That might not be a bad idea. But whether it’s Congress or some other entity providing the direction, we hope they will heed rather than hide the science that should guide management of our forest resources.