Science of owl plan disputed

Old growth - Scientists and Democrats ask the Interior secretary to initiate a new study for spotted owl habitat

More than 100 scientists and 23 congressional Democrats said Tuesday that a federal blueprint for saving the spotted owl ignores and may distort scientific evidence about the threatened bird while freeing more of its old growth habitat for logging.

The scientists and lawmakers from around the country each sent letters to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne on Tuesday asking him to throw out the draft recovery plan for the spotted owl and start over with a new team of objective scientists.

They cited peer reviews of the government's plan by outside scientists who said it minimizes the importance of old growth forests to the owl.

Allegations of political interference and distorted science have dogged the recovery plan from the start. Conservationists who helped draft it said that high-level political appointees in the Bush administration manipulated the process.

The plan is important now because it could open the door for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management to accelerate logging on federal land in Oregon's Coast Range, which would please the timber industry and rural counties that depend on timber revenue.

A key dispute over the spotted owl document hinges on how much and how strictly old growth forests should be protected as habitat for the reclusive bird. The 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, developed by the Clinton administration, outlined millions of acres of older forest reserves for the owl and other species, including salmon.

But the new plan includes an option without fixed reserves that has many critics seeing it as a backdoor attempt to dismantle the Northwest Forest Plan. It also suggests that owls could use younger forests that may not contain old growth.

"We knew we were in an area that was new, and we were pushing it," said David Wesley, deputy regional director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which drafted the plan. He said the agency will revise the plan to address the criticisms and may seek more outside peer reviews to make sure it's on the right track.

The spotted owl also faces rising threat from the aggressive barred owl, which has spread from the Eastern United States into the Northwest in recent decades. Spotted owl numbers are dropping especially fast in Washington, where barred owls have been present the longest.

The Tuesday letter to Kempthorne from scientists, including several in Oregon and Washington, argues there is no scientific basis for doing away with fixed reserves. It also says the effect of the barred owl on the spotted owl is not clear.

The scientists also asked Kempthorne to review the owl plan to determine whether high ranking officials tampered with the science involved.

The 23 members of Congress who released their letter at the same time and held a telephone press conference Tuesday raised many of the same concerns. They also asked Kempthorne to suspend any forest management decisions, such as new direction for lands in Oregon's Coast Range.

"We are especially concerned that the peer review has produced unanimous findings that the draft recovery plan is not based on the best available science and will not ensure recovery of the species," they wrote.

Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., organized the letter. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., was the only Oregon lawmaker to sign it.

Inslee said Tuesday that the owl plan would resurrect logging battles of more than a decade ago.

"It has the capacity to ignite a whole new generation of timber wars in the Northwest, and that's the last thing we need," he said.

His office also released an August letter from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which said measures under the Northwest Forest Plan had helped improve water quality in Oregon's rivers and streams. Michael Gearheard, of the EPA's Office of Water and Watersheds in Seattle, said changes introduced by the new spotted owl plan "could delay or even reverse this positive trend."

"That would be a big step backwards for water quality in Oregon," he wrote to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which drafted the plan.

Michael Milstein: 503-294-7689; michaelmilstein@news.oregonian.com