FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Promise or Peril for Northwest Forests in Economic Stimulus Package?

Regions forests could see increased restoration if funds are used wisely

As the Congress debates an economic stimulus package, Northwest forests could benefit.

Portland, Ore—This week the US House of Representatives debates a sweeping economic stimulus package that includes nearly $2 billion in funds for projects on US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public lands. The bill—HR.1—outlines funding increases for projects ranging from road decommissioning to trail maintenance and fish passage improvements to biomass development. With large concentrations of federally managed land in the Pacific Northwest, the region could see a large influx of federal funding upon passage of a stimulus bill.

“By investing in economic stimulus projects that address failing logging roads and mudslide risks, restore salmon streams, and enhance wildlife habitat we can both create jobs and restore the health of our publicly-owned lands,” said Steve Pedery, Conservation Director with the non-profit organization Oregon Wild. “But, the big question is whether or not Congress will give the Forest Service and BLM clear direction so that these funds are not misspent.”

Descriptions of the funding increases for the Forest Service and BLM take up only three pages in a 647-page bill. The text points to “priority road, bridge, and trail repair or decommissioning, critical deferred maintenance projects, facilities construction and renovation, hazardous fuels reduction, and remediation of abandoned mine or well sites.” However, the bill does little to explain how such projects should be carried out. Nor does the bill identify previously designed projects that could move forward with the new funds.

“With the amount of money being proposed, federal land managers could do a lot of great restoration work,” added Jonathan Jelen, Old-Growth Campaign Coordinator with Oregon Wild. “But we’ve seen in the past that a big Forest Service budget isn’t always going to be a good thing for the forest or for the public. Congress really needs to give clear direction on the types of projects that are in line with what taxpayers want their money spent on.”

A large portion of the increased forest spending would come under the title “Wildland Fire Management.” This section points to “cooperative forest health projects” that can help to restore forestlands while also protecting the largest, oldest, and most fire resistant trees. This sort of collaborative work has taken root in Oregon and across the Northwest and promises to offer an alternative to the forest management conflicts of the past. One of the longstanding examples of this type of stewardship is found on Oregon’s Siuslaw National Forest, where forest restoration projects have been wildly successful in avoiding conflict and producing wood products.

“Congress would do well to steer these new funds towards non-controversial projects that have been shown to work in places like the Siuslaw National Forest,” concluded Pedery. “As we rebuild America, it makes sense to protect and restore the wild places that make our country so special.”

*See Title VIII of HR.1 for specific legislative language pertaining to the US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management.

###