Walden's Logging Bill

Detrimental to natural forest recovery

Legislation aimed to increase controversial logging after fire and wind storms, originally passed by the House of Congress in May 2006, is all but dead in the 2007 Congress. The changed House leadership is no longer inclined to support it.

A good thing, too. The bill, the “Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act" and authored by Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), sidestepped public involvement, encouraged removal of big snags crucial to recovering wildlife, and denied protections for old growth, roadless areas, and water quality.

Other points on the failed bill

• If enacted, the Walden logging bill would have undermined protections for forests, fish, water and wildlife in order to rush logging after natural disturbance events, such as wildfires and rainstorms on national forests.
• In the bill the most basic protections for natural landscapes are missing. There are no protections for old-growth forests, roadless areas, streams or riparian areas, critical wildlife habitat, fragile soils, or other essential natural resources.
• The latest science shows that logging in forests after natural disturbances can be extremely damaging and can actually increase fire risk by leaving piles of limbs and branches on the ground. Letting trees regenerate naturally works better than logging and replanting. Bulldozers destroy naturally regenerating fragile seedlings. Logs left in place following fires or other disturbances are crucial building blocks, providing nutrients for the reemerging forest. In a recent letter, 169 scientists including some of the most prominent forest ecologists in the nation wrote to warn Congress that HR 4200 “…is misguided because it distorts or ignores recent scientific advances.”
• Logging after fires loses taxpayers money. According to a new report by scientists, a former Forest Service employee, and conservation groups, the Forest Service most often loses taxpayer money on post fire logging. It is estimated that, as of 2006, logging in the southern Oregon Biscuit fire that burned in 2002 has cost taxpayers approximately $14 million dollars.
• Community protection priorities will be misplaced should the Walden bill pass. The bill creates incentives to divert scarce agency resources away from projects intended to protect communities before wildfires may occur, and toward destructive logging projects that can delay recovery and increase fire danger.
• Forest management decisions should be based on science. The Walden bill would mandate increased logging under the guise of “restoration,” even as most scientific research says forests recover better when left alone.

The upshot for forests

The last thing a forest needs after a fire or other natural events is the help of bulldozers and chainsaws. Scientists tell us that logging after natural disturbances often harms soils and wildlife and delays forest recovery.

In addition to logging after fire,  the Walden bill encourages logging following any type of disturbance, whether wind storm, ice storm, or insect outbreak, which means it affects every forest in the United States. 

The bill found little support in Washington state and most of Washington State's Congressional representatives except Rep. Brian Baird who originally cosponsored the bill and refused to consider changes to improve it. The bill languished in the Senate at the end of 2006, and is not expected to fare well in this Congress.

Read the Eugene Register-Guard

And the Seattle P-I