WOPR Withdrawal Challenged

On September 8, a legal challenge to the Obama Administration’s decision not to implement the BLM’s Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR) was filed by the Douglas Timber Operators, the Carpenters Industrial Council and AFRC members, C&D Lumber, Seneca Jones Timber, and Swanson Group Manufacturing, in federal district court in Washington, D.C. The action challenges Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar’s July 16 decision to “withdraw” the WOPR. The WOPR, which took five years to complete, went through full public review and comment under the requirements of the Forest Land Policy and Management Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. The lawsuit is based on the fact that there is no authority in any of these laws for the officials of a new Administration to simply “withdraw” plans. AFRC has recently taken a similar position in litigation related to the 2008 spotted owl recovery plan and critical habitat designation.

The lawsuit is yet another chapter in efforts to enforce the purpose of the O&C Act which mandates sustained yield timber production on 2.1 million acres of land, benefitting 18 Oregon counties and countless timber dependent communities and workers. AFRC was among the plaintiffs in a 1994 lawsuit which resulted in a settlement agreement in 2003 by which the BLM agreed to undertake the plan revisions and to complete them by December 31, 2008. Prior to completing the WOPR, the BLM held over 170 public meetings and received 29,500 public comments. Five federal agencies and 10 state agencies were formally involved in the process. The WOPR calls for an annual timber harvest of 502 million board feet of the 1.2 billion board feet grown annually on the 2.6 million acres on the Salem, Eugene, Roseburg, Medford, and Coos Bay Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District. With full implementation, the plan would support 9,036 jobs. /Ann Forest Burns

QLG Update

Following a decade of frustration, and little management occurring on these national forest lands, there has finally been some positive movement in the courts that affect both fire salvage and the
regular timber sale program within the Quincy Library Group (QLG) forests. The QLG area was designated under the Herger-Feinstein Quincy Library Group Act of 1999 on the Lassen National Forest, Plumas National Forest and Sierraville District of the Tahoe National Forest. The most positive action has been a court decision to allow the logging of the Moonlight and Antelope Complex fires, which burned in 2007. In 2008, a subsequent roadside hazard sale was appealed. The Plumas Forest Supervisor withdrew her decision and incorporated the roadside hazard salvage portion into a larger EIS that covered the tractor, skyline and helicopter units to be treated. A new decision was released this July which included an Emergency Situation Determination supported by the Washington Office that allowed the immediate advertisement and selling of sales within 7 days of the signing of the decision. This decision was immediately appealed and a preliminary injunction requested.

Five separate salvage sales had been advertised, but only two sold within the shortened advertisement timeframe. One sale was pulled the day of bid because of an error and two other sales had no bids. Due to the injunction request and the court acknowledging it, the first two sales were not immediately awarded. One sale was reworked and re-advertised, and the two sales with no bids were also reworked and re-advertised. All three re-advertised sales sold on the second auction.

On August 20, Judge Damrell of the Eastern District Court of California, ruled in favor of the Forest Service and awarded the sales. Judge Damrell relied heavily on the Winters Decision in denying all the complaints made by the plaintiffs, Earth Island Institute. However, they immediately requested another stay which was also denied by Judge Damrell. This action has released approximately 120 million board feet (mmbf) of fire salvage in the five sales. It is still doubtful that all of it will be removed because of the timeframe since the fire and the amount of deterioration in the timber.

In a second case, the Champs project on the Lassen was also litigated and the plaintiffs were upheld on their complaint. However, there have been positive steps taken by the Lassen to reverse that decision. The Forest Supervisor made an immediate request to the court through a Motion to Amend the Judgment, which clarified for the court where the agency felt the court had made an error in its interpretation relative to the Stand Density Index used in the EIS. If the court accepts the motion and reviews the clarifying declaration, the Champs project could be released and the two sales that were scheduled to sell this fiscal year and one sale for FY10 could be re-advertised.

The last and possibly most important ruling for the QLG involves a decision out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In that opinion, the court finally addressed their earlier ruling relative to the Sierra Nevada Framework 1 vs. 2. They provided another opinion and turned it back to Judge England and the District Court. Judge England had tentatively set a September 10 hearing date but has since moved it to October 1. The Regional Office had requested several forests to release sales that had been on an informal “hold” list under the threat of litigation by Sierra Forest Legacy (SFL). However, SFL did file a motion for preliminary injunction to stop all those projects once the court date was set back to October 1. As a result, those projects were again put on hold. It is hopeful that Judge England will provide a favorable decision in this case and millions of board feet of timber and biomass will be put back into the program. /Bill Wickman

Click the PDF below to read the complete newsletter.

AFRC Newsletter: 9/11/09