Plan caps two years of work by Walden; Smith calls bill a priority
By Peter Sachs / The Bulletin
WASHINGTON - To the delight of Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., and the
frustration of several environmental groups, a solid majority of the
U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a bill that
would let forest managers act faster after wildfires to salvage
timber.
The 243-182 victory culminated more than two years of work for Walden, who amassed almost 150 cosponsors and said he wrote 50 drafts of the legislation.
Walden's bill now moves to the Senate, where Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., introduced a companion bill in November. Smith said Wednesday that passing the salvage bill in the Senate is one of his top priorities.
Walden's legislation will allow federal forest managers to make broad plans for cutting down dead and burned trees.
Then when a fire hits, it would be easier to implement the plan. That way, forest managers can assess damaged areas faster - within 30 days. Under existing policies, the review process can take from several months to as many as three years in some cases.
"In a post-fire situation, the sooner that you make decisions about what the best courses of action are to help a landscape recover, the better," said Bill Anthony, Sisters district ranger for the Deschutes National Forest.
The Congressional Budget Office, which reviews the financial impact of all legislation, found that the timber bill would cost $5 million to put into effect in the first year. But between 2007 and 2011, it would save the government about $21 million by boosting revenues from timber sales.
Environmentalists and some House members have objected to Walden's bill, saying it would damage ecosystems and habitats and give timber companies a new way to exploit forests.
"There's a trust factor there," said Timothy Ingalsbee, a representative of a group of wildland firefighters, based in Eugene. "The Forest Service in particular has a long history of abusing its discretion in the service of the timber industry."
But Ranger Anthony disputed that "we have land stewardship goals in mind all the time."
In the House debate, Walden insisted enactment of his bill "doesn't mean we're going to harvest more trees, necessarily."
After the debate, he said "I suppose there might be more interest," in post-fire logging.
Walden said he has spoken informally with about 10 senators, and all of them expressed support for the bill.
He was uncertain if the law would take effect in time for this year's fire season, which generally begins in June. But both Walden and Smith were hopeful that it could get through the Senate quickly.
Many House members were skeptical about Walden's approach.
"We need to spend more time learning about and debating this issue before we act," said Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif.
Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., a vocal opponent of the bill, said the proposal is redundant.
"The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management have plenty of existing authorities" to log quickly, Udall said.