Ruling may clear way for tighter logging rules on private lands

A federal judge's decision to consider an environmental lawsuit aimed at Oregon state forest practices may increase the pressure on state- and private-land logging.
U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown recently rejected the Oregon Department of Forestry contention that state officials need not ensure enforcement of federal endangered species protections on logging projects the agency approves.
The ruling was in response to a request by lawyers for State Forester Jim Brown that a February environmental lawsuit be dismissed. Brown reviews all state and private logging in Oregon under the Oregon Forest Practices Act.
Environmental groups said Brown has routinely violated the federal U.S. Endangered Species Act by approving clear-cut logging in northwest Oregon that leads to landslides and erosion harmful to protected coho salmon.
The ruling concerns those in the timber industry, but leaves more questions than answers.
Rick Barnes, who provides timberland consulting services for private land owners through Barnes and Associates in Roseburg, said the lawsuit is just one more attack on forest management by environmental plaintiffs.
"Private land owners have always been required to follow the Endangered Species Act. That is nothing new," he said. "But if the state is required to take action to enforce the federal law, it will increase their work load tremendously."
State laws on forest practices already require 100-foot buffer zones on each side of large fish-bearing streams above the high-water mark. Medium-size streams must have 70-foot buffers. Small streams are protected with 50-foot zones. Some thinning harvest within buffer zones is allowed under the Forest Practices Act if the volume of standing trees meets set standards.
In comparison, U.S. Forest Service requirements typically require more restrictive 150- to 300-foot riparian areas to either side of streams on federal lands, Barnes said.
The judge did not rule on whether state-permitted actions are, in fact, harming species. By refusing to dismiss the case, the judge clears the way so she can decide that question.
Conservation groups hope the federal court will eventually order the state forester to not allow logging on steep slopes, along streams and in other sensitive sites. Such a ban could affect thousands of acres of private timberlands in northwest Oregon.
"The idea that they don't have to show they are complying with the Endangered Species Act has been a pretty prominent piece of their defense, and now the judge has taken that away," said attorney Patti Goldman of Earthjustice, which represents the conservation groups.
Brown's lawyers said the lawsuit was misplaced because it's not the state's job to enforce federal law. But the judge rejected the state's arguments, saying the state forester is liable if he authorizes actions that harm endangered species.
State officials deny they are harming species.
In an April visit and presentation to Douglas Timber Operators, ODF's Brown indicated the lawsuit -- brought by the Pacific Rivers Council, the Audubon Society of Portland, the Native Fish Society and other plaintiffs -- is about putting federal regulations ahead of state law and local decision making.
"There has been no acknowledgment of the voluntary investment by forest industry and woodland owners by the federal government. Federal agencies try to accomplish everything through a regulatory structure," Brown said. "But you can't get there only through regulations."
Assistant State Forester Charlie Stone played down last week's ruling because it did not address the underlying issue of whether state-approved logging harms coho salmon.
"It was a ruling simply that she did not find the state arguments powerful enough to dismiss the case out of hand," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

* You can reach reporter Jeff Willis at 957-4218 or by e-mail at jwillis@newsreview.info.