Timber Industry Distorts Information to Exploit Our Forests

Tim­ber Indus­try Dis­torts Infor­ma­tion to Exploit Our Forests

- by Saman­tha Chir­il­lo, July 11, 2013. Source: Register-Guard

Swan­son sup­pos­ed­ly states just the facts regard­ing Ore­gon’s forests and indus­try, but instead dis­torts them. Swan­son is con­nect­ed to the Swan­son Group, a fam­i­ly that owns mills depen­dent on pub­lic timber.

Her bias may be expect­ed, but her name-call­ing is child­ish­ly rude. Edu­cat­ed, employed, prop­er­ty-tax-pay­ing, law-abid­ing Ore­go­ni­ans like Susan Apple­gate and Pat­ty Keene, whose June 6th guest view­point trig­gered Swan­son’s response, aren’t “extrem­ists” or “rad­i­cals.” They just don’t believe the unsup­port­ed claims the tim­ber indus­try cares for the best inter­ests of Ore­gon’s forests and people. 

Swan­son was more care­ful not to call some things what they real­ly are. Her opin­ion nev­er used the word “log­ging.” When tim­ber indus­try sup­port­ers say “man­age,” what they’re real­ly talk­ing about is log­ging. Man­ag­ing forests can be as benign as pre­serv­ing wilder­ness. When “man­age­ment” is focused on cut­ting and haul­ing away mer­chantable trees, it’s more hon­est­ly called “log­ging.”

Indus­try claims our pub­lic forests are sick and dis­eased and that they need more log­ging to make them healthy again. On the con­trary, it’s because they’ve been logged less and have larg­er, old­er, more fire-resis­tant trees that they are robust, valu­able and cov­et­ed by the tim­ber indus­try. U.S. For­est Ser­vice data shows the indus­try’s forests in Ore­gon being logged faster than they’re grow­ing. The for­est growth sur­plus Swan­son speaks of is on our lands, not theirs. What’s wrong with hav­ing a surplus?

The 86,000 Ore­go­ni­ans report­ed by Swan­son as work­ing in the “for­est indus­try” is more than twice the num­ber report­ed by the state Employ­ment Department.

Swan­son quotes oth­er “facts” from the Ore­gon For­est Resources Insti­tute. This orga­ni­za­tion is also biased heav­i­ly in favor of the tim­ber indus­try. Cre­at­ed by the Leg­is­la­ture in 1991, Ore­gon Revised Statute 526.640 says “The Ore­gon For­est Resources Insti­tute shall enhance and pro­vide sup­port for Ore­gon’s for­est prod­ucts indus­try.” The state Depart­ment of Rev­enue shows that OFRI is fund­ed direct­ly with for­est prod­ucts har­vest tax­es, ben­e­fit­ing direct­ly from increased logging.

The leg­isla­tive find­ings for estab­lish­ing OFRI say, “The state of Ore­gon rec­og­nizes that the for­est prod­ucts indus­try is one of the largest indus­tries in the state.” This is not fac­tu­al. The Employ­ment Depart­men­t’s 2013 Indus­try Employ­ment Fore­cast shows today’s tim­ber indus­try accounts for three per­cent of Ore­gon’s pay­roll employ­ment and con­tributes only two per­cent to 2020’s pro­ject­ed employ­ment. Most job growth is pre­dict­ed to be in whole­sale and retail trade, pro­fes­sion­al and busi­ness ser­vices, leisure and food ser­vice, and health and education.

OFRI’s leg­isla­tive find­ings say, “The wel­fare of the state is large­ly depen­dent on the health and vig­or of the for­est prod­ucts indus­try.” Again, not fac­tu­al. The state Depart­ment of Eco­nom­ic Analy­sis reports that today’s wood prod­ucts indus­try con­tributes only one per­cent to our Gross Domes­tic Product.

In Lane Coun­ty, Ore­gon’s biggest tim­ber pro­duc­er, the wood prod­ucts indus­try is not even one of the top 10 employ­ers. Has this indus­try achieved more employ­ment from recent log­ging increas­es? Not accord­ing to state Depart­ment of Forestry and Employ­ment Depart­ment data. Lane Coun­ty’s log­ging lev­els increased 57 per­cent from 2009 to 2011. In this same peri­od, Lane expe­ri­enced an 11 per­cent drop in wood prod­ucts employ­ment. None of our polit­i­cal lead­ers, obsessed only with increas­ing fed­er­al log­ging, have pub­licly men­tioned this obvi­ous disconnect.

The increas­ing export of unprocessed, “raw” logs, also ignored by politi­cians, may explain the disconnect.

Based on For­est Ser­vice data, begin­ning in 2009, log exports to Asia have increased steadi­ly from the North­west, par­tic­u­lar­ly from Ore­gon, which may be export­ing as much as one third of its annu­al har­vest as raw logs rather than as fin­ished lum­ber. A bil­lion board feet of raw logs were export­ed out of Ore­gon in 2011 alone. OFRI claims that there are 28 jobs cre­at­ed for every mil­lion board feet of logs Ore­gon’s work­ers process. Mul­ti­plied times a bil­lion board feet, OFRI’s inflat­ed employ­ment num­bers imply that as many as 28,000 wood prod­ucts jobs may be export­ed annually.

Lane Coun­ty is par­tic­u­lar­ly hard hit from log exports since one of the region’s largest raw log exporters, Wey­er­haeuser, is also Lane’s largest pri­vate landown­er, with about 340,000 acres. Wey­er­haeuser con­trols more forest­land in Lane Coun­ty than the BLM does. The com­pa­ny gets huge prop­er­ty tax exemp­tions on the val­ue of its stand­ing tim­ber. ORS 321.259, the leg­isla­tive find­ing grant­i­ng this exemp­tion to pri­vate for­est own­ers, says “The inter­ests of the state, its cit­i­zens and future cit­i­zens are best served by tax­ing poli­cies that encourage…millage of tim­ber prod­ucts with­in Oregon.”

Where’s the out­cry about raw log exports from Sen. Ron Wyden, Rep. Peter DeFazio, and oth­ers pro­mot­ing their agen­da to increase tim­ber sup­plies, rev­enues and jobs?

Con­trary to Swan­son’s claims, the tim­ber indus­try and its politi­cians seem to either dis­tort or ignore the facts to jus­ti­fy fur­ther exploita­tion of Ore­gon’s forests and people.

Saman­tha Chir­il­lo of Eugene is a research consultant.


Posted

in

by


EJ Communities Map

Map of Coal and Gas Facilities

We are mapping all of the existing, proposed, closed and defeated dirty energy and waste facilities in the US. We are building a network of community groups to fight the facilities and the corporations behind them.

Our Network

Watch Us on YouTube