Oregon’s Forestry Board has approved a controversial plan to increase logging on more than 630,000 acres of state forests.
The reason? More timber revenues for counties, schools and other local governments. But environmental groups say wildlife will be hurt.
State parks face cuts of up to $8.65 million. Photo from Oregon Parks and Recreation
If Measures 66 and 67 fail in next month’s special election, it could mean major reductions in how much money the state spends on monitoring pollution, protecting and restoring streams, maintaining state parks, and fighting wildfires.
These two measures raise about $733 million for state government by increasing incomes taxes on high earning Oregonians, and raising minimum taxes paid by corporations. Business groups have been fighting hard against the measures. About a month ago, Oregonian’s environmental community stepped into the fight. The Oregon League of Conservation Voters endorsed Measures 66 and 67 and warned that if they’re defeated the state’s natural resources would take a serious hit.
Now we have some actual numbers to examine that claim.
It comes from state agencies. This week, they released new data showing how they might handle budget cuts of 5% and 10%.
A few “let the reader beware” warnings.
I’m using the 10% cut numbers because in the past, agencies that handle natural resources tend to be cut deeper than other parts of state government. If the pain was shared equally, all agencies would be cutting about 5%. My experience tells me that lawmakers are likely to protect spending on education, law enforcement and human services at the expense of wildlife, parks, pollution and water quality.
Remember these are suggested cuts only. If Measures 66 and 67 are voted down, agencies’ priorities might change when faced with making actual cuts instead of hypothetical ones.
The numbers are spread out over two years. These potential cuts cover spending for 2010 and 2011.
Finally, I’m no budget expert. But I’ve done my best to look at the material online and tried to figure it all out. If I’ve made a mistake, please don’t hesitate to correct me.
-See the Legislative Fiscal Office webpage and follow the Budget Reduction Options link to do your own calculations.
With that in mind, here we go!
Parks and Recreation: Faces cuts of about $8.65 million, much of it coming from putting off maintenance at state parks. The agency warns that park facilities will look shabbier and more rundown. The department is also trying to take a lot of money out of office operations.
Forestry Department: Could lose the equivalent of 47 full-time jobs within the department and see its budget cut by about $7.8 million. Most of the money would come from fighting wildfires, including the initial attack units that have been given lots of credit for putting out wildfires before they get out of control. Dozens more temporary wildfire fighting positions would also be cut.
Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board: Probably the most important agency the public doesn’t know about. Every year OWEB funds hundreds of projects including dam removal, improving fish habitat and restoring streams and rivers. A 10% cut would mean OWEB would have about $6 million less to spend on these projects during 2010 and 2011.
Environmental Quality: DEQ would lose about $3.3 million under this scenario and the equivalent of about 15 full-time jobs. The department says efforts to monitor air and water quality would probably suffer the most. One possible casualty, an air monitoring station in either Salem or Medford.
Fish and Wildlife: This agency would have to trim about 1.9 million, with a lot of the cuts coming from the monitoring of steelhead and salmon, fish screening projects and hatchery maintenance.
Agriculture: Could lose about $979,000 with a lot of the money coming from cuts in programs to control noxious weeds, invasive species and soil and water conservation.
Welcome to our first video story produced for Natural Oregon.
Recently, we joined researcher David Wiens of Oregon State University on a field trip in the forests near Veneta, Oregon. He and his team are studying the competition between the Northern Spotted Owl and the Barred Owl, a relative newcomer to the state. We got some amazing close up views of Spotted Owls, including a fledgling. You’ll see those images in our video.
As Wiens reminds us, the loss of old growth forest habitat is still the top reason for the decline in Spotted Owl numbers. But the Barred Owl is only making things worse. When Barred Owls move in to old growth areas, the Spotted Owls are almost always driven out, never to be seen again. Where they’re going, and what’s happening to them, are just some of the questions Wiens is trying to answer.
He’s also trying to learn more about how the two species compete. Are they fighting over the same territory? Are they fighting over the same food? Do Barred Owls deserve some of the blame for the Spotted Owl decline? Or are they just taking advantage of it?
Barred Owls have the upper hand in this fight. They’re bigger, stronger and more aggressive. They’ll eat just about any small animal in the forest, including mice, voles, squirrels, fish, snails and crayfish. Native to eastern forests, they migrated across Southern Canada before invading the Pacific Northwest.
Spotted Owls are fussier eaters. They’ll travel far and wide for their preferred prey, Northern Flying Squirrels and Tree Voles. They’re also more dependent on old growth for places to nest.
The results of Wiens studies could have major implications for how old growth is managed in the Northwest. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering shooting Barred Owls to keep their numbers in check, and help Spotted Owls survive. But Wiens research may lead to non-lethal ways to control Barred Owl populations.
Wiens primary sponsor for this $850,000 research project is the U.S. Geological Society. Other agencies contributing include the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, National Park Service and the Oregon Department of Forestry. The field work wraps up by the end of summer.
