
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, March 25, 1992                   TAG: 9203250360
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-8   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: ROGER P. SCOTT
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CAN HAVE SPOTTED OWL, LOGGING TOO

AS ONE WHOSE job responsibilities include supplying wood to the Roanoke Valley's largest mill-work manufacturer, all information about the spotted-owl controversy in the Pacific Northwest is of great interest to me. An article on your Commentary page (March 3) by Liza Field promoted the thesis that a choice must be made between timber and owls.

This is, at the least, very questionable. Ample evidence exists that proper forest management techniques can permit our feathered friends to flourish without disrupting the supply of timber.

This, unfortunately, doesn't satisfy the preservationist lobby of the environmental movement. They have publicly admitted that the spotted owl is merely a surrogate to achieve their goal to stop logging activities on all government forest lands.

The preservationist minority can probably be best described as the ecological equivalent of the Flat Earth Society. They refuse to recognize certain basic scientific facts. They do not seem to understand that wood is a renewable source.

Trees do not live forever. Once they die they are of no use to anyone, and in fact harm the atmosphere by producing carbon dioxide through combustion or decay. Every year, thousands of acres of forest lands are lost to forest fires, typically started by lightning striking dead timber.

Although it is not generally realized, the majority of the forest land in the United States is owned by the federal government. All sales of timber from these lands include a contractual obligation, that the purchaser replant the land with a suitable mixture of seedlings. So logging of government lands does not put our national heritage in jeopardy, as has been claimed by the preservationists.

Closer to home, the same preservation lobbyists who spawned the spotted-owl controversy are vigorously lobbying to reduce logging in the George Washington National Forest by approximately 50 percent, to 27 million board feet per year.

According to government estimates, approximately 83 million board feet are lost every year to fire, disease, etc., and new growth amounts to about 337 million board feet per year. It is obvious that logging can proceed at many times the levels requested by the preservationists without endangering the George Washington National Forest.

One other consideration needs to be addressed. What are the cost implications of reduced logging activity?

The cost of industrial grades of wood from the Pacific Northwest has already risen appreciably since last year. Dimension lumber, used to build houses, has risen more than 25 percent in the past month.

These trends can be expected to continue as long as supply is restricted by reduced logging activity. If we are already seeing softwood costs rising at an alarming rate during a period when housing starts are at a low ebb, what will happen when housing starts return to normal levels? It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to predict shortages and much higher prices.

The 33,000 jobs already lost due to spotted owl-related logging restrictions may seem remote to people living outside the Pacific Northwest. The resulting increase in wood costs, however, affects us all. Maybe it is time for sober assessment by the public of all the factors involved.

Roger P. Scott is vice president of manufacturing at MW Manufacturers in Rocky Mount.

by CNB