Logging bill is about hunting

http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2012/06/logging_bill_is_about_hunting.html

By Star-Ledger Guest Columnist

on June 23, 2012 at 6:00 AM, updated September 14, 2012 at 4:02 PM

By Sue Russell

New Jersey’s controversial Forest Harvest bill (S1085), rechristened the Forest Stewardship Bill, will allow commercial logging, or “thinning,” in state forests. The euphemism-rich measure raises questions of transparency, ripe conflicts in policy and interest, and the public trust.

In state legislatures, control over public lands, wildlife and funds is concentrated in alarmingly few partnered hands, each washing the other. Vague “stewardship” and “science” nostrums too often serve commercial agendas.

The logging bill’s sponsors — Sens. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), Donald Norcross (D-Camden) and Steven Oroho (R-Sussex) — are members of the Angler and Hunter Conservation Caucus, an arm of the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses.

Logging supporters do not disclose the fact that S1085 will increase the population of white-tailed deer. That’s why Smith has reintroduced legislation — derailed last session — to permit killing deer on forest stewardship lands by poaching methods long deemed unethical, unsporting and unsafe: killing animals directly over bait, any time of day or night, and stunning deer with lights.

The organizations advocating for S1085 are part of Teaming With Wildlife, a partnership among hunting advocacy groups, conservation organizations and hunting equipment manufacturers.

The TWW national steering committee is teeming with firearms manufacturers, including ATK Ammunition Systems, Remington Arms Inc., SigArms Corporation, the Archery Trade Association, as well as state game agencies, hunting groups, the Audubon Society and the Nature Conservancy. The latter was the subject of a

Washington Post series on its corporate associations.

Googling “habitat development” for deer will confirm that logging or thinning forests is a long-standing game management staple.

Forty scientists who signed a letter against the original legislation noted that commercial logging would “grow the deer herd even more.” The original bill — the result of “three years of stakeholder” meetings — was criticized as damaging and commercial.

Commercial logging supporters prefer to say that the bill will benefit “nongame” warblers. Warbler protection does not require commercial logging. The rub: The self-appointed TWW stakeholders relentlessly pursue deer-killing programs they claim protect “forest systems.” Now, they are lobbying for commercial legislation that “grows the herd.”

Mature, contiguous forests do not support large numbers of deer. In 1977, the Journal of Wildlife Management reported that “deer herds are being managed with ever-increasing intensity ... directed at increasing the productivity of the white-tailed deer through habitat manipulation and harvest regulation.” Nationwide, from 1975 to 1985, millions of acres were logged, burned and defoliated for commercial hunting. The majority of acreage burned and logged, wrote the Department of the Interior, benefited deer.

The public disapproves of killing animals “over bait,” a poaching practice by the Division of Fish and Wildlife for deer since the late 1990s, and ironically supported by those who decry deer damage to forests. Baiting changes tree species’ composition and holds back forest regeneration, as it concentrates deer, who continue to feed on natural browse in the area. In eastern deciduous forests, ground-nesting birds were less abundant in baiting areas. Baiting concentrates coyotes, raccoons and opossums near ground-nesting birds. It increases car accidents and the spread of wildlife diseases.

The basic fact is: Logging creates more deer. There is virtually no public demand for logging our state forests. Maximizing deer for hunter-clients, baiting and trapping beavers, and wiping out beneficial birds are examples of how the combine helps cause forest degeneration and profits from the results.

The Public Trust Doctrine establishes government as trustee over natural resources “too important to be owned.” TWW is bent on perpetuating the cozy misalliances, mismanagement and attitudes of the past century. In New Jersey, the only missing stakeholder is the public.

Sue Russell is wildlife policy specialist for the Animal Protection League of New Jersey.

Opinion: Logging in N.J. forests would grow deer population

http://www.nj.com/times-opinion/index.ssf/2012/05/opinion_logging_in_nj_forests.html

Published: Thursday, May 17, 2012

Times of Trenton guest opinion column

By Susan Russell

The controversial Forest Harvest Bill (S1085), recently rechristened the Forest Stewardship Bill, allows commercial thinning, or logging, in our state forests. The measure raises questions of transparency, coherent policy and the public trust.

In state legislatures, power over public lands, wildlife and funds is concentrated in alarmingly few hands, many of them corporate and public-private partnerships, each washing the other and dominated by the gun trade. Vague claims of “stewardship” and “science” too often serve commercial agendas.

Logging supporters do not disclose the fact that the bill will increase the number of white-tailed deer. Logging and prescribed burns are classic game management methods that stimulate deer breeding for hunting purposes.

The endearing bobwhite quail, whose tenuous numbers are faltering, is another target of the bill. Struggling to survive, this beneficial bird is shot for recreation. Only recently has the Game Council restricted its kill. In 1931, conservationist William Temple Hornaday described the bobwhite as “the most useful, social, trustful, and the most lovable” of birds. In vain, he implored hunters to “spare his life.” In 2012, we are asked to log forests not to protect the birds, in any real sense, but to enable a sharply shrinking minority to keep killing them.

Logging supporters prefer to say that the bill will benefit “non-game” (does nature discriminate?) warblers. Others have observed that warbler protection does not require commercial logging.

Forty scientists who signed a letter against the original legislation noted that commercial thinning of forests would “grow the deer herd even more.” The bill — the result of “three years of stakeholder” meetings — was criticized as damaging and commercial.

Those who stand to benefit from logging our forests are the principal “stakeholders” behind the original bill: timber, hunting, firearms and archery manufacturer front groups; state agencies; conservation groups partnered with all of the above; and private consultants and grant brokers.

Here’s the rub: The self-appointed stakeholders relentlessly pursue deer-killing programs they claim protect “forest systems.” Now they are lobbying for commercial legislation that grows the herd. Proposed amendments that would include Forest Stewardship Council guidelines will not change the fact that logging, or thinning, creates more deer.

The link between cutting trees and deer reproduction is fact. Googling “habitat development” for white-tailed deer will confirm that logging and thinning forests are long-standing game management staples. Mature, contiguous forests do not support large numbers of deer. Their dense canopies prevent the growth of plants that deer like to eat. State game departments create deer breeding range by mowing, logging, burning and planting deer-preferred crops.

Lest there be any doubt, in 1977, the Journal of Wildlife Management reported that “deer herds are being managed with ever-increasing intensity. The primary management plan has been directed at increasing the productivity of the white-tailed deer through habitat manipulation and harvest regulation.”

Nationwide, from 1975 to 1985, millions of acres were logged, burned and defoliated for commercial hunting. The majority of acreage burned and logged, wrote the Department of the Interior, benefited deer by providing food and breeding range.

It was all the more remarkable, then, when, during an April 26 public meeting, the bill’s sponsor — hunter legislative caucus member and Senate Energy and Environment Chairman Bob Smith (D-Piscataway) — would not acknowledge that thinning forests, or logging, creates more deer, and said that there was “disagreement with that premise.” At best, the chairman is ill-advised by those who stand to benefit from more deer.

To the stakeholders, the resulting “farmed” deer are utterly expendable. Partnership-backed legislation S1848, defeated last session, would have permitted killing deer on forest stewardship lands by egregious poaching methods long deemed unethical.

The public disapproves of hunting animals “over bait,” a poaching practice legitimized by the Division of Fish and Wildlife for deer since the late 1990s, and supported, ironically, by those who decry deer damage to forests. Baiting is counterproductive: In multiple studies, baiting changed forest composition of tree species and held back forest regeneration. Why? Bait sites concentrate deer, who continue to feed on natural browse in the area. In eastern deciduous forests, ground nesting birds were less abundant in baiting areas.

Baiting lures and concentrates coyotes, raccoons and opossums near ground nesting birds.

Maximizing deer populations for hunter-clients, widespread baiting, and trapping of the beaver, one of nature’s most industrious agents of forest health, are yet other examples of how unseemly gun trade and government partnerships help cause forest degeneration and profit from the results, and why S1085 should be shelved. Excluded from the stakeholder club is any organization that does not support, or opposes, commercial hunting and trapping. Less than 0.6 percent of New Jersey residents hunt. By hook, or by crook, and even as hunter numbers plummet, the ammunition, timber and gun alliance, which includes

cooperating conservation groups, is bent upon perpetuating not only their power, but the mistakes and attitudes of the past century.

The Public Trust Doctrine establishes government as trustee over natural resources “too important to be owned.” Could have fooled us. As diverse people have commented at hearings, the only missing stakeholder is the public.

Susan Russell is wildlife policy specialist for the Animal Protection League of New Jersey (aplnj.org).