Bangor Daily News Bangor, ME - 1/20/00 Environmental reality Chad Hanson Robert O. Voight (BDN, Jan. 14) would have us believe the sky is falling. Like many timber industry supporters before him, he makes dire predictions of the economic calamity he believes will result if forest protection advocates are successful. He points to the Pacific Northwest, claiming that ''tens of thousands'' of jobs were lost due to logging restrictions for the protection of the northern spotted owl, which he asserts was never really endangered (despite the fact that the owl's populations have been declining by more than 4 percent each year during the last decade). As the Northwest goes, so will Maine, says Voight. The reality is that he is absolutely right - just not in the way he expects. Between 1979 and 1989 in the Pacific Northwest, during peak logging levels, timber employment in Oregon and Washington fell by about 20,000 timber workers, according to an exhaustive 1997 study conducted by the University of Wisconsin. The study found that the culprit was not environmental protections, but industry automation and the loss of old-growth forests due to logging itself. The vast majority of the mill closures and timber job losses occurred before logging restrictions to protect the northern spotted owl and other forest species began in 1989. What's more, a 1995 study by dozens of the Northwest's most prominent economists found that, between 1988 and 1994, as federal logging levels were declining, the number of jobs in the Pacific Northwest increased by 940,000, and earnings rose by 24 percent. The report found that many of the new jobs were being attracted by the prospects of enhanced environmental quality in the region. Even the most ''timber-dependent'' communities were reporting a net increase in jobs, according to a 1994 investigation by The New York Times. Part of this trend has been due to the positive effects of forest protection on the recreation economy. The jobs and economic contribution created by hiking, camping, fishing, nature photography and other outdoor recreation activities on public lands dwarf the contributions of timber. According to Forest Service figures, recreation, hunting and fishing in national forests now contribute 31.4 times more income to the nation's economy, and create 38.1 times more jobs, than logging on national forests. There are now more than 800 million visitor days on the national forest system annually. But logging destroys the very basis of the recreation economy: wildlands. Voight criticizes environmental advocates for saying that the timber industry is decimating American forests, but offers no evidence to the contrary. As for me, I can only speak from my personal experience. In 1989 I hiked the length of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail from Mexico to Canada. With my own eyes I witnessed unspeakable devastation caused by logging on national forests from the Sierra Nevada range in California to the Cascades of Oregon and Washington. I know now that the horrific pictures you see of deforestation on public lands are only the tip of the iceberg. They are the rule, not the exception. That's why, for 10 years now, I have been working to end the timber sales program on national forests, and redirect logging subsidies into worker retraining, ecological restoration and taxpayer savings, as HR 1396, the National Forest Protection and Restoration Act, would do. Passage of this important legislation would be great for forests and the economy. And the same is true of forest protection efforts in Maine, whether it be the listing of imperiled salmon species under the Endangered Species Act or the creation of a major new national park. Voight asserts that if these environmental efforts are successful in Maine, there will only be ''memories of how wonderful Maine used to be.'' How ironic. The very goal of these forest protection endeavors is to ensure that, for future generations, the wonders of Maine are more than just a memory. So, when a supporter of deforestation comes up to you, claiming that environmental advocates are going to change everything, you might want to reply simply, ''God, I hope so.'' Because the reality is that we as a nation are not so poor that we must destroy our forests, nor so rich that we can afford to. Chad Hanson is the executive director of the John Muir Project (http:www.johnmuirproject.org), and is a national director of the Sierra Club.
