New Study Finds Siskiyou Timber Sale a Big Time Money-Loser
Washington,
D.C. - An economic study of a U.S. Forest Service timber
sale in southern Oregon found the project could cost taxpayers
more than $100 million, despite the agency's claims that
it would be a money-maker, according to Taxpayers for Common
Sense, a national budget watchdog organization.
"The
Forest Service's rose-colored predictions of big profits
are based on bogus economics and low ball figures that have
no basis in reality," said Steve Ellis, Vice President
of Programs at Taxpayers for Common Sense.
The
timber is from the 2002 Biscuit Fire in southern Oregon's
Siskiyou Wild Rivers Area that was the largest and most
expensive fire in Oregon history. The fire burned nearly
500,000 acres in the Pacific Northwest, the vast majority
within the boundaries of the Siskiyou National Forest in
Southwestern Oregon. In November 2003, the Forest Service
proposed to sell 518 million board feet (mmbf) of timber
from 27,000 acres in the national forest, claiming it would
return $24 million. However, recent reports have indicated
that the Forest Service is considering a smaller 300 mmbf
sale, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recommended
selling less than 100 mmbf. At each of these levels, the
sale remains a money loser.
The
economic analysis, conducted by ECONorthwest, found that
the Forest Service ignored that flooding the market with
timber would dramatically reduce prices, didn't take into
consideration any timber sale associated costs incurred
at the regional and national levels, and low-balled administrative
and clean-up costs by at least 70%.
"The
Forest Service is masquerading this sweetheart deal for
the timber industry as a timber sale," Ellis continued.
"At a time of record budget deficits and with the fire
season already upon us, the Forest Service has no business
letting the taxpayer get fleeced."
The
analysis found that the Biscuit Fire timber sale - at low,
medium and high timber levels - is a consistent money loser:
·
A 518 mmbf timber sale would lose $102 million, resulting
in a return that's 500% lower than the Forest Service predicted.
·
A mid-range, 300 mmbf, timber sale would cost taxpayers
more than $34 million.
·
The EPA's 96.7 mmbf suggestion would still cost taxpayers
at least $3 million.
"The
Forest Service needs to go back to the drawing board and
come up with a realistic plan. Taxpayers should just say
no to fuzzy math and faulty economic assumptions,"
concluded Ellis. |
