Northern Spotted Owl Conflict

The Northern Spotted Owl of the Northwest has been on the rapid decline over the last 10 years with over 50% of the population being wiped out. The 200 year old forest that is home to the owl has become a multibillion dollar logging industry that has created jobs for thousands of workers. As a result of logging however, roughly 10% of the original forest remains intact leaving limited space for the already dwindling number of owls in the region.

In response to this decline, environmentalist petitioned the US Fish and Wildlife Service to place the owl on the endangered species list arguing that as an indicator species the Northern Spotted Owl is a gauge of the health of the ecosystem that provides its habitat. After being labeled as threatened on the Endangered Species list, millions of acres in the Pacific Northwest were protected to help slow or even reverse the decline in numbers.

As a result, logging communities that were dependent on the resources generated from the timber sales are shutting down forcing families and businesses to leave the area. Many people that are suffering from the effects are fighting back pointing out that the revenue generated from the old growth forest outweighs the impact on the environment. The numbers indicate a very valid point, 65% of the wood in the west is derived from the timber harvested in the area and without timber harvesting in the old growth forests 28,000 jobs are at risk and the price of timber sales with increase dramatically.

This then leads us to the basis for our research. We want to look at the possible outcomes to this conflict and potentially find the best result for either side by imposing game theory strategies.

In a debate which pits man against nature it is hard to see just how much each side feels they would be affected by a loss in the conflict. Each side in this case believed that there was a crisis for their respective parties. The logging industry and its employee’s feared profit and job loss if their ability to log old growth timberland was restricted to the point that environmentalist groups wanted in order to protect endangered species like the spotted owl. In logging towns across the Pacific Northwest logger’s way of making a living and in some cases familial values going back generations were deeply rooted in logging and a restriction in logging would be a threat to their livelihood.
On the other side there are environmental groups standing up for the rights of species, such as the spotted owl, that are endangered who rely on the old growth forests for habitat. Spotted owls are indicator species which are a good indication of the health of the forest and with the dwindling numbers it shows detrimental impact to the old growth ecosystem. Knowing the speed at which old growth forests were being cut environmentalists believed that there was a serious threat to the norms of a system that has existed in the areas for thousands of years.

Sense Making
The environmentalists want the loggers to stop harvesting old growth forests because they say that continued logging is destroying the habitat for wildlife to such an extent that many species are threatened by extinction. The logging companies say that if they stop logging the forests they will be out of the job with no source of income and their communities will collapse. A compromise needed to be reached both to keep the timber workers employed and to save face in the eyes of the environmentalists.

Meaning Making
The environmentalists want to stop the logging to attempt to allow the spotted owl population to make a recovery and remove it from the endangered species list that it had been placed on in 1990. The old growth forests are the habitat that the owls live in.
The timber workers were worried about lost jobs. Some logging towns had been reporting increased numbers of homeless, alcoholism, and suicide due to the logging cutbacks. The timber companies are planting six new trees for everyone that they cut down and are hoping that the second growth forests will be good habitat for the spotted owls.
Sources:
Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez “Ethics and the Spotted Owl Controversy”
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v4n1/homepage.html
Elizabeth Arnold “Saving the Spotted Owl: Benefits of Recovery Effort
Remain Complex, Controversial”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3815722

Logging Crisis in Washington State

In this logging controversy the protagonists are the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and a national coalition of evenvironmental groups known as the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (NEA).


Sense Making

Landslide risks and land use management are key issues in the Blanchard Mountain Logging Crisis. Blanchard Mountain is located on the edge of Whatcom and Skagit Counties in the northwestern corner of Washington State. Of the 4500 acres that constitute Blanchard Mountain the upper 3000 acres have not been logged for over 70 years (and never been clear cut).

NWEA seeks to preserve the upper 3000 acres. Removing these trees may significantly and increase the risk of landslides in populated areas. A landslide in this region could destroy homes, wildlife habitat, and and a vital transportation link between Whatcom County and Skagit County (Chuckanut Drive). The forest has large stands of trees that range in age from 50 to 200 years, and provide habitat for many species. It also provides an important wildlife cooridor connecting the North Cascade mountain range with the Salish Sea.

The Washington State DNR has a state mandate to log Blanchard Mountain (and other state school lands) with timber sale proceeds going to state and local (Skagit County) school districts. The NWEA contends that Blanchard Mountain represents a unique environment and that clear cutting on its steep slopes would create a landslide hazard that would threaten homes, lives, an active salmon spawning stream (Oyster Creek).

Decision Making

The DNR and the NWEA convened to negotiate a consensus agreement for the fate of Blanchard Mountain. Eventually, a compromise agreement was reached in 2007. We will model the crisis as of Spring of 2006.

Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (NEA) and the Washington State DNR have the options of negotiating or not negotiating. By not negotiating the parties run the risk of not meeting any of their objectives. Bargaining and negotiation models will be used to model the strategic interactions of the stakeholders.

References
Boin , A., t'Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership under Pressure. First edition. Cambridge University Press, 2005.