Despite mostly good news from Washington, the northern spotted owl is still out on a limb. Last week, only four days after the bird was declared a threatened species, the Bush Administration presented its plan to save the owl, preserve the ancient forest it inhabits in the Pacific Northwest and protect timber-industry jobs all at the same time. In fact, both environmentalists and loggers say, the plan does none of the above.
Since the birds nest in trees loggers prize, observers had expected Bush to stop the cutting. Government biologists had recommended adding 3 million acres of forest to existing preserves. Instead the Administration postponed until September any action on protecting land administered by the U.S. Forest Service — about two-thirds of the owls’ habitat — and addressed only those forests controlled by the Bureau of Land Management. Even there, the Government proposed to reduce logging only 15% to 20%, far less than the scientists had wanted.
The plan was an attempt to placate loggers, who feared the loss of 28,000 jobs over the next decade. But loggers think Government estimates of 1,000 jobs lost are too low. At the same time, environmentalists accused Bush of caving in to the timber industry. “It’s a throwback to the Reagan-era environmental politics,” said George Frampton, head of the Wilderness Society. “It’s 100% politics, 0% science.” He may have a point. The Administration wants to amend the Endangered Species Act, expanding the role of the “God Squad” — a body of mostly political appointees who can carve out exemptions under the act for economic and other considerations. For owls, and other creatures, that is a precarious perch indeed.
More Must-Reads from TIME
- Where Trump 2.0 Will Differ From 1.0
- How Elon Musk Became a Kingmaker
- The Power—And Limits—of Peer Support
- The 100 Must-Read Books of 2024
- Column: If Optimism Feels Ridiculous Now, Try Hope
- The Future of Climate Action Is Trade Policy
- FX’s Say Nothing Is the Must-Watch Political Thriller of 2024
- Merle Bombardieri Is Helping People Make the Baby Decision
Contact us at letters@time.com