[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2381]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

______

HON. FRANK RIGGS

of california

in the house of representatives

Monday, December 18, 1995

Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to Members' attention a
matter of importance regarding the Endangered Species Act [ESA]. We all
are aware of the injustices done to private property owners because of
the overreaching authority of the ESA.
For the past 3 years, northern California timber businesses and
workers have experienced a substantial hardship as the result of
President Clinton's option 9 initiative. Federal agencies have used the
ESA to literally shut down healthy and productive timberlands based on
false assumptions and dubious science.
The administration's option 9 initiative is founded on the belief
that owls can only survive in old growth forests. However, recent
studies have found that this in fact is not the case. One of my
constituents, Robert Barnum, a successful businessman, wrote me on this
subject.
Mr. Barnum specifically addresses the issue of spotted owl survival
in second growth habitat. His experiences and those of other timber
companies in the Northwest continue to prove that the assumptions of
option 9 are false and in need of a massive overhaul in order to avoid
further damage to a very important west coast industry.
I cannot express enough my frustration with Federal officials who
clearly abuse the public trust and deliberately harm hard-working
Americans because of their political and social beliefs. The ESA has
become the vehicle for zealous environmentalists to impose their
political agenda outside of the original intent of the legislation.
That is why it is imperative that H.R. 2275 should become law.
Substantial progress has been made in the past 11 months. The work of
the ESA task force has been indispensable in exposing the gross abuses
of the ESA and pursuing necessary reforms to ensure this law is
properly enforced.
I think my colleagues will find Mr. Barnum's letter of special
interest.

Barnum Timber Co.,

Eureka, CA, November 2, 1995.
Hon. Frank Riggs,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Frank: I have been following with interest the
legislation introduced recently to rewrite the Endangered
Species Act, known as H.R. 2275. I understand that you are
cosponsor of the Endangered Species and Conservation and
Management Act.
I am writing to let you know that I very much appreciate
your support of this legislation. Being in the timber
business and owning a lot of property in the northern part of
your district, we have to deal with the Endangered Species
Act on a daily basis. In my personal dealings with
regulators, and also from reports received from our Foresters
in pursuit of their work, it has become apparent to me that
for many environmental extremists, the Endangered Species Act
is a ploy or subterfuge to achieve ulterior objectives,
namely government control over private property and
prohibitions on development of property.
You may already know about the case of the spotted owl.
From information I have obtained first hand and through the
observation of my foresters, it is clear that the listing of
the spotted owl was scientifically unsupported. You will
recall that the original justification was based upon
``scientific'' findings that the owl would survive only in
the old growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. Subsequent
studies in Northern California have shown that the owl not
only survived, but its population in second growth forests
exceeds that found in the old growth forests of Oregon and
Washington. One might ask, then, if they do better in the
second growth forests than they do in the old growth forests,
and if you want to preserve the owls, then should you cut
your old growth forests?
We have had instances in our timbering operations where we
have not been allowed to cut some timber because of the
presence of a spotted owl nest within the proposed cut area.
Consequently we were forced to log another area on the
opposite side of the valley but contiguous. After doing so,
we found out two years later that the owl that was in the
forested area had now moved over to the area that was cut and
had set up residences there. The reason for the owl moving
over is that there is a greater food supply of wood rats and
rodents in the cut over area than there is in the old growth
forest. We also find that the owls do very well nesting and
living in hardwood forests as distinguished from the conifer
forests.
To put all of the foregoing in dollars and cents, last year
we spent over $40,000 in ``hooting'' for owls as required by
the law. This is an ongoing annual expense; and for a small
company like ourselves, it is a heavy burden.
As you probably know, the California Forestry Association
petitioned to make all allowances for the proliferation of
the spotted owl in the second growth forests of California
under the Endangered Species Act. They were unsuccessful with
that petition. The point of writing this letter to you, is to
give the foregoing as an example of how environmental
extremists can use the Endangered Species Act in devious ways
to achieve objectives not apparent in the expressed intent of
the legislation.
Pat and I happened to see you on television the other
night. We were quite pleased and proud to see you on the
rostrum of the House of Representatives wielding the gavel.
We appreciate and support the fine job you are doing
representing our North Coast district.
With kindest regards,
Sincerely yours,
C. Robert Barnum.

____________________