Alaska Society of American Foresters, Juneau Chapter opposes Ballot Measure 2

Professional foresters take public review very seriously and value it highly. It’s possible that had House Bill 106 of the 27th Alaska Legislature been adopted by the ballot measure proposers, foresters would have seen coastal zone consistency in a different light. That didn’t happen. Instead, this ballot measure creates a new, largely undefined and entirely untested layer of local bureaucracy. As proponents of professional forest management, we find the establishment of a new layer of bureaucracy unnecessary and costly to operate and maintain. We think the originators of this ballot measure have misjudged the need on the ground.

As professional foresters, we believe that every forest value and benefit can be achieved through active forest management. A century of sound, successful and proven scientific forest management in America would be certain to sometimes be swept aside by the broad language of Ballot Measure 2. For instance, for the first time, coastal consistency of Alaska forest management decisions would be subject to a test of “scenic and aesthetic enjoyment,” whatever that means. Why in the world did the measure drafters choose to include such subjective language?

While we leave it to other professional disciplines to speak to mineral, petroleum, agriculture and other income-producing endeavors, we are alarmed that we see this measure shifting the balance from science to hearsay in forest management. So far we can see, this ballot measure gives full regulatory authority to the newly established board, yet board members are not subject to legislative confirmation and cannot be removed by the governor except for cause. And unlike, say, the Alaska Board of Forestry, the Ballot Measure 2 board requires only a simple majority instead of working for consensus.

In HB106, the corresponding board was advisory only and required a 2/3 vote for approval.

Forestry operates on thin margins and scarce dollars compared with petroleum and mining. The amount of process that some interest groups may envision through this ballot measure could easily defeat any forest products manufacturing proposal that might come to Alaska. Forest management is much more than harvesting and manufacturing, of course, but management is diminished and usually cannot pay its own way without harvest.

We have additional concerns about the impacts of Ballot Measure 2 on professional foresters and forest management. Many forest management actions are time sensitive. A delay of a few months could amount to a failed consistency determination, yet we see no requirement for a timely determination in this ballot measure. The program that sunsetted did have a requirement for timely consistency determinations of forest management activities.

The Juneau Chapter of the Alaska Society of American Foresters believes the adoption and implementation of Ballot Measure 2 would be detrimental to the protection, wise use and management of Alaska’s forests and related natural resources.

Wayne Nicolls, John Sandor and Tom Boutin are members of the Juneau Chapter of the Society of American Foresters. The Society of American Foresters, as founded by Gifford Pinchot more than 100 years ago, is the only national organization of professional foresters in the United States.