Episode 017 - Arnie Dood

[Big Fin]

Just loaded up the next podcast. The guest is Arnie Dood, recently retired Threatened and Endangered Species coordinator for Montana FWP. In his career, he has seen it all. He has been a bit of a mentor as I spent time in two big ESA projects - grizzly bears and wolves.

iTunes - https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-001-randy-newberg-talks/id1012713381?i=345687547&mt=2


Stitcher - http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/mea...rg-unfiltered-hunting-conservation?refid=stpr


YouTube - https://youtu.be/pIWkn4JjBO0?list=PLLdxutimd-JvflcJylHR04bP4j4GpcxnC


Subjects discussed include how the Endangered Species Act process works, abuse via the Equal Access to Justice Act, process for listing/delisting of species, stupidity of hunters saying "SSS", Gray Wolves, Grizzly Bears, wildlife as a cash cow, need for a new advocacy model in hunting, and how Arnie suckered Randy into three years of ESA indentured servancy.

Arnie is not only a great guy, but one of the biggest libraries of ESA information I know. He is very level headed and is an articulate spokesperson for wildlife. I expect as we dive more into ESA issues and how abusive litigation under that statute is impacting landscape management, Arnie will make additional appearances on the podcast. But, I doubt we will ever get him to be "unfiltered."



P.S. - I mistakenly loaded up the episode that did not have the final edits and I see that 188 people did that download in the first five minutes before I realized my mistake. So, some of your got the "other version."

 

[double_a85]

Randy- Great episode. When I worked for FWP in eastern Montana I did some work with Arnie and he is a great guy to be around and learn a lot without even realizing it.... very contagious personality!

 

[mtmiller]

Looking forward to hearing from ADood.

 

[hank4elk]

Listening to it now.
Good stuff!
Thank you Randy.

I know I barely scratched the surface with my own intense involvement in ESA and NEPA proccess' back in the 90's-2008 period in the Sierras,Central Coast CA compared with your involvement in all these issues the way you do.
But I was watching the NM Leg. issue bill regarding elk and figuring stratagies...Thanks.

 

[IlliniFIre]

Good stuff as usual Fin. I'd have been happy to hear more detalis, namely who are the groups that treat wolves as bovine. Loved that line.

 

[Big Fin]

Good stuff as usual Fin. I'd have been happy to hear more detalis, namely who are the groups that treat wolves as bovine. Loved that line.

Taken from the header of just two of the lawsuits is the list below. Plenty more pile on when some gubment cheese could be won in court or if you can make the cash register ring by abusing the intent and purpose of the ESA.

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
ALLIANCE FOR THE WILD ROCKIES
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL
SIERRA CLUB
HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
JACKSON HOLE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE
FRIENDS OF THE CLEARWATER
OREGON WILD
CASCADIA WILDLANDS PROJECT
WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT
WILDLANDS PROJECT
Born Free, USA
Help Our Wolves Live (“HOWL”)
Friends of Animals and Their Environment (“FATE”)

 

[emrah1028]

Your best podcast yet Randy!

Emrah

 

[ewludwig]

Great podcast. A bit depressing though when one considers so much blood, sweat and tears go into it and the only people guaranteed to benefit are lawyers.

By the way, this is the first podcast where I had trouble with the audio. I could barely hear Arnie so I had to turn volume way up. As a result, anytime randy laughed my speakers would be on verge of blowing

 

[double_a85]

...Arnie will make additional appearances on the podcast. But, I doubt we will ever get him to be "unfiltered."...

If you can ever get him "unfiltered," it would be the best podcast in history!

 

[basal_area]

I listened to this on my way into work this morning and your distrust of the environmental groups is well placed. I work as a professional forester in North Idaho and I've been involved in several issues where the environmental groups would say one thing in a closed door meeting and then the next day they would be quoted in the media taking the exact opposite position. You have to remember that you are dealing with people who truly believe that the end justifies the means.

 

[GAbearclaw]

Great podcast, you are a great ambassador to have on our side.

I wish I could find a way to lure you out to California as we need someone to help us get organized and take back our F&G. That is one of the worst things out here; we don't even have a state F&G group that works on behalf of hunters and fishermen...

Keep up the good work Randy.

 

[BMurr]

Great podcast, you are a great ambassador to have on our side.

I wish I could find a way to lure you out to California as we need someone to help us get organized and take back our F&G. That is one of the worst things out here; we don't even have a state F&G group that works on behalf of hunters and fishermen...

Keep up the good work Randy.

Fellow CA resident. We are in trouble.

 

[ORHunter]

In this episode Randy talked briefly towards the end about the timber industry and the issues we have with it because of Canada. I'm interested in learning more about this. Can anyone point me in the right direction to read up on it?

 

[Nameless Range]

http://missoulian.com/news/local/mo...cle_bc5a6749-72d4-5ee8-902c-41d6c55db42d.html

Here's an article in the Missoulian when the expiration of the tariff was looming that explains some things.

 

[Big Fin]

In this episode Randy talked briefly towards the end about the timber industry and the issues we have with it because of Canada. I'm interested in learning more about this. Can anyone point me in the right direction to read up on it?

Canada does not force their timber companies to pay competitive stumpage rates, the price you pay per thousand board feet or per cord, for the timber you are harvesting. In some instances, there is no stumpage paid by Canadian companies. US companies have to pay either private landowners, state or county landowners, or the USFS for the price of the timber they harvest.

In addition to the stumpage subsidy and the weak Canadian dollar, Canadian timber companies get paid to build roads. Yeah, "The Crown" as it is called in Canada, pays them for roading highly erosive terrain. The Crown can keep loggers in business by paying them for road building as a way to offset the impacts of tariffs. A timber company in Canada can lose money in the logging business, but the Crown can offset that in payments for road building and it has no impact on the supposed protection provided by a tariff.

In addition, Canada does not have the equivalent of NEPA, ESA, Clean Water Act, or any of the other environmental regulations that American timber companies must operate under, whether on public or private lands. A frustration of many Canadians is that there are no mechanisms to account for fish and wildlife values once a timber sale is suggested.

So long as Canada is economically committed to keeping its timber industry afloat, the US producers will never be able to compete on any basis other than location to large markets.

As much as some want to blame the state of the timber industry on the USFS and the Feds, it is in large part Congress and their lopsided trade deals that have had the biggest impact on the timber industry. You cannot compete in the softwood (pine/fir/spruce) lumber market with companies who have the full faith and backing of the Canadian government.

And now that logging in the intermountain west has been hammered by "free markets" (complete tongue in cheek), the infrastructure of mills, railroad facilities, loggers, truckers, etc. has pretty much disappeared. I completely understand the frustration of the good operators who find it impossible to compete with Canadians. Once again, the frustration gets focused on the USFS, when it is really Congress who is to blame and who could fix the problem. Not holding my breath for that to happen.

It would be a much longer discussion to give full attention. It would include liberal application by Presidents of the Antiquities Act, other market forces, housing markets and interest rates, and a host of other items. One claim that is often used to advocate for the sale of Federal lands is the USFS supposedly being the reason for the loss of the softwood timber industry in the Northern Rockies. I bring that up in the sale/transfer/ESA discussion, as most of the knowledgeable folks would point north of the border as the biggest reason, of many reasons, for the dramatic constriction of that industry.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Continuing my education on timber issues.... Senator Fielder is beating the drum that the reason loggers are having problems making a living is they can't get timber sales from the USFS and because of excessive regulations or red tape holding up sales until they are worthless.

Now I am no economic expert, but the only reason I have time to type this today is because some remodel projects I was doing at the local lumber mill fell through due to the owner being worried about the falling price of lumber. My understanding of economics says that when prices are too low and sales too weak to be profitable, increasing output doesn't help a bit.

I don't see how loggers who complain about not getting enough wood to send to the mill can be helped with more logs, when the mill can't afford to buy their logs because they aren't selling enough lumber at profitable margins. This is the same mill that has hundreds of thousands of logs laying in the yard waiting to be cut and sold when the markets are better.

In my simple way of thinking, should the transfer to state management occur and the logging industry is to benefit and grow, timber sales will have to be priced even lower than they currently are for loggers to be at all competitive with Canadian timber. Selling more timber at lower prices does nothing to help the newly transferred lands pay for their own maintenance and will only hasten the eventual sale of those lands as more roads are required to be built and maintained in order to sustain cheap timber sales to loggers.

Help me out here.... sometimes I think it's so absurdly simple that I must be missing something important in the equation.

My projection is until the housing market rebounds and demand raises lumber prices or Canadian subsidized lumber is restricted or tariffed to make it reflect the cost of American lumber production, the American logging industry is doomed to a continual reduction.

If I understand it properly, the USFS looks at logging as a way to maintain forest health rather than promote jobs in the logging industry. The added benefits of keeping the forest healthy offset the fact that managing logging projects costs more than it brings in to the treasury.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I would be interested in hearing the perspective of anyone actually in the logging industry.

 

[ORHunter]

Canada does not force their timber companies to pay competitive stumpage rates, the price you pay per thousand board feet or per cord, for the timber you are harvesting. In some instances, there is no stumpage paid by Canadian companies. US companies have to pay either private landowners, state or county landowners, or the USFS for the price of the timber they harvest.

In addition to the stumpage subsidy and the weak Canadian dollar, Canadian timber companies get paid to build roads. Yeah, "The Crown" as it is called in Canada, pays them for roading highly erosive terrain. The Crown can keep loggers in business by paying them for road building as a way to offset the impacts of tariffs. A timber company in Canada can lose money in the logging business, but the Crown can offset that in payments for road building and it has no impact on the supposed protection provided by a tariff.

In addition, Canada does not have the equivalent of NEPA, ESA, Clean Water Act, or any of the other environmental regulations that American timber companies must operate under, whether on public or private lands. A frustration of many Canadians is that there are no mechanisms to account for fish and wildlife values once a timber sale is suggested.

So long as Canada is economically committed to keeping its timber industry afloat, the US producers will never be able to compete on any basis other than location to large markets.

As much as some want to blame the state of the timber industry on the USFS and the Feds, it is in large part Congress and their lopsided trade deals that have had the biggest impact on the timber industry. You cannot compete in the softwood (pine/fir/spruce) lumber market with companies who have the full faith and backing of the Canadian government.

And now that logging in the intermountain west has been hammered by "free markets" (complete tongue in cheek), the infrastructure of mills, railroad facilities, loggers, truckers, etc. has pretty much disappeared. I completely understand the frustration of the good operators who find it impossible to compete with Canadians. Once again, the frustration gets focused on the USFS, when it is really Congress who is to blame and who could fix the problem. Not holding my breath for that to happen.

It would be a much longer discussion to give full attention. It would include liberal application by Presidents of the Antiquities Act, other market forces, housing markets and interest rates, and a host of other items. One claim that is often used to advocate for the sale of Federal lands is the USFS supposedly being the reason for the loss of the softwood timber industry in the Northern Rockies. I bring that up in the sale/transfer/ESA discussion, as most of the knowledgeable folks would point north of the border as the biggest reason, of many reasons, for the dramatic constriction of that industry.

Thanks Randy that helps a lot!

 

[Big Fin]

Continuing my education on timber issues.... Senator Fielder is beating the drum that the reason loggers are having problems making a living is they can't get timber sales from the USFS and because of excessive regulations or red tape holding up sales until they are worthless.

Now I am no economic expert, but the only reason I have time to type this today is because some remodel projects I was doing at the local lumber mill fell through due to the owner being worried about the falling price of lumber. My understanding of economics says that when prices are too low and sales too weak to be profitable, increasing output doesn't help a bit.

I don't see how loggers who complain about not getting enough wood to send to the mill can be helped with more logs, when the mill can't afford to buy their logs because they aren't selling enough lumber at profitable margins. This is the same mill that has hundreds of thousands of logs laying in the yard waiting to be cut and sold when the markets are better.

In my simple way of thinking, should the transfer to state management occur and the logging industry is to benefit and grow, timber sales will have to be priced even lower than they currently are for loggers to be at all competitive with Canadian timber. Selling more timber at lower prices does nothing to help the newly transferred lands pay for their own maintenance and will only hasten the eventual sale of those lands as more roads are required to be built and maintained in order to sustain cheap timber sales to loggers.

Help me out here.... sometimes I think it's so absurdly simple that I must be missing something important in the equation.

My projection is until the housing market rebounds and demand raises lumber prices or Canadian subsidized lumber is restricted or tariffed to make it reflect the cost of American lumber production, the American logging industry is doomed to a continual reduction.

If I understand it properly, the USFS looks at logging as a way to maintain forest health rather than promote jobs in the logging industry. The added benefits of keeping the forest healthy offset the fact that managing logging projects costs more than it brings in to the treasury.

You are correct. There is currently plenty of demand to absorb US input to the supply chain. But the supply side of the equation, especially supply at extremely subsidized prices (Canada), is way out of balance and that reduces the market price so the guy at the local mill who deferred your project cannot make it pencil out.

On the other hand, some in the building trades/real estate/home mortgage lobby, a far bigger lobby than the timber industry, will say that let the global market determine the price, drop the tariff on Canada, let lumber prices drop even further if the Canadians are willing to start a "race to zero" with timber/lumber in the same way the Saudis are doing with oil.

Because of that bigger lobby in the building/construction/real estate world, expect very little push back on the Canadians for flooding us with subsidized lumber.

Point to be made is that the ALC/Fielder argument that the USFS has put loggers out of business is a straw man argument. It holds no water, as you quickly pointed out above. But, given her only useful target is a Federal agency, she will connect the dots as she has and some who live in a small world will take her bait. And some in Congress who share her ideology will do what they can to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy if that is what helps get the public lands out of public hands.

I think it is worth noting that the Montana Wood Products Industry came out against Fielder's bills last session. They are smart folks and they know where the problems come from and what solutions might work. Transferring lands to the state is not a solution in the minds of the folks in the timber industry.

 

[Gerald Martin]

So we have Montana Ranchers and those who graze public lands against the transfer. We have Montana Wood Products Industry against the transfer. We have hunters, fishermen, outdoor recreationists against the transfer....

Whom that this transfer supposedly benefits is actually for the transfer to the states?


What about the energy and mineral extraction industries??? What is their position on transfer?