170 



Testimony by Bonnie Phillips 

 July 23, 1996 



In 1994, when the Clinton Forest Plan was proposed, Pilchuck Audubon 

 Society reviewed the Plan carefully, using the resources of many biologists 

 within our organization. Although we found the Plan took a big step toward 

 protecting anaent forest ecosystems, we felt tliat too many plant and animjil 

 spedes were still at serious nsk of extinction under the Plan. 



Very reluctantly, we joined in litigation against this Plan. This time. 

 Judge William Dwyer ruled against us, against the timber industry and for the 

 Forest Service. But as you probably know, although Judge Dwyer ruled that the 

 Plan was adequate, he also stated that it was barely adequate, and that there 

 were a number of factors that could cause him to revisit nis decision. 



These factors included two very specific processes mandated under the Plan. 



—In discussing the untested process of the aquatic conservation strategy the court 

 said that if the plan as implemented is to remain lawful, the monitonng, 

 watershed aruilysis and mitigating steps called for by the Plan must be fciithfully 

 carried out, and adjustments made if necessary. 



—The court recognized that monitoring is central to the Plan's validity. If it is 

 not funded, or not done for any reason, the legality of the Plan will have to be 

 reconsidered. 



The group of plaintiffs represented by the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund 

 chose not to challenge the Dwyer ruling in the Ninth Circuit. Instead, we, and 

 the great majority of other conservation organizations in the affected airea 

 decided that it was in our best interest, our communities' best interest, and the 

 forest ecosystems' best interest to make the Plan work. From the time that the 

 Record of Decision was signed imtil the logging rider became law, I worked 

 through the Western Andent Forest Campaign to establish a region-wide 

 network to help educate dtizens about the Clinton Plan and how to work 

 cooperatively with the vtirious agendes involved in Plan implementation. I 

 urged local conservationists to jom one of the 12 Provindal Advisory Committees 

 set up under the Plan to give advice to Federal Agencies, and I was selected to 

 serve on the Western Wasnington Provincial Advisory Committee. Even before 

 these committees were formed, I worked with federal, state and county agendes, 

 as well as Native American tribes, to set criteria for prioritizing watershed 

 restoration projects. 



Although there was an understanding that the Plan would take a while to 

 be implemented properly, there was also a feeling of optimism that we were 

 finailly headed in a direction of cooperation instead of continuing polarization. 

 We felt that the decade or more of our timber wars were finally coming to an 

 end. 



Urtfortunately, in the year since the logging rider began, we have seen the 

 momentum for the Plan, which was off to a slow but fairly good start, grind to 

 a halt. Last year's rider has had a devastating effect on thePlan ecologically. 



