Chambers pushed "compromise" logging law

By Ken Ward Jr.
STAFF WRITER

A logging law West Virginia many say is too weak was actually pushed through by outgoing House Speaker Chuck Chambers, one of the Legislature's staunchest environmentalists.

Norm Steenstra, chief lobbyist for the West Virginia Environmental Council, said Chambers sold out the environmental community to win continued favor from Gov. Gaston Caperton.

Chambers said he simply cut a deal to get some kind of timber law passed when it became clear to him the stronger measures he initially favored were not politically possible.

Chambers, D-Cabell, and now co-chairman of the West Virginia Democratic Party, called the 1992 Logging Sediment Control Act "a pretty good compromise."

Bill Maxey, director of the state Division of Forestry, says the law is the strongest one in the region and is considered a national model.

The law requires logging operators to register with the state and be trained in ways to avoid pollution. But it does not require them to take measures to avoid soil erosion or stream sedimentation. All such measures are strictly voluntary.

"It certainly didn't go as far as I would like to go or as the environmentalists wanted to go," Chambers said. "But given the political realities, I think we made some progress.

Through the late 1980s, environmental groups called on the Legislature to somehow regulate West Virginia's growing timber industry. Each time, opposition from industry killed the proposals.

In 1991, environmentalists were at the peak of their legislative power. Caperton, in his first two years as governor, had helped them pass laws to regulate landfills, incinerators and groundwater protection.

During his 1991 State of the State address, Caperton appeared to call for a new law requiring timber operators to at least register with the state.

"This industry is increasingly important to our state's economy, and the vast majority of the industry is responsible and concerned," Caperton said.

"But there are a few outlaws ripping up our hillsides, ripping off our landowners, and avoiding paying their fair share of taxes," Caperton said. "Many times, their loaded trucks are headed south with our valuable timber before we even know they've started cutting."

Then-Division of Forestry Chief Bill Gillespie, then-Agriculture Commissioner Cleve Benedict and timber lobbyist Dick Waybright all quickly spoke up to oppose any timber legislation.

Just days after the speech, Caperton backed off. The administration might support a timber bill, officials said, but would not introduce one.

Chambers went ahead and introduced one himself, but the measure died in committee.

During the 1992 session, environmental lobbyists again thought Chambers was going to support a strong timber bill.

But Steenstra said coal and timber lobbyists started spending a lot of time around the speaker's office.

One day, Chambers called Steenstra and another environmental lobbyist into his office. "He said, "We've got a bill. Here it is; take an hour and look at it and meet me in House Judiciary,"|9" Steenstra said.

The legislation was exactly what environmentalists didn't want.

Under the new bill, sponsored by Chambers and Martin, loggers would not have to seek state approval before starting a timber job. They could cut for three days before notifying the state. The job of overseeing timber would be left to the state Division of Forestry. That agency's main job is promoting the growth of the timber industry.

The next thing Steenstra knew, Chambers came into the Judiciary Committee room. Chambers sat down in between Steenstra and the other environmental lobbyist.

"Everybody was looking at the Speaker who was just sitting there shaking his head and [the bill] passed out like that," Steenstra said.

"We knew that a great compromise had been reached," Steenstra said. "Now what we have is a shell of what there should be. [This] was the most pointed example of how puny we are as a lobby compared to the united front of industry."