28,000 Jobs May Hang on Ruling on Owls

In casual remarks that could portend serious economic trouble for parts of the Pacific Northwest, Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan told federal workers Thursday that he expects the northern spotted owl to be added to the endangered species list next month.

If that decision is formally reached by scientists studying the rare bird--the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service insisted that no decision has been made--a U.S. Forest Service study has predicted it could jeopardize as many as 28,000 jobs in Oregon, California and Washington, the country’s three biggest timber states.

The potential economic fallout from logging limits in the timber-dependent region where the owl is found has made the medium-size, mottled-brown bird the subject of the most intense political battle in the history of the Endangered Species Act.

The law was passed in 1973 to protect plants and animals from the rapidly increasing threat of extinction in the face of human development.

A formal decision on whether to add the owl subspecies to the list of birds threatened with extinction--and thus force the government to limit old-growth logging and other activities to protect the bird and its habitat--is expected by the Fish and Wildlife Service by June 23.

Lujan sparked a small furor last week when he told people in Denver that the spotted owl case should prompt Congress to modify the law to prevent it from interfering with substantial exploitation of natural resources.

Environmentalists said Lujan’s idea would essentially gut the law just as the dramatic recoveries of the bald eagle and other once-endangered species are beginning to demonstrate its true effectiveness.

On Thursday, in informal remarks to about 100 regional department employees in Boston, Lujan said, “On June the 23rd, that owl is going to be declared endangered. When that happens, a lot of this timbering will have to shut down.”

The act prohibits consideration of economic impact when deciding whether to protect an animal, but does allow consideration of such impacts while deciding how best to protect endangered species from extinction.

The small owls, which live primarily in old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest, reproduce well only in the older trees, scientists say.

A recent Forest Service economic analysis predicted that setting aside 8 million acres to protect the owl could result in the loss of 28,000 jobs in the logging, lumber and paper industries by the year 2000.

According to the Forest Service, there are 949 known owl pairs in Northern California, Oregon, and Washington.

Fish and Wildlife Service officials in Portland, Ore., said Lujan’s remarks were premature.

“No decision has been made . . . on listing or not listing. We haven’t reached a conclusion yet,” said spokesman Dave Klinger.

In 1987, the service refused to list the owl, but environmentalists claimed in court that the decision was motivated by politics, not science. A federal judge in Seattle ultimately found deficiencies in the first study and ordered another review, which began last summer and will end next month.

Lujan, in Boston, pledged to carry out the law in protecting the owl.

“The law says I cannot interfere with the listing of this owl, and I’m not going to,” he said. “I don’t want to interfere because biology is the only thing that matters as far as listing that owl. If they’re endangered, they’re endangered.”

Times staff writer Mark A. Stein contributed to this story