Decker says he prioritized rebuilding relationships with landowners

By MITCH LIES

Capital Press

SALEM -- On Feb. 1, Oregon State Forester Doug Decker completed his first year at the helm of the state Department of Forestry.

Decker, who began with the department in 1987 as a public affairs specialist, rose to state forest division chief prior to the Board of Forestry selecting him to succeed former state forester Marvin Brown.

The Capital Press recently interviewed Decker. His answers have been edited for length and clarity.

Q How do you look back on your first year as state forester?

A Something I feel good about is that we've been able to rebuild our working relationships with the landowner community.

The fire partnership with the landowner community is fundamental to the Department of Forestry, and some of those relationships had been strained in recent years.

I've also begun a conversation with the conservation community. We've had meetings where we have folks around the table that we have not been able to connect with in a meaningful way. And we are starting to do that.

We probably won't agree on everything, but we ought to be able to sit around the table and make our case and have a good conversation.

There is nothing easy about natural resource policy, and the key to success is being able to bring people together to get stuff done. And without a basis of trust and an open communication, that is not going to happen.

Q You say that you are building a level of trust with the conservation community, yet three conservation groups recently filed a notice of intent to sue the Oregon Department of Forestry for its management of three state forests.

A I can't talk about the merits of that case, but on principle, I think we've seen the effects of trying to create natural resource policy by lawsuit over the last 15 years. And I think the governor, the Board of Forestry and myself are interested in finding ways to get real work done, to work with our partners and interests in a way that allows us to get real work done.

Obviously, the legal remedy is always there on the table. But I would look back over the last two decades and ask, does that really get to a meaningful, lasting solution to complicated natural resource problems.

Q Staying with the theme of reaching out to folks, I heard you tell the Board of Forestry that you recently hosted a couple of meetings in Grants Pass. Can you talk about that?

A I'm in the mode right now of knocking on a lot of doors, and meeting folks and learning and listening and trying to bring those ideas back to the table to help me, to help our department, and to help our board, and to help the governor.

A couple of months ago we were in Coos Bay. And we did something similar in the Corvallis area.

On the Grants Pass trip, we packed the public library, and I walked out of there with a clear picture of the level of desperation in Josephine County. I heard a real alignment around the need for more active management of (federal) forests. When you hear this often enough from the different corners of the state, you realize we've got to do something different. This is not working.

Q Is there anything the state can do to prompt more active management on federal forests?

A The governor has talked clearly about the need for active management on federal lands. He has made it clear that is an emphasis he would like to make.

The National Association of State Foresters is working on that. The Oregon delegation is working on that. And the governor has given us license to focus in on that.

The governor is actually on the cusp of bringing on a policy advisor that is going to focus solely on federal forest lands.

Q What do you see as your priorities in leading the Department of Forestry in 2012 and beyond?

A In the near term, we've got to keep a steady hand as we go through this economic uncertainty.

We need to keep focused on how we deliver service, and we need to work with our stakeholders, with the Legislature and the governor.

Looking forward long term, I would like to see us find a way to improve our ability to support and encourage the small woodland community.

In the past, I'm told by landowners, our service forestry program has been fundamental to them being able to manage their lands. It was federally funded and those dollars continue to decrease.

I would like for us to find a way to diversify our funding sources in all of our programs, but particularly in our small woodland program.

I also would like to have a better tool box for forest conservation.

I would like for us to think about ways in which we can look for innovative funding that can help us keep lands in forest land, whether it be through conservation easements, working forest easements or outright acquisition, like we did with the (recently purchased) Gilchrist (State Forest).

We're not trying to build an empire, but I think we are trying to ensure that those lands that are important forest lands for local communities don't go out of forest land use.

And I don't feel like we have the right set of tools for that.