In September 2013 the Colville National Forest awarded Vaagen Brothers Lumber, the sole bidder, a ten-year stewardship contract with a 54,000-acre analysis footprint, with the company paying up front and at its own risk for the entire environmental analysis. The episode asks whether the party that stands to profit can pay for the analysis, gives both sides full strength, and cites the litigation correctly, noting that no public monitoring report of outcomes appears to exist.
Who's who
- Duane Vaagen+4 more episodesVaagen Brothers CEO who convened the collaborative behind the project
- Russ Vaagen+2 more episodesCompany executive and public voice of the project
- Rodney Smoldon+1 more episodeColville Forest Supervisor who withdrew and reworked a draft approval
- Jeff JuelSierra Club forest chair who called the conflict of interest obvious
- Mike Garrity+1 more episodeAlliance for the Wild Rockies director whose group sued
- Jim FurnishFormer Forest Service deputy chief who said the premise must be unassailable
- Rosanna Malouf PetersonDistrict judge who found the NEPA process's integrity not compromised
- Milan D. Smith, Jr.Ninth Circuit judge who wrote the 2017 opinion affirming an injunction denial
Where it happens
- Mill Creek watershed, WashingtonThe 54,000-acre analysis footprint
- North Fork Mill Creek, WashingtonThe 12,802-acre project reviewed by the Ninth Circuit
- Chewelah, WashingtonSecond and last contract of this kind, about 58,375 acres
Timeline
- September 2013Contract awarded to Vaagen Brothers as sole bidder
- October 19, 2016District court denies a preliminary injunction
- August 1, 2017Ninth Circuit affirms without reaching the conflict-of-interest question
- October 4, 2018District court grants summary judgment for the Forest Service
- March 6, 2020Bid deadline for the Chewelah contract
Still debated
Reported company investment ranges from over $2 million to $4-5 million, and phase acreages conflict. Coverage often wrongly says the Ninth Circuit upheld contractor-funded analysis, when that question was decided by the district court.
