S. 1462, the “Fix Our Forests Act,” passed out of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Conservation organizations from across the nation have voiced strong concerns with the content of the bill and have opposed its passage. The bill now heads to a full Senate vote.

Oregon Wild Wilderness Program Manager Erik Fernandez released the following statement:

“Today, the US Senate advanced its latest attack on public lands, the so-called “Fix Our Forests Act” (FOFA). This bill is a direct assault on what makes public lands public: it stymies science-based forest management, muzzles community input, and endangers the fish, wildlife, and communities that rely on our forests. It also fails to provide dedicated funding for the types of wildfire strategies that save lives and livelihoods — home hardening, defensible space, and emergency planning.

The legislation authorizes 15 square-mile-sized logging projects with little to no public input and environmental analysis, making this one of the scariest plans to face public lands in a generation.

Trump and his logging industry backers have made no secret of the fact that they see public land forests as tree farms, and view any science, transparency, and accountability from the public as an obstacle to profit. FOFA is nothing less than a corporate handout and a further step towards that dystopian vision. It is a betrayal of the very idea of public lands.

Over the past several months, we have seen an incredible movement develop, first to oppose public lands sales proposed by Senator Mike Lee of Utah, then as an unprecedented outpouring of support for the Roadless Rule that protects some of our nation’s last wild places from reckless logging and development. Over 99% of those public comments opposed the Trump administration’s efforts to rescind these public lands protections.

Unfortunately, too many politicians in Washington DC, including Senate Democrats like Amy Klobuchar, still don’t get it. 

Public lands may be managed by agencies like the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service, but they belong to all of us. They’re held in trust for the American people, not for industry lobbyists or corporate logging interests. As caretakers of these lands and as believers in the democratic vision they represent, we will continue to remind our elected officials that these places are ours, and that efforts to privatize, profit, and remove public oversight will not be forgotten.”

The post Anti-Public Lands Forest Bill Passes Senate Committee appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Oregon Wild has been doing our best to keep track of the many attacks the Trump administration and anti-conservation Members of Congress have launched against America’s public lands, clean water, and wildlife. Below is a partial list of what we are keeping tabs on. Amid all the bad news and threats, there is also some good news, and some early signs that grassroots activism is working.

The Good: 

Stopping the Sell-off of America’s Public Lands: Earlier this summer, Representatives Mark Amodei (R-NV) and Celeste Maloy (R-UT) tried to insert language in Trump’s Big, Ugly Tax and Spending bill that would have sold off 500,000 acres of America’s public lands in Utah and Nevada. A ferocious public backlash (including from Oregon, where Rep. Bentz ultimately came out against public lands sales) forced the House to withdraw it. Then, in June, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) went even further with an awful proposal that would have mandated the sale of up to 3 million acres of public land (and paved the way for millions more to be privatized in the future).  The backlash against Sen. Lee’s ploy was even stronger, and it was ultimately pulled.

While Trump’s bill ultimately passed the Senate (with plenty of awful anti-conservation and anti-environmental provisions in it), the backlash against public lands privatization is proof that even in this day and age, grassroots pressure works.

The Bad: 

The Fell (Fix) Our Forests Act: The Fix Our Forests Act is a logging bill trying to pass itself off as a wildfire strategy, and unfortunately democratic Senators like Hickenlooper and Padillia are drinking the Kool-Aid and handing the keys of our national forests over to the Trump administration. The bill will make it easier to avoid environmental laws like The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA) — the bill uses emergency authorities to allow NEPA consultation after a project has been completed. It will allow even bigger loopholes through the expansion of Categorical Exclusions — 10,000 acres or 15 square miles — basically removing all public oversight of projects on federal forest land. And it will help to advance the narrative that commercial logging (and grazing) will protect communities from wildfire. The science is clear — we should be investing in proven community protection measures like defensible space, home hardening, and emergency planning. Unfortunately, the bill does not provide meaningful funding for these proven strategies. 

Trump’s Big, Ugly Tax and Spending Bill: The Senate stripped out provisions to sell off public lands from its budget reconciliation proposal. However, there are some truly awful logging provisions in the version that passed the Senate, including: 

1. 250 Million Mandate: Increases timber production by a minimum of 250,000,000 board feet over previous years’ sale volume for the Forest Service and 20,000,000 million for Bureau of Land Management. This arbitrary increase in logging will occur regardless of the impacts it could cause, be it worsening wildfires due to clearcutting or reducing our federal forests climate and clean water benefits.
2. 20-Year Logging Contracts: This bill calls for ramping up logging across federal forests, by mandating that the Forest Service enter into at least one long-term timber contract per year for 10 years in each region.  A similar provision applies to the Bureau of Land Management. This might force harmful logging to occur that has negative impacts on drinking water, vulnerable wildlife, and mature and old-growth forests.

Trump’s Wildfire Executive Order: Trump signed an executive order aimed to combine major wildland firefighting programs across federal public lands agencies within 90 days, in an effort to streamline how the federal government approaches fires. He issued this order during the height of wildfire season after gutting the federal firefighting workforce. The administration’s poorly thought-out and reckless actions will place wildland firefighters at increased risk and will make communities and infrastructure more vulnerable to catastrophic fires. 

The Ugly:

Recission of the Roadless Rule: The proposed rollback of the 2001 Roadless Rule jeopardizes nearly 58 million acres of backcountry forestland managed by the U.S. Forest Service, comprising around a third of the territory in our national forest system. In Oregon, the rule protects nearly 2 million acres of Oregon’s forests from destructive logging and development. These include beloved places like the Metolius River, Lost Lake, the Oregon Dunes, Mount Hebo, Hardesty Mountain, Tumalo Mountain, and the Upper Hood River Valley. Take action to protect wild Roadless Areas.

NEPA rollbacks: US Department of Agriculture, which houses the Forest Service, and Department of the Interior, which includes the Bureau of Land Management, have announced their intent to gut NEPA as it applies to national forests and BLM lands. There will be a 30 day public comment period for the Forest Service’s interim rule that is expected to close July 30th. 

Trump’s logging Executive Orders (+ subsequent logging directives from his administration): President Trump issued two executive orders (EOs) to dramatically expand logging across federal public forests and increase timber output by 25%. Under the pretense of enhancing national security, these policies seek to weaken environmental protections to supercharge timber harvest and benefit wealthy corporate interests.

Changing the Definition of “Harm” to Endangered Species: For decades, America’s Endangered Species Act has defined “harm” to imperiled fish and wildlife to include the destruction of their habitat, such as building a dam with no fish passage and block salmon from accessing the habitat they need to spawn and reproduce.  In April, the Trump administration proposed changing this rule to remove habitat destruction from the definition of “harm” to an endangered species.  It is an incredibly cynical (and stupid) idea, and one that Oregon Wild is gearing up to challenge in court.

The post The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – The War Against Public Lands appeared first on Oregon Wild.

PORTLAND, OR — A budget reconciliation proposal introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, would force the sale of up to 3.2 million acres of public lands across the West, including in Oregon. The bill, released last night, includes a provision requiring both the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to sell off public lands to offset tax cuts and other budgetary expenses (see pg. 30 of the bill).

The minimum land affected would exceed the size of Rhode Island and Delaware together. Oregon is explicitly listed as an eligible state where lands would be sold off. 

Recent polling shows 76% of Oregonians oppose selling public lands to pay for an extension of Trump’s tax cuts.

“Public lands belong to everyone. They shouldn’t be pawned off to offset tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy,” said Quinn Read, Executive Director at Oregon Wild. “This bill opens the door to selling off some of Oregon’s most treasured landscapes, potentially turning national forest edges into luxury estates with no real requirements for affordability or community benefit.”

While the bill is framed as a housing initiative, its primary function is to generate revenue. The legislation includes no safeguards to ensure the lands are used for workforce or affordable housing. Vague legislative language leaves room for high-end development on ecologically important and wildfire-prone lands.

An analysis from Headwaters Economics showed that the policy of selling off public lands for housing is complicated by wildfire and drought risks, as well as other development challenges. 

“This proposal is deeply unpopular, risky, and short-sighted,” continued Read. “Especially in places like Bend, expanding development deeper into fire-prone public lands doesn’t just damage habitat and recreation, it puts communities at greater risk.”

Just weeks ago, a proposal to sell off public lands in Utah and Nevada was stripped from the House version of the budget reconciliation bill after bipartisan backlash. Oregon Reps. Val Hoyle and Andrea Salinas voted against that amendment; Rep. Cliff Bentz voted in favor.

The post Oregon Public Land Sell-Off Included in Senate Budget Proposal appeared first on Oregon Wild.

This aerial image shows two adjacent forest stands within the Little Lava Fire burn area, in the Deschutes National Forest, just SE of Mount Bachelor. Single-selection thinning was done in both stands in 1978. This is when just a few individual trees within the stand are removed. The stand on the left side of the road was then commercially logged in 2019, which, as you can see in the photos, significantly reduced stand density and opened up the forest canopy. The stand on the right was undisturbed over the last 40 years.

When the Little Lava Fire burned through here last fall, much of the forest that was logged in 2019 resulted in high tree mortality. On the other side, the fire only burned and killed a few trees on the perimeter of the stand, but most are still green and alive.

Aggressive logging often makes fire risk worse

All too often, aggressive logging projects remove the large, mature trees that are the most fire resilient and leave behind smaller, younger trees that are more flammable. These projects also open the forest canopy, allowing more sun to reach and dry out the forest floor. Add in hotter, drier summers caused by climate change, and all of this can add up to increased fire risk and more flammable forests.

On the other hand, mature and old-growth forests across Oregon have unique adaptations to survive–and thrive–in fire-prone landscapes. Fire is natural and necessary for the health of these forests and the wildlife that depend on them for habitat. Larger and older trees, especially species like Ponderosa pine that are prevalent across forests in Central Oregon, develop thick, fire-resistant bark and self-prune their lower branches as they age, making them more resistant and resilient to wildfire. These forests also have more canopy cover than logged forests, creating cooler and wetter conditions on the forest floor that can reduce the risk of intense fire. Take a look at the top photo again; in the unlogged stand on the right, you can still see patches of snow (this photo was taken in late-April 2025). On the left, the soil in the open stand dried out much faster due to increased sun and wind exposure.

Despite the timber industry’s claims that more “active management” and “fuels reduction” are needed to prevent catastrophic wildfires, the science shows that logging is not preventing large wildfires. In fact, logging can often make fire risk and severity much worse. One Oregon study found that corporate-owned tree plantations burned at 30% higher severity than adjacent older stands on public lands. 

This has become a common talking point for the timber industry, who claim that forests are overgrown (and, thus, more susceptible to high-severity fire) due to a lack of management and that management (aka logging) is our best tool against climate-driven wildfires. This simple claim is driving much of the current national forest policy and an increase in poorly designed logging projects that are spreading like wildfire across the country.

Last fall’s Little Lava Fire, in the Deschutes National Forest, allowed us an opportunity to visit a recent burn area and see how forests that were commercially logged fared in the fire compared to adjacent forests that have not been logged as aggressively, and still maintain mature forest characteristics.

Touring the Little Lava Fire

Much like the other severe wildfires that have erupted across the west in recent years, this fire was driven by climate change–namely, high winds and drought-like conditions. 

The fire started near Little Lava Lake, the headwaters of the Deschutes River, from lightning strikes in early September 2024. High winds and dry conditions allowed the fire to quickly spread east towards the town of Sunriver, burning through logged forest, unlogged forest, and even fields of lava rock that are common in the area. 

Oregon Wild staff visited the burn area in April 2025 and sent up our trusty drone to take aerial photos of the burned forest. After referencing the photos with historical logging data, we found that previously logged forests still burned at high-severity and did not stop the fire.  We also found that, in some cases, logged stands burned much hotter than adjacent, unlogged stands.

Parts of the forest burned extremely hot, killing nearly everything. The above photo shows stands that were aggressively logged in the 80s and 90s. The forest in the photo underwent a “shelterwood cut,” a term that describes a very aggressive form of logging. Imagine a clearcut, but with a few “seed trees” scattered throughout the stand that are left standing, and you have a shelterwood cut. Like a clearcut, most of the fire-resistant mature and old-growth trees are removed, and what we are seeing here is the consequences of a younger, drier, and more flammable forest.

When thinning can help

No, logging (or “active management,” “fuels reduction,” etc) does not prevent large fires and, as the Little Lava Fire demonstrates, it can (and often does) make these fires more destructive. However, there are certainly circumstances where some lighter-touch thinning makes sense and can create healthier and more resilient forests.

While the timber industry, land management agencies, and many politicians like to use logging as a one-size-fits-all blanket policy solution for all forests, the answer is not quite as clear-cut (see what I did there?) as they would like.

In reality, Oregon’s forests are incredibly diverse and have evolved differently with fire. In some places, natural low-intensity fires were common, and Indigenous peoples managed fires to promote the growth of certain foods and habitats. In other places, natural and Indigenous use of fire was rare. Decades of logging and fire suppression have left some dry forest types, like many in Central Oregon, unnaturally dense.

Restoration-based thinning and prescribed burning projects that focus on removing small trees and brush (that have grown in due to a lack of natural fires) near communities and seek to restore old-growth conditions can be beneficial in these dry forests. Efforts like the Glaze Meadow restoration project near the town of Sisters have reduced fire risks while improving habitat for fish and wildlife.

Current proposals to expand logging on public forests

Unfortunately, several concerning proposals are making their way through Congress and the Trump Administration that would increase and expand logging projects on public lands.

One of the largest is the so-called “Fix Our Forests Act.” Despite its name, this bill is merely a timber industry giveaway that would allow more logging on public lands and remove public oversight, scientific review, and environmental analysis of those logging projects. The bill passed the House of Representatives in January and is now in danger of being voted on by the Senate and sent to President Trump’s desk.

Earlier this spring, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order and secretarial memo focused on expanding industrial logging across 60% of our National Forests–including millions of acres of roadless areas, old-growth forests, wilderness-protected lands, and critical wildlife habitat.

These proposals have nothing to do with reducing wildfire risk, and everything to do with handing control of our national public lands over to private industries that stand to profit off them.

What can you do

Contact your Senators today and tell them to oppose the Fix Our Forests Act. Reach out to your members of Congress and let them know that more logging is NOT the answer.

Advocate for the solutions that do work and do protect communities:

• Funding and investment in home hardening, defensible space, and community preparedness (learn about how you can make your home safer from fire) 
• Cultural and prescribed burning in forests that have become unnaturally dense due to fire suppression 
• Redirect resources used to log backcountry forests to restoration-based burning and small-diameter tree thinning projects in areas near homes and communities.

To learn more about fire and forests in Oregon, check out our blog about the Ten Things Oregonians Should Know About Forest Fires.

The post Little Lava Fire in Central Oregon shows logging does not prevent wildfire spread appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Key findings include:

• 76% of Oregonians—including 61% of rural residents—oppose selling off public lands to finance tax cuts. This comes as House Republicans recently advanced a proposal to sell hundreds of thousands of acres of public lands in Utah and Nevada. Oregon Representatives Maxine Dexter and Val Hoyle voted against the amendment in the House Natural Resources Committee, with Cliff Bentz voting for it.
  
  
• 74% believe the federal government should focus forest management on thinning small trees near homes and emergency services, rather than large-scale commercial logging. Both state and federal policy heavily subsidize logging lucrative large trees in the backcountry in the name of ‘fire preparedness’ over more effective ways to safeguard lives and communities.
  
  
• 72% support more protections for mature and old-growth forests. Over 1 million public comments were submitted nationally in favor of stronger safeguards during the Biden administration, but efforts have been stalled by U.S. Forest Service leadership.
  
  
• 67% opposed changing Endangered Species Act protections to remove habitat destruction from the definition of “harm” to wildlife. Right now, the law recognizes that “harm” includes not just directly killing or capturing wildlife—but also habitat destruction that makes it impossible for a species to feed, breed, or shelter.
  
  
• 67% oppose logging projects up to 10,000 acres in size without environmental review or public input—a controversial provision in the Fix Our Forests Act, which passed the U.S. House earlier this year and faces a Senate hearing soon.
  
  Senator Ron Wyden has notably commented that the Fix Our Forests Act  “…undermines bedrock environmental laws, and would allow poorly designed, large commercial projects that threaten community drinking water, wildlife and recreation opportunities to proceed with inadequate environmental review.”
  
  
• 65% oppose layoffs of public lands agency employees. The Trump administration has threatened additional “reduction in force” orders that put our public lands and communities at risk.

These views stand in stark contrast to the environmental policies promoted under President Trump and some Oregon lawmakers, including executive orders that placed logging above conservation.

“This poll affirms, once again, that Oregonians overwhelmingly favor policies that protect clean water, wildlife, and public lands for current and future generations—and reject partisan efforts to gut environmental safeguards,” said Oregon Wild spokesperson Arran Robertson.

The post Poll: Oregonians Oppose Trump’s Plans for Public Lands and the Environment appeared first on Oregon Wild.

WASHINGTON, DC— Today, Senators John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) introduced the Fix Our Forests Act (FOFA). In a giveaway to the timber industry, the bill – which is presented as a measure against wildfire – could open the door to unlimited logging across millions of acres of national forests, undermining bedrock environmental and public health laws. House Natural Resources Committee Chair Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) and Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) introduced companion legislation that passed the House in January 2025. 

The Senate version of FOFA arrived less than a week after President Trump’s Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, issued a memo that begins implementation of President Trump’s March 1 executive order to ramp up logging across over half of national forests. FOFA and Trump’s logging directives would both erode environmental laws and make it harder for members of the public to weigh in on government decisions, all of which could devastate forest health.

If passed, FOFA would allow logging on federal lands without scientific review and community input. The bill truncates ESA consultation requirements to protect threatened and endangered species and limits the right of citizens to judicial review, effectively barring communities from bringing lawsuits to hold federal agencies accountable.  

Both FOFA and the Trump administration’s recent actions call for changes in forest management that could ultimately worsen the risk of fire. The executive order seeks to increase timber targets, which would focus limited Forest Service staff on meeting commercial timber amounts rather than taking appropriate measures to reduce wildfire risk. These directives would also facilitate the removal of large old-growth trees that are naturally more fire-resilient. More logging will exacerbate the underlying causes of severe wildfire blazes – namely, dry forest conditions, caused by rising temperatures and a lack of precipitation due to climate change. 

The following is a statement from Earthjustice, Oregon Wild, Standing Trees, and the Center for Biological Diversity, groups in the Climate Forests Coalition.

“Whether we are talking about the Fix Our Forests Act or President Trump’s executive order on forests, we are talking about an attack on our national public lands. This Senate bill could open the door to unlimited logging of forests owned and cherished by all Americans. Cutting down our old-growth and mature trees will ultimately worsen climate change. Rather than handing the keys to the Trump administration to unleash a logging bonanza, Senators should propose an alternative bill focused on supporting sensible wildfire mitigation strategies such as home hardening, local emergency planning, and defensible space.”

Oregon Wild’s mission is to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and water as an enduring legacy. Oregon Wild is celebrating its 50th Anniversary this year.

The post Dem Senators Introduce Logging Bill That Would Hand Over Keys to National Forests to Trump Administration appeared first on Oregon Wild.

In response to a secretarial memo focused on expanded logging, Oregon Wild Conservation Director Steve Pedery issued the following statement, calling out the administration’s attempt to exploit public fear and override environmental safeguards for the benefit of the logging industry:

“This memo isn’t about protecting forests. It is about logging and looting 60% of America’s National Forest Lands, 112,646,000 acres, by declaring a fake emergency to justify weakening protections for our clean water, wildlife, and wildlands. When the Secretary of Agriculture says the primary goal is to ‘protect timber resources,’ it pulls the mask off this manufactured emergency.

This order would gut the ability of the American public to ensure that their clean drinking water and local forests are protected from poor logging practices These safeguards ensure that science, transparency, and community voices are part of the decision-making process. Gutting them only serves corporate logging interests.

The map shared by the Secretary is both vague and misleading. It includes areas that are off-limits to commercial logging and temperate rainforest areas where claims of high fire risk or other justifications are dubious at best. The chaotic and haphazard nature of the Secretarial Order’s release raises serious concerns about how these maps were produced, and who is really making decisions about Trump forest policy.

If this administration were serious about wildfire, it would invest in protecting homes and communities through programs to help homeowners with home hardening, defensible space, and emergency planning— not industrial logging in remote forests that destroys wildlife habitat and makes fire risks worse. The science is clear, and so is the motive behind this memo. Anyone who cares about clean water, wildlife, and public lands should join us in opposing this reckless scheme to loot our National Forests.”

Analysis

Impacts to Oregon in the President’s Executive Order and subsequent secretarial memo.

• Over 11.2 million acres in Oregon are impacted
• 64% of national forests in Oregon are impacted 
• Over 1 million acres of wilderness in Oregon are impacted 
• 47% – fraction of wilderness areas in Oregon impacted
• Over 1.5 million acres of roadless areas in Oregon are impacted 
• 76% – fraction of Oregon roadless areas impacted
• Over 1.6 million acres in Oregon of critical habitat impacted 
• Over 30% – fraction of Oregon critical habitat impacted

See NRDC’s full analysis 

Oregon Wild’s mission is to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and water as an enduring legacy. Oregon Wild is celebrating its 50th Anniversary this year.

The post Oregon Wild Statement on USDA Secretarial Memo: Looting 60% of America’s National Forests for Corporate Profit appeared first on Oregon Wild.

MEDFORD, OR — Medford, Ore., – Yesterday, Federal District Court Judge Ann Aiken ruled that the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) “Integrated Vegetation Management” (IVM) logging program illegally authorized the destruction of old-growth forest stands located within Late Successional Reserves. With this ruling, the court agreed that “gap creation” and “open seral” logging prescriptions within the Late Successional Reserves would have increased fire hazard while removing old-growth forest habitat.

Conservation groups from across Oregon challenged the IVM logging project with the goal of getting BLM forest managers to focus on fuels reduction and fire resiliency instead of logging old-growth forests to meet artificial timber targets.

“This ruling confirms that Late Successional Reserves are exactly what their name says,” said George Sexton, KS Wild Conservation Director. “These fire-resilient old-growth forest stands capture carbon while providing some of the best wildlife habitat left in southern Oregon.”

The first commercial IVM timber sales called Penn Butte and Late Mungers were located in the Williams Late Successional Reserve and would have removed over 400-acres of old-growth habitat through “open seral” logging and another 51 acres through “gap creation” clearcutting.

“Reckless timber sales like this are exactly why we need strong public oversight,” said John Persell, Staff Attorney for Oregon Wild. “Trump’s executive order to ramp up logging pushes for more destructive projects to benefit the timber industry, but the forests at Penn Butte and Late Mungers should be protected as key habitat and for carbon storage, not sacrificed for corporate profit.”

A primary problem with BLM’s IVM timber scheme was that timber planners hoped to avoid site-specific analysis and public input while removing old-growth forest habitat from Late Successional Reserves and increasing fire hazard in logged forest stands.

“If the BLM is interested in real fire-focused restoration, we would be fully supportive,” said stated Cascadia Wildlands Legal Director Nick Cady, “but that is not what the IVM logging program is. Aggressively logging wildlife habitat in the Late Successional Reserves that will increase fire hazard for the surrounding community is ridiculous. It demonstrates that this agency does not care what this community has been through and is only concerned with producing timber volume.” 

The successful legal challenge was argued by Meriel Darzen of the Crag Law Center on behalf of KS Wild, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands, and the Soda Mountain Wilderness Council. In the shadow of the Trump Administration’s anti-environmental Executive Orders, Crag remains committed to the rule of law.

###

Eugene-based Cascadia Wildlands defends and restores Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. The organization envisions vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and vibrant communities sustained by the unique landscapes of the Cascadia bioregion.

Oregon Wild’s mission is to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and water as an enduring legacy. Oregon Wild is celebrating its 50th Anniversary this year.

KS Wild‘s mission is to protect and restore wild nature in the Klamath-Siskiyou region of southwest Oregon and northwest California.

Through a unique model of “legal aid for the environment,” Crag Law Center provides free and low-cost legal services to people and organizations who are working on the ground to protect our environment, climate and communities.

The post Court Strikes Down Illegal BLM Logging in Protected Old-Growth Reserves appeared first on Oregon Wild.

The McKay Creek Project area encompasses forest stands as old as 119 years in parts of Multnomah and Washington counties. It spans the upper reaches of McKay Creek, a tributary of the Tualatin River, and also includes streams that flow east into the Multnomah Channel. To reach the project area from Oregon Wild’s Portland office, we crossed the St. Johns Bridge and cut through Forest Park. We then turned north on Skyline Boulevard, passing impressive homes tucked into the trees to the east and looking out toward the Coast Range to the west. 

Visiting Some of the Last Mature Forest Near Portland

We first stopped near the north end of Skyline Boulevard. Leaving the road, we walked into a classic moss and fern-filled Western Oregon forest. I found myself surrounded by towering Douglas firs and patches of red alder with spotted bigleaf maples and grand firs scattered about. It’s hard to imagine that these trees could be reduced to stumps, yet the BLM says it must convert these “overstocked” hardwoods and older conifers to younger stands for future “harvest.” As a result, fire hazard will be elevated for decades, and drivers passing by will see a wasteland with a few token trees left susceptible to wind. 

The steep slopes in many parts of the project area bring another concern into sharp focus. The BLM plans to log sharply dropping hillsides using cable systems to haul logs out. The removal of large trees will strip away the root systems that hold the soil together. Without these natural anchors, the risk of landslides during heavy rains or after a fire will increase greatly. The potential for slope failure feels more like a certainty when standing on these fragile inclines, surrounded by trees that play a crucial role in keeping the land stable.

Particularly concerning is the emphasis on “regeneration harvest”—a sanitized term for clearcutting—rather than restoration thinning that could allow mature stands to develop more natural old-growth characteristics in time. Under the guise of controlling native fungus to promote forest health, the BLM intends to cut down even the biggest, oldest trees here. Such an approach prioritizes rapid “timber production” at the expense of ecological stability. It overlooks the value of mature forests, which store more carbon, provide critical wildlife habitat, and contribute to climate mitigation in ways that younger, smaller trees simply cannot. The BLM’s focus on maximizing board feet over sustaining biodiversity and climate mitigation reveals a narrow vision that sacrifices long-term resilience for short-term gains.

A Vision for the Future of Our Forests

As we made our way deeper into project area, the beauty of the forest contrasted sharply with its likely fate. The towering trees, quiet streams, and rich underbrush were a testament to the intricate web of life that has evolved here. But much of this could be lost if clearcut, replaced by stumps and increased fire hazards.

The McKay Creek Project exemplifies a broader issue in public land management: federal agencies prioritizing timber targets over holistic stewardship. The proposed clearcutting here and its ripple effects on fire safety, water quality, and biodiversity show a troubling disregard for long-term environmental integrity and community well-being.

Leaving the project area and heading south on Skyline Boulevard, I was left with a mix of admiration for this landscape’s potential and concern for its future. The restoration opportunities for these mature stands in Portland’s backyard are tangible, as are the looming threats of flawed land management practices. If we want to protect places like McKay Creek, we must push for more thoughtful, ecologically sound approaches from the BLM that prioritize the health of public lands, watersheds, and the communities that depend on them.

The post Logging Proposed by the BLM Right in Portland’s Backyard appeared first on Oregon Wild.

I’m not the only one. The natural beauty and diversity of the area, and relative accessibility from major roads and nearby communities has made Waldo Lake and its watershed a popular (and booming) recreation destination – from mountain biking to backpacking to paddling.

Initial protection efforts for the area were driven by the urge to safeguard the unique and pristine waters of Waldo Lake, but efforts to protect the wild and diverse forests surrounding the lake were also active. The Waldo Lake Wilderness was established in 1984, and subsequent codifications of the Roadless Rule ensured even more wild lands in this spectacular landscape had protections from logging and road building – though much had already fragmented the surrounding Willamette National Forest. The North Fork Middle Fork Willamette River – from its source on the north end of Waldo Lake downstream 42 miles – was designated as a Wild & Scenic River in 1988. Superlatives abound. 

Fire has been no stranger in this rugged and diverse landscape. Historic fires shaped the high-elevation subalpine forests around Waldo Lake and the moist Douglas-fir, hemlock, and cedar forests downstream in the North Fork Middle Fork and Salt Creek watersheds for millennia. In recent years, the Warner Creek Fire burned the area around Bunchgrass Ridge in 1991 (sparking a protest and movement against post-fire logging), the 1996 Charlton Fire burned the north side of Waldo Lake, and several other small lightening-caused fires have burned in patches all around. These fires left natural legacies behind – charred snags, down logs, and remnant living trees – to form the base for rebuilding soil, wildlife habitat, and the next forest generation. 

When a lightning strike started a fire on Koch Mountain on August 1, 2022, near the headwaters of Black Creek on the west side of the lake, of course I paid attention. On August 6, I watched smoke rise from where I camped with my family, and wondered what would happen to some of my favorite places and trails. 

The fire burned in the steep terrain on the edge of the Wilderness for a few weeks. Firefighters were cautious in the steep terrain, and sensitive to the wild landscape and ecosystem. The fire  might well have fizzled out without reaching the lake or threatening nearby Oakridge were it not for a strong wind event at the peak of the hot, dry summer, which drove the fire north and east across the old Charlton burn, then west towards town – encompassing the Warner Creek fire area as well. In the end, the Cedar Creek fire impacted 127,000 acres, (including areas intentionally burned by firefighters to control the fire’s spread).

I didn’t get a chance to see the fire’s aftermath until nearly a year later. In July, I arranged a flight with LightHawk – a non-profit organization that pairs volunteer pilots with conservation groups – and my colleague Tim Ingalsbee with FUSEE (Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology). 

Tim is hardly a stranger to this landscape. He was one of the protesters who stopped planned post-fire logging in the Warner Creek Fire area, and he has a long history of activism promoting natural fire recovery and sound fire policy. He was interested to see the effects of this fire on the Warner Creek area so near and dear to his heart.  

Michael Sherman with Spring Fed Media also joined us to document the flight. (See linked videos below)

What we saw was emotional. On the way, we flew over the Holiday Farm Fire area in the McKenzie watershed. Much of that fire burned over private industrial timber lands, where young plantations burned fast and hot, and where any burned trees still standing were logged as soon as possible. The landscape was stark – while fire impacts from this 2020 fire are quite visible, the impacts of industrial clearcutting and roads on the landscape takes it to a new level. 

Once over the Willamette National Forest and the fresher Cedar Creek Fire, emotions shifted to the places I knew and loved. There was the outlet of the North Fork Middle Fork River, and the Charlton Fire – many of the legacies from 25 years ago turned to ash and the small recovering trees largely gone. There was the North Waldo Campground, where I started my first solo backpack trip in 2021 – with many burned trees but still clear blue water. And there, the Black Creek Canyon – a clear mix of fire severity, even where the fire burned for weeks, old-growth trees still green and standing tall. Over Bunchgrass Ridge, where the Warner Creek Fire burned, some of the young trees – regrowing for the past 20 years – with nothing left but their small trunks, while snags from the first fire still stand sentinel for this next round of regrowth. 

As we flew toward Oakridge, smoke from the recently-started Bedrock Fire in a nearby drainage was smothering the low-elevation hills and obscuring our view. 

A few months later, I finally had the chance to drive up into part of the fire area to get a closer view. The story on the ground was also one of a mix of burn severity and impact. Some areas were completely blackened – thin-barked mountain hemlock and fir trees were but standing husks, old snags and down logs converted to charcoal to feed the soil. There were also plenty of green patches that the fire didn’t touch, providing seed sources and shade for nearby burned areas. 

I also saw up-close what firefighting efforts can do on the ground and the limits to human intervention and prediction in these forces of nature: swaths of forest bulldozed as a fire line – sometimes clearly adjacent to the fire (or intentionally burned to reduce fuels – a common tactic) but others surrounded by green where the fire didn’t touch. Unfortunately, these activities left unnatural scars on the landscape.

The Willamette National Forest is not planning a massive post-fire logging operation in the Cedar Creek fire area. But some roadside tree removal is 

proposed, and I made note of burned old-growth trees – legacies for the next generation of forest – that might be in the path of such logging. We’ll be watching proposals here carefully, urging the Forest Service to only do what is necessary, and to preserve forest legacies across this landscape. 

What I saw from the air and the ground affirmed what I know about fire ecology from years of study and observation. Standing dead and downed trees are hanging on to the majority of the carbon they stored over many years, fresh growth is already coming back to become forage for deer and elk, birds and other wildlife are still using the burned areas, and there is added diversity in vegetation and forest structures.

What I saw also affirmed what I know about the importance of public lands. In the protected areas surrounding Waldo Lake, and within the bounds of Willamette National Forest, there is an opportunity for natural recovery of this burned landscape – standing in stark contrast to the private industrial lands where legacies were stripped away to move forward with another tree crop. 

We can’t log our way out of fires like this. We can’t even fight our way out of fires. We’ve seen again and again that fuel breaks and fire lines in the backcountry can’t stop wind-driven fire events. What we can do is address climate change and the conditions that drive hotter, dryer summers, stress native vegetation, and lead to bigger, more severe fires. 

We can also prepare our communities for the reality of climate-driven fires, investing in safe shelters and reducing the chances of home ignitions through home hardening and reducing fuels close to homes.  As the state moves forwards with landscape level strategies for addressing fire risk, funding needs to be directed to real solutions – for the climate and for communities.

Watch four short videos about the Cedar Creek Fire and our overflight 

The post Fire and diversity in the Cedar Creek Fire area appeared first on Oregon Wild.