View the full PIELC program and schedule

Friday, Feb. 28

Saturday, March 1

Sunday, March 2

Bryce Wade

The post Oregon Wild at PIELC appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Yesterday, State Forester Cal Mukumoto stunned the Oregon Board of Forestry by announcing his resignation. Acting Deputy State Forester Kate Skinner will assume the role of Acting State Forester while the Board begins the search for a permanent director at the Oregon Department of Forestry. Oregon Wild Conservation Director Steve Pedery issued the following statement: 

Oregon’s Governor and Board of Forestry must now find a new State Forester—someone ready to confront the toxic “good ol’ boy” culture of the agency, and the reality that it is captive to the logging interests it is supposed to regulate. These problems have existed within the agency for decades, and long pre-date Mukumoto.

In addition to the egregious behavior by agency leaders that came to light in recent months, this entrenched culture is also raising concerns that the Department of Forestry is slow-walking the implementation of the Private Forest Accords (PFA)—a historic agreement between conservation and timber interests to modernize Oregon’s logging rules. This has been compounded by Governor Kotek’s failure to include funding for PFA implementation in her most recent state budget proposal. The lack of funding and slow pace of PFA implementation could put this historic compromise at risk of being rejected by federal agencies.

It’s time for both the Governor and Board of Forestry to reform this broken state agency.

They must work to rebuild the Department of Forestry as a professional, science-driven agency dedicated to protecting Oregon’s forests, wildlife habitat, and clean water. They must ensure that this agency is independent of the logging interests it regulates, that it prioritizes the protection of our state’s environment, and that its leadership and workplace culture reflect the values of Oregon.   

This toxic culture of the Oregon Department of Forestry took decades to create, and past Governors and legislative leaders failed to address it. Governor Kotek has an opportunity to work with the Board of Forestry and ensure that Oregon’s next State Forester has a mandate to reform this broken agency, implement the historic Private Forest Accords, and to serve the people of Oregon. Oregon Wild and our thousands of members will be watching and together we stand ready to hold the State of Oregon accountable.

The post Oregon’s State Forester Resigns appeared first on Oregon Wild.

“For years, conservationists have labored to influence decisions affecting public lands…Hundreds have invested time and effort examining sites, studying maps, adjusting boundaries, deciphering the subtleties of bureaucratic prose, and pressing convictions upon elected representatives. Then came November 4, 1980. Today, conservation accomplishments, decision making processes, and indeed, the public lands are in danger of being swept away…”

Those were the opening words of the January-February 1981 Oregon Wild newsletter. Ronald Reagan had just defeated Jimmy Carter, Republicans had taken the Senate for the first time in two decades, and the new power brokers aligned with anti-public lands extremists known as the Sagebrush Rebellion. To put it bluntly, shit did not look good.

Four and a half decades later, we can look back and see what followed—years of ups and downs punctuated by a steady series of wins for the wild that would have seemed improbable in 1981. Back then, the organization was young, just finding its footing, while the logging industry was an ever-present, dominant force.

Like a mountain goat facing a sheer cliff towering thousands of feet overhead, we didn’t let the scale of the challenge or the long odds of success deter us. We picked our way up the slope—sometimes slowly and persistently, sometimes with bold leaps—and reached every summit because we never gave up.

As we enter a new era with renewed challenges, the stakes are high and the obstacles immense. Here are a few stories from times we defied the odds to secure victories for nature. Let them remind us that we’ll do it again.

From ‘Rebellion’ to RARE victory

After the Reagan revolution put Interior Secretary James Watt in power, conservationists feared for the very existence of public lands. But we dug deep and went to battle for roadless areas. In a review process mandated by Congress, the early-’80s Forest Service had purposely stuck their heads in the sand – identifying only 262,000 acres out of 3 million-plus acres available as wilderness-quality. So, we sued the bastards and the threat of litigation lit a fire under Congress. In 1984 over 850,000 acres of Wilderness were protected in the Oregon Forest Wilderness Act including beloved landscapes like the North Fork John Day Wilderness and the Sky Lakes.

Riding out the rider from hell

When the northern spotted owl was listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Oregon Wild and allies seized the moment to challenge the entire timber sale program in the Pacific Northwest. A federal judge agreed and issued an injunction, halting old-growth logging projects across the region.

Never one to shy away from bending the rules to benefit big timber, Senator Mark Hatfield introduced the notorious Section 318 “Rider from Hell” in 1989, releasing 18 ancient forest logging projects from the injunction. While this move won the day for the timber industry, public and legal pressure to stop the epidemic of old-growth clearcutting continued unabated. Just four years later, the Clinton Forest Summit led to the creation of the world’s first ecosystem management plan—the Northwest Forest Plan—which marked the end of the heyday of ancient forest logging.

From privatization to protection

In the days following Donald Trump’s election in 2016, Oregon got an early preview of public land privatization proposals when the State Land Board accepted bids to sell off the 82,000-acre Elliott State Forest to private timber interests. The deal seemed final. But then Oregon Wild and our allies raised holy hell. Bob Sallinger warned in The Oregonian that Governor Kate Brown would be “haunted for the rest of her career” if she voted to sell the Elliott. Once seen as inevitable, the sale was halted when we raised enough of a ruckus to persuade all three Land Board members (including Republican Dennis Richardson and Treasurer Tobias Read, both of whom flipped their votes) to reverse the decision. Today, the vast majority of old growth in the Elliott is protected under a new Habitat Conservation Plan.

A Devil of a time

Located deep in the heart of the Oregon Coast Range, Devil’s Staircase was one of the last roadless areas left unprotected by the 1984 Wilderness bill. In 2009, Oregon Wild and many allies reignited a campaign to protect the area’s towering ancient trees and mythical, stair-stepped waterfall. Despite multiple near misses, the Oregon Wildlands Act eventually passed as part of a larger legislative package and was, somewhat surprisingly, signed into law by Donald Trump in 2019. The new law also designated the Molalla River and over 250 miles of tributaries to the Rogue River as Wild & Scenic. This hard-won victory is a testament to Oregon Wild’s relentless commitment over the decades to securing a protected natural heritage.

Big trees trump Trump

In the final hours of the first Trump administration, a political appointee overseeing the Forest Service approved a rollback of protections for large trees across seven million acres of National Forests. This action directly attacked the Eastside Screens—a rule established alongside the Northwest Forest Plan to protect the last remaining older forests east of the Cascades. These trees, 21 inches in diameter or larger, represent only 3% of trees still standing in eastern Oregon, yet hold 42% of the forest’s carbon.

Despite efforts from the collaborative-industrial complex (including scientists funded by the Forest Service) to defend Trump’s decision, Oregon Wild and our allies immediately mounted a legal challenge. In August 2023, a magistrate judge ruled overwhelmingly in our favor, citing violations of the Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and other laws. In April, another judge confirmed this ruling, effectively reinstating the Eastside Screens. When Forest Service attorneys dropped their appeal in September, a four-year battle to protect ancient forests across seven million acres finally came to a close.

Mountain goat photo by Drew Watson

The post Defying Gravity appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Bob’s dedication leaves a lasting mark on the diverse landscapes of Oregon, from the sweeping Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, where greater sandhill cranes find sanctuary, to the ancient old-growth forests that shelter spotted owls and marbled murrelets, and the coastal dunes where snowy plovers once again dart across the sand.

To live in Oregon during Bob’s lifetime was to know there was a relentless champion fighting for the places that sustain both people and nature. His legacy will endure, and we remain deeply grateful for the inspiration he provided.

“It was an honor to call Bob a friend,” said Steve Pedery, Oregon Wild’s Conservation Director. “His grace and good humor made him a delight to be around, and no one will ever match the passion, energy, and tenacity he brought to his advocacy for the wildlife, habitat, and public lands of Oregon. I believe the best way to honor Bob is by carrying on his work to protect the birds, wetlands, and forests he loved so dearly.”

The post Honoring Bob Sallinger, Conservation Champion appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Jim Kelly, Chair of the Board of Forestry, remarked, “At the end of the day, most Oregonians don’t want our state forests to be managed like a commercial tree farm.” His statement underscores a widely held sentiment, but the importance of moving forward with this plan extends beyond mere public preference—it’s imperative.

Decades of over-exploitation have plagued Oregon’s State Forests, compounded by rampant clearcutting on privately owned industrial tree farms dominating the Coast Range landscape. This mismanagement has pushed numerous species to the brink of extinction.

The Habitat Conservation Plan represents a compromise, albeit one we believe provides a vital opportunity for species to begin recovering. To truly foster the revival of imperiled species like the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, red tree voles, salmon, marten, and torrent salamanders, the passage of the HCP is an essential step in the right direction.

“State Forester Cal Mukumoto and the Board of Forestry did the right thing for our shared forests, fish, and birds, all in the face of intense opposition,” said Oregon Wild State Forest Program Coordinator Casey Kulla. “Oregonians spoke up, and the Board of Forestry listened. There’s a lot of hope today for the future of these forests that so many of us treasure and rely on.”

The post Compromise Conservation Plan Advances for Oregon State Forests appeared first on Oregon Wild.

One of my favorite trails is tucked away in the central Coast Range, along the North Fork Smith River. The trail takes you through a steep river canyon, past enormous Douglas-fir, moss-draped bigleaf maples, and waterfalls. This area of the Siuslaw National Forest is home to threatened and rare wildlife species (from salamanders to owls), and it is designated as a Special Interest Area and Late Successional Reserve under the forest’s Management Plan and the famous Northwest Forest Plan. 

The Forest Service is planning a logging project here that might be incredibly concerning if not for the constraints of these plans – namely, ensuring that management focuses exclusively on thinning young plantations for the purpose of restoring old-growth and riparian forest habitat that help threatened species. 

In far Eastern Oregon, there is another forested corridor – one that connects Hells Canyon to the Eagle Cap Wilderness. This part of the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest has been identified by scientists as one of the most important and irreplaceable connectivity corridors on the continent. The landscape here is about as diverse and spectacular as it gets. When I first visited, I camped along Lick Creek. I was struck by the majesty of the mountain views, the huge scattered ponderosa pines, and dense stands of fir, larch, and spruce. I saw evidence of natural regrowth after fire. I heard my first wolf howl and saw wild salmon in the stream. 

What is a forest plan?

Every national forest has a guiding management plan, as required under the National Forest Management Act. In Oregon, most of these plans were completed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when logging, roading, grazing, and mining had already fragmented most intact blocks of habitat and cut down most large and old trees over a vast landscape. These forest plans aspired to break with the destructive activities of the past and envision more “sustainable” management. Though they have often fallen short of their aspirations, these new forest plans did start to consider uses that weren’t exclusively extractive. They outlined management guidelines and direction for everything from recreation, logging, Wilderness designations, wildlife needs, and other public values – kind of like a zoning plan for a forest. Plans were intended to be revised every 15 years or when conditions significantly change. Small amendments can be made in the interim.  

Today, revisions and amendments are underway to make substantial, and potentially detrimental, changes to forest plans that touch nearly every national forest in Oregon, from the iconic Northwest Forest Plan to northeast Oregon’s Blue Mountains. 

The Northwest Forest Plan 

In Western Oregon, initial forest management plans saw major new developments almost immediately when, after decades of habitat destruction, northern spotted owls, marbled murrelets, and salmon were listed under the Endangered Species Act. The Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) was developed as an attempt to strike a balance between logging and protecting habitat. In 1994, the NWFP amended plans for the Siuslaw, Mount Hood, Willamette, Umpqua, Rogue River-Siskiyou, and Deschutes National Forests, as well as Bureau of Land Management lands within the range of the northern spotted owl.

However, the NWFP has always been bigger than just one species. In defining areas for protection and setting strong standards for restoration, the NWFP has led to great progress in restoring some of the damage done by decades of unsustainable logging – protecting drinking water, keeping other wildlife off the endangered species list, restoring salmon runs, stabilizing the climate, and improving quality of life which is the foundation of the growing regional economy. 

Efforts to weaken the Northwest Forest Plan began as soon as it was finalized. The most consequential attack came from timber interests that opposed forest and habitat protections on Western Oregon BLM lands. They claimed logging should be the primary use of these public lands. A lawsuit settlement, initiated under the George W Bush administration, led to a revision of the BLM’s management plans in 2016. The revision essentially removed 2 million acres from the conservation framework of the NWFP, allowing more intense logging and shrinking reserves.

In 2015, the Forest Service began considering if and how to revise management plans for national forests within the NWFP area, but the revision process was shelved during the Trump administration. Now, a federal advisory committee has been convened to inform potential amendments to forest plans in Western Oregon, focusing on addressing wildfire risk, climate change, old-growth forests, tribal engagement, and rural communities and workforce.

Blue Mountains Forest Plans

Major adjustments had to be made to Eastern Oregon’s forest plans around the same time as the Northwest Forest Plan. Recognizing the need to address the rampant degradation of wildlife habitat across the region, the Eastside Screens were put in place. Among efforts to maintain wildlife habitat, the Screens protected trees 21 inches in diameter or larger. These protections have many ecological benefits, and they also helped focus the agency and communities on building common ground, rather than fighting over old-growth logging. 

Covering 5.5 million acres, the three National Forests of Eastern Oregon’s Blue Mountains – the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman – have been grouped together for revision. Starting in the early 2000s, a series of failed efforts at plan revisions have provided a sneak peek of the agency’s intentions. In those previous processes, the Forest Service had an opportunity to find a balance that protected undeveloped areas, embraced new science, and brought management of these public lands in line with the modern era. Instead, their proposals adopted an outdated vision of rural economics by prioritizing extractive industries like logging and livestock, while de-emphasizing the importance of natural and cultural values like clean water, recreation, salmon, wildlife, quality of life, and carbon storage.

The Forest Service has re-initiated a new revision process for the Blue Mountains very much in character with their previous attempts. A lot is at stake in this incredibly diverse region identified by scientists as being of global importance for wildlife connectivity and carbon storage. These forests have long been subject to logging, excessive road building, overgrazing, and the exclusion of natural fires. Their recovery from past abuse, and the promise of a healthy future – for the forests, streams, wildlife, and people who depend on this landscape – hangs on a new plan’s outcome.

A huge project covering 87,000 acres, called Morgan Nesbit, is being planned here under the guidance of the 30-year-old Forest Management Plan. In contrast to the constraints embraced by the Siuslaw National Forest, a proposed amendment to the Wallowa-Whitman Forest Plan would allow logging of steep slopes and the largest 3% of trees that remain.

Limits and opportunities 

While forest plans are incredibly consequential, they’re rarely perfect. Most are a compromise. For example, the Northwest Forest Plan, though celebrated for providing some protections for wildlife habitat and ancient forests, still allowed logging and road building in ecologically critical areas and did not fully protect mature and old-growth forests. 

Forest plans are also subject to amendments and rule changes, directed by changing presidential administrations and agency discretion. The NWFP area saw rule changes that increased logging under the Bush administration. In Eastern Oregon, piecemeal amendments are often made to accommodate logging the largest trees under the guise of “restoration” and fuel reduction. The Trump administration tried to do away with those protections entirely. 

Revisions and amendments to forest plans can be a good opportunity to reflect evolving public values and offer beneficial guidance for managing our public lands for clean water, natural ecosystems, wildlife connectivity, climate stability, fire resilience, and more.  Rather than loosening standards, what we need from forest plans are more enforceable sideboards that ensure the protection of large trees and mature forests, water, and connected wildlife habitat. They should make the case for Wilderness or Wild and Scenic River protection, and set the stage for the landscape-scale preservation of natural areas and restoration of ecosystems necessary to address the dual climate and biodiversity crises and help meet national land and water conservation goals. Destructive activities like commercial logging, livestock grazing, backcountry fire suppression, and maintaining high road densities should be reduced.

With these sideboards in place, the Forest Service can focus on real restoration of watersheds that prepare for the return of salmon to their native streams, connecting habitats for species that need to migrate to adapt to climate change, and enhancing habitat degraded by mismanagement. But given the process and outcomes we’ve seen from recent revision efforts that always seem to move toward greater agency discretion and less conservation, it’s hard to feel optimistic that the Forest Service is heading in that direction.

This is why, at the same time, we need strong Administrative direction and durable protections for the landscapes, forests, and waterways that are so important for the future of biodiversity and a livable planet. To achieve this, Oregon Wild’s ongoing campaigns can complement and direct where forest plans go.

• Our Climate Forest Campaign is working to create a strong national rule to ensure forest plans protect mature and old-growth forests. Without a rule, the Forest Service has struggled to implement the vision of President Biden to protect these forests as a climate solution, and instead continues to plan and implement destructive logging projects across the country.
   
• With the Nez Perce Tribe and other conservation allies, we went to court and defeated an illegal effort to undermine forest plan protections for the largest 3% of trees left in Eastern Oregon. Now we’re working together to scale back piecemeal amendments to allow destructive logging proposals like Morgan Nesbit.
   
• We are working to pass Wilderness and Wild & Scenic River designations across the state. These are the best ways to protect Oregon’s remaining wildlands and waters for their many ecological and cultural values. Forest plans can ensure these areas are not degraded and support the case for their permanent protection until legislation is passed. 

Together, we have a long history of speaking up for our vision and values. We’ll be counting on you to let the Forest Service and elected leaders know what you value about our national forests and public lands.

The post The future of forest plans: A look east and west appeared first on Oregon Wild.

Today, the Forest Service took the first official step in its long-rumored effort to amend the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan.

Oregon Wild Conservation Director Steve Pedery:

The visionary Northwest Forest Plan was intended to protect and restore mature and old-growth forests and imperiled salmon and wildlife on federal public lands in the Pacific Northwest.  It was the first landscape-level ecosystem protection plan adopted anywhere in the world and remains an international model for conservation. The plan has had enormous benefits for clean water, salmon, and wildlife because of its protected reserve system. These reserves, with their general prohibition on logging forests over 80 years old, have allowed many areas to recover from the epidemic of old-growth clearcutting that ravaged the region in the 1970s and 1980s.

The announcement today comes just a few days after the end of the COP 28 climate conference in Dubai, where nations from around the globe spoke to the urgent need to pursue climate and carbon solutions–including the protection of mature and old-growth forests.  Unfortunately, the document the Forest Service released today is dangerously vague about its goals when it comes to carbon and logging. While it rightly acknowledges President Biden’s Executive Order 14072 on forests and climate change and speaks extensively about the risks climate change poses to forests, the agency ignores the EO’s related direction to retain and enhance carbon storage as a natural climate solution. While we applaud the document’s acknowledgment of the need to better consult tribal communities and protect tribal treaty rights, it mostly ignores the Northwest Forest Plan’s importance for ecosystem services such as salmon and clean drinking water.

In the coming months, it will be very important that conservation groups, tribes, scientists, and concerned citizens work together to ensure that the Forest Service does not weaken protections for our mature and old-growth forests, clean water, wildlife, and climate here in the Pacific Northwest. The Biden administration has given the Forest Service clear direction about the need to recover mature and old-growth forests as a natural climate and carbon solution. Through grassroots activism, public education, policy advocacy, and the courts, we need to work hard to ensure that direction is followed, and to ensure that the Forest Service adopts strong protections for mature and old-growth forests all across the country.

The post Forest Service releases “dangerously vague” proposal to amend the Northwest Forest Plan appeared first on Oregon Wild.

“The team’s analysis on clearcutting found that 26% of the forested area within the 80 selected watersheds experienced clearcutting between 2000 and 2022,” said the report. “This is equivalent to approximately 584 square miles of land…. or 25 square miles, per year.”

The 584 sq miles of clearcutting in the Coast Range is only the amount in drinking watersheds, it doesn’t factor in the rest of the mountain range. Many of these forests have been clearcut more than once.

“Anyone that has driven through the Coast Range has seen the jarring clearcuts. Now, one of the premier scientific agencies on the planet has demonstrated just how extensive that logging has been,” said Erik Fernandez of Oregon Wild. “Seeing that several watersheds have had over 50% of their drinking watershed logged was of particular concern.” 

The report is the result of a NASA DEVELOP 10-week assessment study co-developed with Oregon Wild.

Download the report

Key statistics from the NASA report

• Total square miles of logging in drinking watersheds in the Coast Range = 584 
• Seaside drinking watershed: 58% logged in past 20 years
• Lincoln City drinking watershed: 34% logged in past 20 years
• Rockaway Beach: 78% logged in past 20 years

Studies have demonstrated that clearcut logging, as well as the practices that accompany it, like road building and aerial pesticide spraying, increase sediment and other pollutants flowing into streams and drinking water sources. While the recent Private Forest Accord increased no-logging buffers around streams and added some protections for steep slopes, communities remain concerned about the extent of clearcutting in their drinking watersheds and short-term and cumulative impacts of industrial logging. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality is responsible under the federal Clean Water Act for protecting water quality.

“Companies are logging a vast landscape–both public and private land–that people depend on for drinking water, treating the forest like a crop rotation instead of the complex and living system that it truly is,” said Casey Kulla, state forest policy coordinator for Oregon Wild. “In the Coast Range, Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality needs to be focused squarely on protecting the quality and quantity of water from these forests. Polluters need to be held accountable for known water quality failures.”

Beyond issues with water quality, clearcut logging has also been shown to decrease the quantity of water available for decades after the logging occurs. When a forest is cut, the roots of the trees begin to break down and the soil no longer stores moisture over time, so water drains out of the clearcut more rapidly, creating high-intensity pulses. The young, growing forests that are planted in the wake of a clearcut take up vast amounts of water, which can leave downstream communities in drought, such as what happened to Yachats in 2015. 

Cities and rural cooperative water associations along the Oregon Coast Range are highly motivated to purchase their drinking watersheds to manage the land primarily for water quality and quantity. Unfortunately, forestland in the Coast and Coast Range remains prohibitively expensive for many communities and state agencies have been slow to respond to the threat of degraded drinking watersheds from logging. In the 2023 legislative session, the Oregon Legislature directed $5 million to community drinking watershed purchases.

“Oregon legislators deserve credit for taking steps that support communities working to protect their drinking water,” said Kulla. “However, more funding is needed for these critical purchases. We hope this analysis from NASA highlights the importance of these investments and that Legislators representing rural communities in the Coast Range and elsewhere will be leaders on this issue in Salem.”

The NASA/Oregon Wild project area primarily encompassed industrial forestlands (owned by Weyerhaeuser, Roseburg Forest Products, Stimson, and others) as well as state, federal, tribal, and municipal/county-owned lands. Private lands logging is typically clearcut logging whereas public lands logging is a mixture of thinning and clearcut logging.

Coast Range residents who want to stay informed about what happens in their drinking watersheds can sign up for the Oregon Department of Forestry’s notification system, FERNS. For a step-by-step tutorial, visit Your Forest Watershed and sign up at the Oregon Department of Forestry’s E-Notification page. 

The post NASA Maps and Report Highlight Oregon’s Clearcutting Epidemic appeared first on Oregon Wild.