By: Noah Angell, Communications Fellow

In these trying times it’s easy to feel helpless, as if our voices don’t matter, our efforts too small, or the systems we’re up against too deeply rooted to change. I’ve felt that too. Working in conservation, especially as a Latino who has had to learn and navigate these systems that weren’t built with our communities in mind, those moments of doubt can feel overwhelming.

But that feeling, although very real and understandable, isn’t the truth. One thing I have always done is to show up, to create that space, to engage no matter what, because showing up is sometimes the hardest part. That is exactly what we need now. There are many ways to engage, ways that go beyond just simply voting, and when we do, collectively, we will be able to see and feel the impact of our actions. Change doesn’t always start big, it starts when people decide they will no longer stay silent and continue submitting to the status quo. However, change cannot start and will not happen unless we are loud and show up, together.

Here in Eugene, Oregon we are surrounded by natural beauty and a strong culture of environmental values and appreciation for nature. But these values and appreciation only matter if we actively engage, and in this case if we actively participate and advocate, especially at a time when environmental protections are being rolled back at a federal level, our neighbors and immigrant communities are being systematically targeted, and frontline communities are feeling these impacts the most.

This blog is meant to provide a quick guide to engagement— what it is, how you can engage, what it can look like, and where you can plug in locally.

What is Civil Engagement and Why Does it Matter?

Civil engagement is how the general public, both as individuals or groups, can participate in shaping decisions and addressing concerns that affect our communities. The first example you may think of is voting, and you would be correct. However, while voting is incredibly important, it’s really just the beginning.

Civic engagement can include things such as:

Local organizations you can support and resources you can share/Organizaciones locales que puedes apoyar:

Participando en Estos Tiempos Difíciles

En estos tiempos difíciles es fácil sentirse impotente, como si nuestras voces no importaran, como si nuestros esfuerzos fueran demasiado pequeños o como si los sistemas contra los que estamos luchando estuvieran demasiado arraigados para cambiar. Yo también lo he sentido. Trabajando en conservación, especialmente como latino que ha tenido que aprender y navegar sistemas que no fueron construidos pensando en nuestras comunidades, esos momentos de duda pueden sentirse aplastante.

Pero ese sentimiento, aunque muy real y comprensible, no es la verdad. Algo que siempre he hecho es presentarme, crear ese espacio, participar sin importar qué, porque dar el paso y hacerse presente a veces es lo más difícil. Y eso es exactamente lo que necesitamos ahora. Hay muchas formas de participar, más allá de simplemente votar, y cuando lo hacemos colectivamente, podemos ver y sentir el impacto de nuestras acciones. El cambio no siempre empieza en grande; empieza cuando las personas deciden que ya no se quedarán en silencio ni seguirán aceptando el estado de las cosas. El cambio no puede comenzar, y no ocurrirá, si no alzamos la voz y nos hacemos presentes, juntos.

Aquí en Eugene, Oregon, estamos rodeados de belleza natural y de una fuerte cultura de valores ambientales y aprecio por la naturaleza. Pero esos valores solo importan si participamos activamente, si nos involucramos y defendemos lo que creemos, especialmente en un momento en el que las protecciones ambientales están siendo debilitadas a nivel federal, nuestras comunidades vecinas e inmigrantes están siendo sistemáticamente atacadas, y las comunidades de primera línea son las que sienten estos impactos con mayor fuerza.

Este blog busca ofrecer una guía rápida sobre la participación cívica: qué es, cómo puedes involucrarte, cómo puede verse en la práctica y dónde puedes conectarte a nivel local.

¿Qué es la Participación Cívica y Por Qué Importa?

La participación cívica es la manera en que el público en general, sea de forma individual o en grupo, puede influir en decisiones y abordar problemas que afectan a nuestras comunidades. El primer ejemplo que puede venirte a la mente es votar, y es correcto. Sin embargo, aunque votar es sumamente importante, es solo el comienzo.

La participación cívica también puede incluir:

The post Engaging During These Trying Times / Participando en Estos Tiempos Difíciles  first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 21, 2026 

Roseburg, Oregon — Today, a coalition of conservation organizations filed suit challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) “42 Divide Forest Management Plan” (42 Divide) near Camas Valley, Oregon. The agency proposes to aggressively log thousands of acres of diverse forest stands, even though more than half the land is in reserves set aside for habitat conservation. The area targeted for logging covers nearly 7,000 acres of public lands within the checkerboard of public and private lands in Douglas County, already heavily impacted by private industrial clearcuts. 

The forests and waterways within the project area are home to federally protected northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, Oregon Coast coho salmon, and BLM designated sensitive species western pond turtles. The targeted area contains healthy, diverse stands of mature forest, including Douglas fir, cedar and madrone, and is home to a great diversity of plant, animal, and fungal life. Not only will the project negatively impact these species, the BLM itself recognizes that it will increase fire risk in the area by creating hundreds of tons of post-logging slash.

Heavy thinning and clearcutting will make these forests more vulnerable to wildfire. Logging removes large trees with thick bark and protective forest canopies. This tends to make the forest hotter, drier, and windier, drying out fuels and driving more extreme fire behavior. Logging also stimulates the growth of hazardous surface and ladder fuels. Despite community concerns, BLM wants to conduct logging that makes wildfire risk and hazard worse for surrounding communities for decades. 

“Our organizations are challenging 42 Divide out of great concern that it does not advance BLM’s purported purposes of restoration and resilience, instead threatening imperiled wildlife, increasing fire hazard, and decreasing these forests’ resilience to disturbance,” said Peter Jensen, staff attorney with Eugene-based Cascadia Wildlands. “The fish and wildlife within the area, as well as the communities in and around these public lands, are put at greater risk by BLM’s timber-centric agenda and disregard for ecosystem needs, public outcry, and federal environmental law.”

The lawsuit alleges the project violates federal law and the agency’s own regulations by failing to protect older forest stands in late successional reserves (LSRs). Late successional reserves are designed to protect remaining older, structurally complex forest–the highest value spotted owl nesting and roosting habitat, and to promote forests maturing into the types of habitat essential to spotted owls where the forest does not currently function as such. BLM’s analysis and ultimate conclusion that this project would not significantly affect the environment failed to address key issues, omitted necessary analysis of critical resource issues and wildlife management concerns, and ultimately left more questions than answers and more controversy than collaboration with the public. 

”BLM continues to wrap large logging projects targeting mature and old-growth forests in a veneer of ‘restoration’ and “resilience”, despite the research showing the logging would negatively impact protected wildlife and increase wildfire risk, and despite the clear legal mandate to protect these forests,” said Brenna Bell, senior staff attorney, Crag Law Center. “It should not require legal action to get this federal agency to follow its own management plan and manage public lands to benefit more than just the timber industry.”

BLM first proposed the 42 Divide in November 2021, subsequently issuing draft planning documents and pausing the project a few times, most recently for further study and endangered species analysis before ultimately issuing the December 2025 decision. The conservation organizations, along with local community members, engaged at every public comment opportunity, voicing their concerns. To the agency’s credit, BLM deferred over 400 acres of logging in occupied northern spotted owl habitat, but myriad other concerns raised by the plaintiffs and community members remained unresolved. 

“In such a diverse and important ecosystem, home to sensitive and imperiled wildlife species, BLM must do better,” said Janice Reid of Umpqua Watersheds. “The agency must conserve and protect imperiled wildlife species and their habitats, and demonstrate compliance with federal environmental laws before authorizing such large-scale industrial forestry practices on public lands.” 

“The BLM continues to shirk its obligations to the public and the law in its pursuit of large commercial logging projects,” said John Persell with Oregon Wild. “Aggressive logging in these protected areas not only endangers fish and wildlife, but it also adds to the cumulative destruction of the landscape already ravaged by the surrounding private-land clearcuts. Public lands are supposed to be a refuge from this kind of destruction, not an extension of it.”

The organizations are represented by attorneys from Crag Law Center and Cascadia Wildlands. 

The post Conservation Groups Challenge Feds’ Illegal 42 Divide Logging Plan in Western Oregon first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 14, 2026 

Missoula, Mont. — Today, a coalition of wildlife advocates filed a complaint in the Federal District Court for the District of Montana against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for failing to designate critical habitat for wolverine, listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in November of 2023. The law requires the Service to designate critical habitat within a year of listing, but the agency has not done so nor issued a proposed rule even though only about 300 wolverines remain in the Lower 48 states.

Scientific studies show critical habitat designation is a primary driver in the recovery of imperiled species. As such, in the Endangered Species Act, Congress directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to provide a “means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved,” with explicit deadline requirements to do so.

The wildlife advocates seek to promote wolverine recovery by ensuring the most important areas for supporting these populations are protected via a court-ordered, agreed upon deadline for the agency to designate critical habitat. 

Quotes:

“For over a decade, the Fish and Wildlife Service has dragged its feet on providing wolverines the protections the Endangered Species Act requires despite clear science showing their imperilment,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director with Cascadia Wildlands. “Its time for the feds to follow the law and ensure these amazing animals have the habitat protections they need to survive and recover.”

“Wolverines are just hanging on—down to roughly 300 individuals. They deserve and desperately need all the protections guaranteed by law after being recognized as threatened, including critical habitat” said Matthew Bishop, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. “Having areas set aside as critical habitat is a major—if not the most important—factor in helping threatened and endangered wildlife recover. Given wolverines’ small population size and climate change quickly shrinking the snowy habitat they rely on to survive, time is of the essence.”

“The endurance and tenacity of citizens actively working to protect iconic wolverines are exceeded only by the wolverines themselves. It’s time to relieve the wolverines of the threats to their existence including habitat loss and trapping,” said Larry Campbell, conservation director at Friends of the Bitterroot.

“In an age when wild, undisturbed areas have already become too rare, we believe it is vital that the USFWS identify and protect the critical habitat the wolverine, a species which perhaps best symbolizes the spirit of wildness, needs to survive,” said Jeff Juel, forest policy director for Friends of the Clearwater. “And this means improving core habitat security and also landscape connectivity so this wide-ranging species can increase its precariously low population of only about 300 in the Lower 48 states to fully recover across its historic home range in the Northern U.S. Rocky Mountains and beyond.”

“Wolverines must be afforded the full protections of critical habitat so their habitat does not become riddled with roads and human developments,” said Swan View Coalition Chair Keith Hammer. “Without habitat protections in place, the species is doomed.”

“Wolverines are wide ranging scavengers,” said Mike Garrity, executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies. “To recover wolverines, their habitat needs to be protected and trapping prohibited—neither of which is currently happening.”

“No critter exemplifies our nation’s wilderness heritage more than the tenacious and beautiful wolverine,” said George Nickas, executive director of Wilderness Watch. “Designating and protecting their critical habitat throughout their range is essential to wildlands preservation.”

“Wolverines are the canaries in the coal mine. To the extent that we can protect them from climate change, we’ll protect ourselves,” said John Meyer, executive director of Cottonwood Environmental Law Center. 

“​​Protecting wolverine habitat is essential to their survival. To neglect that duty under the ESA is to turn a blind eye to the wolverine’s future,” said KC York, founder and president of Trap Free Montana.

“Without protected critical habitat there is no future for the intrepid wolverine,” said Connie Poten, Footloose Montana board chair. “This rare, iconic animal is down to less than 300 individuals in the U.S. Already in a precarious state due to the shrinking snowpack needed to bear and nurture their young, wolverines must have a wide-ranging protected habitat whether occupied or not. This means no traps or snares, as trapping is one of the leading reasons why they are now listed as threatened.”

“Wolverines need critical habitat protections now,” said Lizzy Pennock, carnivore coexistence attorney at WildEarth Guardians. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service cannot keep shirking its legal duty to provide meaningful protections for this species that is already down to a few hundred individuals.”

“Wolverines have waited too long for protection and designated critical habitat,” said Arlene Montgomery, program director for Friends of the Wild Swan. “It is imperative that habitat protections are in place NOW to ensure their survival and recovery.” 

“Helena Hunters and Anglers Association members are continuing to monitor the status of wolverines and their habitat along the Continental Divide and in inventoried roadless areas,” said Gary Ingman, board member of Helena Hunters and Anglers Association. “Without an evaluation and designation of critical habitat by the Fish and Wildlife Service, our small population of remaining wolverines remains extremely vulnerable to mortality from indiscriminate trapping and diminishing habitat.”

###

Photo for media use: Jeff Moss poses with wolverine tracks on Nov. 10, 2025, on the Continental Divide west of Helena, Montana. Photo by Gary Ingman, Helena Hunters and Anglers Association.

Photo for media use: Trail cam photo of wolverine in Montana by Gary Ingman, Helena Hunters and Anglers Association.

Photo for media use: Wolverine by Howie Wolke, Wilderness Watch board member.

Photo for media use: Wolverine by Howie Wolke, Wilderness Watch board member.

The post Legal Challenge: Feds More Than a Year Overdue in Designating Much Needed Critical Habitat for Wolverine first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

By: Madeline Cowen, Field and Organizing Manager

In May of 2018, the Willamette National Forest first proposed the egregious Flat Country old-growth timber sale. The project proposed aggressively logging 2,000 acres of older forests in the McKenzie River headwaters, which provide fresh drinking water to hundreds of thousands of residents in the Willamette Valley. Astonished by the proposal’s targeting of pristine, carbon-rich old-growth and mature forests in the renowned McKenzie River watershed, our community came together and began what would turn into a five year fight. 

When I first started volunteering as a WildCAT with Cascadia Wildlands, I spent virtually all my free time going out to the Flat Country project, field checking and getting to know fellow forest advocates in the community. This project, and my time spent there, is how I deepened my love and passion for defending the forests of Cascadia. With new friends and old, I wandered through moss-covered Douglas firs and western hemlocks growing more than 200 feet tall and six feet wide. I gazed up in astonishment at cathedral-like western red cedars surrounded by delicate vine maple, and interlaced with Pacific rhododendron flowering magenta in the summer. In autumn, we WildCATs would field check as many units as possible, leave with baskets brimming with chanterelles and head to Bigelow hot springs to soothe sore muscles. The ecosystems in this area inspired me to learn, and knowing it was under threat drove me to fight.

In addition to almost five years of extensive field checking and writing public comments, we wrote opinion articles and letters to the editor, and highlighted the project in the national Worth More Standing report to draw the attention of policy makers. We further grew public awareness through community-centered events like the first ever Flotilla on the McKenzie, and rallying at the Forest Service’s doorstep. The robust Deep Roots Trainings for Forest and Climate Action series, now in its fourth year, kicked off at Flat Country, and unaffiliated community advocates even hung a banner across highway 126 and put up a tree sit. Advocates, community members and rabble rousers put in blood, sweat and tears to protect these ancient forests and the communities that rely on them…and we won! At the end of 2022, the Forest Service announced its decision to withdraw the Flat Country timber sale. Thankfully, my and so many other people’s efforts resulted in the cancellation of this terrible project, keeping these irreplaceable forests standing. However, when it withdrew Flat Country, the Forest Service stated it planned to revisit the project. For the past three years we’ve been watching. 

Under the Trump administration, we are facing unprecedented attacks on public lands. The administration has demanded public land agencies increase the cut from national forests and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) managed public lands, with hardly any environmental review and reduced public involvement opportunities. This means we are likely to see horrendous projects like Flat Country popping up across the nation. We must remain resilient, keep a keen eye on projects, and be even more nimble with our field checking and organizing. When the Forest Service’s McKenzie District announced two projects around the same area as Flat Country in 2025, major alarm bells went off. The two projects are called the South Fork Delta Expansion and the Tie Project, and both have direct overlap with previous Flat Country units. With the help of our friends at Oregon Wild and WildCAT volunteers, we’ve taken a close look at these two proposals. The bottom line is that thankfully, they are not targeting the highly important mature and old- growth stands in Flat Country we were initially concerned about. However, the projects still do have some concerning aspects. Let’s break them down:

Tie Project

On Nov. 21st, 2025, in collaboration with the Oregon Department of Forestry using the Good Neighbor Authority (GNA), the McKenzie District of the Willamette National Forest announced it was beginning scoping the Tie Project. According to the initial scoping notice, the Forest Service plans to “treat” i.e., log, 7,898 acres. The stated purpose and need for the project is:

• Providing a sustainable timber supply to support local economies,
• Reducing wildfire risk through strategic thinning and shaded fuel breaks,
• Improving forest health and resilience by enhancing forest structure, species diversity, and stand density, and
• Maintaining and improving road systems for management, recreation, and wildfire response.

When I opened the map for the Tie project to see where it is located, my heart sank. I could immediately tell that the units are in the same area, and spreading across similar boundaries, as Flat Country. Were we really about to fight this old-growth logging project again and so soon? Before panicking, I needed to take a closer look. And as it turns out, the project is not as bad as it seems, at least in terms of targeting mature and old-growth. While the project is quite massive, with 7,898 acres of logging proposed, it appears that the majority of the project consists of previously clearcut plantations that have now grown into dense, relatively young forest stands. An area that legitimately could benefit from thinning. Also, of the 209 units proposed in the project, only 38 of them directly overlap with those from Flat Country. Of course, field verification is almost always necessary to determine how accurate this is. That checking will happen after winter snows melt. 

South Fork Delta Expansion

The second project in the Flat Country area is the South Fork Delta Expansion, first proposed in early July 2025 by the McKenzie District in the Willamette National Forest. This project is meant to “provide recreational opportunities near the Delta Campground area” which burned in the 2020 Holiday Farm fire, and also expand the restoration area in the 2018 Lower South Fork McKenzie River Floodplain Enhancement Project. Restoration and floodplain enhancement is absolutely a great use of agency and taxpayer resources, and oftentimes these projects need to use larger diameter trees and their rootwads to meet the goals of the restoration. Unfortunately, the fact that the agency wants to source trees directly from Flat Country, which is over 20 miles away from the restoration area when those efforts usually use trees from much closer, raised some flags, especially because the project boundaries are identical to some of the older units in Flat Country. 

The over 300 acres of old-growth forest where logging would occur is far more valuable as an intact ecosystem. The forest is currently providing habitat value not only to those species who are living there, but also to the salmon, bull trout and other aquatic life living downstream in the floodplains. These increasingly rare forests help mitigate runoff during extreme weather events, filter sediment, and ensure steady stream flows. Why degrade this habitat in order to restore habitat elsewhere? Why sacrifice old-growth forests in the uplands to restore floodplains and lowlands? The Forest Service did not disclose if these units are part of another timber sale that got cancelled and they failed to address the potential impacts to imperiled species utilizing the habitat, most notably the northern spotted owl. The Forest Service canceled the Flat Country project in the face of overwhelming public opposition. Why bring that controversial mess into this otherwise appealing project? 

Cascadia Wildlands and our partners at Oregon Wild brought these concerns and others to the Forest Service directly in an effort to identify a better way to move forward with restoring important floodplain habitat while minimizing impacts to older forests and protecting habitat for northern spotted owls in the Flat Country area. We are still in negotiations and are hopeful we can get to a place where we can support this project. 

Overall, I feel better about the South Fork Delta Expansion knowing that it will improve floodplain conditions and have minimal impacts to the mature and old-growth forests in the Flat Country area. And for the Tie project, knowing that the essential and incredibly valuable forests are not a part of it is definitely a better outcome.  Both of these projects are a stark reminder of how important it is for us to maintain a close watch over proposed projects, and the value of on the ground field checking. Want to get involved? Check out our Field Checking 101 video, and sign up for WildCAT (Cascadia Action Team), and reach out if you have any questions about these or other projects. 

The post Flat Country Repackaged? Thankfully, no. first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

By: Flora Booker, 2025 Summer Field and Events Coordinator

On July 30th, Cascadia Wildlands staff and WildCAT volunteers joined a tour hosted by the Southern Willamette Forest Collaborative and the U.S. Forest Service to take a look at the proposed Dead Mountain Project. The collaborative is a mix of agency staff, environmental groups, timber industry representatives, and local community members who live in and around Oakridge and Westfir, Oregon. While Cascadia Wildlands is not a part of the group, we joined them to walk through sections of the Willamette National Forest near Oakridge, around 40 miles east of Eugene, to view current conditions and imagine what these ecosystems could look like in the years ahead with increasingly intense climate-driven wildfires. 

With recent changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) under the Trump administration limiting public comment, this project shows how agencies can still engage the public in shaping land management. Federal directives to prioritize timber revenue can undermine ecological goals and local needs, highlighting the importance of careful evaluation to sustain ecosystems for human and more-than-human communities. 

Early on during the tour, we reached a ridge top and looked down at Forest Service managed public lands that had burned in past years. Sarah Altemus-Pope, the Executive Director of Southern Willamette Solutions, which manages the Southern Willamette Forest Collaborative program, pointed to a swath of trees scorched just last summer. She reminded us that this community has faced high-severity fire every year for five years. The urgency to reduce community wildfire risk became all the more real when, just days after our tour, the Aubrey Fire broke out along highway 58 just outside Oakridge. Burning just south of the Dead Mountain project area identified for future thinning and controlled burning treatments, the new start is a reminder that fire is a continual presence, shaping lives and forests. The project must ensure that the work done here prepares the forest and the community for what may come, through public involvement and careful planning to promote fire resilience.

Throughout the tour, collaborative staffers handed out a stack of maps: treatment units, proposed burn blocks, road plans, and land designations. They looked like standard planning documents but carried a larger story. We were told that those maps and plans for forest treatments had been developed through a process called Potential Operational Delineations, or PODs. In practice, it means land managers, local residents, and other interested stakeholders sit down together and weigh in on where fires are most likely to be contained, what community and resource values are at greatest risk, which ridges or rivers might serve as natural boundaries, and where firefighters could move safely. Forest Service representatives emphasized that POD planning highlights the need to thin forested areas near town and open the tree canopy to reduce crown fire risk, where flames climb up understory plants into the tops of trees, burning quickly and at extreme temperatures difficult to stifle. Local residents, many with direct experience of wildfires, stressed the urgent need for more controlled burns, and staff pointed out on our maps the areas where these treatments are proposed to take place.

The first site we walked through exemplified what these treatments can mean. Sarah Altemus-Pope grew up in Oakridge and ran regularly on the Dead Mountain trails. She told us she remembers when the forest was so dense the trails were quiet. After thinning opened the forest, she began to hear birdsong on her runs, filling the silence that had been there before. Community members nodded in agreement, noting that the trails have become more popular for recreation since then. The ground beneath us seemed to confirm her story: chinquapin, incense cedar, and madrone were sprouting in the understory, a richer mix of species than the uniform Douglas fir plantation that once dominated the hillside.

Later in the day, we stood in a different kind of forest. This one had been clearcut in the past and replanted densely with conifers, creating an even-aged stand that has grown without thinning or other caretaking. The trees were crowded, the air was still, and there was little sign of the diverse plant life we had seen earlier. Here, proposed treatments would thin the stand to create space for light, water, and nutrients to reach the understory, allowing biodiversity to return. When done thoughtfully, these treatments can create healthier forests that are less vulnerable to severe fire, while also offering better habitat and more resilient ecosystems.

The promise of healthier, more fire-resilient forests is clear when you stand among the trees, but profit rather than science-driven policy pressures complicate the picture. Management direction and laws like the National Forest Management Act of 1976 push the Forest Service to prepare parcels for timber harvest on a strict timeline, raising a critical question: how much of this management is about ecological and community wildfire resilience, and how much is about meeting timber targets?

Thinning can improve forest health, but its benefits depend on how the forest is accessed and managed. Roads bring soil erosion, altered hydrology, habitat fragmentation, and increased fire risk (Connor and McCoy 2013). The Dead Mountain project currently proposes to decommission four miles of road, restore up to ten miles, maintain or reconstruct 34 miles, and build three miles of temporary roads. Decommissioning roads can help reduce the oversized road system and encourage healthy waters, soils, wildlife, and resilient forests. Road decommissioning also reduces the risk of invasive species introduction and accidental human caused fires. Opening “light gaps” up to three acres can benefit meadows or oak savannas if paired with caretaking such as recurring controlled burns, but replanting them with uniform seedlings creates stands of dense, even-aged trees vulnerable to high intensity crown fires. Old-growth forests show resilience through structural complexity that buffers wildfire and supports biodiversity (Betts et al. 2017). 

Many elements of the Dead Mountain project have the potential to support resilience, but its success will depend on careful implementation. To meet community priorities and ecological goals, management must move beyond timber quotas and focus on cultivating healthy, fire-adapted forests that can withstand changing fire regimes. Equally important is investing in home hardening and other strategies for living with fire. Collaborative members are already advancing this work through fuel reduction near homes, maintaining a five-foot buffer, and other practices that strengthen firewise communities.

One of the most encouraging aspects of the Dead Mountain project is the depth of public engagement throughout the planning stages. The incorporation of community input through the PODs and NEPA processes show a genuine effort to reach informed decisions that reflect both ecological and local priorities.

The highlight of the tour, however, was seeing how my own community responded. At one point, I spoke with two WildCAT volunteers: one who is a seasoned field checker familiar with these forests, the other a newer volunteer, an artist with a fresh perspective. The experienced volunteer admitted he had not expected to be impressed, but the level of collaboration and the way participants genuinely listened to one another gave him hope. The newer volunteer agreed, noting how the project seemed to account for diverse perspectives and marveling at the contrast between forest stands we had walked through. Their reflections reminded me that fire planning isn’t just technical; it’s relational. Building trust and making space for different experiences is an essential part of the forest management process.

Projects like Dead Mountain can succeed when sound ecological management is paired with inclusive community engagement. Fire is a constant presence on the landscape, and making respect for and adaptation to these natural processes is essential. By centering local input, focusing treatments near communities, and balancing ecological goals with policy realities, this project — if actually implemented as planned — shows what thoughtful forest management can achieve.

The post Fire, Forests, and Collaboration on Dead Mountain first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

By: Dara Evans and Nicole Morshead, 2025 Summer Legal Interns  

Among the old-growth forests along Oregon’s North coast lives a population of delightful little creatures that frolic in the treetops feasting on conifer needles and rarely ever touching the ground. Weighing less than two ounces, these North Coast red tree voles are a unique population of red tree voles, which primarily exist from western Oregon to Northwest California. Unfortunately, decades of clearcutting and wildfires have destroyed the vast majority of the old-forests that these animals call home. What remains of the North Coast vole population live on federal public lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. For over a decade, advocates have fought to secure listing under the Endangered Species Act to protect these red tree voles, which would provide the entire isolated population with fierce and important safeguards that could prevent total elimination.  

The Endangered Species Act, designed to provide protections to endangered or threatened species, directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to “list” imperiled wildlife, fish and plants by adding the species to a comprehensive list of endangered and threatened species. The Service is meant to make these listings based on the “best scientific and commercial data available.” Once a species is listed, it gains numerous protections, including the designation of “critical habitat” deemed essential to the conservation of the species. The Service has had every opportunity to list the North Coast red tree vole but has repeatedly failed to do so. First petitioned in 2007 by the Center of Biological Diversity, the Service found that the North Coast red tree vole “warranted” protections under the Endangered Species Act in 2011, but that listing the species was “precluded” by other “high priorities,” an unfortunate loophole within the law. Since this initial finding, the Service maintained that the red tree vole warranted protection but continued to delay listing it – allowing habitat destruction through logging and wildfire to further imperil the shrinking population. In 2019, the Service denied protections to the red tree vole which the Center of Biological Diversity challenged, resulting in a settlement requiring a new listing decision. Unfortunately, in 2024, the Service once again found that the North Coast red tree vole did not warrant listing as an endangered or threatened species under the ESA.  

This clear violation of duties by the Service has led valiant red tree vole defenders Center of Biological Diversity, Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild, and Bird Alliance of Oregon to file suit against the agency for ignoring the best scientific and commercial data and downplaying the risk of habitat fragmentation, isolation, and wildfire – which could lead to the extinction of the North Coast red tree vole.  

Cascadia Wildlands has fiercely advocated for the red tree vole for over a decade. In 2012, Cascadia litigated against three timber sales —North Fork Overlook, Buck Roberts, and Bummer Ridge — challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s failure to analyze whether the proposed thinning would harm the red tree vole. Cascadia, working alongside various other environmental groups, has continued to fight for the red tree voles’ right to live safely in Oregon North Coast forests. In 2015, Cascadia won a legal challenge over clearcutting in the Bureau of Land Management’s White Castle project, which put 160 acres of 100-year old trees, and their little residents, at risk. And now, Cascadia, along with the Center for Biological Diversity, Bird Alliance Oregon and Oregon Wild, will once again battle it out with U.S. Fish and Wildlife for the lives of the North Coast red tree voles.  

To learn more, see our press release discussing the details of the litigation we recently initiated. We hope the lawsuit will result in North Coast red tree voles finally receiving necessary protections.  

We are grateful for legal representation by attorneys at the Center for Biological Diversity. We also appreciate your ongoing interest and concern about this issue and the red tree voles that call the Oregon coast old-growth forests their home. 

The post Lawsuit Launched to Safeguard North Coast Red Tree Voles  first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 17, 2025 

PORTLAND, Ore.— Conservation groups sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today for denying protections to the imperiled North Oregon Coast population of red tree voles. The voles spend most of their lives in the upper branches of the Oregon Coast’s mature and old-growth forests.

The Service’s 2024 decision to deny life-saving Endangered Species Act protections to the North Oregon Coast population echoes a similar 2019 Trump administration denial, which also sparked a lawsuit. Those decisions were made despite studies showing that these red tree voles are threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, largely due to logging and climate change-fueled wildfires.

“Red tree voles have graced Oregon’s coastal old-growth forests for thousands of years, but we could lose them forever if they don’t get Endangered Species Act protections soon,” said Ryan Shannon, a senior attorney in the Center for Biological Diversity’s endangered species program. “It’s time for the Fish and Wildlife Service to follow the science and do the right thing by stepping up for red tree voles.”

Red tree voles build their nests on complex branch and bole structures found in mature and old-growth forests. The North Coast is dominated by a combination of private industrial timberlands and the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests. Decades of rapacious clearcut logging, as well as a series of historic fires known as the Tillamook Burn, have eliminated most of the area’s old forests along with the red tree voles that once called them home. Red tree voles are an essential species in the last remaining old-growth and mature coastal forests in Oregon and protecting them is necessary for ecosystem recovery.

“Red tree voles are a key prey of the threatened northern spotted owl whose population is plummeting,” says Joe Liebezeit, statewide conservation director for Bird Alliance of Oregon. “We need to step up protection of voles to ensure the integrity of forest ecosystem as a whole — including the food web which so much wildlife depends on.”

Remaining North Coast voles are concentrated on federal public lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Although the Northwest Forest Plan helps protect these remaining small and isolated populations, the long-term survival of the voles depends on improving state and private land forest management and connecting fragmented and isolated red tree vole populations.

Oregon is in the process of adopting a state forest habitat conservation plan that will provide some protection to the vole, but the plan will also allow for continued logging of thousands of acres of potential vole habitat without any surveys to determine if voles are present. There are currently no meaningful protections in private forests.

“The red tree vole is a unique species with adaptations that allow them to live almost their entire lives high in the canopy of mature and old-growth forests,” said Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild. “Its range and habitat are already limited, and without protection for the North Coast population, we could lose red tree voles to irresponsible logging.”

In response to a 2007 Center for Biological Diversity petition, the Service determined in 2011 that protection of the North Oregon Coast population of red tree voles was “warranted but precluded” by other listing priorities. It then moved the voles to a list of candidate species for a decade, repeating its determination that the North Oregon Coast population warranted protection several times before reversing course and denying protections in 2019. A Center lawsuit over the denial resulted in a 2022 settlement directing the Service to reconsider the decision.

“The Fish and Wildlife Service is yet again shirking its duty to this and future generations to prevent the extinction of our most imperiled wildlife species including the red tree vole,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands. “Red tree voles are an important indicator species of forest health; their decline should be a wake-up call to us all to better care for our remaining mature and old-growth forests.”

Bird Alliance of Oregon, Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild are represented by the Center for Biological Diversity in today’s suit.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.8 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Bird Alliance of Oregon was founded in 1902 and works statewide to advocate for Oregon’s wildlife and wild places, and to inspire all people to love and protect birds, wildlife, and the natural environment upon which life depends.

Cascadia Wildlands defends and restores Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets.

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

The post Lawsuit Aims to Protect Oregon Coast Red Tree Voles first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which governs the environmental review process for public land management decisions and mandates public input in the review process, has been a repeat target for the administration. On June 30th, 2025, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released an interim final rule changing NEPA implementation procedures for all of its agencies, including the Forest Service. These regulations come in response to the administration’s rescission of the Council of Environmental Quality’s NEPA regulations earlier this year (spurred by EO 14154, Unleashing American Energy) which prompted each agency to craft its own NEPA regulations without meaningful public or Tribal input during the development of the rule. 

Sign our petition below to tell the US Department of Agriculture — Don’t Shut the Public Out of Public Lands.

The USDA NEPA implementation regulations strip away mechanisms for public input. The implementation regulations no longer require scoping, an early and essential process where an agency provides the public with notice of a potential project and identifies the potential environmental impacts. The regulations also no longer require public comment periods during the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) stages. The agency will no longer be required to provide a Schedule of Proposed Actions to the public. These changes, which took effect July 3rd, 2025 with the interim final rule’s publication in the Federal Register, impact all 193 million acres of land that the Forest Service manages, including Mt. Hood, Willamette, Umpqua, Siuslaw, and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests.

SIGN THE PETITION BELOW TO TELL TRUMP — PUBLIC INPUT FOR PUBLIC LANDS!

The post Forests Over Fascists—Don’t Shut the Public Out of Public Lands. first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 8, 2025 

Eugene, Ore. — The Trump administration is dismantling the public’s ability to engage with federal land management decisions  — an alarming shift with especially dire consequences for Pacific Northwest  forests. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which governs the environmental review process for public land management decisions and mandates public input in the review process, has been a repeat target for the administration. 

On June 30th, 2025, the U.S. Department of Agriculture released an interim final rule changing NEPA implementation procedures for all of its agencies, including the Forest Service. These regulations come in response to the administration’s rescission of the Council of Environmental Quality’s NEPA regulations earlier this year (spurred by EO 14154, Unleashing American Energy) which prompted each agency to craft its own NEPA regulations  without meaningful public or Tribal input during the development of the rule.

The USDA NEPA implementation regulations strip away mechanisms for public input. The implementation regulations no longer require scoping, an early and essential process where an agency provides the public with notice of a potential project and identifies the potential environmental impacts. The regulations also no longer require public comment periods during the draft Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Statement stages. The agency will no longer be required to provide a Schedule of Proposed Actions to the public. These changes, which took effect July 3rd, 2025 with the interim final rule’s publication in the Federal Register, impact all 193 million acres of land that the Forest Service manages, including Mt. Hood, Willamette, Umpqua, Siuslaw, and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

“Mandated periods for public comment allow everyone to weigh in on what happens on public lands, including those most impacted. Importantly, these public comments are put into the public record, which can be essential if a proposal is challenged in court,” said Grace Brahler, Wildlands Director at Cascadia Wildlands. “The Trump administration is systematically and strategically targeting the tools the public can use to fight against rampant logging in public forests.”

Importantly, these new NEPA regulations serve a strategic purpose for Trump’s agenda and come after months of setup by the administration. Just four days after its sweeping rescission of CEQ’s NEPA implementation regulations in February, the White House issued Executive Order 14225 calling for the “Immediate Expansion of American Timber Production” and instructing agencies to eliminate any regulations that hinder or delay approval of logging projects. In response to instructions in the EO, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins declared a national emergency, opening up roughly 60% of all national forest lands to emergency procedures intended to fast-track logging. Rollins’ emergency declaration and subsequent memos describing it, called for the elimination of scoping, public comment, and objection periods, among other damaging practices to speed up irresponsible logging. The new NEPA implementation regulations now codify Sec. Rollins’ national emergency into regulatory language that reaches beyond the emergency declaration timeframe and expands the functional application of the order. While Sec. Rollins’ order applies to 60% of national forest lands, the USDA’s new NEPA regulations governing the Forest Service now apply to all national forest lands. The new Forest NEPA regulations are, in this way, a culmination of the agenda that the Trump administration has been laying out for months. 

“These policies represent a sharp pivot toward prioritizing timber production at the expense of environmental safeguards, public transparency, and ecologically based forest management,” said Jordan Latter, Bark’s Forest Watch Program Manager. 

For months preceding the new FS’ NEPA implementation regulations, to align with Secretary Collins’ order, Forest Service districts have implemented actions to reduce public input in a ploy to increase timber output. Internal memos obtained by Bark reveal that the Forest Service was told in April to begin relying heavily on “Categorical Exclusions” (CEs) —a legal shortcut that allows timber sales to proceed without public comment or formal objection periods and with only minimal environmental analysis. To maximize use of this loophole, the agency has adopted over 40 new CE categories from other federal agencies. The new FS NEPA regulations suggest that this expanded use of CEs has become a permanent feature of Forest Service policy.

“The Trump administration has taken strategic steps since January to push their corporate, timber-industry agenda forward by eroding mechanisms for public input,” said Madeline Cowen, Grassroots Organizer with Cascadia Wildlands. “The new Forest Service NEPA implementation regulations take away the very tools and opportunities the public has to decide what happens to their public lands.” 

Attacks on NEPA are only part of the administration’s aim. The Trump admin continues to target largely popular and impactful environmental Laws, regardless of the public support that they have. Agencies have been directed to repeal any policy not explicitly required by statute. In line with this directive, the Trump Administration recently announced that they plan to repeal the Roadless Rule, which protects 58.5 million acres from new road construction around the United States. In 2002, the Roadless Rule set the record for the most public comments submitted with 1.6 million public comments supporting its adoption. And this Spring, the administration proposed rescinding the definition of harm in the Endangered Species Act, despite the law’s broad support across political spectrums. 

“What’s happening here is a shift from a multi-use, community-informed forest management model to one that prioritizes extraction and profit,” said Jade Hagan, Bark’s Director of Community Engagement and Communications. “That shift is happening fast, and the public is being locked out of the process.” 

These policy changes eliminating formal opportunities for public comment and objection effectively force communities to resort to litigation if they want to challenge harmful projects, which is exclusionary for the public and costly for agencies and will not result in a more efficient process. Moreover, by reducing public notice and scoping requirements, the administration is making it harder for everyday people to even know what’s happening on their public lands—all while the federal government prioritizes industry profits over transparency, accountability, and environmental protection.

Despite these setbacks, Bark, Cascadia Wildlands and other watchdog organizations remain committed to defending our forests and advocating for public land management that is transparent, science-driven, and rooted in community values and environmental justice.  

The post Public Shut Out as Trump Administration Guts Bedrock Environmental Protections   first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

From June 20 to 23, Cascadia Wildlands held our biggest volunteer event of the year: the WildCAT Field Checking Basecamp. Volunteers gathered near Glide, Oregon, to help stop logging in some of the most breathtaking old-growth ecosystems in the Little River watershed.

The area lies within the traditional homelands of the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians. Their ancestors include Upper Umpqua, Takelma, Molalla, and Yoncalla peoples who have lived in and traveled through the South Umpqua River basin since time immemorial. We encourage support for Indigenous-led environmental justice efforts, including Cow Creek youth-led programs like Tuú Yap’a Xumá, which teaches traditional plant cultivation.

Throughout the weekend, WildCAT volunteers worked to field-check seven units in the proposed Bureau of Land Management (BLM) timber sale. Field checking is the process of documenting on-the-ground conditions of a forest to challenge or stop harmful logging projects. As we documented the threatened forests on the ground, news of even broader threats at the federal level began to surface. The Summer Solstice arrived under dark clouds that seemed to reflect our growing frustration over Trump’s plan to rescind the Roadless Rule and open millions of acres of public lands to logging. Rain fell steadily, turning at times to hail and wet snow. Still, spirits stayed high. Thanks to a well-tended fire and delicious meals made by our amazing volunteers, we stayed warm, nourished, and ready to keep going. Despite the elements, we successfully field-checked all of our targeted units.

Along the way, we trekked through dense forests, open meadows, and misty waterfalls teeming with life. We spotted mycoheterotrophs (partly or entirely non-photosynthetic plants that obtain energy and nutrients from fungi) like coralroot, gnome plant, and ghost pipe pushing up through the soil. These rare plants thrive in biodiverse ecosystems that support the complex symbiotic relationships they depend on. We admired Pacific madrones with their purple peeling bark, sprawling California black oaks, and towering old growth trees with broken tops that create prime nesting habitat for northern spotted owls.

Several trees with diameter-at-breast-height measurements over 70 inches towered above us, including ancient Douglas firs wide enough for our whole group to wrap around. Their massive trunks offered calm to each of us, while also providing critical habitat for countless other species. We found waterways that had not been marked by the Bureau of Land Management, recorded signs of wildlife ranging from bear to coyote, and watched a bright green Pacific tree frog launch itself confidently into the duff. 

On our final day, we gathered under the freshly shining sun, grateful for its warmth, and each shared a teaching we were taking from Basecamp and a gratitude for one another. I was sure the first comment would make us chuckle, something like “I learned to bring a darn good quality rain jacket!”. But instead, every single person offered something thoughtful. People spoke about their gratitude for the fire tenders and the care put into our shared meals. They reflected on joyful moments of connection with the life around us, on noticing things they hadn’t seen before, and on the kindness exchanged between all of us. What remained with us was the meaningful community we built and the vital field checking we accomplished together.

Now that the field checking is complete, Cascadia Wildlands will submit the data and detailed comments gathered by our volunteers to the Bureau of Land Management. If the agency fails to listen, we’re prepared to challenge the sale through legal action.To everyone who showed up, thank you. Your presence made this trip what it was. And for those who couldn’t join this time, we hope to see you at the next one. There are more old-growth ecosystems to stand up for, and more work ahead to care for the places we love.

The post Basecamp 2025 at Little River first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.