Contacts:
Peter Jensen, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Lindsey Hutchison, Willamette Riverkeeper
John Persell, Oregon Wild

Eugene, Oregon – Today, conservation organizations Willamette Riverkeeper, Cascadia Wildlands, and Oregon Wild filed suit against the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), challenging the agency’s authorization of the approximately 4,600-acre Big League Project in the Calapooia and Mohawk River Watersheds northeast of Eugene. According to the groups’ complaint, the BLM violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to take the required “hard look” at the impacts that the Big League Project would have on a host of environmental values, including spotted owl habitat, carbon storage, stream flows, and water quality. Specifically, this project plans to clearcut the last and best older forest stands in the Calapooia and Mohawk River Watersheds. 

Of particular concern, the BLM failed to fully analyze the effects of logging and road construction activities on the threatened Upper Willamette River spring Chinook salmon. According to a 2011 analysis by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), these salmon are at a “very high risk” of extinction and logging units within the Big League Project directly abut the species’ critical habitat in the Calapooia River.

Due to impacts on Chinook salmon, the conservation groups also gave notice to the BLM and NMFS that the agencies are in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by failing to account for changed conditions in the Calapooia Watershed following the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire.

“It’s outrageous and completely unacceptable that the BLM and NMFS have not acted in accordance with bedrock environmental laws. The BLM’s pursuit of clearcut logging along the Calapooia puts the Upper Willamette River spring Chinook salmon’s already fragile habitat directly at risk,” said Lindsey Hutchison of Willamette Riverkeeper.

The groups claim that the changed conditions in the Calapooia Watershed make the BLM’s timber sale unlawful. Particularly, while most of the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire burned at a low or moderate severity, a significant portion experienced high or moderate soil burn severity. Fire-damaged soils have high rates of root mortality and increased rates of water runoff and erosion. The fire affected nearly 14,000 acres of the Calapooia Watershed, eliminating streamside vegetation, destabilizing streambanks, and elevating sediment in the river. Such changed conditions make the BLM’s reliance on NMFS’s 2018 Biological Opinion (BiOp) to support the Big League Project and associated timber sales unlawful. 

“Once again, the BLM is rushing to log without fully considering how their actions impact the larger landscape,” said Peter Jensen of Cascadia Wildlands. “Our forests and watersheds will pay the price, and vulnerable spotted owl and salmon populations will be pushed even closer to extinction.”

In the 2018 BiOp, NMFS recognized that the BLM’s logging program would affect designated critical habitat by raising stream temperatures, introducing sediment into streams, reducing large wood recruitment into streams, and altering peak and base flows of streams. The added effects of the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire compound the harm that will result from the logging and road work authorized for the Big League Project. By ignoring the cumulative impacts on Chinook salmon, the BLM risks severely degrading the species’ habitat in pursuit of timber volume.

“Public lands are some of the last places for imperiled wildlife and quality salmon habitat, where mature and old-growth forests can grow to help us fight climate change and make the landscape more resilient,” said John Persell of Oregon Wild. “The BLM is performing a lot of bureaucratic gymnastics to argue that turning these refuge forests into another series of clearcuts, surrounded by more clearcuts, is going to have ‘no significant impact.'”

The Upper Willamette River spring Chinook salmon are a genetically distinct group, well-adapted to the natural river flows and seasonal changes of the Willamette River and its tributaries. Logging can degrade its stream habitat by muddying waters, altering riverbed stability, and obstructing migration corridors. All of these changes harm the survival of these unique salmon. Efforts to protect their habitat and ensure clean water, stable riverbeds, and clear migration paths are crucial, as their populations have sharply declined, with counts of wild Upper Willamette River spring Chinook averaging less than 10,000 fish annually at Willamette Falls since 2010. Historically, the Upper Willamette River supported hundreds of thousands of spring Chinook salmon. In the 1920s, approximately 300,000 adult spring Chinook salmon were observed passing Willamette Falls.

Cascadia Wildlands is a 501c3 non-profit with over 12,000 members and supporters whose mission is to defend and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. We envision 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. 

Willamette Riverkeeper is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded in 1996 with thousands of members in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. Willamette Riverkeeper focuses on protecting and restoring the resources of the Willamette River Basin in Oregon and works on programs and projects ranging from the Clean Water Act compliance and river education to Superfund cleanup and restoring habitat.

Oregon Wild represents 20,000 members and supporters who share our mission to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and water as an enduring legacy. Our goal is to protect areas that remain intact while striving to restore areas that have been degraded.

The post Press Release: Conservation Groups Challenge BLM’s “Big League” Logging Project Due to Impacts on Imperiled Spring Chinook Salmon Habitat and Other Values first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

A broad coalition of organizations—Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides, Cascadia Wildlands, Willamette Riverkeeper, 350PDX, Neighbors for Clean Air, and ACLU of Oregon—filed a lawsuit against DHS, calling out its failure to consider the potentially severe human and environmental health impacts of its violent operation in Portland. This despite the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requiring that hard look.

After a federal judge in Oregon dismissed the case on shaky grounds, the coalition appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In part, the government argued that it was too late for a court to get involved because the operation had ended in Portland and doing an environmental review after the fact would do no good. On January 20, 2023, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that there was no longer a role for the courts to remedy our members’ injuries.

Respectfully, we dissent. Our coalition is committed to continuing to advocate for an end to the domestic use of tear gas. Measuring the impacts of tear gas on people and our environments is not only possible, but it is required by federal law. We stand ready to hold the government accountable to us the next time.

The post Statement on the 9th Circuit Court Ruling Dismissing our Portland Teargas Case first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Erin Hogan, Crag Law Center

Federal Agency Plan Would Intensively Log Remaining Spotted Owl Reserves

Eugene, OR — Today, Oregon-based conservation organizations Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild challenged the Bureau of Land Management’s (“BLM”) Siuslaw Field Office’s plan to log 13,225 acres of public forests in the coast range foothills west of Eugene. The agency’s Siuslaw HLB (“Harvest Land Base”) Project will clearcut these mature and old-growth forests that border many communities and residences west of Eugene. The BLM admits that this logging will increase fire hazard risks, slope instability and landslide risks, and drinking water contamination for these communities, but dismissed concerns raised about these impacts as insignificant.

“The BLM cannot continue to chase timber volume production at the expense of our communities,” said Nick Cady with Cascadia Wildlands. “Not only are we losing the few older forest stands that remain in the coast range, but admittedly the agency is putting us at increased risk from forest fires and landslides, and jeopardizing water quality. The little timber volume being generated from these mature, public forests is just not worth it.”

The targeted forests are home to at least four federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed species: northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and Chinook and Oregon Coast coho salmon, along with listing candidate species the red tree vole, which is a candidate for ESA listing. Most of the forests slated for logging are mature and old-growth forests that provide suitable habitat for these species, but the agency dismissed impacts to these imperiled species as insignificant without any actual review of the impacts the logging would have on the ground. 

Many of the local residents strongly oppose the logging, as they believe its negative impacts–including drinking water contamination, increased wildfire hazard, loss of recreation opportunities, soil erosion, further road construction, and outright habitat destruction–strongly outweigh any benefits associated with timber production.

“If they remain standing, our public forests provide so many important public services, including clean water, habitat for fish & wildlife, climate stability, fire resilience, recreation and quality of life. Clearcut logging will sacrifice all these values, and for what? The private profits of a few in the timber industry. BLM has a responsibility to tell the truth but they are hiding the fact that the public is getting a rotten deal here,”  said Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the National Environmental Policy Act, including failure to take the requisite “hard look” at environmental impacts and failure to conduct any site-specific analyses or prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. The BLM is required under federal environmental law to consider the negative impacts the proposed logging will have on our communities and weigh those impacts against the alleged benefits of timber volume generation logging. Many of the local residents strongly oppose the logging, which they believe will create that the negative impacts–including contamination of to their drinking water, increases in fire hazard, loss of recreation opportunities, soil erosion and stability, further road construction, and outright habitat destruction–that which elimination strongly outweighs any benefits associated with timber production.  

“The BLM is attempting to evade its legal obligation to consider and publicly disclose the impact these clearcuts will have on sensitive wildlife species, forest health, carbon storage and climate change, water quality, and wildfire hazard,” said attorney Erin Hogan. “The agencies tasked with managing our public lands must be accountable to the public they serve.”

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

###

Eugene-based Cascadia Wildlands is a 501c3 non-profit with over 12,000 members and supporters whose mission is to defend and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. We envision 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 represents 20,000 members and supporters who share our mission to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and water as an enduring legacy. Our goal is to protect areas that remain intact while striving to restore areas that have been degraded.

Crag Law Center is a nonprofit environmental law center based in Portland, Oregon that supports community efforts to protect and sustain the Pacific Northwest’s natural legacy. Implementing a unique model of legal aid for the environment, Crag balances the scales of justice by offering free and low-cost legal services to people who are working on the ground to protect our environment, climate and communities.

The post Press Release: Conservationists Challenge Coast Range Logging Plan  first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Oliver Stiefel, Crag Law Center, Lead Counsel
Doug Heiken, Oregon Wild
Travis Williams, Willamette Riverkeeper

Judge Halts Willamette National Forest Roadside Logging Project

Finds Agency Overreached in Using Rule for Routine Maintenance for Massive Logging Project

EUGENE, OR – Today for the second time this year, a federal court halted U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) plans to carry out extensive post-fire roadside logging. In granting a preliminary injunction, the court stopped planned commercial logging along 400 miles of roads within the Willamette National Forest. Federal District Judge Michael McShane’s order states: “Given the immense scale of this Project, which allows the felling of trees along 404 miles of forest roads, Plaintiffs [Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild, and Willamette Riverkeeper] have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the claim that the Forest Service may not use the road repair and maintenance [Categorical Exclusion] to avoid [National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)] review,” page 11. The Forest Service will be largely precluded from commencing logging until the court has heard and decided on the case, likely in early 2022.

After the 2020 Labor Day wildfires, the Willamette National Forest planned a massive logging project along 400 miles of forest roads and several thousand acres under a loophole called a categorical exclusion, which would have excused the agency from the required NEPA review. If allowed to proceed under the categorical exclusion, the agency would have moved forward with large-scale logging operations without considering environmental impacts and without considering public feedback and involvement.

Lead counsel Oliver Stiefel of Crag Law Center said: “Many of the trees proposed for logging pose no imminent danger. As the judge recognized, a large majority pose a low risk, which completely undercuts the Forest Service’s attempt to rush the project forward without carefully weighing competing values and meaningfully involving the public.” 

In the wake of other fires, other National Forests in the region have applied a much lighter approach to post-fire roadside logging. The conservation groups did not object to removal of imminent danger trees along major roadways or repair and maintenance of bridges, including the Henline Bridge which provides access to Jawbone Flats and the Opal Creek Ancient Forest Center. Post-fire logging has widespread, detrimental effects on water quality, wildlife habitat, forest soils, and natural recovery. 

“The court recognized that this massive post-fire logging project was not routine maintenance,” said Nick Cady, legal director for Cascadia Wildlands. “The Forest Service attempted to use the fires as cover to commercially log in scenic areas and on remote roads, which risked further harm to these sensitive burned landscapes and undermined confidence in their ability to manage public lands.”

Today’s ruling follows a decision this summer from the federal court for the Eastern District of California, enjoining the Forest Service from proceeding with roadside logging until the court hears the merits of the lawsuit.

Doug Heiken, Conservation and Restoration Coordinator with Oregon Wild said, “Our response after fire must be thoughtful, not rushed or we risk doing more harm to the sensitive recovery ecosystem. Experts tell us to retain as many trees to stabilize soils, provide shade and nurture the new forest.”

The planned roadside logging would impact water quality in the Willamette River and tributaries and would negatively affect adjacent streams and rivers.  Rivers in the project area are home to Upper Willamette Spring Chinook, Bull Trout, and Upper Willamette Winter Steelhead.

“Logging along 400 miles of roads will increase erosion and push more dirty water into the Willamette River impacting fish, freshwater mussels and adding more stress to the system,” said Travis Williams, Riverkeeper & Executive Director at Willamette Riverkeeper.

Judge McShane indicated Wednesday that the conservation organizations have a high likelihood of success on their claims and that logging activities will be largely paused until the court holds a full hearing on the merits of the case, likely early next year.
 
The conservation groups in this case are represented by attorneys from the Crag Law Center and Cascadia Wildlands.

###

The post VICTORY! Court Halts Roadside Post-fire Logging Project first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

This work was only possible with your support – THANK YOU!

The court ruled that FDA failed to analyze the serious risks to endangered salmon and other environmental impacts of this novel GE fish. The court declared FDA’s failures violated both the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. Genetically engineered animals create unique risks and regulators must rigorously analyze them using sound science, not stick their head in the sand as the officials did here. In reality, this engineered fish offers nothing but unstudied risks. The absolute last thing our planet needs right now is another human-created crisis like escaped genetically engineered fish running amok.

The most important part of the court’s decision yesterday was its resounding rejection of FDA’s far-reaching argument that the agency had no duty to protect against the environmental impacts of the GE salmon, or any future GE animal. Thanks to our lawsuit, FDA has to make a new GE salmon decision that accounts for and protects against those dangers. And it has to do the same for any future GE animals.

Yesterday’s victory was the result of over 4 years of hard-fought litigation: In 2016, Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Earthjustice — representing Cascadia Wildlands and a broad client coalition of environmental, consumer, commercial, and recreational fishing organizations — sued the FDA for approving the first-ever commercial genetically engineered animal, an Atlantic salmon engineered to grow twice as fast as its wild counterpart. The genetically engineered salmon was produced by AquaBounty Technologies Inc. with DNA from Atlantic salmon, Pacific king salmon, and Arctic Ocean eelpout. This marks the first time any government in the world has approved a commercially genetically engineered animal as food.

Studies have shown that there is a high risk for genetically engineered organisms to escape into the natural environment, and that genetically engineered salmon can crossbreed with native fish. “Transgenic contamination” — where genetically engineered crops cross-pollinate or establish themselves in nearby fields or the wild — has become common. These contamination episodes have cost U.S. farmers billions of dollars over the past decade. In wild organisms like fish, the damage would be even severe. 

Currently there are no genetically engineered fish being sold in the U.S., and if any fish were to be sold, it would be required to be labeled as genetically engineered. And thanks to pressure from Cascadia Wildlands members like you, dozens of retailers such as Kroger have already pledged to NOT sell GE salmon!

Lawsuits such as these take many years and thousands of hours.
Thank you for helping make this victory possible!

The post Victory! Court rules GE Salmon Approval Unlawful! first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Media Contacts:
Dylan Plummer, Grassroots Organizer, Cascadia Wildlands; dylan@cascwild.org, 541.531.1858
Doug Brown, Communications Strategist, ACLU of Oregon; dbrown@aclu-or.org, 7 34.239.2706

Broad Coalition of Organizations Sue Feds for Use of Chemical Weapons in Portland

Portland, OR — With no regard for health or safety, the federal government blatantly violated federal environmental law when it flooded Portland and the surrounding communities with an unprecedented amount of dangerous chemical weapons, a lawsuit filed today by a broad coalition of environmental justice and civil rights advocates alleges.

Represented by the attorneys from ACLU of Oregon, Cascadia Wildlands, Willamette Riverkeeper and Markowitz Herbold, a broad coalition of environmental justice and public health organizations, including Neighbors for Clean Air, Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides, Cascadia Wildlands, 350PDX and Willamette Riverkeeper have filed a legal challenge against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) today. The lawsuit cites the federal agency’s failure to analyze the potentially severe human health and environmental impacts before deploying chemical munitions against anti-racist protesters in Portland as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The organizations seek a court order forcing the DHS to halt their use of chemical munitions, including tear gas, until the DHS performs a thorough analysis of the health and environmental impacts of these chemicals, and makes this information available to the public.

Kelly Simon, Interim Legal Director with ACLU Oregon, said:
“Environmental justice is racial justice. We all have a right to a safe and healthy community. Environmental hazards and police violence disproportionately deny that right to Black, Indigenous, Latinx and other people of color. The large volumes of tear gas and other chemical weapons that federal officers recklessly and thoughtlessly unleashed in Portland is yet more evidence of the Trump administration’s racist disregard for public health and a safe living environment. So we will see them in court, again.”

Indi Namkoong, Coalition Manager with 350PDX, said: “I’ve been on the ground facing tear gas and police brutality for months because racial justice and climate justice are faces of the same struggle for a just and livable future, one that as a young person of color I expect to be in all my life. The price of justice shouldn’t be further harm to public health and to the Black, Indigenous, and other people of color who are already out here fighting for their lives. Everyone has a right to know the impacts of the toxic chemicals we’re being subjected to by our government.”

Ashley Chesser, Executive Director with Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides, said: “Pesticides originated as tools of war before being used to kill insects and continue to play a role in violence against Black, Indigenous and People of Color and those protesting racist acts. Protesters are not pests and the prolonged use of pesticides and similar chemicals to disperse a crowd, without knowing the consequences, is unacceptable. We don’t have any idea what repeated exposure to tear gas does to human health or the environment. DHS had a legal duty to research this before they started gassing Portland, and they may have caused significant harm by failing to do so. We want to ensure no other city shares Portland’s pain.”

This lawsuit comes after anti-racist Black Lives Matters protesters in Portland have been demonstrating in the streets for over 125 days in response to the murder of George Floyd this May, and regularly being subject to massive, indiscriminate deployments of teargas, pepper spray, and other chemical munitions including toxic smoke grenades linked to cancer and kidney and liver damage. The federal government’s consistent, high-volume use of these chemicals has raised concerns about the possible health impacts of repeated, concentrated exposure, and has reportedly caused loss of appetite, hair loss, and irregular menstrual cycles among those exposed. Chemical munitions and residue has remained in downtown Portland long after deployment, accumulating on vegetation, on buildings, and in the streets. This has raised concerns that the stormwater system is conveying chemicals, which may contain aquatic toxicants, to the Willamette River, potentially impacting water quality, wildlife habitat, and recreational users.

Elisabeth Holmes, Willamette Riverkeeper’s Staff Attorney said:
“For months we have tried other avenues to obtain the information the public is entitled to under the law, but have been denied at every turn. Disclosure and scientific analysis is the minimum requirement. It is a pretty low bar, but DHS has completely flouted its responsibility.”

Brenna Bell, a volunteer member of Cascadia Wildlands, said:
“As a street protester for racial justice, I know firsthand the harmful impacts of toxic tear gas and other chemical warfare to my body, and the body of so many other Portlanders. What none of us knows is the extent that harm has caused and will continue to cause to our health, and to the
environment.”

A copy of the filed complaint can be found here.

#

The post Environmental, public health, and social justice groups file legal challenge against DHS citing lack of analysis on impacts of teargas to human health and the environment first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

by Gene McCarthy
Cascadia Wildlands Legal Intern, Summer 2020

It can be exhausting keeping up with the constant barrage of unfortunate news covering the current administration’s breakneck efforts to remove environmental safeguards. Unfortunately, the past six months during the COVID-19 pandemic have been no exception. Despite the global emergency, the Trump administration have not slowed their agenda of environmental deregulation, in some cases, using the pandemic as an excuse to justify it in some vague attempt to jumpstart the economy. These rollbacks have come in several forms, including executive orders and rulemakings, all aimed at removing environmental safeguards in favor of industry interests.

If fully implemented, the rollbacks would have profound effects on Cascadia’s forests. While Cascadia Wildlands efforts focus on the Cascadia Bioregion, we have also taken the time to briefly highlight some of the broader rollbacks that will have a dramatic impact on the human/natural environment.

Executive Orders Weaken or Remove Environmental Protections

In early June, President Trump signed an executive order that calls on agencies to waive the required environmental reviews of infrastructure projects, like highways and pipelines, during the pandemic-driven economic crisis. The executive order uses “emergency authorities” to allow “action with significant environmental impact” without observing the standard requirements of federal laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA). NEPA and the ESA typically require agencies to solicit public input on proposed projects and analyze in detail how federal decisions could harm the environment.

These laws have been the cornerstones of environmental protection for the past fifty years, providing procedural (both NEPA and ESA) and substantive (ESA) requirements when reviewing proposals for major federal actions. They have served as essential tools for environmentalists to challenge arbitrary agency action and will be significantly blunted by this executive order. Activists and lawyers have questioned the legality of the order and accused the administration of using the pandemic to speed up actions that have been moving slowly through the regulatory process.

NO REVIEW OF SALVAGE LOGGING EFFECTS: More impactfully, the administration is pushing rulemaking to gut NEPA, granting a significant new exemption for salvage logging, and eliminating public protest periods. The US Department of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has proposed to create a Categorical Exclusion (CX) that exempts most environmental review and public comment for post-disturbance (i.e., post-fire) “salvage” logging and road building. The scientific community has widely acknowledged that the impacts of post-fire salvage logging and road construction are “pervasive and cumulatively negative.” Similar conclusions were reached regarding salvage logging in other types of recently disturbed forest, such as through insects, disease, windthrow, or drought.

Cascadia Wildlands has signed on to comments, backed by 192 scientists nationwide, opposing the BLM proposal. Those comments express deep concern with the proposal to rely on a categorical exclusion to “fast-track logging as this undermines the agency’s stated policy of utilizing the ‘best available science’ to inform the decision-making process in federal land management.” The BLM already has a CX that allows for expedited salvage logging of up to 250-acres. The proposed rulemaking would expand that acreage by 20-fold, resulting in “needless harm to forests and watersheds and has little basis in the scientific literature.”

“Post-fire conditions serve as a refuge for rare and imperiled wildlife that depend upon the unique biological legacy features created by intense fire. Complex early seral forest produced by natural disturbances is not mimicked by plantation forestry, clearcut logging, or salvage logging that typically removes most if not all biological legacies. Post-disturbance logging and road building, especially with minimal environmental standards under a CX, would degrade these natural values. BLM lands, and public lands in general, provide the last strongholds for terrestrial and aquatic species, important carbon stores, and clean water supplies that will only be even more valued in a rapidly changing climate.”

ENDING PUBLIC COMMENTS: In addition to the salvage logging exemption, the BLM has proposed eliminating the 15-day public protest period for projects fully reviewed under NEPA. This will eliminate the administrative protest process for timber sales in Oregon, and fits with the administration’s broader effort to stifle public input regarding public land management. The administrative review process provides an opportunity to resolve disputes prior to the issuance of a final agency decision, and is an important democratic tool. Cascadia has signed on to comments by a coalition of groups objecting to the BLM protest rule change. Instead of scrapping the protest period, we believe that the BLM’s alleged intent to promote “collaboration and information-sharing during the NEPA process” could be furthered by the adoption of a predecisional timber sale objection process. The comments we have joined urge the BLM to adopt these procedures rather than the Proposed Rule.

These changes to our federal environmental laws are not yet certain and Cascadia Wildlands will continue to advocate on behalf of the Cascadia Bioregion, as always, envisioning vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, and vibrant communities sustained by the unique landscapes of the region.

Changes to Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act

Though they are out of Cascadia Wildlands focus, there are a few other general environmental rollbacks to the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act that are especially salient given the nation’s current public health crisis and focus on racial inequality and are worth mentioning. These changes both affect public health and disproportionally affect people of color, and could potentially exacerbate the pandemic by worsening air quality during a pandemic which targets the respiratory system. As an article in Mother Jones pointed out, “the connections between the environment, race, and the COVID-19 crisis are many: Air pollution in poor communities has long caused soaring rates of respiratory and heart disease—underlying conditions that are now worsening outcomes in people who contract COVID-19.”

PROFIT OVER PEOPLE: The EPA is changing Clean Air Act air pollution standards by introducing a cost-benefit analysis, allowing the agency to view pollution economically, without considering other factors, like public health. Like the changes to NEPA, this rule would weaken the very regulations that can protect already vulnerable communities from air pollution. This is especially concerning given the coronavirus pandemic: Recent research has linked air pollution to an increase in death rate of COVID-19. The administration also used cost-benefit analysis in April to justify weakening a rule that forced coal plants to cut mercury emissions. The changes would keep the current Mercury and Air Toxic Standards in place but make them more vulnerable to industry lawsuits and could prevent future regulations from being passed. The National Mining Association, which represents coal-company interests, praised the April decision.

WATER IS NOT LIFE: The very same week as President Trump’s executive order waiving portions of NEPA and the ESA, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule revising section 401 of the Clean Water Act, making it harder for states, tribes and the public to block pipelines and other projects that could pollute their waterways. The rule revises the certification process listed under section 401, which, traditionally, has given local governments the power to review new projects to ensure they’re safe for the environment.

The changes to the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act clearly prioritize industry over public health and should not go unnoticed.

These changes are especially egregious during the pandemic, further endangering Americans’ health during an unprecedented public health crisis.

The post BLOG: Environmental Rollbacks Gut Core Conservation Laws first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

On a cool Saturday morning, over twenty people met in the Cascadia parking lot to prepare to go out on the first public field checking trip of the year into the Flat Country timber sale. Covid-19 had been declared an international pandemic three days earlier, and terms such as social distancing and flattening the curve had not yet become the center of our thoughts and interactions. We caravanned into the forest, into snowy mountains, and away from the impending crisis that would soon envelop the nation. 

Flat Country is a public lands timber sale in between Eugene and Sisters at the headwaters of the McKenzie river, just north of Blue River  and adjacent to the Mount Washington Wilderness. The sale encompasses over 5,000 acres of management, including 1,000 acres slated for regeneration harvest (aka clearcutting with minimal retention) in forest stands ranging between 40 and 140 years old. 

The Forest Service opened up the comment period for this sale in the winter, making much of the sale inaccessible to field checking due to snow, but Cascadia Wildlands’ field-checking team has been busy exploring the units we can access, and we’re finding a lot of old, and healthy forests. 

That Saturday morning, we drove up along the western border of the sale to check out unit 1300, an older stand that the Forest Service has proposed to be commercially thinned. Diving into the unit from the gravel road, we walked over soft forest ground, covered with snow, wet moss and decomposing wood.  We came across a couple of rapidly flowing streams ,and we all had very different approaches to crossing. The braver of us used the leap and pray method, others strategically scouted out a route over solid logs, and some of us mistakenly picked mushy logs to step on that resulted in puddles in our boots… ok maybe that was just me. But once we crossed the last stream we walked into a beautiful meadow with an epic old alder snag (pictured above)! 

We then broke into smaller groups to tackle different parts of the unit and cover as much ground as possible. My group decided to check out the southeast corner area of the unit. We walked through the forest that was between two streams and taught folks new to field checking how to collect data such as diameter-at-breast-height measurement of trees, slope measurement and canopy coverage estimations. We animatedly shared our plant and tree identification knowledge with each other as we walked through the diverse area. One of the environmental studies students shared their dream of seeing a spotted owl before they lose the chance due to the destruction of their remaining habitat, like the lush forest full of snags and old legacy trees that we were in. I, being the new field checking intern, was mostly focused on my map — adamant to not get our group lost. 

As we entered new areas of the forest we kept exclaiming “there is no need to log this!” The trees were healthy, with scattered remnants of ancient Douglas firs, cedars and hemlocks. Natural gaps were present throughout the area and plenty of downed decomposing wood littered the forest floor. Everything was very much alive, growing and thriving.

As we walked between the two streams, we got pretty fond of the area and named it after the fertile land between two rivers, Mesopotamia. It was an epic last jaunt in the woods with Cascadia before the state mandated lockdown! Walking through this beautiful old forest with a great group of knowledgeable folks, I fondly recalled my first field checking trip last spring at Breitenbush. After that trip I was sold on forest defense work, especially field checking, as it consists of venturing in wild places and directly utilizes experiential learning. Now, it’s a year later and I’m in a new forest, but I still feel the same sense of amazement and joy at the experience of field checking. 

It is very clear that the resilient forest in this unit is well on its way to becoming an old healthy forest, and does not have the attributes that necessitate commercial thinning. Just walking through the area, I couldn’t help but feel guilty, for the forest floor was teeming with life, and I felt that I was disturbing so many complex biological processes. Logging equipment and the construction of new roads across the swiftly flowing waterways and rich forest floor, would cause drastically more harm than good in this forest stand. Cascadia Wildlands urges the Forest Service to drop all regeneration harvest (aka clearcut) for older stands in the Flat Country sale, and choose Alternative 3 in the Environmental Impact Statement.

No Clearcutting and No Logging Old Forest in Flat Country!

Field checking is the most effective way for the public to protect our forests. Field checking directly contributes to shaping our land ethic and knowledge about the incredible but threatened Pacific Northwest forests. Our government agencies too often rush through the survey process, relying more and more heavily on remote technology to determine what a forest “needs,” and often missing what’s on the ground in front of them. All to sell off the forest to the highest bidder. Oftentimes, old native forests are listed as under 80 years old, waterways go unmarked, and essential habitat for key species are overlooked. Sometimes, we uncover old-growth patches tucked deep off trail that we name—like Flat Country’s Mesopotamia—and plan to visit again and again.  

Identifying and advocating for threatened forests is a responsibility of the public, and one we should take seriously. I would be more upset at the injustice of destructive logging happening in public lands except that it has given me the chance to venture into forests all over our state, build relationships with community members of all ages, and learn vast ecological knowledge. I will be spending this spring field checking with my “quarantine circle,” and I’m so grateful to be able to safely spend time outside and be of service to our forests during this pandemic. But I can’t wait for the time that we can all gather again and go field checking together!

The post INTERN-al UPDATE: A Snowy Field Check in Flat Country first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

COMMENT HERE BY MARCH 10 AND URGE THE REJECTION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES! * The comment period for this is now closed *

The administration is expected to gut the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by making more projects exempt from the environmental review it requires, and by stripping requirements for federal agencies to consider “cumulative” impacts such as contributions to climate change. By mandating risk evaluation to the environment and human health and allowing public review and participation, NEPA is one of our strongest tools for intervening against projects that destroy forests, ruin drinking water for our communities, and imperil endangered species. Despite the fact that 95% of federal projects are exempted from this law and review, the White House is proposing to increase the projects exempted (specifically including pipelines like the Jordan Cove LNG Project) in order to further gut environmental protections in this country.

The proposed rule is riddled with vague, banal language, and the devil is truly in the details. The full proposed changes can be found here, but in summary, CEQ’s proposed rule, if finalized, would:

• Weaken the obligation for federal agencies to constructively use the NEPA process to protect, restore, and enhance the environment. This would embolden radical political agendas supported by extractive interests, such as fossil fuel companies.
• Attempt to avoid the federal government’s duty to take responsibility for the indirect or “downstream” effects of its actions, such as the effects to the environment and public health of burning coal, oil, and dirty natural gas extracted from federal public lands.
• Eliminate the duty of federal agencies to consider the cumulative impacts of their actions. Under the proposed rule, a federal agency could, for example, approve a new coal, oil, or natural gas extraction project without accounting for the climate or public health impacts of the project when combined with other existing or reasonably foreseeable fossil fuel projects approved by that agency.
• Weaken the responsibility of federal agencies to provide a clear basis for choice by the agency and the public by rigorously and objectively considering reasonable alternatives, in particular those alternatives proposed by the public.

• 

  Chill the ability of the public to hold agencies accountable to the law by requiring the public to post a monetary bond prior to seeking administrative review.

• Allow federal agencies to decline to undertake environmental analysis if the agency believes that analysis conflicts with other laws. For example, the timber industry in the Pacific Northwest has long (and wrongly) argued that NEPA and other laws like the Endangered Species Act do not apply to the Oregon & California lands in southwest Oregon because of those lands’ unique multiple use statutory direction.
• Allow project backers to undertake environmental analysis of the proposed project even if there is a conflict of interest between the project proponent and protection of the environment.
• Provide virtually unbridled authority to federal agencies to determine whether impacts are sufficiently significant enough to warrant an environmental impact statement. Existing regulations include specific criteria that must be used in making this determination, including where a proposed action involves highly controversial, highly uncertain, or unknown risks or would risk significant impacts to unique resources such as Wild and Scenic Rivers or Wilderness Areas.

Cascadia Wildlands and our conservation allies will be pushing back against these proposed changes legally and otherwise, but it is important that the Trump administration is shown the level and degree of public support for federal environmental protections that have long safeguarded our treasured wild places. Your voice is needed!

Comments can be submitted via the federal government’s online portal here or mailed to:

Ms. Mary Neumayr
Chair
Council on Environmental Quality
730 Jackson Place, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20503

Suggested talking points (please personalize yours): Please urge the Council on Environmental Quality to abandon this rulemaking process. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a critical law that has helped local communities protect themselves and their environment from dangerous, rushed, and poorly planned federal projects for over 45 years. The NEPA process simply and sensibly requires our government to take a cautionary approach by identifying any significant impacts a project may have on our health, environment, and livelihood before construction begins. NEPA and its implementing procedures provide a strong foundation for informed, science-based decision-making and already provide ample flexibility. We will not stand by while our country’s foundational environmental protections (that were signed into law by President Nixon) are gutted in the name of corporate greed.

The post Action Needed: Trump Attacks Bedrock Environmental Law first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

The North Landscape project, which was approved by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s Lakeview District last year, is expected to generate 111 million board-feet of lumber. The lawsuit seeks to overturn the project for allegedly violating the National Environmental Policy Act and Administrative Procedures Act.

In its haste to increase timber harvest on an extremely fragmented landscape, the Lakeview BLM has unlawfully elevated timber volume production over ecological considerations such as wildfire risk and at-risk species conservation. Nearly 7,000 acres of the project area that have been slated for thinning or clear-cutting are within the designated critical habitat of the Northern spotted owl, which is protected under the Endangered Species Act and continues to experience declines.

The project area contains five sites that are occupied by the spotted owl and the birds will be extirpated from these areas, while the BLM also plans to log seven unoccupied sites that could be inhabited in the future. Northern spotted owls are not expected to recolonize the area until suitable habitat develops in 120 years.

Further, the BLM failed to address important issues associated with the project, including the increasing spread of barred owls that are competing with northern spotted owls, the unique ecological features of the area including the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, and also the fact that the project will admittedly drastically increase fire-hazard for the region.

Our organizations have asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke in Medford, Ore., to enjoin the BLM and its contractors from implementing the project and to vacate its approval.

Additional media coverage can be found here.

The post Cascadia Wildlands and Allies Challenge Enormous North Landscape Timber Sale first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.