The post Take Action: Call on Senators Wyden & Merkley to support real solutions for communities facing the wildfire crisis! 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.

• Saturday, September 10 @ 5:15 pm and 7:30 pm
• Monday, September 12 — Thursday, September 15 @ 6:30 pm.
• Friday, September 16 @ 5:00 pm
• Saturday, September 17 — Sunday, September 18 @ 11:50am and 4:50 pm
• Monday, September 19 — Thursday, September 22 @ 6:00 pm
• Secure your tickets before they sell out.

The film will also be shown at the US Basketball Academy near McKenzie Bridge just above the initiation site of the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire on September 30 at 6:00 pm. Click here to RSVP and for more information about this no-cost showing.

About the film:

Narrated by David Oyelowo, ELEMENTAL takes viewers on a journey with the top experts in the nation to better understand fire. We follow the harrowing escape from Paradise as the town ignited from wind-driven embers and burned within a few hours of the fire’s start. We visit fire labs where researchers torch entire houses to learn why some homes burn and others survive. We learn from Native Americans as they employ fire to benefit nature and increase community safety as they have for thousands of years. We follow researchers who work to understand the effects of climate on forests and the crucial role that natural forests play in storing vast amounts of carbon. Along the way we listen to people who have survived the deadliest fires to underscore the importance of this quest.

The post ELEMENTAL Film Premier and Additional Showings in Eugene and Surrounding Area — Sept 2022 first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Nick Cady, Cascadia Wildlands, nick@cascwild.org, (541) 434-1463
Meriel Darzen, Crag Law Center, meriel@crag.org
Doug Heiken, Oregon Wild, dh@oregonwild.org

Judge Halts Post-Fire Logging near Breitenbush

Forest Service Unlawfully Changed Logging Contracts Following 2020 Wildfires

Eugene, OR — Today, a federal judge enjoined post-fire logging on the Willamette National Forest near Detroit Lake and Breitenbush hot springs. The Forest Service was converting previously approved restorative thinning projects into post-fire clearcuts without any public notice or environmental review, despite the significant new information and conditions created by the fires.

IMAGES FOR MEDIA USE

“Oregon’s response to these fires needs to include the public, be forward-looking, and designed to protect and restore our treasured forested areas, instead of knee-jerk efforts to generate as much timber volume as possible,” said Nick Cady of Cascadia Wildlands. “It is heartening to hear the Court explicitly recognize and emphasize this approach.”

Conservation groups Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild learned the Forest Service had changed the terms of timber sales pre-dating the fires in late spring 2021 because members of the organizations discovered clearcutting in areas that were supposed to be restoration thinning projects. The organizations had participated in the public process shaping these prior projects, but were not informed about the agency’s dramatic shift. Documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the contract changes were not limited to the areas in the lower McKenzie River watershed adjacent to highway 19 near Cougar Reservoir, but in fact were occurring across the Willamette National Forest, including in areas near the beloved Breitenbush hot springs. The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to consider significant new information, such as large forest fires and the risks and tradeoffs associated with logging in these sensitive post-fire areas.

“Both the catastrophic 2020 fires and the Forest Service’s decision to implement ‘salvage’ where it was originally going to do selective thinning and burning were significant changes that required new analysis and public involvement,” said Meriel Darzen of the Crag Law Center, one of the attorneys for the conservation groups. “Cascadia and Oregon Wild were heavily invested in these projects and are deeply concerned about the recovery of these areas after the fires; the Forest Service’s backroom decision to log these sensitive recently burned areas with no analysis is harmful to the forest and the communities that are still recovering from the fires.”

Though some of the areas subject to the contract changes were already logged, today’s injunction precludes the Forest Service from moving forward with those that have yet to be cut pending the outcome of the lawsuit. In November, a federal judge enjoined much of the Forest Service’s plans to log along little used forest roads within the 2020 fire perimeter, also for failure to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. These actions highlight a pattern of the Willamette National Forest failing to comply with federal environmental laws designed to ensure the public is included in decision-making on public lands and that agency decisions follow the best available science.   

“Oregon Wild brought this case to defend the simple proposition that when a wildfire burns through an ongoing timber sale, the Forest Service needs to pump the brakes and involve the public in deciding how to move forward,” said Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild. “That’s not just the law, but also the best way to protect our forests, drinking water, wildlife, carbon, and scenic values.”

Logging in recently burned areas does significant environmental harm: introducing invasive species, disturbing sensitive soils, increasing the likelihood of landslides and disturbing wildlife and plant species that coevolved with and depend on wildfires. It can also increase future fire risks and hazards.

Federal Judge Ann Aiken ruled from the bench during today’s hearing, granting conservation organizations’ request for an injunction.  A written ruling is forthcoming. The organization are represented by attorneys at the Crag Law Center and Cascadia Wildlands.

###

The post Press Release: Post-fire Logging Halted on the Willamette National Forest 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.

On an uncharacteristically rainy morning in mid-June, myself, along with my fellow Cascadia team members, pulled into the Middle Fork Willamette Ranger Station. Here, we would meet with representatives from Oregon Wild, as well as a number of Willamette National Forest District Rangers and fuel planners.

The purpose of the visit was twofold. First, we were going to visit sites within the Oakridge/Westfir Thinning and Fuel Reduction Project (OWTFR). Visiting these sites would open the door to discussion on the effectiveness of these projects, and allow us to visually assess outcomes. Second, we sought to use discussions about these projects as a jumping off point to discuss future fuels reduction projects proposed in the Forest.

As an intern, I had the luxury of being able to quietly take it all in. Legal issues and logging concerns aside, I found it fascinating to watch the interpersonal interactions between the different groups unfold. Forest management and fire suppression is a fascinating subject matter and certainly not straightforward. At the end of the day, I’d like to believe that all groups represented on that tour share a mutual respect for the natural world. The bottom line, however, is that different organizations have different priorities, not to mention the motivations underlying them. Thus, as you might imagine, the tour was not a simple walk in the woods filled with idle chatter. Rather, the tour functioned more as a respectful, but not reserved, opportunity for different parties to present their viewpoints in an effort to inform future decision making.

The purpose of the OWTFR Project is to reduce the risk of future catastrophic wildfires. The project operates in two parts. First, forests are thinned. This is accomplished by removing trees from stands in order to decrease the density. Second, fuels reduction takes place. This is accomplished through prescribed burning of the debris left over on the forest floor after thinning. By reducing ground fuels and increasing space between the canopy, these methods aim to slow the spread of fire and keep it closer to the ground, allowing firefighters to more effectively intervene. These thinning and fuels reduction projects make sense in theory, but the reality is much more nuanced.

Often times when thinning and fuels reduction projects are proposed, older stands are slipped into the proposal alongside younger stands. Logging mature forests is problematic for far more reasons than a simple blog post can hash out. Further, thinning old forests is by no means the most effective method of fire reduction. On the contrary, the ramifications of logging old forests can often lead to an increased fire risk. Thus, mature stands are often tossed into thinning and fuels reduction proposals more as a money grab than a fire risk reduction strategy. That being said, it should come as no surprise that one of our goals on the tour was to address this concern of mature forest logging.

The extreme downsides of mature forest logging should not undercut the fact that logging of any kind comes with drawbacks. While Cascadia recognizes that in some cases thinning can be beneficial to protect communities from the spread of wildfire – more on that later – it comes at a cost. Interestingly, one of the points brought up by a District Ranger on the tour was that many people who own homes in high fire risk areas are opposed to the logging. These people would rather run the risk of a fire destroying their home than intentionally remove the trees that attracted them to the area in the first place. Risky? Perhaps. But in many ways these community members might be onto something. When discussing 2020’s Holiday Farm Fire, District Ranger Darren Cross commented that thinning and fuels reduction projects would not have made much of a difference in stopping the fire’s spread. The force of the wind and the speed with which the fire was traveling rendered it nearly impossible to slow down. The fire crossed rivers, and it’s difficult to imagine a much more effective fire break than a body of water.

On a related note, during the tour I noticed the terms “extreme” and “unusual” being used to discuss the 2020 fires. Given the rate of climate change and the effects already occurring, it is entirely likely that 2020 was not unusual so much as it was the start of a new normal. In that case, we need to critically examine the steps we are taking to preemptively reduce fire risk, especially when fuels treatment projects contribute certain negative climate impacts, and uncertain positive outcomes.

I’ll step off my soapbox now to say that fuels reduction projects do have a time and place. Agencies using prescribed fire and commercial thinning to fight fires can be a good thing when done correctly.

The devil is in the details, and one critical detail to keep in mind is that fires are a natural part of the forest ecosystem. The Forest Service has a bad legacy of fire suppression. Wildfires that should have burned in the past were put out. Consequently, stands have become overstocked, tree size and growth has been stunted, and species that don’t belong have moved in. On the one hand, ensuring public safety must be balanced with naturally allowing areas to burn. On the other hand, the reality is that often these wildfires have been put out not to protect the general public, but to protect neighboring private timber plantations.

If all of this sounds a bit confusing, it’s because it is. There’s a lot to unpack here. Fire management is not black and white, but in some ways that is a good thing. It means there is lots of room for compromise.

During the tour, discussions about compromise took place. More importantly, these discussions were productive. For instance, representatives from the environmental groups shared the aforementioned points on the necessity of fire to a healthy forest ecosystem. They suggested that the Forest Service might let more fires burn naturally, so long as they do not pose a safety risk. In theory, the more that fires naturally thin the forest, the less intentional thinning must be done. This benefits not only the ecosystem, but also the Forest Service itself. The reality is that fuels reduction projects are expensive; if more natural burning is allowed to occur, the Forest Service can save time and resources.

As it turns out, the Forest Service has already been considering a fuels reduction strategy along these lines. Inspired by fire management techniques in New Mexico, the fuels reduction planners shared their plans to implement the use of Potential Operational Delineations (PODs) to manage fire.

According to the Rocky Mountain Research Station (RMRS) branch of the Forest Service:

PODs are spatial units or containers defined by potential control features, such as roads and ridge tops, within which relevant information on forest conditions, ecology, and fire potential can be summarized. PODs combine local fire knowledge with advanced spatial analytics to help managers develop a common understanding of risks, management opportunities, and desired outcomes to determine fire management objectives.

Perhaps more importantly than what PODs are, is what they are intended to achieve. Echoing the sentiments I shared earlier, the RMRS explains,

Sometimes, fires resulting from natural ignitions can be strategically managed to achieve goals similar to a prescribed fire: ecological restoration, watershed health, reduced risk of catastrophic wildfire, and reduced future fire suppression costs. When values are likely to benefit, the right kind of fire can be managed for risk reduction and restoration objectives rather than immediately suppressed. Collaborative pre-planning during the PODs process helps to identify these opportunities, as well as conditions and locations where rapid initial attack may still be the best option to protect sensitive resources and assets. Where and when possible, leveraging natural ignitions for non-suppression objectives can reduce fire risk to adjacent high-value PODs over the near term, with benefits for maintaining lower risk conditions with future actions.

Essentially, PODs provide a method of forest management that would allow for a better balance between allowing fires to operate naturally within the ecosystem and ensuring community safety. As far as the Willamette National Forest is concerned, the idea of implementing PODs into fire management planning is still in the early stages, but the concept sounds hopeful.

Overall, I’d deem the tour worthwhile. Attendees were able to share perspectives, tradeoffs were acknowledged, and collaboration, at least to some degree, ensued. The trip ended on a positive note with ideas being floated for future tours including longer hikes to older stands, as well as rotating ranger districts and discussion topics. Most importantly, all parties agreed collaboration and communication are in everyone’s best interest.

Danielle Curtis
University of Oregon School of Law
J.D. Candidate 2023

The post BLOG: Reporting Back from the Oakridge/Westfir Field Visit first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

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

Conservationist Appeal ODOT’s Bill for Release of Public Records

Agency Billed Cascadia Wildlands $87,000 for Hazard Tree Removal Records

Portland, OR — Cascadia Wildlands appealed the $87,756.60 estimated bill issued by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) in response to the organization’s public records request seeking documents related to the agency’s hazard tree removal activities following the 2020 Labor Day fires.

ODOT is in the process of using hundreds of millions of federal and state dollars to remove hundreds of thousands of trees along public roads and public and private properties that burned the 2020 wildfires. Despite the considerable amount of taxpayer dollars at issue, and the impacts of these actions on Oregonians and Oregon’s public forests, ODOT largely failed to be transparent regarding its allocation of funds and its contracting process. This spring, individuals including several contractors and landowners with first hand knowledge came forward with allegations of mismanagement of the funds and excessive tree cutting. Considerable media coverage led to several state legislative hearings during which whistleblowers testified on the record to misdeeds including over marking of trees, unqualified individuals conducting tree marking, excessive cutting, and drug use on the job.

On April 1, 2021, Cascadia Wildlands submitted a public records request to ODOT. Under Oregon’s Public Records Law, “every person” has a right to inspect any nonexempt public record of a public body in Oregon. Cascadia requested records pertaining to hazard tree removal following the fall 2020 wildfires, including guidelines to be followed, the criteria for hazard tree removal and assessment, and information about the contracts and contractors. As is standard under Oregon law, Cascadia Wildlands — an Oregon-based non-profit organization with an over 20 year history of forest advocacy — requested a fee waiver. Public bodies, including ODOT, are statutorily required to consider and grant reasonable requests to waive or reduce fees associated with fulfilling a public record request if doing so is in the public’s interest “because making the records available primarily benefits the general public.” ODOT sent Cascadia an estimated bill of over $87,000 to provide the records and denied the fee waiver request. Today, Cascadia Wildlands appeals that denial to the Oregon Attorney General.

“Public records are just that: public and ODOT’s staff and activities are paid with public dollars,” said Nick Cady, legal director for Cascadia Wildlands. “ODOT’s refusal to reduce or waive fees and it’s outrageously high estimate demonstrate the agency is more interested in hiding its misdeeds than being transparent with the public the agency serves.”

Cascadia Wildlands is represented by the Crag Law Center in the appeal.

###

Background

The 2020 wildfire season was one of the state’s most destructive on record. The largest block of fire, referred to as the Oregon Labor Day Wildfires, consisted of five fires on the western side of the Cascades that spread dramatically due to a historic windstorm. These fires took the lives of nine Oregonians, displaced thousands of individuals, burned more than 1.2 million acres of land, and destroyed more than 5,000 residential and commercial structures. In the wake of the 2020 wildfire season, Oregon began rehabilitation efforts, including cleaning up debris and hazardous materials.

To reach Oregon’s wildfire recovery goals, the state has assigned the Oregon Department of Transportation to lead the Oregon Debris Management Task Force. The task force also consists of the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Oregon’s wildfire debris clean-up process consists of two steps focusing on the safe clean-up and disposal of potentially harmful materials. In December 2020, ODOT completed step one, which addressed the clean-up of household hazardous waste removal. Step two, which consists of removing hazard trees, ash, and debris by state-hired contractors, began in December 2020 and is predicted to take six to eighteen months to complete. Hazard tree removal clears trees that can fall onto roadways, properties, and recreation areas where people frequent. Similarly, ash and debris removal consist of toxic ash and structural debris which must be removed to ensure safety before rebuilding can begin.

Currently, the total cost estimate of the debris clean-up is $622 million. The assessment includes $326 million for ash and debris removal and $295.7 million for hazard tree removal. Oregon and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will share the cost to fund the clean-up efforts. While Oregon funds will initially pay for clean-up, at least 75% of the hazard tree removal and structural debris removal is eligible for reimbursement by FEMA as long as the Oregon Debris Management Task Force complies with FEMA’s requirements of controlling costs, reducing waste, and eliminating fraud.

As the Oregon Debris Management Task Force and specifically ODOT and its contractors began implementing their plans to cut nearly 300,000 trees deemed as hazardous, members of the public grew concerned about the number of trees being cut along scenic highways, protected rivers, and secondary roads within the burn boundaries of 2020’s wildfires. Following Oregon Public Broadcasting’s exposé of ODOT’s mismanagement of post-fire roadside hazard tree removal and accusations by whistleblowers and industry leaders, Oregon Senator Jeff Golden, chair of the Senate Wildfire Recovery Committee, held several hearings requesting information from ODOT regarding the tree removal effort. It was during this time that Cascadia submitted its public records request. Since the hearings, public officials, environmental groups, and communities affected by the post-fire logging have called upon Governor Kate Brown to immediately pause the cutting and halt the excessive roadside logging occurring under the guise of hazard tree removal.

The post Press Release: CW Appeals ODOT’s $87,000 Bill for Post-Fire Hazard Tree Removal Public Records Request  first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Nick Cady, Legal Director, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Noah Greenwald, Endangered Species Director, Center for Biological Diversity

Environmental Groups Sue to Stop Post-Fire Logging on Oregon State Forest

Organizations Challenge Department of Forestry’s Clearcutting in Santiam State Forest After Last Summer’s Wildfires

Portland, Oregon — Today conservation groups including Cascadia Wildlands, the Center for Biological Diversity, Willamette Riverkeeper, Audubon Society of Corvallis, Audubon Society of Salem, Oregon Wild, and the Benton Forest Coalition filed suit challenging the ongoing post-fire clearcutting in the Santiam State forest east of Salem. Closed to visitors since 2020’s Labor Day wildfires, the state forest is currently being extensively logged by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF). 

The Oregon Department of Forestry’s logging operations in the Santiam State Forest are particularly contentious as they are impacting areas beloved by mountain bikers, horseback riders, and hikers including the Monument Peak horse camp and the Niagara area. 

Mark Goldsworthy, a Salem resident and member of Cascadia Wildlands said:

“I’ve been mountain biking in this area for years and got to know the trails really well. When I heard that the area was due to be clear cut I was shocked and disheartened. It’s like losing an old friend.”

Community members and environmental organizations are also raising concerns about the significant ecological impact that heavy logging has on post-fire forests and watersheds. Research shows that post-fire salvage logging damages the local environment and delays forest recovery, while releasing large amounts of carbon — further exacerbating the global climate crisis. 

Nick Cady, Legal Director with Cascadia Wildlands, said:

“Oregon’s Department of Forestry is doubling down on the devastating effects of last year’s fire season, and clearcutting some of the most treasured recreation areas in the Santiam State Forest. These are beautiful forests in protected areas and the Department is taking advantage of the fires to log these areas and triple its volume output for the year. The agency is out of control.”

Post-fire logging typically removes most of the remaining trees and involves intense road building and maintenance, the planting of non-native species and the application of toxic herbicides. The combined impacts of these actions disrupt forest health, degrade habitat, harm forested watersheds, and impact aquatic ecosystems by driving erosion and removing potential habitat in the form of woody debris (Karr et al. 2004, Donato et al. 2006, Reeves et al. 2006). 

Noah Greenwald, Endangered Species Director with Center for Biological Diversity, said:

“Salvage logging the Santiam State Forest will do great damage to spotted owls, struggling salmon populations, water quality and forest recovery. The Oregon Department of Forestry is stuck in the 1950s and out of step with science and the values of most Oregonians.” 

Logging emits far more carbon than even severe wildfire (Law et al. 2018). While fire-killed trees may take several decades or even centuries to decompose, during the logging and milling process, most of the carbon is rapidly released into the atmosphere (Smith et al. 2006, Gower et al. 2006). Post-fire logging undercuts the natural sequestration and storage capacity of post-fire forests and contributes to carbon emissions that worsen climate change.

Rebecca White, Wildlands Director with Cascadia Wildlands, said:

“We’ve known for a long time that burned forests are great at storing carbon, but not when they’re logged. It’s time for our state land managers to plan actions that will help us fight against climate change, not contribute to making it worse.”

In congressional testimony to the House Subcommittee on Resources (November 10, 2005, hearing on HR4200), University of Washington Professor Jerry Franklin said “Timber salvage is most appropriately viewed as a ‘tax’ on ecological recovery.”

Travis Williams, Executive Director of Willamette Riverkeeper, said:

 “Protection of high watersheds of the Willamette River are critical to the overall health of the river system.” 

The Santiam watersheds drain some 1,800 square miles from the Cascade range, providing an abundance of clear, cold water that is beneficial to the Willamette River.

Find an interactive map of the areas proposed for logging here.
Find photos of the ongoing logging here.
Review the filed lawsuit here.

###

Cascadia Wildlands is a Eugene-based nonprofit working to defend and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.7 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Willamette Riverkeeper works to protect and restore the Willamette River’s water quality, habitat, and ecological health through advocacy, education, and on-the-ground projects across the Willamette River Basin. 

The post Lawsuit Filed Challenging Ongoing Post-Fire Clearcutting in Santiam State Forest East of Salem first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

Contacts:
Bethany Cotton, Conservation Director, Cascadia Wildlands, (541) 434-1463
Tim Ingalsbee, Executive Director, Firefighters United for Safety Ethics and Ecology (FUSEE)

Conservationists Call on Biden Admin to Rein in Destructive Post-Fire Roadside Logging

Widespread Post-Fire Clearcutting Threatens Drinking Water, Climate Resilience, Wildlife

Eugene, Oregon — Today, over twenty conservation and climate justice organizations sent a letter to Cabinet Secretaries Deb Haaland of the Department of the Interior and Tom Vilsack of the Department of Agriculture opposing the sweeping post-fire roadside logging proposed or actively being carried out by their respective agencies. The organizations are calling for an end to the blanket prescription linear clearcuts within the perimeters of the 2020 Labor Day wildfires, and a halt to the use of Categorical Exclusions (CE) by federal land management agencies to bypass environmental review and public participation. These clearcuts are up to 200 feet wide on both sides of roadways, adding up to tens of thousands of acres of clearcuts in addition to the hundreds of thousands of acres of private land clearcuts and proposed public lands post-fire logging.

The letter comes as tens of thousands of acres of “hazard” tree removal road and riverside logging are proposed and taking place along federal public forest roads across the State of Oregon. In the past six months, hundreds of thousands of acres of private timberland were already clearcut.

“The roadside clearcutting of burned forests is an insult to the safety risks, health hazards, and hard work that wildland firefighters subjected themselves to save those trees,” said Timothy Ingalsbee, executive director of Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE). “Worse, the logging will greatly amplify the fire risks and fuel hazards affecting future firefighters if and when they are sent to the weedy brushfields that grow up in the wake of clearcutting.”

Community members and environmental organizations are raising concerns about the serious ecological impact that heavy logging has on post-fire forests and watersheds. Research shows that post-fire logging damages the local environment and delays forest recovery, while releasing large amounts of carbon — further exacerbating the global climate crisis. Agencies permit the logging under the scientifically unsound theory of “salvage,” implying burned forests must be clearcut to save value. In truth, burned forests provide habitat for myriad fire-dependent wildlife and plant species, sequester carbon, and naturally recover if only left to do so.

“Far from improving public safety, the unprecedented scale of road and riverside logging is further endangering imperiled species, undermining climate resilience, and jeopardizing drinking water sources for hundreds of thousands of Oregonians,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands. “Federal agencies are attempting to circumvent scientific analysis and public process, by claiming these impacts are minimal when nothing could be further from the truth.”

The organizations are also calling on the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture to promulgate clear, science-based post-fire hazard tree removal and remediation regulations applicable across federal agencies via notice and comment public rulemaking to ensure transparency, clarity and consistency.

The signatory organizations are: Cascadia Wildlands, Center for Biological Diversity, Western Environmental Law Center, Firefighters United for Safety Ethics and Ecology, Breach Collective, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Forest Web, Soda Mountain Wilderness Council, 350PDX, Redwood Region Audubon Society, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, John Muir Project, Sunrise PDX, Sunrise Eugene, Bark, Western Watersheds Project, Blue Mountain Biodiversity Project, South Umpqua Rural Community Partnership, Oregon Wild, Environmental Protection Information Center, WildEarth Guardians.

###

Background and Resources:
Read more about the impacts of post-fire roadside logging here and here. Find photos of ongoing post-fire roadside logging here.

Post-fire logging typically removes most of the remaining trees and involves intense road building and maintenance, the planting of non-native species and the application of toxic herbicides. The combined impacts of these actions disrupt forest health, degrade habitat, harm forested watersheds, and impact aquatic ecosystems by driving erosion and removing potential habitat in the form of woody debris (Karr et al. 2004, Donato et al. 2006, Reeves et al. 2006).

Logging emits far more carbon than even severe wildfire (Law et al. 2018). While fire-killed trees may take several decades or even centuries to decompose, during the logging and milling process, most of the carbon is rapidly released into the atmosphere (Smith et al. 2006, Gower et al. 2006). Post-fire logging undercuts the natural sequestration and storage capacity of post-fire forests and contributes to carbon emissions that worsen climate change.

In congressional testimony to the House Subcommittee on Resources (November 10, 2005, hearing on HR4200), University of Washington Professor Jerry Franklin said “Timber salvage is most appropriately viewed as a ‘tax’ on ecological recovery.”

Cascadia Wildlands is a Eugene-based nonprofit working to defend and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets.

Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE) conducts public education and policy advocacy promoting safe, ethical, ecological fire management

The post A Call on Secretaries Haaland and Vilsack to Rein in Reckless Post-Fire Roadside Logging in Oregon first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.

As we move into the post-wildfire season here in western Oregon, I am thinking of having some bumper stickers printed up. Maybe, “Gaia Knows Best.” Or perhaps, “What Would Gaia Do?”

In the aftermath of this year’s big fires, I want to share the idea that when the land has suffered what may appear to be a major wound, sometimes the picture is brighter than it first seems—especially when we are willing to trust natural processes and give the land some room to heal.

It’s nevertheless true that major wounds lie all around us this winter. Large wildfires, many that were likely sparked by power lines then driven to conflagration by unusually hot and dry east winds, have caused tragic loss: some in our communities have lost their homes and businesses; some lost their lives. We mourn those lives, and extend our compassion and support to those who lost homes and livelihoods. Tough times lie ahead as people make plans for a different future than they might have hoped and planned for.

We have also heard people’s fears and concerns about the wild lives lost. Will our forests recover? Is destructive wildfire going to become our “new normal” under climate change? Will big fires in spotted owl habitat drive them to extinction?

I am happy to tell you that, at least as far as the forests go, you can breathe a sigh of relief. Our Western Oregon forests and native wildlife are used to wildfire. They’ve evolved with it, and a fully functioning ecosystem needs it.

As to whether large wildfires will become the “new normal” under climate change, the truth is that large wildfires are just … normal. In recent decades, we’ve emerged from an unusually wet time period that coincided with federal policy encouraging fire suppression, so our expectations of a normal fire year are based on an abnormal baseline. Large wildfires – even so called “mega-fires” – are the historic norm west of the Cascades. We may start to see increased drought and extreme weather due to climate change, though, and that will certainly influence fire behavior in years to come.

If you’ve been wondering whether our forests can recover from the fires, you can set your mind at ease about this, too. Very large, and often severe wildfires have burned in our forests for thousands of years. Our forests and the wildlife within them evolved in concert with fire and not only recover in its aftermath, but thrive. Even this season’s biggest fires burned in a mosaic, leaving a patchwork of green forest, untouched or lightly burned, intermingled with more severely burned patches.

If left to recover naturally, these blackened patches of charcoal forest will start to sprout new growth next spring, birds and their nestlings will feast on insects that have colonized the burned trees, and tree seeds will sprout, nourished by the living mycorrhizal network beneath the burned soil surface. Fire, our forests can handle.

Now, whether our forests, and the wildlife that depend on them, will recover from decades of destructive logging is another question – and that’s why we fight tooth and claw against any old-growth and mature forest logging, as well as the particularly destructive post-fire clearcutting.

There is also some good news on the spotted owl front with regard to wildfire. An ongoing scientific debate about the fate of spotted owls after wildfire has flared back up recently. The upshot of the controversy is that an independent scientist has shown that spotted owls thrive through wildfires, while a group of industry and agency-sponsored scientists have been trying to cast doubt on that. There’s going to be some back-and-forth for a while, but it looks like the debate will come down in favor of the rigorous, independent scientists, as it usually does. I’m ready to breathe a sigh of relief here: I don’t think wildfires, alone, are going to drive spotted owls extinct.

Yet the owl population has been declining steadily since they were listed under the Endangered Species Act in 1990, so much so that the US Fish & Wildlife Service has determined they should be uplisted from “threatened” to “endangered,” meaning they are now in danger of extinction (note, the listing is not finalized; the government has determined they are too busy to handle it just now, but will revisit the idea in a year). So, what is sending spotted owls down the extinction spiral?

In a word, logging. Despite the frantic efforts of the industry and, unfortunately, most of our federal land managers, to blame a myriad of other causes, the main culprit is logging.

When an industry strips away a habitat needed for a species’ survival – and for spotted owls, that’s old-growth forest – then that species will die off. Estimates vary on the amount of old-growth the industry has deigned to leave behind in spotted owl range, but it could be as low as 10% of what existed prior to colonial settlement in the 1800s. It’s not too surprising that spotted owl populations are way down, too. Species and their habitats go hand in hand; when their homes go, they go.

If they aren’t logged, we can expect to hear plentiful birdsong and enjoy native wildflower blooms in our burned forests this spring. Forests that develop on their own post-fire are more complex than clearcut-and-replanted stands; they can develop into old-growth twice as fast as managed forests. On top of that, many are surprised to hear that burned forests are great at storing carbon. But not if they’re logged.

Owls – and any other living thing that prefers to live in a forest (even a burned one) versus a strip-mined hellscape – are among the reasons we are particularly concerned by new post-fire clearcutting proposals coming hot in the wake of this season’s wildfires. We are geared up on all fronts with our conservation partners to fight this, the worst and most environmentally destructive form of logging.

Because industrial timberlands will flood the market with burned logs from private lands, we are asking our state and federal agencies to take a more responsible role with our shared forests and leave them to recover naturally, providing diverse habitat for a myriad of wild species.

Although we’d hoped the agencies might have the decency to wait until the pandemic eased, the holidays had passed, and 2020 was finally in the rear view mirror before acting, they’ve unfortunately decided to start pitching post-fire clearcutting in some of our most cherished watersheds this month. We are keeping an eye on three massive, harmful projects now (outlined below). We know more will be headed our way in the months to come, and we will keep you all apprised of opportunities to weigh in.

McKenzie River / HLB-MITA Salvage Project

This proposal out of the Bureau of Land Management proposes to clearcut over 1,300 acres of burned forest in the McKenzie River watershed (salvage and green tree harvest within Harvest Land Base-Moderate Intensity Timber Area (HLB-MITA). We’d like to see the agency operate with some concern for the trauma already suffered by the human and wild residents of the McKenzie valley. Clearcutting these hillsides would instead add increased landslide risk and risk to fish streams, degraded soil webs, flash floods, and homeless wildlife to the list of insults following the Holiday Farm Fire.

The agency is taking comments on its scoping proposal now through January 11. They are asking whether they should do a full Environmental Analysis (EA) or if they can get away with filing this under a “Categorical Exclusion” – a new pass on environmental impact review granted for post-fire logging in the waning days of the Trump administration. We want them to slow down and take the time to do a full EA review as required by law, giving our citizens plenty of time to look over their plans and comment prior to them committing to undertake actions that would ravage our forest and watershed.

You can contact the field manager in charge, Rebecca Brooke, with your concerns: rbrooke@blm.gov

North Umpqua River / Archie Creek Salvage Project

Here again, the Bureau of Land Management is moving lightning-fast on a proposal to clearcut a massive area along the North Umpqua River that burned in September’s Archie Creek Fire. We can’t even tell you exactly how many acres are involved, because their scoping proposal is so vague it doesn’t even list that basic information. So much for fair and open public oversight procedures. We do know this one is too big to go forward under a Categorical Exclusion, but we fully expect the agency to rush its Environmental Analysis.

We’ve asked for more information, but in the meantime, you can comment until January 8. If you support a careful environmental review that fully considers all the logging impacts to fish, streams, water quality, soil quality, and wildlife that we would expect, let the agency know!

You can reach out to Mike Korn, the field manager in charge: mkorn@blm.gov

North Santiam River / Santiam State Forest

This proposal is moving fast to sell off swaths of our burned state forest to clearcutting. About half of the roughly 47,000-acre Santiam State Forest east of Salem burned last fall. As with fires generally, this one burned in a healthy mosaic pattern, leaving fertile ground for a new, natural forest to arise there. Instead, the state is sticking to its outdated 2010 planning document and wants to clearcut up to 3,500 acres. We know some of what they will cut will be green, and as you know, even the blackened areas provide important habitat for years to come.

The Oregon Department of Forestry has provided very little information about what they intend here. We don’t know how old these trees are, how severely they burned, or where exactly the agency intends to allow loggers free rein. They’ve shortened the usual public comment period to 30 days – comments due December 23 – and have revealed they intend to auction off the first trees for logging that same day! We think our public trust deserves better.

You can ask for more information and share your opinion of this plan here:
odf.sfcomments@oregon.gov

The post BLOG: After the Fires, the Birds and the Blooms first appeared on Cascadia Wildlands.