E-mail-001-399

# Sender Subject

Date

Body
EM-1 "Comcast Mail" <Reshal@comcast.net> 2.5 million acre logging project 8/10/2007 9:44:45 Hello,
  I do not believe that you are doing the right thing by logging that 2.5 million acres of trees. Although the land is federal forest, that forest has grown to support a larger number of animals, and logging 54% of it will confine them to a much smaller space. By doing this, you are setting the stage for Oregon animal numbers to drop dramatically. Please review your plans. Some very unique animals live in that forest, such as owls. A small portion of the forest's animal population have continually decreasing numbers. By logging this forest, you are helping them to disappear from the face of the earth for good. Please do the better thing for the environment.
                                    Sincerely, A Caring Citizen
EM-2 joseph@kswild.org WOPR Draft DEIS Comments from the Public 8/11/2007 12:12:11 Submitter: Joseph Vaile
email: joseph@kswild.org
Location: Ashland, OR 97520
Comment: Please don\'t log the old-growth. Instead, thin the plantations. Choose the Citizens Conservation Alternative submitted in scoping.

Thanks,

Joseph Vaile
Ashland Oregon 97520
Relevant Section/Page: all of it
EM-3 info@abolishpoverty.us Priority Invitation August 30 Eugene Radio Town Hall 8/19/2007 11:23:53 BLM rep,
 
I am the event  designer for a radio town hall we are having on federal forest policy in Eugene, Oregon. We are very interested in having a Bureau of Land Management spokesperson as a panelist. Are you interested in discussing with me BLM's possible participation? Copied below is information on the event.
 
Thank you,
 
Michael Smith
August 30th Radio Town Hall
Event Designer
 
1630 Arthur Place
Eugene, Oregon
97402
 
541-653-6315
 

To: Event Advisers

From: Michael Smith, Event Designer

Re: August 30th Radio Town Hall

 

Note: Comprehensive and updated report next week.

 

Event Name:Our Forests, Our Economy, Our Future

 

Event Description:A radio town hall conversation with community members and panelists representative of different perspectives on current federal forest policy and the impact on communities within O&C counties. The recent Bureau of Land Management report and the status of Secure ! Rural Schools legislation are essential topics of conversation with radio listeners, audience and panelist members perspectives on environmental, economic, humanitarian and county government impacts woven into the pattern of discussion by moderator Brian Shaw throughout the evening.  Panelists field questions from moderator, audience members and call-in listeners. Event is open to the public and no reservations are required. Sponsors include the Eugene Weekly and KOPT 1600-AM. Other locally owned media concerns are being asked to consider sponsorship.

 

After the meeting, everyone is invited to the Oak Street Speakeasy, a jazz bar right down the street from the county courthouse, for an informal "get together" hosted by the Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station). Admission is free. Must be 21. 

 

Event Purpose: To engage the greater community in a critical conversation about federal forest policy within O&C counties and encourage open, tolerant, and effective participation to influence local, state, and federal officials on future policy to make our communities a better place to live, attend school, and work in a sustainable environment.

 

Event Panelists

1) Pete Sorenson, Lane County Commissioner

2) Jay  Lininger, Executive Director, Cascadia Wildlands Project.

3) Open Chair for Bureau of Land Management Spokesperson 

4) Open Chair for timber products industry member

 

 

Sue Kupillas, Citizens For Sustainable Forests and Communities, a timber products industry group, recently withdrew as a panelist because of travel considerations. Brian has an invitation extended to a Douglas County commissioner and expects to hear from him soon. Martin Desmond, former director of the Northwest Forestry Contractors Association and a member of this advisery group, is putting together a list of people that might be interested in filling the chairs. I am also putting together a list. Thank you Martin and welcome to the group. Let me use this space to welcome Travis Diskin, with the Independent Party of Oregon to our advisor group. Travis, feel free to comment about the town hall and I will contact you soon with ideas on how your group can help.


 

Event Time and Location:Town hall meeting begins promptly at 6:30 p.m and concludes at 8pm. Broadcast live by KOPT 1600-AM from Harris Hall inside the Lane County Courthouse and Public Service Building at 125 East 8th Avenue. Eugene, Oregon.

 

"Get Together", hosted by the Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station), is at the Oak Street Speakeasy located at Broadway and Oak in downtown Eugene and begins right after the town hall, 8pm. More details soon.

 

Event Contact List

 

Primary Press Contacts

Brian Shaw- Event Producer and Moderator "Brian Shaw" <shawsound@att.net>,

Pete Sorenson- Lead Adviser, Panelist "SORENSON Peter" <Peter.SORENSON@CO.Lane.OR.US>,

Michael Smith- Designer, info@abolishpoverty.us

Rose Wilde- Contact for "Get Together" at Oak Street Speakeasy, "Rose Wilde" <rose_wilde@hotmail.com>,  

Technical

Brian Shaw

Joe Harper- 1600 KOPT-AM (Technical) "Joe Harper" <j.harper@churchillmedia.com>

Dan Banducci- Harris Hall (Technical),  Daniel.Banducci@co.lane.or.us ,

Advisers

Pete Sorenson- Lead Adviser 

Mike Biglan- Lane Bus Stop (Bus Project) "Mike Biglan" <mike@biglan.org>,

Travis Diskin- Independent Party of  Oregon "Travis Diskin"-  <travis@indparty.com>

Martin Desmond- Micro-Business desmondm@lanecc.edu 

Sponsors

KOPT 1600-AM - Sadie Dressekie- "Sadie Dressekie" sadie@arlie.com

Eugene Weekly- Bill Shreve  Bills@eugeneweekly.com

 

"Get Together"

Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station), Host of "Get Together" at Oak Street Speakeasy,

"Rose Wilde" <rose_wilde@hotmail.com>,
EM-4 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/20/2007 12:31:11 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

As a member of the taxpaying public, and thus partial owner of BLM
lands, I am writing to express my grave concern over the possible
elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon
BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species,
clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

However, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Western
Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR) proposes to dismantle the reserve system
across 2.5 million acres of low elevation western Oregon BLM lands.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not implement the WOPR. Thank you for your time and attention.

Greg Lief
PO Box 2685
Salem, OR 97308
greglief@gmail.com

--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-5 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/20/2007 12:32:45 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

Hello. I am sending this message to say that your fabricated plans
at destroyed Oregon's Old Growth, is NOT GOING TO WORK.

Once Bush is OUT, which we are working on...you will be stopped. Go
tell your Industrial Tree Farm friends that we are PREPARED THIS
TIME, YOU WILL NOT DESTROY OUR FORESTS AND WILDLIFE TO FATTEN THE
POCKETS OF BIG TIMBER.

-below are the polite comments I hope you will please record into the
record, along with the above...coastal mountains are some of the
steepest you can find - stay out of our forests!

I would like to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


catherine koehn
40153 Little Fall Creek
Fall Creek, OR 97438
catfish@efn.org

--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-6 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/20/2007 12:33:18 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Travis Herb
751 Clay St.
Ashland, OR 97520
travis.herb@gmail.com

--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-7 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/20/2007 12:34:18 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I've lived in Oregon for 17 years now. I spend as much time in the
woods as I can...hiking, skiing, mushrooming, etc. I'm also a
carpenter and a woodworker who clearly understands the commercial
value of our forests. I strongly oppose any expansion of old-growth
cut in our western forests.

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


David Stucky
Street: 2624 Harris
Eugene, OR 97405
david.stucky@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-8 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/20/2007 12:35:06 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Will McDonald
9505 245th Ave SE
Monroe,WA 98272
william.mcdonald@bastyr.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-9 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/21/2007 9:36:04 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. My
concern is for Oregon's future and my children's future. I understand
that many Oregon counties are in dire financial straits in light of
the loss of Federal monies, but clearing out the principal on our
proverbial forest bank account (cutting any of the remaining old
growth trees on BLM lands) is not a way to balance the budget.

These forests on western Oregon BLM lands provide habitat for many
wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities,
recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, as well as a legacy for future
generations. Please remove the old growth forests from the logging
plan. Instead, plan to log even-age tree plantations.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Patrick McIlrath
2675 Adams
Eugene, Oregon 97405
pmcilrat@efn.org
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-10 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/21/2007 9:37:46 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am a businessman and a resident of Eugene. I am deeply concerned
about the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves
on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many
wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities,
recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future
generations. They provide commercially valuable fungi. They also
help build soil carbon and protect it from loss by erosion and
runoff, thus contributing to climate stabilization.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them.
Wood products can be more sensibly and sustainably generated in
even-age plantations of young trees.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Mr. Randall Wayne
Street: 2720 Onyx St.
Eugene, OR 97403
rushwayne@comcast.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-11 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/21/2007 9:38:37 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Philip Simon
Box 9473
San Rafael, Ca. 94912
philsimtpr@aol.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-12 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/21/2007 16:49:03 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my extreme concern over the possible
elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon
BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species,
clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. It
is short-sighted and greedy in the extreme to log old growth trees.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Dr. Sasha Tavenner Kruger
1287 8th St.
Springfield, OR 97477
physics_duck@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-13 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/21/2007 16:49:44 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Adam Marlow
1208 W.28th Ave.
Eugene OR 97405
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a
difference!
EM-14 Ken Goldsmith <kenconserv@charter.net> Western OR Plan Revisions comment 8/22/2007 11:09:57 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Ken Goldsmith
Simmons
75 Route 197
Woodstock, CT 06281
EM-15 Stephanie Smith <pseudoluslucy@yahoo.com> BLM Forest Planning 8/23/2007 9:30:08 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Stephanie Smith
3714-F Sand Creek Road
Kettle Falls, WA 99141

509-230-2653
EM-16 "Kassandra Olsen"
<greengoddess12@care2.com>
Protect Our Heritage for generations to come! 8/23/2007 22:20:33 Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan and I believe the Plan's reserve system should remain in place. These forests should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in management, fire safety and tourism. These forests can provide jobs and material as a by-product of forest restoration, such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, and we would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy.

Please protect western BLM forests and maintain the Northwest Forest Plan reserve system.

Sincerely,

Kassandra K Olsen (an Oregon Native)


"And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -- Anais Nin


http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free).

http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 7 million members!
EM-17 "Kassandra Olsen"
<greengoddess12@care2.com>
Protect Our Heritage for generations to come! 8/23/2007 22:20:37 Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan and I believe the Plan's reserve system should remain in place. These forests should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in management, fire safety and tourism. These forests can provide jobs and material as a by-product of forest restoration, such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, and we would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy.

Please protect western BLM forests and maintain the Northwest Forest Plan reserve system.

Sincerely,

Kassandra K Olsen (an Oregon Native)


"And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -- Anais Nin


http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free).

http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 7 million members!
EM-18 Chris Norden <cnorden@lcsc.edu> Don't clearcut BLM Forests!! 8/24/2007 10:05:52 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear Trusted Fellow Citizens working for BLM,

In response to your proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I and my family strongly oppose any clearcutting of BLM forests, in the northern Rockies, Cascades, Oregon's Coast Range, or anywhere ewill result in degradation of habitat, watersheds, and aquatic ecosystems. The proposed changes in forest management would represent a huge step backward, as these forests presently enjoy better protection for water quality as well as fish and wildlife.

As a former resident of Western Oregon, now living in Northern Idaho, I look to the BLM for progressive, science-based, and ethically responsible ecosystem based management of our federal public lands.

Please keep the faith. Current political and industry pressures to abuse public lands for profit will pass soon enough. January 2009! By contrast, damage to these lands will endure well beyond that date, and will constitute a negative legacy for future generations of Americans, who would otherwise enjoy, value, and sustainably use these lands.

Thank you for your good work, and please keep the faith. Public lands are our greatest resource and legacy as Americans.

Chris Norden
428 E. 7th St.
Moscow, ID 83843
EM-19 Rolf Skar <rolf.skar@sfo.greenpeace.org> DEIS comment submissions 8/24/2007 15:16:39 Hi Alan,

I know that, in addition to traditional mail, BLM has set up a web-page
interface for Western Oregon Plan Revisions DEIS comment submissions.
Is there an email address that can be used to submit individual comments
on the DEIS as well? The web interface may be awkward for some, and I
want to offer our members several options to choose from.

Thanks for your help,

-Rolf

--
Rolf Skar
Senior Forest Campaigner
Greenpeace USA
75 Arkansas Street, Suite 1
San Francisco, CA 94107-2434

office: 415.255.9221 x305
mobile: 415.533.2888

rolf.skar@sfo.greenpeace.org
www.greenpeace.org
EM-20 "Josh Weber" <offbeatunity@hotmail.com> 8/25/2007 11:34:40 Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a
citizen very concerned with the management of these lands. I live in a
community that has BLM old-growth forest literally in my back yard, and I DO
NOT want to see these lands clear cut!

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests
in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these
forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also
provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as
thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water
pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of
these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife
concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners
who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from
wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation
opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Most Sincerely Yours,

Josh Weber

_________________________________________________________________
More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507
EM-21 HolgerTSo@aol.com BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 8/26/2007 11:43:35 August 26, 2007

Dear Commissioners,

Your agenda for Monday August 27, 2007 shows :



Monday, August 27, 2007





COMMISSIONERS, BOARD OF COUNTY


 





 

(8:30 AM - 10:00 AM) General Discussion & Possible Actions** (BCC Conference Room )

1) ACTION ITEMS:

a) Bikeways Committee Appointment

b) AMR mileage waiver request

c) JosephineCountyClaims

d) EA Environmental Assessment Alternate


I am not clear what Item 1) d)  is about, but if this regards the BLM Draft Environmental Impact Statement here are my 5ct on that issue.

This BLM’s planning process revises the resource management plans (RMPs) for the six BLM districts in western Oregon. This process will address over 2.5 million acres of forest lands.

I did, like many other, provide comments as an individual to the BLM last October 20, 2005. My comments focused on understanding the  planning and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. I hope my comments at that time helped to lead to an informed public and informed decision making.

This revision looks quite scientific, but I believe the BLM process at this point of the draft EIS is mostly a political process for the design of the important Preferred Alternative. There is already so much time and money invested by the BLM that it can not change its Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) in any significant way. I belief the big allocation picture will not change.

The BLM informed the public about a year ago and said that part of the reason for the planning process was to satisfy a settlement agreement resolving long-standing litigation of the Northwest Forest Plan (Clinton Plan) (AFRC v.Clarke, Civil No. 94-1031-TPJ (D.D.C.)) that alleged the current RMPs violate the O&C Act).

The BLM’s RMP evaluations showed the BLM’s timber harvest levels directed by existing plans were not being achieved. Except for the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District, BLM’s evaluations for the other districts documented that regeneration harvest was 30 to 60 percent of the levels anticipated. Even when thinning volume was added, except for the Klamath Falls Resource Area, BLM’s evaluations showed that the timber offered from the harvest land base was 40 to 70 percent of the anticipated allowable sale quantity (ASQ). The BLM states that "This failure to meet the harvest levels is largely due to unanticipated legal and practical implementation issues involved in managing designated critical habitat for the northern spotted owl that was different then the land use allocations in the Northwest Forest Plan, and court decisions regarding the survey and manage mitigation measure, and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy." (Page 4, Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I).

The BLM’s Purpose and Need Statement identified that the goals for the Northwest Forest Plan were broader than the specific requirements of the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act and sought to provide more consistent management of federally-managed lands by applying National Forest Management Act (U. S. Forest Service) requirements to BLM-administered lands. The preferred alternative for the Northwest Forest Plan was selected because it would "maintain the late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystem and provide a predictable and sustainable supply of timber, recreational opportunities and other resources at the highest level possible." The BLM’s Purpose and Need Statement for this effort to revise the BLM’s western Oregon plans identified that the need for this plan revision is focused on specific legal requirements and intended benefits of the BLM’s unique mandate under the O&C Act, distinct from the mandate to the U.S. Forest Service under the National Forest Management Act.

The bottom line is that the Bush Administration has decided to change the BLM’s land use policy allocations and prescriptions for BLM lands in western Oregon just as other administrations have in the past (i.e., Clinton Northwest Forest Plan).

The BLM has now identified Alternative 2 as its Preferred Alternative. It believes that based on the language of the O & C Act, the O & C Act’s legislative history, and the decision by the Ninth Circuit in Headwaters v. BLM, (914 F.2d 1174 (9th Cir. 1990), that it is clear to BLM that the management of timber (including harvesting) is the main use of the O & C lands in western Oregon. (Page 12, Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I).

Implementation of the Alternative 2/Preferred Alternative probably means that the land base for management of timber will increase from 25 percent of the lands to 48 percent of the lands and the ASQ will increase from 268 million board feet a year to 727 million board feet a year. (Page XLVIII, Summary, Page 112, Chapter 2 - Alternatives, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I).

I believe the only way to maintain the Northwest Forest Plan’s harvest levels versus those for Alternative 2/Preferred Alternative of the revised BLM plans is to demonstrate that the assumptions in Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need are in error.

Because BLM has develop the alternative based on wrong assumptions, and the legislature has not changes with regard to the Court decisions cited above, this preferred  Alternative (2) will revert the process back to the timber wars of the 1980s and early 1990s,.

Instead of the County supporting a lost cause, the county should support Non-Action Alternative and focus its activities to become self-sustained, independent of O&C funds and from timber sales.

Our most important assets in Josephine County is our rural beauty. We have not actively promoted tourism. It is time to stop the destruction of  our forests an rivers when only a few individuals benefit form these destructions.

Regards

Holger

 





Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
EM-22 Fred Fleetwood <waterrat1@earthlink.net> Comments on the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of Western Oregon"... 8/29/2007 6:17:48 Alan Hoffmeister, Communications and Public Outreach Coordinator for Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project:

    The following are my comments about the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the BLM's Resource Management Plans of Western Oregon."  (I have decided to submit my comments directly to you, rather than try to deal with the frustrating and cumbersome web site at http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/PrincipalFramedPage.aspx?PAGECODE=DOC_EXPLORER.  There is no convenient way to make comments there at that web site.  In addition, I will submit a signed hard copy of this message via the Postal Service mailing address of: Wester Oregon Plan Revisions, P.O. Box 2965, Portland, OR 97208.)

First, my two reactions to the document:I don't know if I should be flattered to think the BLM people would believe I could possibly adequately digest the sheer volume of text the document contains,

OR... whether I should be naive enough to think commenting on it could possibly make any substantive difference in the decisions the BLM would make.    I think rejection of the later is prudent, and I think acceptance of the former would be unwarranted -- unwarranted because the way the document is couched, it does amount to insincere adulation (flattery and fawning) of the public.

Second, my general impression of the document and the whole process it entails: The document generally contains much bureaucratic obfuscation.  But the public shouldn't have to correct the document.

For example:

The "Key Points" box at the top of the Introduction on page XLIII starts out with this statement: "This draft environmental impact statement has been written because (1) the BLM plan evaluations found that the BLM has not been achieving the timber harvest levels directed by the existing plans, (2) there is an opportunity to coordinate the BLM management plans with new recovery plans and re-designations of critical habitat currently under development and (3) the BLM has re-focused the goal for management to the objectives of its statutory mandate to utilize the principles of sustained yield management on the timber lands covered under the O&C Act."The "(1)" portion of that statement is just flatly untrue -- a lie!  The draft environmental impact statement (the DEIS) was not written because "the BLM plan evaluations found that the BLM has not been achieving the timber harvest levels directed by the existing plans."  An uninitiated reader, who doesn't know better, wouldn't realize that until he/she just happened to read footnote #2 (over at the bottom of the next page, page XLIV).  That footnote reveals the real reason this EIS was written.  The footnote (finally) reveals the truth.  It states that this DEIS was ultimately written to: "...satisfy a settlement agreement [bold type for emphasis] resolving long-standing litigation of the Northwest Forest Plan (AFRC v. Clarke, Civil No. 94-1031-TPJ (D.D.C.)) that alleged the current RMPs violate the O&C Act. The settlement agreement requires BLM to consider revisions to the RMPs by the end of the year 2008, and include at least one alternative that “will provide permanent forest production [i.e., "timber"] across the O&C lands without reserves except as required to avoid jeopardy under the Endangered Species Act.” See Appendix A for a discussion of the Settlement Agreement."Suggestion, so you will be "true to" and "honest with" your readers:  The text of "Appendix A" should be placed up front! -- in the Introduction under the heading of "Key Points."  Stop trying to hide (obfuscate) the "real facts!"

As for portion "(2)" of the statement of "Key Points" on page XLIII:  The "opportunity" to "coordinate the BLM management plans with new recovery plans and re-designations of critical habitat currently under development" did not just serendipitously happen.  It is necessary -- to make the plans "jibe" with the Administration's new Northern Spotted Owl "Recovery" Plan, which is now being formulated.  That portion "(2)" of the statement is just another example of the BLM attempt to "color" the facts.

And about portion "(3)" of that statement of "Key Points":  The BLM's "re-focusing" of its management objectives to conform with the "statutory mandate" of the O&C Act, is, yes again, just necessary -- to make things "jibe."My general conclusion about the whole exercise of writing this DEIS and the public's commenting on it:Near the beginning of the process, the BLM asked some pertinent questions in an October 2006 Newsletter, Issue No. 5, which I subsequently answered in an e-mail message, dated November 10, 2006.  I sent that message to the Team Members of the BLM's Western Oregon Resource Management Plan Revisions Project.  I hereby restate those questions and my answers to them because they are still pertinent.  The writing of the DEIS does not change the relevance of those questions and my answers to them.  The question and answers are, and relate to: Vegetation:  How can the BLM provide a sustainable supply of wood and other forest products as mandated by the O&C Lands Act while also meeting applicable laws and regulations [such as the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act]?"
    Answer:  It can't. The O&C Act is mutually exclusive to (i.e., in conflict with) those two environmental Acts.

Habitat for Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act:  "How can the BLM manage federal lands in a way that contributes to the conservation of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act?"
    Answer:  It can't.  That's because mere "conservation" is not consistent with the Endangered Species Act.  "Recovery" is what is consistent with the Endangered Species Act.  Can you people understand that?

Watershed Management and Water Quality:  "How can the BLM 'manage' federal lands [translation of 'manage' is: "for permanent timber cutting"] in a way that contributes to the goals of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act?"
Answer:  It can't.  Again, that's because the O&C Act is mutually exclusive to (i.e., in conflict with) those two environmental Acts.

Wildland Fire and Fuels:  "How can the BLM manage federal lands in a way that reduces the risk of wildfires and integrates fire back into the ecosystem?"
    Answer:  By adequately reducing ground and ladder fuels without diminishing the overstory.  At present BLM's excuse for not reducing ladder fuels (as exemplified by its fuel reduction actions on its property adjacent to our property), the BLM is not adequately preserving the forest overstory.  Its stated reason (excuse) for not doing that, is its over-emphasis on "thinning" the tree stands and thereby allowing too much daylight to reach the ground, which in turn, diminishes water production of the watersheds.

In spite of what the DEIS says (on page XLIV) the purpose and need is (for the revisions), the fact remains that the O&C Act is in basic conflict with other applicable laws and regulations [such as the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act].  Therefore, the BLM cannot possibly manage its lands in a way that contributes to the recovery of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act.  Thus, either the O&C Act or the environmental laws need to be rescinded.  That is just the reality of the situation.  Otherwise the goals of the revisions (and those of the environmental laws) are just "pipe dreams."   But in this day and age, the environmental laws must be really and honestly adhered to.  The O&C Act does not permit that to happen.Consequently:  Commenting on the specific details of the DEIS is a colossal waste of time and energy.

However, I am nevertheless compelled to comment because I care about what happens to the BLM forests.  They adjoin my wife's and my property.  Moreover, I am compelled to comment simply for the purpose of "being on record" of having stated my objections to the revisions.

And because I am a watershed and fish advocate, I wish to comment specifically on the statements contained in the draft regarding "Fish" and "Water" found in the document's "Summary," starting in the middle of page "LX."

About the "Fish" statements: First, they are a "crock" of "you know what!"

But specifically:

1. All areas in [a] watershed do not "serve as source areas that can deliver large wood to streams."  That statement is just an out and out falsehood.  Any discerning person knows, intuitively, such a statement is not true.  The people who write this stuff are astounding in their apparent belief that people would accept such a statement -- even from "experts."  What these people excel at is "not telling the truth," and they don't even do a good job of it.

2. Any increases in fine sediment delivery do degrade fish habitat, and therefore they are unacceptable!

3. Is "some localized increases in stream temperature" acceptable?  No, of course they are not.About the "Water" statements: 1. About the words "Most," "where possible," and "mostly likely" found in the statement that "Most new roads would be located outside of a stream influence zone where possible, and therefore these miles would mostly likely not deliver fine sediment to streams channels.": Those quoted words are "weasel" words designed to give the author's of the Impact Statement "an out" (excuse) for doing something that shouldn't be done.2. Construction of "8 and 37 miles of permanent new roads within a distance that could deliver sediment to streams over the next 10 years ... ." is also unacceptable!

3. About the statement of "Between 8 and 37 miles of permanent new roads with a natural or aggregate surface would be constructed within a distance that could deliver sediment to streams over the next 10 years under the all four alternatives.": Again, an increase in the amount of fine sediment delivered to streams from new permanent roads is not acceptable, no matter how small the amount is.4. About "Road improvements and the decommissioning of roads near streams [being] of greater importance to decreasing fine
     sediment delivery than the effect of new roads": That is simply a matter of opinion, and not a fact.5. About "increases in peak flows" and "best management practices": Contrary to the picture BLM tries to convey by all its machinations and “falderal,” vegetation removals (and in particular, logging) do exacerbate seasonal extremes of water runoff from watersheds.  Rhodes and Purser, in their paper titled “Thinning for Increased Water Yield in the Sierra Nevada: Free Lunch or Pie in the Sky?,” August 1998, together with the paper "Peak flow response to clear-cutting and roads in small and large basins, western Cascades, Oregon,” Water Resources Research, 32(4) 959-974, April 1996, by J. A. Jones and G. E. Grant, very well "make the case" that vegetative removals [which are, almost without exception, the result of "logging and logging-related activities " (i.e., forest "management activities")] do and/or can: 1. Dramatically increase (and "shift" to an earlier time in the year) the annual high stream discharge (i.e., the "peak flow"), and2. Diminish the "baseflow" from watersheds.Now, does anybody (besides the people at the BLM) deny that increased peak flows also increase the delivery of sediment to streams?  I don't think so.

Also, on page 11 of the Rhodes and Purser paper, there is this interesting discussion about the term "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) that the Federal agencies like to use (especially the Bureau of Land Management).  The paper says: "...although BMPs are designed to reduce pollution, such as sedimentation, they may not eliminate cumulative effects. Espinosa, et al. (1997) documented that sedimentation continued to damage fish habitat even with application of a wide variety of best management practices. Espinosa, et al. (1997) concluded that over-reliance on best management practices together with over-estimation of their effectiveness was a major cause of habitat degradation by land management. Thus, while management practices can reduce the level of damage caused by land-disturbance, this is only relative to a “no-protection” scenario. There appears to be no compelling evidence that management practices can reduce the adverse effects of logging and road construction to biologically and ecologically negligible levels."[The bolding and underlining of the certain words in that immediately preceding paragraph are this reader’s, and they are done only for emphasis.]

One frequently sees references to BMPs in Forest Service and BLM documents.  To those references, my reaction is, "Well, B.F.D.!" -- which stands for "Big Fat Deal!" -- only the middle word is not "Fat."-------------------------------------------- The following statements (taken from my e-mail message, dated November 10, 2006, to the BLM's "Revision Team") pertain to some other items the Team Members of the BLM's Western Oregon Resource Management Plan Revisions Project might take into account:If any part of the O&C lands (including those portions which contain "old growth" forests) is not managed for permanent "forest production" (a BLM euphemism for permanent "timber production"), the management of that part of the O&C land is in violation of the O&C Act -- pure and simple!

But also, if any part of the O&C lands which contain "old growth" forests is managed for permanent timber production, instead of for protection of habitat for recovery of threatened and endangered species, the management of that part of the O&C land is in violation of the Federal Endangered Species Act.  (See BABBITT v. SWEET HOME CHAP., COMS. FOR ORE., ___ U.S. ___ 1995 at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=U10269.)

In addition...  When the dominant trees of old growth forests are cut (not "harvested," but "cut"), they are gone -- for ever!, as far as the general run-of-the-mill "foresters" are concerned.  That is because the replacement trees will never be allowed (by "foresters" -- i.e., "timber beasts") to grow them for the length of time (i.e., multiples of hundreds of years -- generally more than 200 years) it took the original dominant trees (that were cut) to become as large as the originally cut trees were when they were cut.  Therefore, to say, "The BLM is not proposing that old-growth stands be eliminated from O&C  lands." is just plain... nonsense!
 -------------
      Under the question of "Will there also be an environmentally preferred alternative identified in the draft resource management plan and EIS?", there is an admission that whatever alternative (or variation there of) is chosen, the resultant plan cannot meet the goals of: 1. Providing a sustainable supply of wood and other forest products as mandated by the O&C Lands Act while also meeting applicable laws and regulations;

2. Managing the lands in a way that contributes to the conservation of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act; and

3. Managing the lands for permanent timber cutting in a way that contributes to the goals of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act.      That admission is contained in the second sentence of the answer given in res
EM-23 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/31/2007 9:40:07 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Adam Marlow
1208 W.28th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97405
apmarlow@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-24 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/31/2007 9:41:00 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Justin Jacobs
15 NE Monroe St.
Portland, OR 97212
wharftphellow@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-25 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/31/2007 9:42:06 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


David Mildrexler
PO Box 715
Joseph, Oregon 97846
dvdjosmil@netscape.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-26 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 8/31/2007 9:42:48 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Charlotte Sahnow
2756 Chad Drive
Eugene, OR 97408
csahnow@uoregon.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-27 "Luke Ward" <groovinkangaroo@gmail.com> WOPR 8/31/2007 14:50:28 I am just an ordinary citizen that doesn't want to see more clear cuts. I don't think that whoever is working on the WOPR really cares about this state, its workers, and especially its greatest environmental assets. I think that you are a tool of the timber industry and are unconcerned with a sustainable future. Please reconsider your plans.

Thanks,
Luke Ward
Eugene OR
EM-28 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/1/2007 22:54:57 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


stu phillips
212 benjamin
eugene, or. 97404
stulips@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-29 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/1/2007 22:55:45 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Ellen Welcker
1424 W 5th Ave
Eugene, OR 97402
ellen@footzonebend.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-30 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/1/2007 22:56:28 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Emily Frost
10538 Bradbury Rd
Los Angeles, CA, 90064
areyouexperienced_ef@berkeley.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-31 "Diane Conrad" <mydiane@earthclick.net> cutting old growth 9/4/2007 15:26:06 Do not include in any plan to manage forests, the cutting of old growth trees. Diane Conrad
EM-32 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/4/2007 15:51:48 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

DO NOT open older forests on our public lands to logging no matter
what the BUSH administration does.

Sincerely,


Kim Kelly
5205 Cold Springs Way
Eugene, OR 97405
playwright@bigplanet.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-33 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/4/2007 15:52:23 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Jorry Rolfe
3475 Mill Street
Eugene, OR 97405
jorry.rolfe@linnbenton.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-34 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/4/2007 15:53:04 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Andy Neary
1728 NW 1st ST
Bend, Oregon, 97701
ayndaroo@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-35 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/4/2007 15:54:06 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


John Krausser
40 E 30th Ave
Eugene, OR 97405
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-36 Joseph Vaile <joseph@kswild.org> Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/5/2007 11:46:13 Bureau of Land Management
Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas-all at the expense of roadless areas,
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for
old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been
stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our
nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past
mistakes.

Sincerely,

--
Joseph Vaile
Campaign Director
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center
POB 102 Ashland OR 97520
p: 541-488-5789
http://www.kswild.org
EM-37 "Jean Mount" <jkmount@rascal.cc> Western Oregon Plan Revisions 9/5/2007 22:33:20  BLM Managment- Portland office
Comments on the WOPR released plan.
 
I want to register my strong objection to the WOPR plan of increased logging-
1.  Clear cut logging and logging of old growth trees is not supported by the scientific community, nor by the majority of citizens. 
2.  We do not want to return to the timber wars of the 1960's and 70's.  Infact, we really can't return there.
3.  This level of logging (up to a 700 per cent increase) is not sustainable and will only confuse the public.  Maybe confusion and anger is the intent.  In the end the deficit in the O& C funds will not be met by this increase.
4.  Cutting trees is only one part of the equation, as forests are essential for protections of our rivers, streams, and fish.  Again you will be reducing protections for our salmon bearing streams.  We need the EIS based on the best science, and the Clean Water Act was passed for an important reason--- to protect our public waters.
5.  It's time for the timber industry to continue to use thinning of trees, second growth, retooling and use of smaller diameter trees and known practices which will not cause extreme harm to the land, forests, and water.  In the end it's the smart and profitable way to go.
 
Jean Mount
3620 Helms Road
Grants Pass, OR, 97527
Lower Applegate Citizen's Advisory Committee
Rogue Advocates
EM-38 Trina Weiland <phantomwolf@hotmail.com> Protect BLM Forests 9/6/2007 9:33:29 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Graduate Student Trina Weiland
Graduate Student
2848 Minnesota Ave
Stevens Point, WI 54481
EM-39 "Keira Harrison " <keira@apbb.net> Protect BLM forests 9/6/2007 17:12:05 Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.  I have lived in Williams, OR for 30+ years, and choose to live here to enjoy the natural wild beauty of the area.  My home adjoins BLM, which I enjoy hiking in regularly.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregonunder the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregonare adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Keira Harrison
EM-40 Dinda Evans <dindamcp4@yahoo.com> Oregon Plan Revisions 9/6/2007 22:10:30 we need to preserve open spaces and wildlife. We don't
need more roads, development. Most of america is just
rows of streets and houses and malls. we need pure
natural places: please



____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat?
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
EM-41 "MONA JONES" <jonesmona@hotmail.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision 9/8/2007 13:00:40 To whom it may concern,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the Western Oregon Plan Revision. I
grew up in the coast range and I support a no action alternative. I have
watched forest after forest razed for timber leaving an altered environment
that I don't believe can ever repair itself. I believe the primary problem
here is that the forests are being managed under the O&C act for timber
yields alone. While other considerations are made under the Endangered
Species Act, the Clean Water Act and the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act the mandate for timber overrides these consideration. Forest offer much,
much more than timber in terms of their ecological services. We know more
now about the importance of those services than we did in 1937 when the O&C
act was first enacted. And I believe that we still don't understand the true
extent of what an intact forest ecosystem offers us.
Furthermore the O&C never specified a minimum timber nor revenue yield so I
believe it is being used to obfuscate the true point, which is that the BLM
is not making enough money from the forests. Regardless of how much revenue
from logging comes back to the local govenment I do not think that we should
alter our current management practices. We must find more sustainable ways
to fund our local governments. Any continued logging in the coast range
cannot be considered sustainable. The point is that there is much more to
sustainability than how fast a trees can regenerate. The forests were never
meant to be managed as crop land for a few species.
I urge you to raise this issue among your colleagues and constituents and to
support the no action alternative that maintaines what is left of the
coastal rainforest. And if you have never been there by all means go. It is
an undeniable majestic landscape that you will see is already scarred with
clearcuts and roads.
All my respect,
Mona Jones

_________________________________________________________________
Share your special parenting moments!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
EM-42 "janice cowan" <major@cavenet.com> WOPR plan 9/8/2007 14:35:44 Dear BLM,
 
We want equal opportunities for OHV use at a local level. Especially in the Medford district. The public lands are supposed to be just that, PUBLIC LANDS.  Keep the trails open to the public.  That is why people live here.  This is our freedom.
 
Please put us on your mailing list and keep us informed:
 
Jason and Janice Cowan
2975 Thompson Crk Rd
Selma  OR  97538
 
Thank you
EM-43 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/9/2007 21:47:59 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

Have you ever visited an old growth forest? Do you have any idea how
irreplaceable they are? Do you know the ongoing value of ecosystem
services an intact old-growth forest provides, as opposed to it's
one-time and limited value as lumber?

To log old-growth forests for lumber is a foolish use of resources.
I urge your department to reconsider such a step. Once done, it can
never be taken back.

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Do
not destroy the ongoing basis for our well-being in favor of short
term gain. It makes absolutely no sense.

Sincerely,


hope malkan
1300 summit st.
austin, TX 78741
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-44 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/9/2007 21:48:44 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


sima Baldwin
350 foxtail dr.
eugene, or 97402
hawthjewelry@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-45 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/9/2007 21:49:32 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Karalyn Walker
82061 Lost Valley Lane
Dexter Oregon 97431
feelfreely@earthlink.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-46 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/9/2007 21:50:21 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Sean Parson
1678 Villard St
Eugene, OR 97402
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-47 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/9/2007 21:51:26 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to let you know about how strongly against WORP I am. I
am a hiker and an environmentalist who knows how irreplacible older
forests are. There needs to be a legislative solution to permanently
protect older forests.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. No
to WORP. The greatest value in old forests is not measured in board
feet.

Sincerely,



Leslie L. Hogan
931 Washington SW
Albany, OR 97321
qwizats@peak.org
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-48 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> Re: WOPR comment 9/10/2007 10:33:41 Alan: These messages are forwarded to you via our website. They get routed from our website to me  then to BLM  (to ensure spammers don't pick up the BLM's email address). That is why it looks like they come from me. Take them as individual comment. People who visit our website may or may not personalize their comment to you regarding the DEIS.

As for what our organizational interest is... we are working to permanently protect remaining older forests (mature and old-growth) in the Northwest Forest Plan area. I'm sure you can guess our reasons why. Currently, as you may be aware, Rep. DeFazio is considering legislation that may do that. We see WOPR as a step in the wrong direction, not in the public's interest, dangerous for counties to even be considering as a funding solution, and harmful for older forest dependant species, many continuing to teeter on the brink of extinction. WOPR is a trainwreck in the making. I'd be surprised if the BLM didn't know this the day the settlement was signed.

We are working towards a solution that would target logged over forest (ie restoration thinning in tree plantations) that could put people to work and deliver logs to mills unchallenged. It could also generate significant revenue for counties with a gradual phaseout. I sure hope the BLM has been getting this message as we and out colleagues have been offering this for quite some time. Bottomline, we (stakeholders) need to get more creative than selling off fragments of old-growth to fund county funding crisis and meet timber target goals.

Josh Laughlin



Sorry Josh:

I went off half-cocked this morning with the preceeding questions I sent back to you.  I now see these are not your comments, but comments I assume you are receiving through your web site.

We are recording these comments but it's a bit confusing with your "signature" at the bottom of each one.

The point I was trying to make is that comments that say "No to WOPR" or "save the old-growth" provide very litte for us to respond to.  We know these are major issues in many people's minds.  We heard it clearly during our scoping phase.  That's why we included a couple of subalternatives in the Draft EIS that take older forest stands off of the table (see page 102 in the DEIS).  If Cascadia Wildlands could use the analysis provided to feedback to BLM what management scenario you feel will help us meet our mandates (permanent forest production while meeting clean water standards and protection for habitat necessary for listed species - to put it into a nutshell), that would be substantive input that the BLM would have to react to.

If your organization is simply out to stop WOPR, then we're right back where we started from with BLM plans that have old-growth in the intensive forest management area and timber sales that are challenged in court.

Alan Hoffmeister


--

Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR  97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)


The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-49 George Sexton <gs@kswild.org> Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions 9/10/2007 13:22:23 We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon.

The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions.  The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions.

It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose.

Bullshit. You signed a settlement with your friends in the AFRC that pre-determines the outcome.
I'll gladly bet you $100 dollars right now that the RODs that get signed will reduce the size of the reserves and increase the amount of old-growth logging.

It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands.

Bullshit. 81-year old tree farms are not old-growth.


It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands.

Bullshit. You couldn't care less what most Oregonians think about turned 400 year-old stands into fiber farms. 3,000 people sent in scoping comments, and you ignorred them.

Take a look in the mirror.
That's what a professional liar for the timber industry looks like.

Regards,
George Sexton


EM-50 Paul West <Paul@Mycosphere.org> Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions 9/10/2007 13:27:52 Please include the Natural Selection Alternative. Thank you.

On Sep 10, 2007, at 12:20 :13PMPDT, orwopr@blm.gov wrote:


We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon.

The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions.  The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions.

It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose.

It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans. (Chapter 4, Timber, Page 557)

It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. (Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494)

It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands.

·        Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf).  The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives.  The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission.
·        Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/
·        Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail.

Project Web Site:  http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr

Need More Information?  Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629
EM-51 Albert Kaufman <albertkaufman@gmail.com> Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions 9/10/2007 21:40:47 Hello, I tried to submit these comments but your website would not take them.  Albert Kaufman, Mount Hood National Park Campaign.

My organization and myself wish to see as little cutting of trees as possible in the Oregon BLM lands.  Our sense is that global warming is a real threat to our species and other species on the planet and to combat it we need more trees growing, not less.  Please stop cutting down our forests and calling it management.  Thank you for considering this comment in your decision making on our land.


We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon.

The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions.  The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions.

It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose.

It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans.

It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands.

It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands.

·        Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf<http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf> ).  The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives.  The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission.
·        Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/<http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/>
·        Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail.

Project Web Site:  http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr<http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/index.php>

Need More Information?  Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629




EM-52 "Sharon " <sharonlemaster@frontiernet.net> Protect BLM forests 9/11/2007 14:09:55 Dear BLM,

Please accept these comment on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregonunder the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregonare adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

S. Lemaster, extremely alarmed Oregon citizen & voter
EM-53 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/12/2007 14:52:49 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. In
particular I am concerned that the extensive science of forest
ecosystems is not being taken into account and that we don't even
know what we might be losing should these lands be logged.

These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. They also protect
communities from erosion and flooding.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

If you want to understand why old growth is important read: "The
Hidden Forest: The Biography of an Ecosystem" by Jon R. Luoma.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Janine Gordon
82211 Mt. Zion Dr.
Dexter, OR 97431
janinegordon@earthlink.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-54 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/12/2007 14:53:27 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


richard warren
60669 river bend dr
bend oregon 97702
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-55 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/12/2007 14:54:26 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I've just heard on the radio about the proposed WOPR plan to log
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
Inasmuch as over 90% of old growth forests have already been logged,
gone forever, it seems short-sighted to log the little remaining.
These forests provide habitat, clean drinking water to rural
communities and recreation for people which also results in tourism
income for those communities.

The timber companies have been very vocal about their
"sustainability" practices. Well, if they are so sustainable, why do
they need to log old growth? And, once it is inevitably gone, where
does this leave them?

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Susan Brenner
732 W. Broadway
Eugene, Or. 97402
afoonman@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-56 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/12/2007 14:55:13 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Clark Kocurek
111 E. Morton St.
Bethlehem, PA 18015
clarklovesfencing@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-57 "Melo, Wes" <Wes.Melo@ingrambook.com> BLM WOPR Comments 9/12/2007 16:15:55 I have reviewed the Western Oregon Plan Revision/Restoration documents and information provided by your agency.  I find it appalling that the best alternative you have come up with only allocates 48% of your land base to Timber Management. 
 
The BLM's specific mission with O & C lands is to manage the lands to provide a steady source of forest products and revenue to support the economy of western Oregon.  Your agency and the U.S.F.S. have not only failed to achieve your specific mission for our nation, but your actions in severely restricting your forests from raw materials for the production of forest products has had an absolute devastating effect on the rural economy in western Oregon.   Your actions have literally cost thousands of jobs in the forest products industry and have taken millions of dollars out of our rural economic base.  The social as well as the economic effects of your failure to meet the mission to which your agency was directed to do in the management of O & C lands is nothing short of a dereliction of your responsibility to our citizens and our communities as well as to our nation.  Beyond all of that, quite frankly with each passing year of ineffective forest management, your land base is becoming more and more of a real mess with increasing potential for catastrophic fire as the lack of management allows for continued fuel buildup in the forest.
 
That being said, Alternative 2 is the option that I must support given the options you have developed for the management of our forests.   While I am absolutely astounded that you could not find better options that would accomplish the mission directed by the O & C Act, Alternative 2 does at least provide at least some options for returning some economic activity to our rural areas from forest products, and gives our local governmental agencies some options for recovering much needed revenues to provide needed services to our communities.
 
My education is in forestry (B.S. in Forestry, University of California-Berkeley 1966) and I spent most of my life working in the forests, or in industries related to forest products.   While I have been fortunate enough to be able to find other employment outside of the forest products industry here in Oregon since the contraction of the industry lead to the closure of operations of the last company I worked for, I am saddened and disheartened by the many families in rural Oregon who have not been able to recover economically as a result of the severe restriction of raw materials from national forests and BLM managed lands.   The resulting contraction of forest products manufacturing capacity now severely restricts your markets for selling timber and other forest products from your land base.   That economic fact will seriously affect your ability to maximize revenues from timber management and harvesting activities, and if in fact you were to increase and stabilize your supply of raw materials, it will take many years for the capacity of the markets you serve to increase to provide adequate revenues for local governments that are a part of your mission in providing revenue to support the local economy.
 
There are several specific issues I wish to address in the letter on line signed by Edward W Shepard regarding your planning process.

Forest fire resiliency will be accomplished only through the reduction in fuel load.   That means we must do everything possible to mimic the actions of nature before humans began "interfering" with the natural processes of our lands. Most importantly, we cannot allow photosynthesis to continue unabated with out some reduction in fuel load.   From my perspective, the combination of controlled burns during the "off season" (spring, and more importantly fall) combined with minimizing ladder fuels and potential crown fires through thinning activity is our best approach to fire resiliency in all forests, not just in the Medford District and the Klamath Falls area of the Lakeview District.   Fire from lightening was a natural part of our environment well before even the occupation of our lands by native Americans, and we need to return fire to our forests in order to get them back to some semblance of their original profile.
The spotted owl controversy needs to find final resolution.   The environmental activists have used the spotted owl and other "emotional" species to manipulate forest management to a state where we are no longer managing our forests for either fire prevention or raw material supply.   Numerous articles in recent months pretty well spell out the ineffectiveness of restricting timber management to "save" the spotted owl.  The barred owl apparently is competing effectively with the spotted owl and apparently will eventually take the majority of the habitat of the spotted owl.   That is a natural part of succession.   It is time to minimize the emotion of spotted owls, marbled murreletts, and all the other "single issue" emotional matters the environmental community has managed to drum up, and manage our forests primarily for Homo Sapiens, with consideration as appropriate for the optimization of all wildlife species.
Structurally complex forests can be planted and/or managed just like industrial forests are planted and managed.   Your agency hires foresters who have been educated to evaluate site and growing conditions and make appropriate decisions.   From my perspective it is time to unshackle  the skills and abilities of your professionals, give them the mission and objectives they are to achieve, and let them do their jobs without all of the interference of lay citizens and our court systems, neither of which truly have the background or education to fully understand the complexities of the ecology of our forests.

Sincerely
 
Wesley L. Melo
825 Umpqua College Road
Roseburg, OR 97470
 
Home  541 672 5561
Cell     541 580 2081
EM-58 Fred Fleetwood <waterrat1@earthlink.net> Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions 9/13/2007 9:58:14 To Alan Hoffmeister, BLM Public Outreach Coordinator for the BLM's Western Oregon Plans Revision Project:

Dear Alan,

    On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 at 14:09:58 -0700 you sent the following message (confirming receipt and acceptance of my comments relating to the WOPRs and submitted directly to you via an e-mail message dated Wed, 29 Aug 2007 at 06:17:48 -0700): "Thank you Fred.  Your comments have been received.

Alan Hoffmeister"    Now I wish to submit additional comments, again directly through you, regarding the WOPRs, and in particular regarding the following message sent from "orwopr@blm.gov."  [My additional further comments, which represent my second comment submission, appear directly and immediately under the Mon, 10 Sep 2007 orwopr@blm.gov message which is located between the dashed lines ("----") below.]

------------------------------
(Note: A "hard copy" version of this message having the same exact boldly formatted words as is contained in the following e-mail message, was received in the U.S. Postal Service mail by Fred Fleetwood on September 10, 2007.)

   Subject:
        Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions
   Date:
        Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:43:51 -0700
   From:
        orwopr@blm.gov We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alternatives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon.

The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions.  The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions.

It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose.

It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans. (Chapter 4, Timber, Page 557)

It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitatin the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. (Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494)

It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands.

·     Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf).  The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives.  The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission.
·    Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/
·    Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail.

Project Web Site:  http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr

Need More Information?  Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629------------------------------

My second comment submission: The third item listed in the above e-mail message and characterized as "It's a fact" is absolutely NOT a "fact!"  The actual real "fact" is that the statement -- that the "alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands" amounts to, at the very least, subterfuge, if not an outright lie!

The reasons why it is subterfuge, if not an outright lie?: 1.    In its e-mail messages and hard copy mailings the BLM has sent out to the public (e.g., the above e-mail message), the BLM refers to and uses the term "old-growth," but yet it purposely resists defining that term.  An uninitiated person, who may just now be becoming acquainted with the very voluminous Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS of 1,604 pages), would quite naturally go to the "Glossary" of the document (p. 855) to find out "what the heck" the BLM's definition is of what it is writing about.  But, "Low and behold!"  When one does that, he finds out that the definition is NOT THERE!  That's simply amazing!  And the uninitiated person is left wondering why it isn't there.
    Where the Mon, 10 Sep 2007 message which appears above refers to "more old-growth forest habitat in the future," it also (parenthetically) refers the reader to a certain part of the DEIS, specifically to "Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494."  When the reader does go there to see a discussion on "old-growth forest habitat in the future," he finds there is not discussion there, in any way, of the subject of "old-growth" -- Nada! Nothing!  The discussion there is about "spatial patterns of the forest structural stages" -- nothing about the absolutes of age and size of trees, and it only discusses forest spatial patterns and structural stages in the relative terms of "Young," "Mature," and "Structurally Complex."  How convenient  for the BLM.  Discussion of forest and timber stands in "relative" terms allows the BLM to avoid the real subject at hand -- the absolutes of forest tree sizes and ages, and all their accompanying attributes -- such as, for example: "moderate-to-high canopy closure; a multi-layered, multi-species canopy dominated by large overstory trees; high incidence of large trees, some with broken tops and other indications of old and decaying wood (decadence); numerous large snags; and heavy accumulations of wood, including large logs on the ground and ecological processes that are not found in younger forests (younger than 150-250 years)."
    By not having the definition of "old-growth" defined in the basic documents (the DEIS or ultimately the final EIS) which are supposed to support the revisions, the BLM is not being honestwith the public.  After all, old-growth habitat (for the Northern Spotted Owl and other dependent species) was the whole reason in the first place for the Northwest Forest Plan, which the revisions are now endeavoring to "bust!"  Whether the BLM wants to straightforwardly and up front admit it or not, instead of burying it in the obscure pages of the DEIS or the final EIS, the fact remains that "old-growth" habitat is and was the ultimate reason for the law suit which prompted the revisions.
    As I pointed out in my first submission of comments, the Supplement to the October 2006 Newsletter, Issue No. 5 pertaining to the then upcoming revisions, the BLM said that:

"The use of the term “old-growth” will be avoided in the resource management plan and EIS because the term means different things to different people."

    That is just out and out subterfuge!  It is an "artifice or expedient [way] used to evade" the opening up of a "can of worms," which defining "old-growth" would do.

2.    About "more old-growth forest habitat in the future":  Old-growth habitat "of the future?"  The BLM has to be kidding.  (But, of course, it is not, in spite of the incongruity between the O&C Act and the Northwest Forest Plan.)  "Old growth of the future" on BLM land under the O&C Act is an oxymoron, and therefore the phrase is just simply nonsense!  Also, like I said in my first comment submission:

"When the dominant trees of old growth forests are cut (not 'harvested,' but 'cut'), they are gone -- for ever!, as far as the general run-of-the-mill 'foresters' are concerned.  That is because the replacement treeswill never be allowed (by 'foresters' -- i.e., 'timber beasts') to grow for the length of time (i.e., multiples of hundreds of years -- generally more than 200 years) it took the original dominant trees (which were cut) to become as large as those originally cut trees were when they were cut."

So, again, to say, "The BLM is not proposing that old-growth stands be eliminated from O&C  lands." is just plainly not the truth! -- a lie!Therefore, out of necessity, the BLM must define "old-growth" in its EIS documents -- themselves! -- instead of obfuscating the "facts" as it now proposes to do.

[Good definitions -- there are seven of them -- can be found on the on the Internet http://www.reo.gov/library/reports/old_growth_definitions.htm.  But of course the BLM will undoubtedly ignore them, it cannot do otherwise -- because of the settlement agreement.  Those definitions are from the "Regional Ecosystem Office" (http://www.reo.gov/general/aboutreo.htm#What) which supports the implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan -- the very plan which, again, the revisions are attempting to "bust," -- i.e., "negate."  And of "odd coincidence" -- and even of a "conflict of interest" in this instance, the Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) is sponsored by several Federal Government agencies, the BLM among them.  How bizarre that is!]


Fredric ("Fred") L. Fleetwood
4261 Hwy. 227
Trail, OR 97541
EM-59 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/14/2007 8:37:10 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/14/2007 08:36 AM -----

"Helen Lambie" <htlambie@hotmail.com>

09/13/2007 05:28 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in
with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests
under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the
BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest
Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and
increased conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new
logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle
Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species,
water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth
forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our
nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already
moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged
public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning
- they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions
for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing
old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water
quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We
should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land,
not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth
protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is
proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex
ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM
lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in
restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood
products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Helen L. Goldstein
1026 Winding Ridge Ct.
Santa Rosa, CA 95404

_________________________________________________________________
Get the device you want, with the Hotmail® you love.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/mobilehotmail/default.mspx?WT.mc_ID=MobileHMTagline

EM-60 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/14/2007 17:10:44 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Alan Hoffmeister
alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-61 Dave Gilmour <drgilmour@mac.com> Public Comment Re: WOPR DEIS 9/16/2007 12:24:43 Western Oregon Plan Revisions
P.O. Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208
http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr

Sirs,

At the onset, I must emphasize that the following comments do not represent a consensus of the Jackson County Board of Commissioners. They do, however, represent the opinion of the Commissioner who has historically been the most sympathetic to both the local environmental community and to the non-industrial private landowners who own properties within and adjacent to the proposed John?s Peak OHV area.

From my prospective, Alternative 2 has several ?fatal flaws? that could provoke litigation that would delay implementation until well into the next Administration. These include the following:

1) OFF HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV) AREAS: Although BLM officials have stated that they are working on Alternatives for the John?s Peak OHV area, the WOPR DEIS seems to set into stone the most extreme scenario. The ?preferred? Alternative 2 sets aside 16,375 acres (page 143).


The WOPR DEIS states clearly that ?Alternative 2 would result in a loss of non-motorized recreation opportunities in the Medford District due to the larger portion of land that would be designated specifically for motorized use (12% of the district?s total land base)?visitors seeking non-motorized forms of recreation would be dissuaded from using these areas.?(P.778)

Because of the ?checkerboard? delineation of Federal ?O&C? lands on John?s Peak, a significant portion of lands within this designated area are privately owned. A significant percentage of those who own non-industrial private lands within this area have signed petitions opposing the OHV area.

Since I am sympathetic to the strongly held concerns of private property owners within the John?s Peak OHV area and its surrounds, I could not support an Alternative that seems to ?set into stone? a 16,000+ OHV park, even if less extreme proposals were later brought forward.

2) FUEL REDUCTION AND WILDFIRE RISK: This one surprised me. It would appear that Alternative 2 actually increases long-term fire risk even more than the present management practices that most would agree are woefully inadequate. (Figure 273, page 769: look at ?high severity acres Medford? for the year 2116). Alternative 2 promotes the development ?of even-aged plantations, which would be highly susceptible to stand-replacing crown fires. This would maintain or increase the crown fire hazard in the South.? (P.770).

3) POTENTIAL WILDERNESS: The acreage within the Medford District dedicated to wilderness management is only 17,759 acres (p.219), only 1384 acres more that the proposed John?s Peak OHV reserve. An omission that could very well doom Alternative 2 is the exclusion of the ?Wild Rogue Wilderness? that is considered by many to be the largest roadless area in the entire WOPR planning area. It is not even listed in ?lands with wilderness characteristics? on table 125, Medford District (p. 418).

Even if were to be designated ?wilderness,? ?the special management to maintain wilderness characteristics would not apply to portions of these units that occur on O&C lands suitable for permanent timber production.? (p.784).

Since the area has developed nationwide recognition among mainstream environmental organizations, its omission could easily set off litigation that could delay implementation until long after we have another Administration in Washington.

4) RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT: The ?riparian management area? is also an area of significant concern, from both members of the environmental community and anglers. The ?steam bank zone? is only 25 feet. Within this zone, harvesting would be allowed for ?operational reasons.? (P.79, table 31) What are ?operational reasons?? Could a caterpillar tractor tear up riparian habitat just to get to the other side for ?operational reasons?? If turbidity is increased for ?operational reasons,? is the Clean Water Act violated? Does removal of up to 20% of effective shade from 25 to 60 feet and 50% of canopy from 60 to 100 feet impact water temperature?

5) REJUVINATION HARVESTING: Clear cutting has been reborn as ?rejuvenation harvesting.? Alternative 2 would allow 143,400 acres to be clear-cut per decade (14,340 acres or 22.4 square miles / year). (p.581). Although clear cutting is certainly more profitable in the short term than less invasive forestry techniques, it is no longer supported by a majority of American citizens, especially in the Northeast and upper Midwest, regions that still have significant political clout in Congress.

6) NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL: Alternative 2 allows clear cutting in areas previously reserved as spotted owl habitat. It is not clear what the impact would be. This is another area where change in policy without a clear sense of impact will result in litigation that could delay implementation well into another Administration.

Although my comments may seem quite negative, I still believe that a compromise is still possible that could move the process forward.

Before such a compromise can be reached that can move us beyond stalemate, several important questions must be answered.

From the environmental community: What are the specific boundaries of lands that should be preserved for wilderness areas and preservation of vital habitat? How many acres would that entail?

From the timber industry: How many annual board feet must be harvested yearly from Federal lands to maintain local production and local jobs? How many acres would be required to ensure ?sustainability? of production within the confines of plantation management? Is there a local capacity for processing large diameter logs, or will these logs be sent out of region or even overseas? Does such harvesting really require incursion into ?road less? areas or areas that have ?wilderness potential??

From the O&C counties: What is ?bottom line? additional income required to sustain County operations, and to provide services such as roads and sheriff patrols within the historic checkerboard of O&C lands? How many acres and what are the boundaries of ?interface? areas that need special treatment to reduce fire risk?

Jackson County may be one of the few that are poised to move into a ?post-O&C? era. We have already made the painful cuts needed to move ahead without Federal moneys. If we get no further O&C moneys, we will survive, even though our resources will be stretched very thin by the need to provide services across the vast checkerboard of Federal lands.

Even though our county?s fiscal survival is not threatened, the fragile societal threads that hold us together could soon be unraveled if a solution is not found that could provide both sustainability of jobs and critical habitat. The threads have already been pulled to close to the breaking point by recent demographic changes.

Small remote timber dependant communities have slid into endemic poverty and hopelessness, with the loss of family wage jobs and an aging poorly educated workforce that is poorly equipped to move into post-timber economy.

Larger communities have experienced a flood of immigrants from California and elsewhere who have significantly higher educational attainment and economic resources, who value the non-economic resources of Federal lands.

Although the values cherished by each group are different, they need not be mutually exclusive. A well thought out compromise that produces a new ?Alternative? is still possible, but not within the Alternatives that have been proposed by the WOPR DEIS.

Sincerely,
David R. Gilmour, MD
Jackson County (OR) Commissioner
EM-62 Hefnorton@aol.com BLM LOGGING 9/16/2007 12:27:54 As a land owner whose property is bound by both Blm and forest service land I am very concerned with how the agencies manage that land. I believe that the current BLM resource management plan is a good balance of retaining healthy forest habitats and removal of forest products. To allow political and corporate pressure to define how the BLM manages it's forest land would be a huge mistake. To increase the amount of timber extracted or to reinstate the practice of clear cutting would have negative results both to the environment and to the health and beauty of our forests.
Jeff Norton
Applegate Oregon


**************************************
See what's new at http://www.aol.com
EM-63 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/16/2007 23:35:30 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


James C Taylor
78245 Rat Creek Rd
Cottage Grove, Or 97424
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-64 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/16/2007 23:39:38 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. To
continue to cut old-growth is not possible for much longer, so why
not adjust now while they are still around for us to appreciate.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


George Langeliers
88575 Partridge Lane
Springfield, OR, 97478
champion@rawfoods.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-65 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/16/2007 23:40:54 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Many sustainable and careful logging methods are used. It's
crucial that you study and use them. Clear cutting damages
top soils as well as the lost protections mentioned above.
The cutting of old-growth is nothing more than a greedy act
by one industry. PLEASE DO NOT continue thinking this way
and realize that many citizens view our forests as more than
money making devices. It's past time for rural areas to look into
other methods of income and not fall back on old,
"easy kill" methods. We expect better thoughts and plans
from our government agencies. Retain our few older forests
for our future generations as well as ourselves.

Sincerely,


David and Joan Seidel
1142 Ash Avenue
Cottage Grove, OR 97424
jdseidel@efn.org
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-66 Luke Cartmill <lukec@metrogymnastics.com> Protect BLM Forests 9/17/2007 10:18:02 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Luke Cartmill
10342 SW Mc Donald Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
EM-67 "GAry shade" <asap7802@hotmail.com> Johns Peak/ OHV Emphasis Area---No Way 9/17/2007 15:36:30 OHV is a single use management designation for Johns Peak. Bikers don't
share quit settings and environmentally sensative areas with the public.
Biker use of this area causes significant conflict with neighbors and
enviornmental damage. Biker abuse and lawless conduct in the Johns Peak area
warrents that OHV use in this area be stopped.
Just get out of the office and go see and spend some time talking to folks
of Jacksonville.
We understand that you are catering to the bikers and can't understand why
you support this activity that disrupts lives and is causes such damage.
I live in Jacksonville and I want the Johns Peak OHV Biker Destruction Area
closed down.
Gary Shade
P.O. Box 1443
Jacksonville, OR 97530

_________________________________________________________________
Get the device you want, with the Hotmail® you love.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/mobilehotmail/default.mspx?WT.mc_ID=MobileHMTagline
EM-68 jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> Stop the Whopper 9/19/2007 11:04:56 Please listen to the people! You are asking for input
- please actually implement what the people want don't
just give us a token opportunity to speak and then
ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT
LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700 million
board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be reasonable
and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy when
they grow up. We often take them hiking and have seen
the landscape change to accommodate more Californians
- lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and leave
us some beauty, some healthy forests, some recreation
places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush
administration is almost over - hold on - wait for the
next policies before you implement evil and destroy
what can not be restored. I would thank you for
listening but I don't think you really are. Surprise
me.
Jan Wright
313 B Gangnes
Talent, OR 97540




____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
EM-69 Michael Connors <mconnors@opendoor.com> Western Oregon Plan Revisions 2007 9/19/2007 11:10:24 Dear BLM:

Regarding this action:

Draft Environmental Impact Statement now available for Review and Comment!
Formal Public Comment Period:
August 10 - November 9, 2007




I am not in favor of opening areas above Jacksonville to OHV use! Please do not destroy our natural surroundings nor our quality of life!


Thank you!

Michael Connors
Sales / CDS Publications
cdspublications.com
772 Indiana Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Ph/Fax: 541.488.2553
Mobile: 541.944.4563
EM-70 "Connie Lynn" <lynn@jeffnet.org> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 9/19/2007 12:04:33  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

Connie Lynn
74 Granite St.
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-71 jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> Re: Stop the Whopper 9/19/2007 12:25:34 If law is guiding you- then why the change in policy
why suddenly increase the amount of timber being cut ?
What was wrong with the previous amounts were you
within the law then too? And are still protecting the
spotted owl and other animals who don't have a voice
or a choice about where they can live????And are you
actually claiming that Bush has no influence on this -
Has the rate of cutting ever been higher than you are
proposing since 1937? Bush obviously doesn't care a
bit about the environment much less about Oregon so do
not fold to his policies. The info. from the paper
said your new plan would not make up for the lost O &
C funds anyway. Are you training people to actually
manage the forest- to do fuel reduction and good
forest health practices instead of the focus being on
short term revenues. In what way will my comments be
considered? Statistically, morally....? Thank you for
writing back.
Jan Wright, Talent
--- orwopr@blm.gov wrote:

> Jan:
>
> Thanks for your comments. We are listening. We
> will consider your
> comments as we make final decisions.
>
> However, we also have to obey the law. And for most
> of the lands we
> manage in Western Oregon, the law that tells us what
> to do with these
> lands is the O&C Act of 1937.
>
> http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/oclands.php
>
> Our challenge is to meet the provisions of this law
> that directs us to
> manage for "permanent forest productions under the
> principles of sustained
> yield" while at the same time meeting the Endangered
> Species Act, the
> Clear Water Act, and other applicable laws. These
> laws don't change with
> changes in Administration.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> R. Alan Hoffmeister
> Bureau of Land Management
> Communications - Public Involvement
> Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project
> http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr
> alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov
> Portland Phone: 503-808-6629
>
>
>
> jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com>
> 09/19/2007 11:04 AM
>
> To
> orwopr@or.blm.gov
> cc
>
> Subject
> Stop the Whopper
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please listen to the people! You are asking for
> input
> - please actually implement what the people want
> don't
> just give us a token opportunity to speak and then
> ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT
> LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700 million
> board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be reasonable
> and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy
> when
> they grow up. We often take them hiking and have
> seen
> the landscape change to accommodate more
> Californians
> - lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and leave
> us some beauty, some healthy forests, some
> recreation
> places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush
> administration is almost over - hold on - wait for
> the
> next policies before you implement evil and destroy
> what can not be restored. I would thank you for
> listening but I don't think you really are. Surprise
> me.
> Jan Wright
> 313 B Gangnes
> Talent, OR 97540
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you
> sell.
> http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
>
>




____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
EM-72 "Tognar Toolworks" <info@tognar.com> I oppose designation of Johns Peak near jacksonville for OHV use 9/19/2007 15:40:52 I live and run very close to this area and think the use of OHV in the area would greatly diminish the beauty and sserenity of this lovely valley.
please consider my views in your deliberations
yours sincerely,
Cat Gould
cat1sun@yahoo.com   
541-512-88887


I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 11516 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!
EM-73 "Nick Shevchynski" <nickdotcom1@yahoo.com> comment on wopr 9/19/2007 16:51:35 please DO NOT proceed with wopr to degrade all our public old growth forests on blm land, DO NOT cut any old growth at all on public old growth blm lands in western Oregon at all, thankyou.  Stu Phillips, eugene, 5414611384, stulips@hotmail.com, only, this comment page on draft eis does not work at all, I'm sure that's your doing of course, do not go ahead with WOPR, no old growth logging on any public BLM lands in western Oregon at all, thankyou.  Stu Phillips, Eugene!
EM-74 "Jacksonville Mercantile" <foodlover@jacksonvillemercantile.com> OHV Use at John's Peak in Jacksonville 9/19/2007 18:19:43 As a small business owner and home owner in Jacksonville, it is truly distressing to think that the BLM would allow the OHV usage on the land near John's Peak.  Overwhelmingly, the people who live, work and play in Jacksonville have made it perfectly clear that we do not want this type of destructive activity.  It hurts everyone.  The businesses, the home owners and of course the land itself.  It does not bring people into Jacksonville, quite the oposite. If people discover that this is a huge OHV park, Jacksonville definately loses its appeal to visitors and people living here. 
 
Please listen to the majority of people living and working in Jacksonville and don't allow the OHV park to go through.
 
Thank you for listening.
 
Constance Jesser
Owner
Jacksonville Mercantile
EM-75 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/20/2007 13:44:58 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/20/2007 01:44 PM -----

Naomi Rowden <nrowden@uoregon.edu>

09/20/2007 01:20 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Naomi Rowden
1526 Willamette Alley #1
Eugene OR 97401
EM-76 "Peter Gibb" <pgibb@ashlandhome.net> WOPR 9/21/2007 18:12:32 
As a local resident, I want to register my strong objection to the proposed useage of John's Peak for Off Highway Vehicles.  This is not what most local residents want or need.  Please listen to and follow the wishes of local residents on this matter.
 

Peter Gibb
www.petergibbart.com
 
EM-77 Ed Miller <enigmaT120@q.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision, comments 9/23/2007 11:10:25 Where I live, in the Oregon coast range, the land owned by BLM (namely,
me and other citizens) is just about the only forest land worth visiting
for hiking, bicycling, mushroom hunting, and general recreation. The
private timberland owners are overlogging their property. The last
thing we need around here is more clear cuts.

I oppose increased logging on public lands, and particularly logging of
old growth forests, or even forests that have started to develop the
characteristics of old growth, say much over a hundred years old. I do
not oppose management of younger tracts of timberland which frequently
need thinning to lower the risk of fire and improve forest health, but I
don't want to see them clear cut either.

Thank you for your attention,
Ed Miller
Falls City, OR 97344


sx
EM-78 David Fulton <nicelynicely@mac.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 9/23/2007 20:31:28 Are you nuts!?! In light of a this recent talk about global climate
change and the importance of forests as a carbon sink you are going
to permit the most lush and vibrant of forest ecosystems to be
destroyed? I must say that I'm outraged. Old-growth forests are
sensitive habitat for many animals and are irreplaceable.

I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving
forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase
logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in
currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon
bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,
David Fulton
Portland, Oregon
EM-79 "Kidessa Young" <kidessa@hotmail.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 9/24/2007 6:47:00 Greetings,

I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with
the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's
old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old
growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Please do not cut these vital ecosystems as doing so will destroy a legacy
rightly owned by our grandchildren.

Sincerely,

Annette Young

_________________________________________________________________
A place for moms to take a break!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
EM-80 Lynda Stevenson <lyndagarden@yahoo.com> Comment on BLM proposed WOPR for Oregon 9/24/2007 8:27:33 I am opposed to all three of the alternative proposed
by BLM under the WOPR.
Alternative 2 is the worst of the three. The WOPR
would be a disaster for southern Oregon forests. None
of the three "action alternatives" offer responsible,
sustainable management for healthy forest.
Sincerely,
Lynda Stevenson
2101 Woodlawn Dr.
Medford OR 97504
EM-81 Gael Miller <oddsend@q.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 9/24/2007 9:22:13 We live in the OR coastal range and enjoy hiking, biking, shrooming and
other forms of recreation. Since we first moved here 17 years ago ALL
of the land surrounding us has been clear cut and replanted exclusively
w/douglas fir tree farns. The BLM land, with its many diverse species
and beauty is the only land worth visiting for recreation and to enjoy
the natural beauty of the forest. We daily see first hand the
destruction of unchecked logging and the devastation it causes to the
soil, our clean water, fish & other forms of wildlife.

I oppose increased logging on public lands and particularly ancient
forests or any forests that are in the process of becoming old growth
with trees much over a hundred years old. We want our public lands
protected for future generations to enjoy. Our ancient forsts CAN
NEVER BE REPLACED ONCE THEY ARE LOST!!

I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward
with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in
Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently
protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers
and creeks.

Please prevent any more logging or clear cutting of our ancient forests
and BLM land which WE want to enjoy and preserve for all time.

Gael Miller
Falls City, OR



EM-82 jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> Re: Stop the Whopper 9/24/2007 11:33:58 I have been informed of your tactics to drown the
public with your charts and facts and label all that
we say as "opinion" and therefore with out validity.
Denying that Bush has anything to do with this change
is disingenuous - I can't believe that you don't know
that this came directly from meetings with Bush and
the Timber companies. They were tired of judges (the
real legal system which of course, Bush doesn't honor
anyway) turning down their requests for the timber on
public lands so they went to Bush and he just waved
his wand and said "let's do this out of court" and let
the Timber industries circumvent the legal system and
the only recourse the public has. Bush told the BLM to
start letting industry log public lands at record
levels. Your little chart aside, this is not called
the Whopper for nothing. This represents something
huge. The Timber people have so mismanaged their own
resources they had to turn to the public lands and
will profit tremendously but will the tax payers????
NO they will not in fact - we LOSE our resources, our
rights to stop something we don't want and create a
mess for our grandchildren to figure out. Most people
think that clear cutting is illegal - most people
think that there are safeguards in place being honored
to protect the land. Won't they be surprised when they
find out otherwise and that the BLM agreed to let them
do it. Yet, you say you are listening to the public -
as long as they agree with you and as long as they
have fancy charts to contend with yours. None of this
will matter once the timber companies take over public
lands and destroy what only God can make. Why do you
trust profit making companies to do good? That is
naive and even stupid not to mention morally
reprehensible. If you do not stop the whopper, you can
safely assume that you are not listening or heeded any
warnings or honoring the trust the public has in your
will to protect our lands from rape and destruction.
Shame on you.
Jan Wright
--- orwopr@blm.gov wrote:

> Jan:
>
> You asked about the rate of cutting. I hope you can
> read this chart - if
> not let me know. This shows what the harvest has
> been from these BLM
> lands over the years.
>
>
>
> Under Alternative 2 (heaviest harvest goals) the
> Annual Sale Quantity
> would approach 700 MMBF, under the other
> alternatives being considered, it
> would be much less.
>
> Alan Hoffmeister
>
>
>
> jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com>
> 09/19/2007 12:25 PM
>
> To
> orwopr@blm.gov
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Stop the Whopper
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If law is guiding you- then why the change in
> policy
> why suddenly increase the amount of timber being cut
> ?
> What was wrong with the previous amounts were you
> within the law then too? And are still protecting
> the
> spotted owl and other animals who don't have a voice
> or a choice about where they can live????And are you
> actually claiming that Bush has no influence on this
> -
> Has the rate of cutting ever been higher than you
> are
> proposing since 1937? Bush obviously doesn't care a
> bit about the environment much less about Oregon so
> do
> not fold to his policies. The info. from the paper
> said your new plan would not make up for the lost O
> &
> C funds anyway. Are you training people to actually
> manage the forest- to do fuel reduction and good
> forest health practices instead of the focus being
> on
> short term revenues. In what way will my comments be
> considered? Statistically, morally....? Thank you
> for
> writing back.
> Jan Wright, Talent
> --- orwopr@blm.gov wrote:
>
> > Jan:
> >
> > Thanks for your comments. We are listening. We
> > will consider your
> > comments as we make final decisions.
> >
> > However, we also have to obey the law. And for
> most
> > of the lands we
> > manage in Western Oregon, the law that tells us
> what
> > to do with these
> > lands is the O&C Act of 1937.
> >
> > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/oclands.php
> >
> > Our challenge is to meet the provisions of this
> law
> > that directs us to
> > manage for "permanent forest productions under the
> > principles of sustained
> > yield" while at the same time meeting the
> Endangered
> > Species Act, the
> > Clear Water Act, and other applicable laws. These
> > laws don't change with
> > changes in Administration.
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > R. Alan Hoffmeister
> > Bureau of Land Management
> > Communications - Public Involvement
> > Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project
> > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr
> > alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov
> > Portland Phone: 503-808-6629
> >
> >
> >
> > jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com>
> > 09/19/2007 11:04 AM
> >
> > To
> > orwopr@or.blm.gov
> > cc
> >
> > Subject
> > Stop the Whopper
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please listen to the people! You are asking for
> > input
> > - please actually implement what the people want
> > don't
> > just give us a token opportunity to speak and then
> > ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT
> GOVERNMENT
> > LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700
> million
> > board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be
> reasonable
> > and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy
> > when
> > they grow up. We often take them hiking and have
> > seen
> > the landscape change to accommodate more
> > Californians
> > - lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and
> leave
> > us some beauty, some healthy forests, some
> > recreation
> > places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush
> > administration is almost over - hold on - wait for
> > the
> > next policies before you implement evil and
> destroy
> > what can not be restored. I would thank you for
> > listening but I don't think you really are.
> Surprise
> > me.
> > Jan Wright
> > 313 B Gangnes
> > Talent, OR 97540
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you
> > sell.
> > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet
> in your pocket: mail,
> news, photos & more.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
>
>



____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7

EM-83 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 10:57:57 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Judyth Hyll
3795 Wilshire Lane
Eugene, OR 97405
Judyandbobber@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-84 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 10:59:41 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.
Please. There is no reason to. The devastation has gone on far to
long. What are we leaving for our children. Trees breathe in CO2,
in case you didn't know so they are absolutely critical to slowing
down global warming. Logging old forests for corporate profit is the
dumbest thing we could possibly do. Clear cutting seals our fate of
an unihabital world. Thankyou for taking your time to listen,
please, I speak with the voice of millions you do not hear. Do what
is right, stop all old growth logging immediatley.

Sincerely,


Katey Seefeld
Eugene, Oregon, 97401
omshaktima@yahoo.com

--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-85 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 11:00:41 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Bill Pfeil
1805 NE Conifer Blvd.
Corvallis, Oregon, 97330
bkmjbc@comcast.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-86 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 11:01:21 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Jane Van Dusen
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-87 "Ken Smith" <kn@oip.net> PLAN REVISION/BLM-O&C LANDS 9/25/2007 11:40:51 Sir,
After reviewing the proposed plan amendment as explained by Ms. Anna Morrison, I respectfully request that ALTERNATIVE #2 be implemented for the coming years as it clearly shows a definite advantage for the citizens of Oregon.
Respectfully yours,
Kenneth R. Smith
31658 Beach Rd
Creswell, Or. 97426
EM-88 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Don't log old growth 9/25/2007 12:07:04 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/25/2007 12:06 PM -----

Lisa Warnes User lisawarnes <lisawarnes@efn.org>

09/25/2007 11:43 AM

To
<Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
Don't log old growth








Dear Mr. Hoffmeister

Our last remaining and irreplaceable 10% of old growth forest need to be
protected not clear-cut in order to pay off county debt. This BLM proposal
is short sited and lacks wisdom. In a time when global warming is
threatening our very existence we need to be doing everything we can to turn
this around not put the peddle to the metal and drive right toward it at an
accelerated speed.

These old growth forest provide us with clean air, clean water and is home
to the endangered Spotted Owl.  Practicing sustainable forestry in existing
tree plantations is profitable. Tourism is also very profitable and by
eliminating our last few shreds old growth forests tourism will be severely
impacted, who wants to vacation in a forest full of ancient stumps?

If BLM is granted permission to move forward with this ill-conceived
proposal to clear-cut our last and precious old growth forest then what?
What can be sacrificed to pay county debt then?

Oregon needs to practice sustainability and to maintain some since of its
heritage and we need to be intelligent and creative in ways to finance our
debt. To sacrifice these majestic, rare and finite resources for short term
relief to county debt defies sensibility and reasoning.

Lisa Warnes
Eugene, ORE


EM-89 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 17:16:45 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Jane Van Dusen
82233 Rattlesnake Rd.
Dexter, OR
janevand@epud.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-90 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 17:17:44 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Orit Adam
P.O. Box 178
Dexter, OR 97431
janevand@epud.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-91 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/25/2007 17:19:06 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I'm a resident of the Coast Range, and while I understand the
importance of sustainable logging to the local economy, I also
understand the importance of preserving our natural heritage, the
cleanliness of our water supplies, and the habitat vital to local
wildlife.

I am concerned that the proposed increase in logging in my area will
negatively impact quality of life for residents, wildlife, and future
generations. Old growth and stream side forest must be preserved for
the health of the land and those of us who depend on it.

Despite the heavy logging activity in this area, the Coast Range has
slowly become an example of sustainable forestry practices, and the
current proposals would be an enormous setback to this progress.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,

Peter Bergin
23420 Highway 36
Cheshire, OR 97419
pmbwebdesign@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-92 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/26/2007 7:57:30 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 07:57 AM -----

Kim Mericle <kimm@mcmatters.net>

09/25/2007 09:34 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am agitated and disheartened with the direction the Bush  
Administration is heading with the management of nearly 2.6 million  
acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan  
Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating  
will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan,  
and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased  
conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Kim Mericle
PO Box 414
1273 Sheraton Dr.
Williams, OR
97544
EM-93 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/26/2007 11:21:15 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 11:21 AM -----

Tracy P Lamblin <wrensnest2@starband.net>

09/26/2007 10:58 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS,

Tracy Parks Lamblin
5223 Carberry Creek Rd
Jacksonville, Or
EM-94 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/26/2007 11:27:28 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 11:27 AM -----

Tracy P Lamblin <wrensnest2@starband.net>

09/26/2007 10:58 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS,

Tracy Parks Lamblin
5223 Carberry Creek Rd
Jacksonville, Or
EM-95 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/26/2007 14:36:29 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

And, as a resident of western Oregon, in the foothills of the Coastal
Mountains, I am increasingly concerned with air and water quality,
wildlife and diversity in my area. I understand the consumer demand
for wood products, but I believe that it is far better harvested from
tree plantations than to risk all that we lose by destroying some or
our last remaining old growth forests.

Thank you for taking the time to read my comments. Please do not open
older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Teri Myers
23420 Highway 36
Cheshire, OR 97419
dancewithleela@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-96 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/26/2007 14:37:09 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Melanie McCloskey
po box 921
Hood River, OR 97031
melaniemccloskey@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-97 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/26/2007 14:39:21 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Patricia Beis
82066 Lost Valley Ln.
Dexter, OR 97431
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-98 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/26/2007 14:40:54 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Carlyn McCormack
2576 Potter Street
Eugene, OR 97405-4166
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-99 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 9/27/2007 7:51:53 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/27/2007 07:51 AM -----

Faist Family <faist@magick.net>

09/26/2007 06:53 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,
Louann Faist PO BOX 343 Williams OR 97544
EM-100 "John & Vicki" <jvpro@dishmail.net> Western Oregon Plan Revision 9/27/2007 9:48:59 My husband and I attended the community meeting at the Azalea Grange a few weeks ago.  The team that was there was very informative and helpful.  We just wanted to go on record for having huge concerns about the water run off behind our home if the timber is cut.  We live at 3808 Upper Cow Creek, Azalea, OR and during normal winters we have a small ditch that fills with water and in extreme winters it overflows and our back yard is flooded and goes into our neighbors on the west.  Our neighbors above us, the Colletts, have had so much water run off that they couldn’t get in or out of their driveway.  It was basically under water. 

 

We just hope that you take into consideration our concerns and the concerns of our neighbors.  

 

Thank you for listening.

 

John & Vicki Prohoroff

3808 Upper Cow Creek

PO Box273

Azalea, OR  97410

 

 

 
EM-101 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/28/2007 15:46:57 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,

Rebecca Noble
Street: 9383 Nashville Road
Eddyville, OR 97343
shine_rn@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-102 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/28/2007 15:47:32 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


rob miron
eugene or 605 howard ave. 97404
robmiron@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-103 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/28/2007 15:48:08 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Jan Aho
82233 Rattlesnake Road
Dexter, Oregon 97431
jaho@epud.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-104 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 9/28/2007 15:48:54 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


stu phillips
212 benjamin
eugene, oregon, 97404
stulips@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-105 dinda evans <dindamcp4@yahoo.com> Protect BLM Forests 9/28/2007 19:47:31 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

dinda evans
pob 178695
san diego, CA 92117
EM-106 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/1/2007 11:34:56 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


jeramy vallianos
4680 w. hillside dr
eugene, or 97405
jeramyvallianos@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-107 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/1/2007 11:36:16 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Susan Marsh
8121 SW 62 Place
Portland, OR. 97219
sunseeker56@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-108 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/1/2007 11:36:52 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Jacob Ritley
35551 Hood Canal Dr. NE
Hansville, WA, 98340
jacobritley@gmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-109 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/1/2007 11:37:31 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Candice Cook
Street: PO BOX 3011
EUGENE, OREGON 97403
candicecook@gmamil.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-110 "Steve Hanson" <stevenjhanson@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:13:03 Steve Hanson
36552 Cedar Hills Drive
Pleasant Hill, OR 97455-9603


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Steve Hanson

EM-111 "Cindi Barrett" <cbarrett@amforest.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:17:42 Cindi Barrett
1712 NW 18th Court
Gresham, OR 97030-3687


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Cindi Barrett

EM-112 "Greg McGuire" <gregm@dunollieent.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:21:44 Greg McGuire
1507 S 74th
Yakima, WA 98908-1919


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Greg McGuire
5099654711

EM-113 "ALLEN PRICE" <allenp@ootci.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:23:45 ALLEN PRICE
62663 SHELLHAMER ROAD
COOS BAY, OR 97420-7326


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


ALLEN PRICE
541-269-9506

EM-114 "Ben Smith" <ben.smith@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:24:57 Ben Smith
15555 S. Highway 211
Molalla, OR 97038-8443


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ben Smith

EM-115 "Tyril Spence" <tyril.spence@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:30:14 Tyril Spence
243701 HWY 101 west
Port Angeles, WA 98363-9472


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tyril Spence

EM-116 "Rick Forgaard" <rick.forgaard@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:44:29 Rick Forgaard
3415 33rd Way NW
Olympia, WA 98502-3240


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

My company operates two sawmill facilities in OR and is highly dependent
on public timber. After a briefing by the American Resource Council it is
clear that none of the alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the
requirement of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the
dominant use of timber production. Reserving 52% for the purpose of a
listed species is in violation of the Act!

The O&C lands are unique and by law are not available to be part of a
reserve to recover listed species.

The BLM must develop an alternative that maximizes timber receipts that
meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Lastly, access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for
private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such
as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Rick Forgaard
360-791-7058

EM-117 "John Ernst" <john.ernst@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:44:43 John Ernst
Box 707
Gilchrist, OR 97737-0707


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Ernst
541/480/0779

EM-118 "Richard Steers" <rick.steers@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:47:44 Richard Steers
8639 Blue Grouse Way
Blaine, WA 98230-5726


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Richard J Steers
360-510-9984

EM-119 "John Straw" <john.straw@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:48:56 John Straw
Box 638
Gilchrist, OR 97737-0638


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Straw
541-480-9790

EM-120 "Keith Elser" <keith.elser@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:49:21 Keith Elser
337 McLaughlin Dr
Woodburn, OR 97071-4509


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.



Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Keith Elser
503-759-2044

EM-121 "Mark Landers" <mark.landers@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 13:52:04 Mark Landers
Box 638
Gilchrist, OR 97737-0638


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Mark Landers
541-433-3312

EM-122 "Kerst, Duncan" <DKerst@zgf.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/2/2007 13:54:30 Dear BLM,

I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon.

I do not like your plan that would boost logging of trees 200 years and older sevenfold over the next decade. This would be an unprecedented and unsustainable increase in logging Oregon's last old-growth forests and by the BLM's own admission will open up currently protected streamside forests and 'old-growth reserves' to new clearcutting.

I am against the BLM plan to move forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

R. Duncan Kerst

1933 SE 32nd Place

Portland, Oregon97214

The contents of this email and any attachments to it contain confidential and/or legally privileged information from Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects LLP or its affiliates. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
EM-123 "Richard Svilich" <ricknroll50@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:05:38 Richard Svilich
104 N. Dewitt Way
Yreka, CA 96097-2202


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Richard Svilich
530-905-0181

EM-124 "Richard Parker" <rick.parker@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:21:19 Richard Parker
243701 Hwy. 101 West
Port Angeles, WA 98363-9472


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

I just don't get people today, they all want everything but who is going
to pay for it. I have worked in the timber industry for the last 30 years
and now becoming extinct. Sure there are some out there that just want to
clearcut but the rest want keep living with nature and prividing for their
families. You not only stop logging and their families but take away for
communities for tax dollars that help our kids. But then maybe they only
need learn how to sit along the streets and expect the goverment to take
care of them. There needs to be middle ground both sides can not have it
all. But if you decide to give it all to them we sure won't need you any
more, please make sure to turn off the lights and lock the door because
nobuddy will be able to make a living here.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Richard W. Parker

EM-125 "Jeff Demers" <jeffd@frllc.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:27:17 Jeff Demers
P.O.Box 876
Veneta, OR 97487-0876


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jeff Demers
541-484-4462

EM-126 "Lisa Bennett" <bennettj5@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:28:50 Lisa Bennett
1710 South E St.
Port Angeles, WA 98363-7026


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

How about preserving another endangered species: the working middle class
who provide the government with revenue in the form of taxes collected?
Every week more sawmills are taking downtime due to the sluggish housing
market. Keep people working and not collecting unemployment to ensure
economic recovery.

Protecting sensitive species is important but enviromentalists need to be
realistic: look at all of the measures taken to preserve the spotted owl
and their numbers are still declining due to factors completely out of our
control such as the migration of a competitive species.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Lisa Bennett
360-417-6181

EM-127 "Tom Partin" <tpartin@amforest.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:29:06 Tom Partin
17890 Royce Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97034-7313


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tom Partin
503-638-5566

EM-128 "Howard Hutchinson" <aznmc@earthlink.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:29:37 Howard Hutchinson
HC 61 Box 484
Glenwood, NM 88039-9702


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Howard Hutchinson
505-539-2692

EM-129 "Louis Gilbert" <42utus@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:34:44 Louis Gilbert
PO Box 2203
Port Angeles, WA 98362-0287


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.
BLM should be working with each states Forestery
Management team and judge what applications of use are best suited for the
local juristictions.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Louis Gilbert

EM-130 "Chuck Wert" <chuck.wert@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:44:32 Chuck Wert
PO Box 250
Glendale, OR 97442-0250


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Chuck Wert
541-832-1112

EM-131 "Alexandria Sherman" <al740@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:45:31 Alexandria Sherman
1712 NW 18th Court
Gresham, OR 97030-3687


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Alexandria Sherman

EM-132 "Jennifer Fryman" <jfryman@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:46:20 Jennifer Fryman
PO Box 631
Conway, WA 98238-0631


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jennifer Fryman
3604453163

EM-133 "Edward Girrens" <eddie.girrens@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 14:55:15 Edward Girrens
513 Jefferson St.
Silverton, OR 97381-1121


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. . Congress and the
Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM
receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Edward Girrens

EM-134 "Nick Watkins" <nick.watkins@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 15:00:02 Nick Watkins
15555 s Hwy 211
Molalla, OR 97038-8443


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nick Watkins

EM-135 "Steve McGuire" <stevemcguire@hamptonaffiliates.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 15:07:17 Steve McGuire
P.O. Box 189
Randle, WA 98377-0189


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Steve McGuire
360-497-0204

EM-136 "Frank Pratt" <fpratt@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 15:52:58 Frank Pratt
Po box 234
Hydesville, CA 95547-0234


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Frank Pratt
707-768-3839

EM-137 "Michael Richardson" <mike.richardson@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 16:10:51 Michael Richardson
419 Eastview Lane NE
Silverton, OR 97381-9814


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Michael Richardson
503-989-5337

EM-138 "Eric Recht" <eric.recht@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 16:34:25 Eric Recht
1594 N Redwood
Canby, OR 97013-2411


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.



All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Eric Recht
503-539-9350

EM-139 "Dean Olson" <dean.olson@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 17:59:57 Dean Olson
1040 West 5th Street
Port Angeles,, WA 98363-2115


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dean Olson
360-417-6181

EM-140 "Nick Partin" <nicksperformance@comcast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 19:17:59 Nick Partin
3801 NE 113th Ave
portland, OR 97220-2423


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Personally, I would say any area not within the set boundaries of a stream
river or wilderness areas should at least allowed selective and un even
age harvest methods to allow for at a minimum fire prevention and other
catastrophic events that effect the growth of wildlife populations
throughout the forest regardless of where it is located with in the paper
trail of boundaries. setting ANY amount of timberlands aside for
"wildlife areas" places the surrounding forests at risk of damage by
events within the wildlife areas due to mismanagement overtime due to the
inability to properly control risk factors in the areas of forest set
aside for habitat and rehabilitation, all areas should be of a common
goal, manage the resource to be as high of yield without reducing the
annual growth of the forest, without stressing the animal and wildlife
populations within the forest, and to assume the least amount of risk to
the forest by fire, and to keep the areas that do inevitably catch fire by
lightning or other hands to a minimum acreage. Of the acreage that will
burn over time, the areas are to be properly cared fore and managed by
the personnel trained in proper management techniques,. to avoid the
appearance and mismanagement of the B&B complex fires that have yet to be
dealt with and are effecting the surrounding forests with bug kill,
windfall, fungus and a over burden of usage from displaced wildlife that
used to be present in the burnt areas. The appropriate use of science
and management style for the tree species with in each specific area of
the forest.

Nick Partin
Altec Industries

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nick Partin
503-740-5472

EM-141 "Joyce McGuire" <jlmcguire@tds.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/2/2007 20:20:52 Joyce McGuire
po box 385
Mossyrock, WA 98564-0385


October 2, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber prodction and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopary obligation.



Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Joyce McGuire
360-983-3976

EM-142 "Larry Duysen" <lduysen@sierraforest.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 6:59:50 Larry Duysen
P.O. Box 10060
Terra Bella, CA 93270-0060


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Larry Duysen
559-535-4893

EM-143 "Kay King" <royalline@hughes.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 7:21:29 Kay King
PO Box 219
Florence, OR 97439-0008


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Dear Mr Shepard:

BLM lands were set aside for timber production, principally. Timber was
to be the dominant use. O&C lands are not to to be part of a reserve
system for recovery of specific species. However, a good sensible
management plan of the forest, will still provide for sensitive species.
You, the BLM should be mandated to select the alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production. Oregon is hurting for timber
receipts for county governments and taxpayers can pay no more. Be
sensible--and do not bend to pressure, when you know how to best manage
the forest. A token timber harvest will not meet the mandate requiring the
BLM to provide for schools and roads through the production of timber
receipts. I have watched the preservationist community whittle away at
our forests until rural communities are suffering beyond measure. Be bold
and do not bend to their pressure. Thank you for taking my input.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Kay King
5419978212

EM-144 "Zander Willis" <zander.willis@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 7:31:26 Zander Willis
15555 S Hwy 211
Molalla, OR 97038-8443


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Zander Willis
503-759-2053

EM-145 "Tony McKague" <tonym@kinzuaresources.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 7:51:56 Tony McKague
P.O. Drawer AA
Pilot Rock, OR 97868


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tony McKague
541-443-2261

EM-146 "Tony Sims" <tsims@sierracedarproductsllc.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 8:19:34 Tony Sims
1401 Melody Road
Olivehurst, CA 95961-7406


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Our sawmill is located in Northern California where we employee 72 people.
The survival of our company and small timber dependent comunities depends
largely on how federal lands are managed in the future. We have great
concern over the end result of the Resource Management Plans for Western
Oregon. We would like to make the following points for your consideration.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.


All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tony Sims
530 741 8090

EM-147 "Tom Insko" <tainsko@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 9:33:23 Tom Insko
12 Pine Crest Drive
La Grande, OR 97850-1300


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

I have lived in the state of Oregon for most of my life and value the many
benefits our state's natural resources offer. It is disappointing to
experience the impact on these resources through recent improper
management.

I applaud the agency for proposing alternative two which returns to a more
active management regime on much of the land but it still falls short of
what needs to occur.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tom Insko

EM-148 "Bruce Haynes" <bhaynes@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 9:59:30 Bruce Haynes
PO Box 10939
Anderson, CA 96007-1939


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Bruce Haynes
5303788352

EM-149 "David Sweitzer" <dasweitzer@comcast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 10:37:43 David Sweitzer
P.O. Box 1095
Camas, WA 98607-0095


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


David A. Sweitzer
360/835-1900

EM-150 "William Lanier" <willie.lanier@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 11:01:52 William Lanier
15555 hyw 211
molalla, OR 97038


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


William Lanier
5037023844

EM-151 "james chambers" <jim.chambers@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 13:49:26 james chambers
4711 parkview lane
mt. vernon, WA 98274-8765


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


james chambers
360-416-6954

EM-152 "Kenneth Gazzaway II" <ken.gazzaway@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 14:27:07 Kenneth Gazzaway II
4020 newell rd
port angeles, WA 98363-2465


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ken Gazzaway II

EM-153 "David Kunert" <davekunert@hamptonaffiliates.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 16:24:40 David Kunert
3111 Third Street
Tillamook, OR 97141-2643


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


David Kunert

EM-154 "Kristina West" <kristina.west@verizon.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 19:37:38 Kristina West
23779 SW Shady Grove Dr
Sherwood, OR 97140-6268


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Kristina West

EM-155 "Todd Merritt" <merrittta@chwa.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/3/2007 20:44:26 Todd Merritt
5022 Caribou Ct SW
Albany, OR 97321-5889


October 3, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

I believe the BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that
maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local
county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented, without the funding, the Plan cannot succeed or live up to
the full commitment that was made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.




In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Todd Merritt

EM-156 "Steve Courtney" <scourtney@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 8:22:15 Steve Courtney
14654 Ovenell Rd
Mount Vernon, WA 98273-8232


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Steve Courtney
360-424-7619

EM-157 "Sharon Cork" <sharon.cork@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 8:54:11 Sharon Cork
324 E. 10th St.
Port Angeles, WA 98362-7924


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Sharon Cork

EM-158 "Greer Kelly" <greer.kelly@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 12:05:41 Greer Kelly
1453 Trail Creek Court
Redmond, OR 97756-7488


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Greer Kelly
923-6487

EM-159 "Howard Peterson" <hpeterson@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 13:04:33 Howard Peterson
3735 El Cajon Ave
Shasta Lake, CA 96019-9211


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Howard Peterson
530-275-8851

EM-160 "John Phillips" <jphillips@spi-ind.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 13:07:35 John Phillips
3735 El Cajon Ave
Shasta Lake, CA 96019-9211


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Phillips
530-275-8851

EM-161 "Richard Wilfong" <richwilfong@hamptonaffiliates.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/4/2007 15:00:00 Richard Wilfong
P.O. Box 2315
Salem, OR 97308-2315


October 4, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Richard Wilfong
503 365-8400

EM-162 rhudspethrvm@charter.netkia WOPR Draft DEIS Comments from the Public 10/5/2007 11:15:49 Submitter: rae hudspeth
email: rhudspethrvm@charter.netkia
Location: medford, OR 97504
Comment: None of your proposed Plans fits reasonable forests. Please cancel
Relevant Section/Page: WOPR all
EM-163 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/5/2007 13:21:03 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Dione Armand
4006 V St
Eureka, CA 95503
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-164 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/5/2007 13:21:57 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Robert Jones
67590 Spinreel Rd.
North Bend, OR 97459
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-165 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/5/2007 13:23:36 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Andrew Livesay
Eugene, OR 97405
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-166 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/5/2007 13:24:50 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Emily Dixon
12 NW Edgewood Dr.
Corvallis, OR 97330
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-167 "Pat Combs" <patcombs@gorge.net> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/5/2007 16:59:47  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

Patricia F. Combs
EM-168 "Jill M" <elfsgirl@gmail.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/5/2007 18:01:25 I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
Sincerely,
 
Jill Mulligan
Portland, OR
 
 
EM-169 hogrider <hogrider37@peoplepc.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/6/2007 1:33:36 We are very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

James and Shirley Combs
4943 Pleasant Ridge Road
The Dalles, Oregon 97058


________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com
EM-170 "Gerald Jones" <jerry.jones@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/6/2007 5:59:51 Gerald Jones
38055 Sandy Heights St.
Sandy, OR 97055-6304


October 6, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Gerald Jones

EM-171 David Neumann <dneumann@mac.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/7/2007 9:39:40 200 years is a really really long time to wait for something to grow.
Last time I checked, it was over two lifetimes and many more
generations. As I recall, entire country isn't much older. That's
how old those "old growth" trees are. This is not sustainable. Some
business will get a some income in the next few years or year and the
benefit for our children will be lost effectively forever. We just
can't get these trees back.

I completely agree with this position from the sierra club (a group I
don't always agree with):
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon.
The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision,
which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold
by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and
sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

David Neumann
4725 Parkview Dr. #H
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
EM-172 M Neumann <mneumann77@mac.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/7/2007 16:24:19 NO MORE FREEBIES FOR BUSH CRONIES.

I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving
forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase
logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in
currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon
bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

Michelle Neumann
4725 Parkview, Apt. H
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
EM-173 "Bill Wickman" <billwickman@sbcglobal.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/7/2007 17:41:17 Bill Wickman
109 Cottonwood Ct.
Quincy, CA 95971-9354


October 7, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Bill Wickman

EM-174 "Sue Wickman" <suewickman@sbcglobal.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/7/2007 17:42:18 Sue Wickman
109 Cottonwood Ct.
Quincy, CA 95971-9354


October 7, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Sue Wickman

EM-175 Sally Hawkins <shawkins@cse.unl.edu> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/8/2007 6:15:22 I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving
forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase
logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in
currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon
bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
Sally Hawkins
shawkins@unlserve.unl.edu
EM-176 "Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 9:48:13 Ross Mickey
2977 Ingalls way
Eugene, OR 97405-6305


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ross Mickey

EM-177 gretchen fidler <sugarmountainrescue@yahoo.com> Protect BLM Forests 10/8/2007 9:54:13 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

gretchen fidler
14189 Sugar Mtn. Rd, WC 156
West Fork, AR 72774
EM-178 "Ron Partin" <rpartin@drjlumber.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 9:56:53 Ron Partin
PO Box 66
Riddle, OR 97469-0066


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies.

The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its fiduciary obligation to the O&C counties.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ron Partin

EM-179 "Larry Holmgren" <larryh@schmidbauerlumber.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 10:00:15 Larry Holmgren
PO Box 152
Eureka, CA 95502-0152


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Larry Holmgren
707 443-7024

EM-180 "John Ernst" <john.ernst@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 10:58:17 John Ernst
Box 707
Gilchrist, OR 97737-0707


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Ernst
541/480/0779

EM-181 "Darrel Hanson" <darrel.hanson@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 15:07:05 Darrel Hanson
2211 rimland dr
bellingham, WA 98226-5664


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Darrel Hanson
360-788-2200

EM-182 "Owen Graham" <afa@akforest.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 15:36:47 Owen Graham
111 Stedman #200
Ketchikan, AK 99901-6549


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Owen J Graham

EM-183 "Jacob Groves" <jgroves@amforest.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 17:59:49 Jacob Groves
2300 Oakmont Way Suite 205A
Eugene, OR 97401-5530


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jacob R. Groves

EM-184 "Edmund Groves" <crtminc@oregonfcu.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 18:04:33 Edmund Groves
706 Ash St.
Myrtle Point, OR 97458-1135


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Edmund A. Groves

EM-185 "Julie Groves" <jgroves75@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 18:09:16 Julie Groves
706 Ash St.
Myrtle Point, OR 97458-1135


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Julie A. Groves

EM-186 "Elizabeth Groves" <elizabeth_erwin@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/8/2007 18:12:25 Elizabeth Groves
520 Fisher St.
Brownsville, OR 97327-2141


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Elizabeth Groves

EM-187 "Jr. Malcolm R. Dick" <bdick@amforest.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/9/2007 7:35:31 Jr. Malcolm R. Dick
606 Columbia St NW, Suite 104
Olympia, WA 98501-1093


October 9, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Our nation uses far more forest products than it produces, mainly because
our federal public lands are terribly underproductive.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Malcolm R. Dick, Jr.
360-352-3910

EM-188 "Larry McBride" <lmcbride@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/9/2007 7:42:17 Larry McBride
15555 S Hwy 211
Molalla, OR 97038-8443


October 9, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Larry McBride
503-759-3591

EM-189 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/9/2007 11:21:06 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 11:20 AM -----

Samantha <samantha@efn.org>

10/09/2007 10:35 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208
CC: Oregon Congressional delegation
Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed
in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal
forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the
changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the
landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution,
degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of
new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway
Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened
species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want
federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests,
safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our
nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are
already moving beyond the conflicts of the past.

By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local
mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and
keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR
proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth
clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality
at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We
should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public
land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth
protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM
is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex
ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining
old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already
logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration
thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products
without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,
Nancy Kaswell
1672 Wilson Street
Eugene, Oregon 97402
- samantha.vcf
EM-190 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM's new old growth logging plan is bad for people, water, land and animals 10/9/2007 14:43:54 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:43 PM -----

JB <unibaj@yahoo.com>

10/05/2007 12:05 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM's new old growth logging plan is bad for people, water,  land and animals








Alan-

Logging old-growth is not the solution.

The quality of water, land, air and life will be better if we
preserve these ancient trees.

Thank you. JB

EM-191 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 10/9/2007 14:46:05 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:45 PM -----

"John Weatherman" <weatherman@whoever.com>

10/05/2007 05:48 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








Dear Mr Hoffmeister ,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration would place half of the public land that the BLM manages – and most of our best old-growth
BLM forests – in “Timber Management Areas” to be clearcut every 80 years. The Bush Administration’s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon’s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 mile of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas – all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from
wildfire and protect what remains of our nation’s ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon’s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never
been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

John Weatherman


--
Want an e-mail address like mine?
Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com!
EM-192 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Don't log old growth 10/9/2007 14:49:20 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:49 PM -----

"Tara N. Mulski" <goldstar007@mac.com>

10/04/2007 02:43 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Don't log old growth








Dear Bureau of Land Management,

Please do not allow any increase of the amount of logging allowed on
federal land; in our nations forests and old grown forests.  Here is a
list of reasons I oppose any increase or change in the current amount
of logging allowed in federally managed forests:

IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE
The logging levels called for in the WOPR are not sustainable.  Cutting
down 700% more old growth when we have so little left will leave us
with zero ancient trees in a few years.

THERE IS A BETTER WAY FORWARD
Many areas that have been logged in the past are now overgrown and
ready to be cut.  By practicing restorative thinning in these areas, we
can meet the demand for timber, provide an influx of money to rural
counties and reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire.  All of this
without cutting down trees that were already giants when Lewis and
Clark first came to Oregon.

INSUFFICIENT HABITAT PROTECTION
The BLM plan does not adequately take into account protections provided
by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Streamside logging buffers are
reduced in a way that would harm water quality in streams where salmon
spawn.  In addition, habitat for owls and the marbled murrelet would be
negatively impacted by clear-cut logging.  In the Northwest Forest
Plan, scientists concluded that endangered wildlife cannot be protected
without adequate safeguards for old growth forests on BLM lands.

HEALTHY WATERSHED
BLM lands also protect water quality for communities’ drinking water.
Diminished protection on these lands will affect the drinking water
quality for the citizens of Salem, Albany, Corvallis, Eugene, and
Roseburg, among others. Many rural residents rely on springs that
originate on BLM lands. If these watersheds are not protected, their
water supplies could be polluted or interrupted.

THE CONTROVERSY
The WOPR came as the result of a sweetheart deal between the Bush
administration and the logging industry.  It is a stark departure from
the balanced approach of the Northwest Forest Plan.  A plan to
clear-cut our forest heritage is a plan that is sure to be met with
controversy and skepticism.  Re-opening the wounds of the 1980s timber
wars won't solve anything.

THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Many businesses rely on healthy rivers, fish populations, hiking
opportunities and work in the woods. The commercial fishing industry
depends on high quality salmon habitat. Cottage industries that harvest
tree boughs for wreath making, collect commercial mushrooms, or take
visitors rafting, fishing or hiking flourish on public forests in
western Oregon. Responsible thinning of tree plantations and fuels
reduction in fire prone forests are important economic activities.

HIGHER PROPERTY VALUES
Property values in western Oregon are diminished by logging the
surrounding beautiful forests, or by subjecting a property’s water
source to logging, herbicides, or ammonia-based fertilizers.

QUALITY OF LIFE
Healthy, standing forests provide a priceless living environment.
Healthy, protected forests are one of the most important natural assets
that Oregon’s economy is based on. More logging on BLM lands diminish
Oregon’s quality of life and will reduce property values for those
living near these lands. Public lands are where people go to find
solitude, to walk their dogs, to hike, to hunt, and for children to
explore and learn about nature.

GLOBAL WARMING
Old-growth forests have been identified as an invaluable source for
storing carbon.  Healthy large trees help to keep carbon pollution out
of the air and in their trunks and soil.  As climate change becomes an
increasing concern, the role of old growth in mitigating global warming
is essential.

LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF RURAL COUNTIES
It is true that timber-dependent counties are struggling to provide
services due to lagging budgets.  However, forward-looking county
commissioners like Dave Toler of Jospehine County and Pete Sorenson of
Lane County realize that logging old-growth isn't a long term solution.
 Cutting down all of the big trees will put us right back in the same
place a few years from now.

Thank you,
Tara Mulski
Los Angeles, CA 90066
EM-193 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: WOPR 10/9/2007 15:03:41 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:41 PM -----

"Stephen Anderson" <hops@mcsi.net>

10/06/2007 10:27 AM

To
<Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
WOPR








Dear Mr. Hoffmeister,
 
Here we go again.  I've lost track of the number of times I and the general public have asked the BLM to save the old growth forests and concentrate on thinning plantations and second growth forests.  And now the BLM proposes to increase old growth cutting by 700% in the next decade?  Anyone can see this is way too extreme.  In fact the whole WOPR is too extreme.  I live along the Umpqua River and can only imagine the detrimental affect this plan would have on the fish and river, wildlife, local environment, and my quality of life.  The WOPR goes against logic, science, and the current law.  Please reconsider this insane proposal.
 
Sincerely
Stephen Anderson
450 Edjon Ln.
Oakland, OR
97462  
EM-194 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/9/2007 15:04:10 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:45 PM -----

james wilhelm <rowanmorningstar@gmail.com>

10/03/2007 09:51 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,    James Wilhelm;  6020 Bellsprings rd.; garberville CA 95542

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
EM-195 "Cindy OeDell" <cindy.oedell@interfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/9/2007 15:55:22 Cindy OeDell
29655 S. Molalla Avenue
Molalla, OR 97038-9404


October 9, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Cindy OeDell
503-759-2041

EM-196 "Robert Smith" <bob.smith@intrfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/9/2007 16:30:48 Robert Smith
11578 s finnegans way
Oregon City, OR 97045-9770


October 9, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.




When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating Atving and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Robert L Smith
503-803-8310

EM-197 "Herb Nash" <herb.nash@charter.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/10/2007 5:56:15 Herb Nash
1706 NE Shale Ct
Roseburg, OR 97470-5751


October 10, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Herb H Nash
541-580-1491

EM-198 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/10/2007 11:46:39 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Michelle LeJeune
2519 Kincaid
Eugene, OR 97405
shel31337@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-199 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/10/2007 11:47:40 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.
none of the best scientific evidence available purports that the
measures proposed in the wopr plan are ecologically viable, NOR are
the economic justifications for such a plan great enough to log LSRs
or the last remaining migratory corridor's in western oregon

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


nicholas willard withrow
198 north river road
cottage grove oregon
backcountry_bum@riseup.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-200 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/10/2007 11:48:20 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


faye primka
1644 ash ave.
cottage grove, or.97424
faye@earthclick.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-201 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/10/2007 11:49:35 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

Please retain all our old-growth and streamside reserves on western
Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife
species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for
outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. This is
very very important and it is quite in keeping with the BLM's job.

Since so few old-growth forests remain, we must protect them. I want
my grandchildren to be able to experience them. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Keep our older forests on our public lands unlogged and fully available for us.

Sincerely,


Lisa Roehrich
2780 Potter St.
Eugene, OR 97405
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-202 "Merridy Cross" <xxcross@apbb.net> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/11/2007 7:49:22  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
I live in the beautiful Williams Valley and worry that my quality of life will be adversely affected by WOPR. We are surrounded by the Siskiyous and BLM lands and are concerned about our watershed. Please do not increase logging in this area. Once the forests are gone they are gone forever.

Sincerely,

Merridy K. Cross
205 Holmstead Road       
Williams OR 97544
EM-203 "Donna Svoboda" <dmsvoboda@dmci.net> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/11/2007 8:31:47  
I strongly disagree with and am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.  For many reasons, including global climate, these forests should be protected to the utmost, not used for monetary gain.  How sad that it has come down to this.  Protect these forest for your grandchildren's grandchildren future.

Sincerely,

Donna M. Svoboda 34194 Meyer Rd, Cottage Grove, Or 97424 541-942-8044
EM-204 "Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net> RE: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/11/2007 9:11:39 Alan,

 

Here is the website

 

http://www.citizensforforests.org/

 

It is under “Take Action.”

 

This is our website

 

http://www.amforest.org/

 

It is under “Call to Action”

 

Ross Mickey

AFRC

 

 




From:Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov [mailto:Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov] On Behalf Of orwopr@blm.gov
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 11:05 AM
To: Ross Mickey
Subject: Re: BLM Western OregonPlan Revision

 


Ross:

We're getting quite a few of these e-mail form letters.  Just out of curiosity, can you tell me which web site is generating them?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
R. Alan Hoffmeister
Bureau of Land Management
Communications - Public Involvement
Western OregonPlan Revisions Project
http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr
alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov
Phone:  503-808-6629



"Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net>

10/08/2007 09:48 AM



To


"Edward Shepard" <orwopr@or.blm.gov>


cc


 


Subject


BLM Western OregonPlan Revision


 



 


 









Ross Mickey
2977 Ingalls way
Eugene, OR97405-6305


October 8, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species.  The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the SecureRuralSchoolsand
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me.  I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ross Mickey


EM-205 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: 10/11/2007 11:40:08 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/11/2007 11:39 AM -----

Information Washington/WO/BLM/DOI
Sent by: Peggy S Britell

10/11/2007 11:31 AM

To
"debraporta@netzero.net" <debraporta@netzero.net>
cc

Subject
Re: Link







Your comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revision have been forwarded to our Oregon State Office.




"debraporta@netzero.net" <debraporta@netzero.net>

10/08/2007 04:08 PM

To
woinfo@blm.gov
cc

Subject









Hello,

 I am writing you today to register my concerns and opposition to plans for the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon’s old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

The Northwest Forest Plan's protections should remain in place for BLM lands, not sacrificed in an out-of-court deal between the timber industry and the White House. Oregon ancient forests deserve permanent protection and should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in forest restoration, fire safety and tourism.

Ancient forests in Oregon also serve as an important carbon storage and sequestration resource to help mitigate global warming. The BLM's plans for increased logging in these ancient forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revision will take America backwards in efforts to prevent global climate change. Clearcutting and damage to soils from logging has been shown to release tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, while old forests absorb and store carbon dioxide.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM has proposed in its Western Oregon Plan Revision will lead to the loss of Oregon's irreplaceable ancient forests, water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, who would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy.

 Thank you.

                                                                             Debra Porta

 




I SUPPORT JOHN EDWARDS FOR PRESIDENT
http://johnedwards.com/
and JEFF MERKLEY FOR U.S. SENATOR
http://www.jeffmerkley.com/
My page..http://notawellbehavedwoman.blogspot.com/

EM-206 "Ted Magnuson" <t.magnuson@verizon.net> Western Oregon Revision Plan 10/11/2007 23:13:30 Ladies and Gentlemen-

 

            Please do not activate the above named plan as currently outlined. We do not need a seven-fold increase in the ‘harvest’ of ancient forests. To do so would jeopardize the protection of rivers, streams, and clean water. It is time to recognize that the pace of logging that has been in effect over the past 30-50 years is not sustainable. What we would basically doing should this continue is to rob future generations of something precious. Do we really need to ‘pave paradise and put up a parking lot?’

            There is beauty, majesty, and a spiritual value to maintaining lands where man is a visitor.

 

            Thank you for your attention to the legacy we leave to those who come behind us in the continuing story of democracy and justice.

 

CC Senator Wyden

      Congressman Wu

      President George Bush

      Governor Ted Kulongoski

 

Ted Magnuson
t.magnuson@verizon.net
Those Self Evident Truths now available at:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/tedmagnuson
www.tedmagnuson.com
www.myspace.com/tedmag
503 590 7998
EM-207 "Lynn Ransford" <lransford@mtashland.net> Please do not log ancient, old growth forests! 10/12/2007 10:22:15 Dear BLM,
   Already, we have "harvested" over 80% of our old growth forests.  Please, no more!  We can never replace these forests, and while we attempt to re-plant, we deprive generations of children, numerous animal species, and our quickly warming environment of valuable, irreplacable resources.  We need those 200 year-old trees to protect our atmosphere, our air quality, climate, recreational opportunities, fish and wild life, water...  As a professional educator of young children and their teachers, I beg you to reconsider your WOPR plan.  It is so clear that we are attempting to do what we criticize other nations with rapidly depleting rain forests of doing.  We, like they, are being very short-sighted, ruining our future world, while concentrating on old solutions for what we define as immediate needs.  Money from harvesting can be gleaned from other means.  Nation-wide, we need to look at old growth forests, continue to protect what little we have not already destroyed, and designate other, previously cut or newer forests as "harvestable."  We need to re-examine our re-planting attempts.  I have seen for myself how futile many of these attempts have been.  Planting little trees in areas that have eroded, as a result of clear-cutting, means that those trees do not survive--they do not have enough rich topsoil left, they are unprotected without larger trees, and their lack of diversity means that they compete and do not support one another.  If we plot forest lands (not old-growth ones) on a 30 year cycle program, for instance,  we could cut one batch of forests a year (and replant them), while 29 other batches of forests are growing, each one to mature each year.  We can continue to replace our resources in a manner like this, without destroying those lands and old growth trees that will never be able to be replaced and that will continue to compromise our national (and world) environment.  Please do not move ahead with plans that are very much like and as unwise as those we see being carried out in South American and Indonesian countries.  We should know better!  Sincerely,
    Lynn Ransford, M.A.
    Professor of Education
EM-208 "Ed Tergeson" <vikingjet@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 12:48:19 Ed Tergeson
27533 Hwy 392
Gill, CO 80624-9333


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Ed Tergeson

EM-209 "Erica Rhoad" <erhoad@dc.bjllp.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 12:50:23 Erica Rhoad
1813 Monroe Street NW
Washington, DC 20010-1014


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Erica Rhoad

EM-210 "Judi Tergeson" <clareunion@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 12:51:50 Judi Tergeson
27533 HWY 392
Gill, CO 80624-9333


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Judi Tergeson

EM-211 "Robert Rhoad" <rrhoad@crowel.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 12:55:47 Robert Rhoad
1813 Monroe Street NW
Washington, DC 20010-1014


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Robert Rhoad

EM-212 "Brandi Graham Pensoneau" <bgraham@nrahq.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 13:20:55 Brandi Graham Pensoneau
410 First Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003-1819


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Brandi Graham Pensoneau
202-651-2581

EM-213 "Robert Graham" <beancounter7247@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 13:46:47 Robert Graham
5828 W. Atlantic Place
Lakewood, CO 80227-2540


October 12, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. THIS IS, ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT POINT>

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Robert T. Graham
303-516-7095

EM-214 "Schramm, Richard : CO IR" <RSchramm@LHS.ORG> My comments on the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/12/2007 16:25:58 To whom it may concern at the BLM:

Please include these as my comments in the public record concerning the
BLM's WOPR.

I object to the proposed the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision and its
emphasis on increased logging of our ancient forests. The WOPR's emphasis
on clearcutting in old-growth forests, as well as its reduction in the
protections for salmon-bearing rivers and streams is unwise, in my opinion.
Instead, I favor sticking with the original Northwest Forest Plan's
protections for these ancient forests and its protections for salmon-bearing
rivers and streams. Why the BLM is trying to change the Northwest Forest
Plan after so much work went into its design is beyond me. I feel that the
increased logging of what little old-growth timber remains in Oregon will
cause increased fire danger, threaten water quality due to erosion, and
further endanger those species depending upon Oregon's old-growth forests.
Please do all that you can to stop the implementation of the current,
proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision by the BLM. Thank you for considering
my thoughts on this important matter.

Richard Schramm
3024 N.E. Bryce
Portland, OR 97212




IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains
information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely
for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
intended recipient, you should contact the sender and delete the message.
Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is
strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is
intended to be a legally binding signature.
EM-215 "alice pueschner" <paljack@comcast.net> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/12/2007 23:51:17  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.  There are so many reasons to stop this ill-conceived plan.  Please  heed the voices of Oregonians and stop this at once.

Sincerely,

Alice Pueschner
1512 Barber Dr.   
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-216 Jerry Harris <oregonjerry@yahoo.com> WOPR adoption 10/13/2007 10:30:20 To Whom It May Concern:

I am opposed to adoption of the WOPR.  It depletes the remaining ancient forests in our state and compromises salmon runs and clean water.  I will increase fire risk and will have a negative impact on global warming.  Please do not proceed with the WOPR.

Thank you.

Jerry Harris
oregonjerry@gmail.com


Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
EM-217 "Leon Posey" <leon.posey@intrfor.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/13/2007 11:06:41 Leon Posey
15555 s hwy 211
molalla, OR 97038-8443


October 13, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Leon F Posey
503-329-6548

EM-218 "ann blaker" <a.blaker@comcast.net> Western Oregon Plan Revision - objection 10/13/2007 14:05:24 To: The Bureau of Land Management
 
I am writing in objection to the "Western Oregon Plan Revision". There are absolutely no redeeming qualities to this revision and it would result in the devastation of ancient forests - trees 200 years and older.  I understand that the BLM is aware that it will open up currently protected streamside forests and ancient forest reserves to clearcutting. 
 
As the daughter of someone who worked within the logging industry, I am of the opinion that as a society, we must adjust to the concept of wood/timber production as crops on private land set aside for "farming", rather than cutting any additional old growth or irreplacable ancient trees on public lands. Besides losing the ancient forest environment forever, the impact on streams and rivers is inexcusable.  We know better. There is no place for clearcutting in our current environment.  The 1000 miles of new logging roads required to care out this plan will be destructive, in and of themselves.
 
Please take my comments into consideration. Thank you. 
 

Ann Blaker

Capacity Builders

503-771-3563

a.blaker@comcast.net 
 
EM-219 "ann blaker" <a.blaker@comcast.net> Western Oregon Plan Revision - objection 10/13/2007 14:09:14 To: The Bureau of Land Management
 
I am writing in objection to the "Western Oregon Plan Revision". There are absolutely no redeeming qualities to this revision and it would result in the devastation of ancient forests - trees 200 years and older.  I understand that the BLM is aware that it will open up currently protected streamside forests and ancient forest reserves to clearcutting. 
 
As the daughter of someone who worked within the logging industry, I am of the opinion that as a society, we must adjust to the concept of wood/timber production as crops on private land set aside for "farming", rather than cutting any additional old growth or irreplacable ancient trees on public lands. Besides losing the ancient forest environment forever, the impact on streams and rivers is inexcusable.  We know better. There is no place for clearcutting in our current environment.  The 1000 miles of new logging roads required to care out this plan will be destructive, in and of themselves.
 
Please take my comments into consideration. Thank you. 
 

Ann Blaker

Capacity Builders

503-771-3563

a.blaker@comcast.net 
 
EM-220 b.cade@comcast.net 10/13/2007 14:37:38 Please do what is necessary to portect, permanently, ancient forests and other public lands 
from the Bush administration's plans.  I do not want the flora and fauna, water and other natural resources harmed/destroyed/depleted.  Thank you. 
EM-221 Jesse Elliott <jonsey3@yahoo.com> wopr 10/13/2007 21:02:28 Regarding the Western Oregon Plan Revision I want to
submit my strong opinion that we must not cut our
ancient forests down. This will not help any of us in
the long run: not the environment, not the economy
(think of future tourism when all we have is tree
farms instead of forests), and certainly not the
wildlife that depend on the forests. Please consider
the recommendation of myself and almost everyone that
I know (primarily long-term Oregonians) in vowing to
prevent the destruction of our diverse ancient forests
and thereby the defeat of the WOPR. Sincerely,

Jesse Elliott

Political history is largely an account of mass violence and of the expenditure of vast resources to cope with mythical fears and hopes. -Murray Edelman



____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
EM-222 "Linda Kluver" <lkkpdx055@comcast.net> ancient forests 10/14/2007 12:22:52 Please protect these sacred areas that are not replaceable! Treat the Earth well: it was not given to you by your parents,it was loaned to you by your children.  We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - Ancient Indian Proverb
EM-223 "Pam Myers" <pammyers@freedomnw.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/14/2007 12:27:48  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
 
Pamela Myers
P. O. Box 1427
Cannon Beach, Or 97110
EM-224 "JOHN SWEDO" <threejsswedo@msn.com> WOPR 10/14/2007 21:26:19 Dear sir or madam,
I am writing this email to object to the proposed Western Oregon Plan
Revision. I am concerned about the danger to watersheds and ancient/older
forests. I enjoy the forests for recreation benefit and do not want more
roads and clearcutting in the forests of my state. I would like these older
forest areas to be permanently protected. The surrounding communities could
then begin to benefit economically from planned recreational tourism.

Thank you,
Jana Swedo
2228 13th Ave.
Forest Grove, OR 97116

EM-225 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/15/2007 9:14:33 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Chris Potter
1230 Ferry Street Apt. 4
Eugene, OR 97401
cpotter1@uoregon.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-226 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/15/2007 9:15:41 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,

Catherine Hood-Foster
8121 sw 62nd place
Portland, OR, 97219
cathoodf@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-227 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/15/2007 9:16:20 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Kristina Stewart
6459 Vooscane Ave
Cochiti Lake, NM 87083
miss-kris@earthlink.net
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-228 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/15/2007 9:17:16 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Erik Norris
730 Cathedral Dr.
Coupeville, Wa. 98239
enorrris33@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-229 "Tom Woxell" <tbow40@msn.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 9:59:58 Please do not allow implementation of the Western Oregon Plan Revision which will clearcut thousands of acres thus destroying our forests, the watershed, recreational areas and adversely impact global warming.
 
Sincerely,
 
           Tom Woxell
            Eugene, Oregon
EM-230 "James Hunt" <jimh@sgsc.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:07:55 James Hunt
PO Box 1779
Grants Pass, OR 97528-0216


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


James Hunt
541-956-4300

EM-231 "H. DEAH HAGUE JR" <dean.hague@swansongroup.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:13:10 H. DEAH HAGUE JR
27942 SPENCER CR RD
EUGENE, OR 97405


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


H. DEAN HAGUE JR
541 686 3009

EM-232 "Samantha Cline" <samantha.cline@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:16:49 Samantha Cline
163 Cline Ranch Lane
Glendale, OR 97442-9732


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Samantha A. Cline
541-659-9347

EM-233 "Greg Johnson" <greg.johnson@swansongroup.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:17:17 Greg Johnson
141 Admiral Circle
Merlin, OR 97532-8747


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Greg Johnson
5414746055

EM-234 "Nicole Gallego" <nicole.gallego@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:17:18 Nicole Gallego
PO Box 662
Glendale, OR 97442-0662


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nicole Gallego
541-660-0430

EM-235 "Michael Rudy" <mike.rudy@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:20:08 Michael Rudy
1651 S. F st
Springfield, OR 97477-5251


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Michael L Rudy Jr
541-762-3306

EM-236 "Rachelle Denys Hallock" <denys.hallock@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:20:09 Rachelle Denys Hallock
1875 McCullough Creek Road
Glendale, OR 97442-9700


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Rachelle Denys Hallock
541-932-1254

EM-237 "Michael Brinkmeyer" <mike.brinkmeyer@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:20:20 Michael Brinkmeyer
3885 N. Clarey
Eugene, OR 97402-9785


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Michael Brinkmeyer

EM-238 "Bob Maurer" <bob.maurer@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:21:01 Bob Maurer
965 NW Cooke Ave
Grants Pass, OR 97526-6339


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Bob Maurer
541-660-8372

EM-239 "Andrew Eck" <andy.eck@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:24:47 Andrew Eck
2110 Sunburst Ct. #1
Medford, OR 97504-4897


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

As an environmentalist, a veteran wildland firefighter, and a wellness
coordinator for a local timber company I believe that my statements below
speak for many as our forests are very important to all of my fellow
Oregonians. I thank you for reading this and please feel free to contact
me with any questions.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.



In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Andrew Eck

EM-240 "Alyssha Swanson" <alysshas@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:28:37 Alyssha Swanson
4905 SE 104th Avenue
Portland, OR 97266-3509


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Alyssha Swanson

EM-241 "Richard Baldwin" <dick.baldwin@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:34:20 Richard Baldwin
837 Golden Park Dr
Grants Pass, OR 97527-4783


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.


Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Richard Baldwin
541-476-6457

EM-242 "John VanWinkle" <john.vanwinkle@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:35:02 John VanWinkle
PO Box 250
Glendale, OR 97442-0250


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Due to the loss of O&C funds, the Douglas County OSU extension service has
lost county funding for their operations. The 4-H program, master
gardeners, and other programs provided by the extension service are vital
to Douglas County and important to many community members. Restoration of
timber revenue equal to the funding through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act is critical to the funding of these and
other programs.

Timber supply from these lands would also be of great benefit to our local
wood products manufacturing facilities and the employees that work in
them. High log prices due to low supply continue to threaten the
viability of the timber industry and the family-wage jobs they provide.

Thank you for your consideration.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John VanWinkle
(541) 832-1662

EM-243 "Chris Swanson" <chris.swanson@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:35:29 Chris Swanson
1032 harris hill drive
Roseburg, OR 97470-6807


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Chris Swanson

EM-244 "Scott Pedersen" <kspeders@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:37:12 Scott Pedersen
PO Box 459
Noti, OR 97461-0459


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Scott Pedersen

EM-245 "larry rogers" <larry.rogers@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:42:28 larry rogers
35150 pashal place
wildomar, CA 92595-9515


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


larry rogers
951-316-0621

EM-246 "John Stembridge" <john.stembridge@swansongroupinc.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 10:47:23 John Stembridge
PO Box 1779
Grants Pass, OR 97528-0216


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Stembridge
541-956-4300

EM-247 Clay Spencer <yalc97207@yahoo.com> BLM's "Western Oregon Plan Revision" (WOPR) 10/15/2007 10:49:18 Dear BLM:

Although there is a little more than a year left for
George W. Bush's occupancy of the White House, there's
still plenty of time for him to create some serious
mischief. A noted piece of his chicanery is the
recently proposed "Western Oregon Plan Revision"
(WOPR) that would allow massive clear-cutting of
ancient forests on BLM land in Oregon.

Please do not permit the passage of the WOPR. We must
preserve what little remains of Oregon's (and all of
America's) ancient forests.

Sincerely,

Clay Spencer
PO Box 592
Portland, OR 97207


____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
EM-248 "PATRICK CALLAHAN" <pat.callahan@swansongroup.inc> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:02:41 PATRICK CALLAHAN
1043 quartz ave
medford, OR 97501-8149


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


PATRICK CALLAHAN
541-420-1566

EM-249 "Anthony Flagor" <tony.flagor@charter.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:15:42 Anthony Flagor
1072 Harris Hills
Roseburg, OR 97470-6807


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.


When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Land Management is truly at the essence of long term success for the
timber industry and the country as a whole. Timber harvesting is at the
root of that success and legitimate timber industry follow all guidelines
in preserving legally mandate harvesting practices. As a person of choice,
I chose to allow the legal harvesting of timber for the socioeconomic
stability of Oregon.



None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.


Timber Harvesting has been defaced through negative propaganda cam and the
quite majority is ready to speak.

Thank you for your consideration.


Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Anthony Flagor
541-430-0031

EM-250 "John Vogan" <flyingvog@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:31:41 John Vogan
1186 Westerly Ct
Grants Pass, OR 97527-5817


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Vogan

EM-251 "Gene Landolt" <gk_landolt@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:32:41 Gene Landolt
P.O.B. 441
winston, OR 97496-0441


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Mr. Shepard The above boiler plate comments express my concerns more
eloquently than I can imagine, please take them seriously.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Gene H. Landolt
541-679-4482

EM-252 "Elmer Miller" <elmer.miller@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:34:34 Elmer Miller
2183 N.E. Vine Street
Roseburg, OR 97470-5623


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Elmer B. Miller
(541)440-2122

EM-253 "Heath Grafton" <heath.grafton@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:41:16 Heath Grafton
709 Pierce Rd
Medford, OR 97504-6340


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Heath Grafton

EM-254 "Riley Fogarty" <riley.fogarty@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:49:52 Riley Fogarty
PO Box 827
Glendale, OR 97442-0827


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Hi,
My name is Riley Fogarty. I have a B.S. in Forest Engineering from Oregon
State University. I graduated 4 years ago and am currently the Southern
Region Cruiser for Swanson Group MFG. I am living in Glendale OR and
spend part of my working year looking at BLM Timber Sales. With the large
amount of timbered acres managed by the BLM it is baffling to me why the
entire forest is not put on a sustained rotation in order to maximize
timber growth and yield. This could easily be done with a combination of
thinning and clear cuts. If the entire forest managed by the BLM was
actually managed for timber, the diversity in forest age characteristics
would provide more than adequetly for all types of species. By using 100%
of BLM timbered lands for timber harvest it would alow fewer entries over
longer rotation times. This would also alow a great increase in yearly
allowable harvest and more timber sales, which keeps me working and paying
taxes.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Riley Fogarty
541-890-1479

EM-255 "Michael Curran" <mcurran@superiorlumber.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 11:52:09 Michael Curran
1200 SE Casey Place
Grants Pass, OR 97526-4150


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Mr. Shepard, I felt the need to address the BLM's proposals as they are
critical to my employement and my rural communitie's future.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

I spend a great deal of time in the woods of Southern Oregon and have been
involved in all aspects of the Industry. We should not let the voice of a
few radical enviros and liberal congressmen steer us away from the
original plan.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Michael Curran
541-479-4680

EM-256 Ralph Parsons <rljeparsons@yahoo.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/15/2007 12:33:19 I am very much against the Western Oregon Plan Revision for timber management that the Bureau of Land Management is moving forward.  Our ancient forests are healthy forests, alive with indigenous plants and animals, a wonderful environment and clean water.  You can be sure that if pressure from the Bush Administration is part of the problem, those people will be gone with the next election.
 
What makes us so arrogant that we would ruin the chance of animals, plants and our progeny to live?  Issues important to me are:
 
1.  Controlling clear cutting; stopping cutting of the few remaining ancient forests at once!
2.  Protection of rivers, streams, watersheds, providing clean water.
3.  Handing a legacy of nature to our progeny and that of plants and other animals.
4.  Controlling fire damage and disease that are less prevalent in ancient forests.
5.  Preventing the incredable damage that logging roads encourage in forest habitat.
6.  Finally, the future demands that we control global warming.  Clearcutting and road building are major CO2 releasers.
 
Please drop plans to increase logging immediately.
 
Respectfully yours,
 
Ralph L. Parsons
12015 SW Faircrest St.
Portland, Oregon 97225
 
 
 
concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
 
Sincerely,
 Ralph Parsons
 12015 SW Faircrest St.
 Portland OR 97225
EM-257 "Vickie Linderman" <vickiel@douglasfast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 13:29:26 Vickie Linderman
1550 Westview
Roseburg, OR 97470-8635


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Vickie Linderman
541-672-8501

EM-258 "Greg Standley" <gregstandley@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 13:43:13 Greg Standley
4920 upper camas rd.
camas valley, OR 97416


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Greg Standley
541-430-0479

EM-259 "Pat Dodge" <pat.dodge@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 13:47:23 Pat Dodge
21411 Vaughn Rd.
Veneta, OR 97487-9419


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

I have lived in the northwest my entire life. Montana, Washington and now
Oregon. I believe in Multi-Purpose forest planning. I expect our state and
federal land managers to rely on science rather than yeilding to pressure
of emotional and uninformed groups whether they are "environmental
zealots" or "timber barons". Do the job you have been trained to do and
stand behind those decisions, that is what we have hired you to do.

with respect,
Pat Dodge

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely, Pat Dodge


Pat Dodge
541-935-0852

EM-260 "Jeremy Marshall" <jmarshall2@comcast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 14:07:18 Jeremy Marshall
3417 SE Midvale Dr.
Corvallis, OR 97333-3195


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jeremy D. Marshall
541-829-3593

EM-261 "Eric Adams" <ric.adams@terraintamers.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 14:14:17 Eric Adams
34854 Perkins Creek Road
Cottage Grove, OR 97424-9450


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Eric P. Adams
5419429869

EM-262 "Frank Peterson" <frankpetersonhouse@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 15:06:18 Frank Peterson
201 Eagle Ridge Dr
GRANTS PASS, OR 97526-9661


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Frank Peterson
1-541-956-1369

EM-263 "ANDY RICHARDSON" <andy.richardson@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 15:13:44 ANDY RICHARDSON
977 GARDEN SPRINGS CIRCLE
MEDFORD, OR 97504-6460


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


ANDY RICHARDSON
973-3266

EM-264 "George Hewitt" <george.hewitt@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 15:15:11 George Hewitt
3271 larue drive
medford, OR 97504-5702


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


George Hewitt
541-734-5753

EM-265 "Nancy Daniels" <nancy.daniels@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 15:26:31 Nancy Daniels
1500 N. W. "B" st
Grants Pass, OR 97526-1124


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

My family, father, father-in-law, husband and myself have been employed in
the lumber industry for many years. I am now still employed as a
Salesperson for Swanson Group Sales. This industry is very important to
the economy of our City, County & State.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nancy Daniels
541-479-5952

EM-266 "Chuck Burley" <chuck@burleyandassociates.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/15/2007 19:33:13 Chuck Burley
131 NW Hawthorne Ave., Suite 108
Bend, OR 97701-2957


October 15, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Chuck Burley

EM-267 "Elisabeth Stanek" <stanratt@easystreet.net> Western OregonPlan Revison 10/15/2007 21:50:05 Dear Senators, Representative, and Governor,
The Bush Administration "Western Oregon Plan Revison" is a disaster.
It would drastically increase cutting of old growth forest and
eliminate protections for rivers, streams and clean water. All other
uses would be subservient to the economics of timber production,
meaning the value of protection of watersheds and stream flows,
fishing and recreation opportunities and associated economic acitivity
would be ignored entirely. This is in clear contradiction to the
current understanding of the impact of global warming and it's causes
and consequences, as well as creating negative outcomes for the state
of Oregon in terms of fire risk and overall ecological well-being. I
urge you to speak out for permanent protection of ancient forests and
other public lands. Stop the threat to ancient forests, clean water
and wild salmon. Please use Congress' "power of the purse" to prevent
the administration from sepnding money to log ancient forests, and
stop the BLM from selling off the forest, and stand up to the Bush
administration to prevent them from logging Oregon's ancient forests,
threatening clean water and wild salmon.
Elizabeth Stanek
105 SW Brugger St
Portland, Oregon 97219
EM-268 DNewlyn@aol.com Forest 10/15/2007 22:58:50 October 15, 2007


Please protect the last remaining old forest, affected watersheds, and other public lands.

Timber production is not paramount, global warming, sustainable harvesting, and state economics are.

Rein in Bush and his administration; reject “ Western Oregon Plan Revision”

Regards,

David A. Newlyn
2014 NE 37th Ave
Portland, Oregon
dnewlyn@aol.com



**************************************
See what's new at http://www.aol.com
EM-269 sara fischer <holyfirebug734@yahoo.com> Please stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/16/2007 1:29:53  
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,
Sara Fischer
Native Southern-Oregonian, and student of Willamette University



Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
EM-270 "James Dean" <jim.dean@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 6:00:29 James Dean
1308 George Tweed Blvd
Grants Pass, OR 97527-6400


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


James Dean

EM-271 "Loren Olsen" <loren.olsen@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 7:24:25 Loren Olsen
8354 Coos Bay Wagon Road
Roseburg, OR 97470-9711


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

We continue to let bad policy and science with scare tactics lead us into
financial crisis. Our local governments are struggling because we have
allowed the enviro-wacos too much clout concerning our forests.

When did it become "good science" to raise endangered species in captivity
and then release them into disputed areas just to shut those areas down to
management? I have seen the USFS grow rooms for the feed (mice)for
"endangered" owls in Oakridge and have had contact with some of the hand
raised birds in the wild.

Our communities are in need of long term continued support and we have the
resources available to give that support if we allow our lands to be
properly managed.

It is time to quit with the lies and manipulations and move forward with
good management according to good science and allow our lands to be opened
back up. Our communities and most importantly our schools need the
additional funding that forest management provides.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Loren Olsen
541-733-6245

EM-272 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: WOPR 10/16/2007 8:02:55 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:02 AM -----

"robert thompson" <mckarob@earthlink.net>

10/12/2007 01:35 PM

Please respond to
mckarob@earthlink.net



To
alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
WOPR








Dear BLM,

It has come to my attention that under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions, protections of the Northwest Forest Plan would be severly compromised.  To clearcut our best old-growth forests and build 1,000 miles of new logging roads is deplorable.  It appears BLM is stepping backward to a bygone era when timber production took precedence above all else, including water quality, recreation and sustainable local economies.  The WOPR ignores the role that our forests play in regulating the climate.  Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire, and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests.  Our forests should not be used for an economic fix!  I'm also concerned that the "quiet-type" recreation will take a back seat to OHV use when the preferred alternative disignates new Emphasis Areas.  We have seen first hand the damage that can be caused by irresponsibl! e riders!  I know you have all been schooled in Science and know the benefits of proper management.  Stand up to the administration and express what you KNOW is the right way to manage our unique environment.  Thanks for listening,   Karen Mitchell (Applegate Valley)
 
 
 
 
 
EM-273 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/16/2007 8:06:22 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:06 AM -----

Liz Vesecky <eVesecky@charter.net>

10/14/2007 12:41 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Liz Vesecky
791 Faith Avenue
Ashland, OR 97520

EM-274 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/16/2007 8:14:40 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:03 AM -----

Michael Brown <miguelcafe@mac.com>

10/12/2007 02:40 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed
in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal
forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the
changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the
landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution,
degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of
new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway
Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened
species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now
overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local
mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and
keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing
old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts
water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special
places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on
public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes
to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth
protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM
is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex
ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of
BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds
and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Michael D Brown
2850 Warren St
Eugene, OR 97405

EM-275 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/16/2007 8:14:55 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:12 AM -----

Kenneth and Leanne Palmer <freedonia7@earthlink.net>

10/15/2007 02:26 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I, Kenneth Palmer, heartily support all groups that defend old growth  
forests in the US.

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Palmer
(503) 246-4629
freedonia7@earthlink.net

EM-276 Jim Bender <oregonian99@yahoo.com> WOPR 10/16/2007 11:09:46 Dear Friends,
 
I am opposed to the Western Oregon Plan Revision and the increased clearcutting of old growth forests and decreased protections for salmon-bearing creeks and streams it would allow.
 
Please enter this email into the public comment on WOPR.
 
Thank you!
 
James Bender
10192 Kestrel Road
Klamath Falls, OR 97601-8652



Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more.
EM-277 Josh Cott <joshcott@yahoo.com> Please stop WOPR 10/16/2007 13:29:07 Hello,

I live in the Rogue Valley in southern Oregon, and I
am opposed to the Western Oregon Plan Revision.
Oregon needs to move forward towards a new economy,
not perpetuate one which is supported by unsustainable
harvesting of old growth trees. If we move forward
with this plan, we will end up right back where we are
now in another 20 years, only then we'll have
permanently changed our environment for the worse--not
a very forward thinking plan! We deserve better from
the BLM. Please reconsider or stop this plan.

Sincerely,
Josh Cott



____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
EM-278 "Kenneth Kent" <ken.kent@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 14:33:55 Kenneth Kent
P.O. Box 151
Glendale, OR 97442-0151


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Kenneth Kent
5418321191

EM-279 "Mike Stewart" <mike.stewart@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 14:36:55 Mike Stewart
POBox 702
Roseburg, OR 97470-0144


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Mike Stewart

EM-280 "Mike Stewart" <mike.stewart@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 14:41:33 Mike Stewart
POBox 702
Roseburg, OR 97470-0144


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Mike Stewart

EM-281 joe car <newjoestonefree@yahoo.com> WOPR comment 10/16/2007 14:43:51 Hello,
 
As an Oregon resident who loves natural beauty and a healthy environment I must express my strong disapproval of the attempt by the Bush Administration to log our last old growth forests and destroy our clean water in the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision.
 
We simply cannot endure the devastating impact this logging above all other concerns mentality will have on our great state. The health of our ecosystem hangs in the balance. Ancient forests are not replaceable.
 
I thank you for your consideration and hope we can reject this outrageous plan and find a sensible alternative.
 
Sincerely,
Joseph Cartino
5822 SE Reed way St.
Portland, OR 97206
503-788-7387
 



Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV.
EM-282 "John Poore"
<john.poore@swansongroup.biz>
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 14:59:18 John Poore
P.O. Box 158
Glendale, OR 97442-0158


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.



When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

The true stewards of the timberland are those individuals who are impacted
either positively or negatively by the actions of so called environmental
groups, courts and government agencies. The people who use the forests to
make their livleyhood need to have a greater voice in the decisions .

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Poore

EM-283 chris zilka <chriszilka4@yahoo.com> wopr comment 10/16/2007 15:15:31 Dear BLM,
 
    I'm glad to see your asking for comments on the WOPR. Your proposed changes are large and will have long lasting impact on our forests. I think you know this and the BLM can do very good job. But making these radical changes is only leading to a short sighted impact for the future. The money that is generated will only lead to a boom and bust short time gain. We will lose for all time our ancient forests and protections that allow the many other economic activities to go on, not only for people but for the plants and animals that require old growth forests to exist.
 
    In this time of global warming we can't point the finger at the people cutting the forest in the S. American rain forest when we are proposing to do the same thing. We should set an example and do everything in our power not to change the NW Forest Plan. But see that the protections provided by the NW Forest Plan are maintained.
 
    I reolize there is alot of pressure to make up budget short falls with timber sales. But the changes you propose is not the kind of Oregon that most people want. We have a chance to maintain our forests and there by insuring a jewel of a place that people will pay to see for the future. All Europe has to do is maintain its buildings and people will flock there for ever. We have the same chance with our forests.
 
    I know the checker board lay out of the BLM land is difficult to manage. It would simplifie its management to consolidate. But these lands are no longer land that no body wants. Alot of the lands have been left allown, but that is the beauty of the checker board. It keeps that land protected and makes it a valuble asset.
 
Thanks for your consideration of my views
Chris Zilka   
 
   



Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
EM-284 chris zilka <chriszilka4@yahoo.com> wopr comment 10/16/2007 15:34:41 Dear BLM,
 
    I'm glad to see your asking for comments on the WOPR. Your proposed changes are large and will have long lasting impact on our forests. I think you know this and the BLM can do very good job. But making these radical changes is only leading to a short sighted impact for the future. The money that is generated will only lead to a boom and bust short time gain. We will lose for all time our ancient forests and protections that allow the many other economic activities to go on, not only for people but for the plants and animals that require old growth forests to exist.
 
    In this time of global warming we can't point the finger at the people cutting the forest in the S. American rain forest when we are proposing to do the same thing. We should set an example and do everything in our power not to change the NW Forest Plan. But see that the protections provided by the NW Forest Plan are maintained.
 
    I reolize there is alot of pressure to make up budget short falls with timber sales. But the changes you propose is not the kind of Oregon that most people want. We have a chance to maintain our forests and there by insuring a jewel of a place that people will pay to see for the future. All Europe has to do is maintain its buildings and people will flock there for ever. We have the same chance with our forests.
 
    I know the checker board lay out of the BLM land is difficult to manage. It would simplifie its management to consolidate. But these lands are no longer land that no body wants. Alot of the lands have been left allown, but that is the beauty of the checker board. It keeps that land protected and makes it a valuble asset.
 
Thanks for your consideration of my views
Chris Zilka   
230 Myoak Dr.
Eugene, OR 97404
   



Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
EM-285 "Donald King" <don.king@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 15:34:55 Donald King
28809 Clear Lake Rd.
Eugene, OR 97402-9502


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Donald King
5416886383

EM-286 "John Davisson" <johnd@mill-supply.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 16:23:09 John Davisson
376 Industrial Drive
Roseburg, OR 97470-7157


October 16, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John L Davison

EM-287 "L Read" <lr_sayhey@hotmail.com> Comment on proposed WOPR plan 10/16/2007 17:40:48 Bureau Of Land Management
October 16, 2007





Re: Western Oregon Plan Revision



To BLM,

Abandon the Western Oregon Plan Revision. Any ancient forest logging now
being done is a serious problem. To increase current logging of 200 year
old trees on 2.6 million acres, a seven-fold increase, is outrageous. We don't
need 100's of new logging roads to spread more noxious weeds, more herbicide
spraying and soil erosion to degrade more salmon habitat, and more loss of
ancient forests. We already have a problem of second and third growth denser
forest causing more flammable conditions. The forests should be managed
correctly on the lands we already have in "managed timber production". Don't
add insult to injury by creating more of the same.

The federal national forests and BLM lands already have more than enough
managed timber acreage where timber is being harvested. For god sake, 2000
more square miles to clear-cut; are you out of your mind? The small
percentage of ancient forest left should stay standing for future
generations, wildlife, and recreation.

This new draft plan that the President and the BLM is proposing is shock
and aw. And the results aren't profitable or desirable.

Abandon plans for the WOPR and preserve whats left of our last ancient
stands!



Larry Read

West Linn, Oregon
EM-288 Bendcoles@aol.com Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/16/2007 21:04:53 The BLM's WOPR plan to allow accelerated logging of old growth trees,  ancient forest reserves, and riparian areas in western Oregon must be halted. Watershed protection, fishing and recreational uses of BLM lands must not take a back seat to unsustainable logging and road building (which will also increase the risk of fire). As a federal taxpayer, I should not subsidize this giveaway to the timber lobby. By protecting our old growth forests and streams, Oregon will generate more economic benefits and tax revenue from tourism than the short term benefits we get from our state's reliance on federal timber revenue.
 
 
                                                                        Jeffrey D. Cole
 
                                                                        1109 NE Locksley Dr.
                                                                        Bend, Or. 97701
                                                                        (541) 318-7075
 
 
 
                                





See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
EM-289 "Alan Humphrey" <alan.humphrey@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 7:09:02 Alan Humphrey
83465 Williamson Lane
Dexter, OR 97431-9715


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.




None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.
My family and I have been part of
Lane County for over 160 years we understand the importants of a harvest
plan for the BLM and are community and the future of are family. Thank
you for reading this.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Alan Humphrey
953-0150

EM-290 "Dale Claassen" <dale.claassen@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 7:33:06 Dale Claassen
PO Box 459
Noti, OR 97461-0459


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and
sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve
strategies. Recent effects of the Barred Owl on Spotted Owl behaviour are
evidence that, since the ecosystems are constantly changing, so will the
science behind the best management decisions to protect sensitive species.
Allow local resource managers some level of say in how the resources in
their area are managed.

The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

All BLM land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic
wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Oregon
landowners work hand-in-hand with the Oregon Department of Forestry to
minimize resource loss from fire, including to ODF-protected BLM lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dale Claassen
541-935-4811

EM-291 Casey Venzon <kcven@sbcglobal.net> Protect BLM Forests 10/17/2007 7:33:47 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Casey Venzon
1140 Maplewood Lane
Algonquin, IL 60102
EM-292 "Stan Martindale" <foresterstan@earthlink.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 9:15:43 Stan Martindale
821 Winston Section Road
Winston, OR 97496-5506


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of these three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the
requirements of the O&C Act, because they do not manage the land for the
specific use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the
suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is not in
accordance with the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species, not adopting massive reserves, just in
case.The alternative selected by the BLM should not jeopardize continued
existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives the funding neccessary to implement the
plan.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties. It is congresses responsibility to make this
happen. Some think it is the counties responsibility to find alternative
means to replace this missing revenue. It is not, it belongs to congress
which allowed the problem to reach its current catastrophic state. They
MUST step up and honor their committment to Counties. Counties should be
looking at means of forcing congress and the BLM into doing what is right.
That means restoring funds and or management of these lands to the
counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating,sightseeing,and frog kissing, and all other
forms of outdoor use by the public.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Stan Martindale

EM-293 "Albert Diggle" <albertddiggle@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 10:19:10 Albert Diggle
24917 Strike Street
Veneta, OR 97487-9794


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

I perticipated in several of the past set asides and in each case we set
aside a percentage of land , the next time it is a percentage of that
percentage. It eventually ends in 5o % of 10 % left. In every case it has
affected my family directly as I work in sawmills as part of my family
does. We have moved twice directly the cause of widerness and preservation
that went way to far . Some thought has to be given to family, schools,
just people in general.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Albert Diggle
541-935-2130

EM-294 "Tratina Jones"
<tina.jones@swansongroup.biz>
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 10:21:06 Tratina Jones
PO Box 394
Noti, OR 97461-0394


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Tratina Jones
541-935-9540

EM-295 "jack gordon" <jack@mill-supply.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/17/2007 12:02:53 jack gordon
2110 cosmoledo st.
eugene, OR 97402-1197


October 17, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.



In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


jack gordon

EM-296 Ginny Griffin <ginnyg@townofbreckenridge.com> Protect BLM Forests 10/17/2007 14:41:08 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Ginny Griffin
PO Box 3004
Breckenridge, CO 80424
EM-297 Elizabeth Graser-Lindsey <egraserlindsey@bctonline.com> Ancient Forests -- public comment 10/17/2007 14:50:58 Dear Madames/Sirs at BLM:
I oppose the draft Western Oregon Plan Revision in that it does not
protect the older trees. Not only do I want these trees saved so my
children will live in a world where they may see an old forest, but also
these older ecosystems contain irreplaceable elements that we loose with
the trees. We may not know now how human kind might be materially
benefited by these trees and the ecosystem and its components that they
contain, but we have seen with many other systems and endangered species
that they are valuable to use for cancer-fighting potential or genetics
useful in new environmental conditions. It is not wise to waste our
heritage nor not appreciate its unique specialness.
Elizabeth
EM-298 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Please protect Oregon's Forests and Rivers 10/17/2007 16:15:53 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:15 PM -----

"Amber Gayle" <ambergayle@gmail.com>

10/17/2007 03:44 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Please protect Oregon's Forests and Rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

We are very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of Oregon's forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. We fear that  the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the  Northwest Forest Plan and lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new OHV Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect our nation's remaining ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands, they are providing wood to local mills and improving conditions for fish and wildlife. We can work and also keep saws out of precious old-growth forests.

The WOPR proposes to inflame controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for short-term profits. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We must protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures!

Public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger. The BLM cannot ethically and democratically clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests! Please focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Amber Gayle, Erich, Grace and Isaiah Mead Thalmayer
EM-299 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/17/2007 16:17:01 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:16 PM -----

Alison Clement <aclement@peak.org>

10/17/2007 07:17 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I'm writing to object to the Bush Administration's Western Oregon  
Plan Revisions, and to urge you to please protect what is left of our  
remaining old growth forests.

The Bush Administration is proposing to clear-cut 140,000 acres of  
Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging  
roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle  
Emphasis Areas, and we're supposed to think it's a good idea? No! We  
value our roadless areas. We care about our water, about threatened  
species and our native forests.

Below is a picture of one of the trees that will be cut, if the WOPR  
goes forward.

Yours truly,
Alison Clement
[IMAGE] - C.jpg
EM-300 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/17/2007 16:17:41 ---- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:17 PM -----

Rick Sparks <rick@sparksandsparks.com>

10/16/2007 08:41 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am apalled at the direction in which the Bush Administration is  
headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, lead to water  
pollution, degraded habitat, and serious diminishment of our natural  
legacy to future generations of Oregonians in particular and  
Americans in general.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 miles  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

I want my federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth  
forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains  
of our nation's ancient forests. Many Oregon forest managers are  
already moving in this new and very viable direction. By focusing on  
previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now  
overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local  
mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and  
keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes increasing old-growth clear-cutting  
for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk  
and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should  
protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land,  
not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

I thought it was the purpose of the BLM to protect all of the values  
inherent in our national forest lands. The WOPR will enhance timber  
production and mechanized off-road recreation, but will all but  
eliminate the many other economic, recreational and heritage values  
remaining in the 15% still standing of our once-mighty forests.

Please don't do this. Please protect remaining old-growth forests,  
focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas,  
and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects  
that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without  
multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Rick Sparks
17360 Upper Cow Creek Rd.
Azalea, OR 97410
EM-301 Mike S Goodman <opeiulocal39uselesscompanyunion@yahoo.com> Protect BLM Forests 10/17/2007 16:50:14 Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office
ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1)
PO Box 2965
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear BLM,

Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands.

For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests.

I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns.

Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities.

Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected.

Sincerely,

Mike S Goodman
IWW
540 W Olin Av
#211
Madison, WI 53715

(608) 257-1927
EM-302 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/17/2007 17:02:30 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Erik Norris
730 Cathedral Dr.
Coupeville, Wa. 98239
enorrris33@yahoo.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-303 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/17/2007 17:03:24 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Angela Langevin
110654 Hazelton Rd.
Cottage Grove, OR 97424
alangevi@sewanee.edu
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-304 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/17/2007 17:04:06 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


Evelyn McConnaughey
1653 Fairmount Blvd.
Eugene, OR 97403
evelynm@efn.org
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-305 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/17/2007 17:04:51 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of
old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands.
These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean
drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor
enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations.

With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we
protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree
plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products.

Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging.

Sincerely,


jason brown
Hazelton Rd.
Cottage Grove OR 97424
jasonbrown644@hotmail.com
--
Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director
Cascadia Wildlands Project
P.O. Box 10455
Eugene, OR 97440
541.434.1463 (voice)
541.434.6494 (fax)

The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests,
waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org
to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the
conservation movement. Become a member today at
http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-306 "NORMAN RICHARDS" <normpaulette@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 7:14:15 NORMAN RICHARDS
1895 NW CALKINS
ROSEBURG, OR 97470-6126


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


NORMAN RICHARDS

EM-307 "Lynn Anderson" <p00pie727@gmail.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision comment 10/18/2007 9:51:53 Sirs-
As a citizen of Oregon, I am deeply concerned about the threatened approval of cutting of thousands of acres of ancient forests.  We have enough managed forest to supply lumber, we MUST save the old growth forests for our children and grandchildren.  The most wonderful thing about Oregon is its natural beauty, it brings in tourism, and that is why many people want to live here.  We must preserve it.  It is NOT SMART to gain a little extra money now, for the destruction of something that cannot be replaced.

Lynn Anderson
22268 Vaughn Rd.
Veneta, OR  97487
EM-308 "Max Merlich" <maxm@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:37:07 Max Merlich
40573 SE Kubitz Road
Sandy, OR 97055-8518


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Max Merlich

EM-309 "Heather Case" <daremefairy@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:42:42 Heather Case
PO Box 4063
Port Angeles, WA 98363-0997


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Heather Case

EM-310 "Lisa Green" <lisag@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:43:10 Lisa Green
PO Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Lisa Green
503-678-1222

EM-311 "Charles Bailey" <chuckb@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:45:17 Charles Bailey
311 Cascade Meadow Dr.
Sublimity, OR 97385-9807


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Charles O. Bailey
5037695641

EM-312 "Daniel Kenney" <dkenney@holheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:45:34 Daniel Kenney
P.O. Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Daniel T Kenney
503-678-1222

EM-313 "Mike Deese" <mikedeese@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:47:03 Mike Deese
73 romant rd
Port Angeles, WA 98362-9472


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Mike Deese

EM-314 "Lyle Talle" <lylet@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:48:10 Lyle Talle
PO box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Lyle Talle
503-678-1222

EM-315 "Jessie Simpson" <jdsimpson4@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:48:46 Jessie Simpson
119 south penn st apt. 16
Port Angeles, WA 98362-4634


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jessie Simpson

EM-316 "Steve Bandy" <steve_bandy@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:49:03 Steve Bandy
28484 SW Meadows Loop
Wilsonville, OR 97070-7706


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Steve Bandy
503 682-4503

EM-317 "Nathan Horn" <natehorn@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:51:23 Nathan Horn
1306 east 4th st
Port Angeles, WA 98362-4706


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nathan Horn

EM-318 "Cheryl Harnack" <cherylh@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:56:09 Cheryl Harnack
9301 SW Sagert ST #45
Tualatin, OR 97062-7022


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Cheryl Harnack
503-692-0434

EM-319 "Kurtiss Dent" <kurtissd@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:56:24 Kurtiss Dent
110 mains rd.
Sequim, WA 98382-9507


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Kurtiss Dent

EM-320 "Frank Nigro" <chinookpilot1@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:56:49 Frank Nigro
7912 N. Alberta Ct.
Spokane, WA 99208-9266


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Frank J. Nigro

EM-321 "George Warren" <georgew@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:57:44 George Warren
Box 1147
Warrenton, OR 97146-1147


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


G

EM-322 "Stan Wilson" <stanw@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:58:51 Stan Wilson
PO BOX 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Dear Mr. Shepard,


Thank you for considering my opinions on this important issue. None of
the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the
O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber
production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for
the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM should develop and analyzes alternatives that maximizes the amount
of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and
meets its no jeopardy obligation. We are finding more and more
situations where we have left our resources unmanaged and left nature to
destroy the resource.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Again, thank you for your consideration.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Stan Wilson
503-685-9482

EM-323 "Stacey Beck" <beckster@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 10:59:40 Stacey Beck
1024 west 10th st.
Port Angeles, WA 98363-5732


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Stacey Beck

EM-324 "John Noonan" <ejn@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:00:03 John Noonan
825 west 9th st.
Port Angeles, WA 98363-5723


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Earl Noonan

EM-325 "John Bennett" <bennettj5@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:04:12 John Bennett
1710 south E st.
Port Angeles, WA 98363-7026


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Bennett

EM-326 "Heather Wheeler" <heatherw@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:06:50 Heather Wheeler
14452 Arndt Rd NE
Aurora, OR 97002-9525


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.


The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.


Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Heather Wheeler
503-678-1222

EM-327 "Anthony Alcantar" <aalcantar@wavecable.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:08:43 Anthony Alcantar
119 south penn st apt. 3
Port Angeles, WA 98362-4604


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Anthony Alcantar

EM-328 "Yvonne Myrand" <yvonnem@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:11:43 Yvonne Myrand
1077 northshire ct ne
keizer, OR 97303-1838


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Yvonne Myrand

EM-329 "Josh Blunk" <rbs4207@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:11:58 Josh Blunk
2355 east 6th ave.
Port Angeles, WA 98362-9015


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Josh Blunk

EM-330 "Jeff Lund" <lundj@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:13:01 Jeff Lund
412 south lincoln PO box 39
Port Angeles, WA 98362-0007


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jeff Lund

EM-331 "Don & Jan Venable" <venable@canby.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:17:38 Don & Jan Venable
452 SW 7th Avenue
Canby, OR 97013-4033


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Don & Jan Venable
503-266-3296

EM-332 "Nikki Ticen" <nikkit@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:19:47 Nikki Ticen
P.O. Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Nikki Ticen

EM-333 "Staci Damgaard" <stacid@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:21:54 Staci Damgaard
po box 478
aurora, OR 97002-0478


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Staci Damgaard
5036781222

EM-334 "Kenneth Spencer" <kens@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:23:56 Kenneth Spencer
P.O. Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Kenneth Spencer
(503) 678-1222

EM-335 "Dennis Spath" <cascaceview@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:26:30 Dennis Spath
22330 SW Chapman Rd.
Sherwood, OR 97140-8689


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Please do your best to implement these actions.
Thanks
Dennis Spath

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dennis Spath
503 487 7736

EM-336 "John Dalton" <john.dalton@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:51:00 John Dalton
POB 631
Roseburg, OR 97470-0133


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Dalton
541-6430260

EM-337 "Dan Razdik" <danr@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:51:58 Dan Razdik
Box 3500
portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dan Razdik
503-678-1222

EM-338 "Dave Wilmes" <davew@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 11:56:01 Dave Wilmes
14577 SE Anderson Rd.
Damascus, OR 97089-8710


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dave Wilmes
5038167223

EM-339 "Brian Wagner" <brianw@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:05:21 Brian Wagner
166 E. Hemlock Dr.
Gervais, OR 97026-9790


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Brian Wagner

EM-340 "Joe Daracunas" <joe1space@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:12:26 Joe Daracunas
4006 fairmount rd.
Port Angeles, WA 98363-8326


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Joe Daracunas

EM-341 "David Norris" <daven@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:14:50 David Norris
PO Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


David Norris
503-678-1222

EM-342 "Peter Lance" <petelance@mac.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:20:31 Peter Lance
15128 SW Barcelona Way
Beaverton, OR 97007-6852


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Peter M. Lance
503-626-7179

EM-343 "Don Breese" <donbr@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:31:54 Don Breese
14452 arndt rd ne
aurora, OR 97002-9525


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Don Breese
678-1222

EM-344 "Midge Shaughnessy" <shaughnc@amp.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 12:39:03 Midge Shaughnessy
31 Scott Street
Woburn, MA 01801-2929


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Midge Shaughnessy

EM-345 "Michael Dauenhauer" <miked@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 13:11:05 Michael Dauenhauer
949 Mt View Ln
Molalla, OR 97038-7373


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Antything less is preposterous.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Michael Dauenhauer
503-708-3989

EM-346 "Donna Seberson" <dseberson@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 13:21:25 Donna Seberson
1000 Ginko Ct
Silverton, OR 97381-1487


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Donna Seberson
503-481-0452

EM-347 "Max Merlich" <maxm@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 14:10:43 Max Merlich
40573 SE Kubitz Road
Sandy, OR 97055-8518


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Max Merlich

EM-348 "Marci Abel" <marcia@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 14:52:48 Marci Abel
10808 NE 192nd Ave
Brush Prairie, WA 98606-9708


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Marci Abel

EM-349 "DAN BISHOP" <bishop@ortelco.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 14:56:28 DAN BISHOP
PO BOX 340
prairie city, OR 97869-0340


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.


Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.



Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


DAN BISHOP
541.575.4510

EM-350 "FRED HEAVENS" <fheavens@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 15:44:12 FRED HEAVENS
21122 S. Deer Creek Ln.
Colton, OR 97017-9798


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.


In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


FRED HEAVENS
503-824-2453

EM-351 "Rowdy Haskins" <rowdyh@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 19:42:51 Rowdy Haskins
115 Midvale ave
Caldwell, ID 83605-6185


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Rowdy Haskins

EM-352 "rehbeccah Burkhart" <indigooregon@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 20:14:37 rehbeccah Burkhart
p.o. box 304
lowell, OR 97452-0304


October 18, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


rehbeccah Burkhart
541-937-8214

EM-353 "Jeff Reavis" <jeffr@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/18/2007 23:26:09 Jeff Reavis
P.O. Box 1031
Mariposa, CA 95338-1031


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jeff Reavis
503-970-7263

EM-354 "MATTHEW WINKELMAN" <trishabartley@wavecable.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 2:29:15 MATTHEW WINKELMAN
301 North Ryser
Sequim, WA 98382-9102


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


MATTHEW WINKELMAN
(360)477-3969

EM-355 "Jason Wickersham" <wickersham@wavecable.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 2:41:57 Jason Wickersham
182 MacDonald Drive
Sequim, WA 98382-8396


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Jason Wickersham
(360) 681-3548

EM-356 "Terry King" <chevy54truck@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 6:13:35 Terry King
7908 N.E. 29 th Street
Vancouver, WA 98662-7258


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Terry King
360-882-2796

EM-357 "Phil Jenkins" <philj@drjlumber.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 7:18:06 Phil Jenkins
P.O. Box 730
John Day, OR 97845-0730


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.


Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Phil Jenkins
5415754514

EM-358 "Robert Meadows" <bobm@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 7:54:40 Robert Meadows
box 153
Brinnon, WA 98320-0153


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Robert Meadows
503-887-1921

EM-359 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/19/2007 7:57:05 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/19/2007 07:56 AM -----

Dawn Winalski <winalski@uoregon.edu>

10/18/2007 04:39 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is  
headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's  
federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am  
concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the  
protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to  
water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and  
controversy.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut  
140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile  
of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off  
Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas,  
threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation.

Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second  
growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what  
remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest  
managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By  
focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are  
now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to  
local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife  
and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by  
increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix.  
The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of  
Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature  
and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural  
treasures as the WOPR proposes to do.

It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-
growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger,  
the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and  
turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms.

Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management  
of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job  
opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit  
watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes.

Sincerely,

Dawn Winalski
1284 W. 13th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97402
EM-360 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM forests and rivers 10/19/2007 8:08:04 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/19/2007 08:07 AM -----

D Ellen Babin <d_ellen@mac.com>

10/18/2007 10:01 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM forests and rivers








Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon
Portland, OR 97208

CC: Oregon Congressional delegation

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,
I have been a resident of Curry County Oregon for 27 years.  I whole  
heartedly support the draft plan.  After bankrupting the rural  
counties in Oregon by co-opting the land and then refusing to pay  
taxes to which they would otherwise be enttiled, the federal  
government is using its heavy hand in a way that is very harmful to  
the residents of our county and others like ours.  The land has value  
and should be be taxed accordilng to its best use.  If the county  
can't receive these type of taxes the fed govt. should compensate the  
county for such a taking.

I support the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the  
management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests  
under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am not concerned that the  
changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the  
landmark Northwest Forest Plan.  The Northwest Forest Plan has proven  
to be a supreme mistake.  None of its mitigating measures have come  
even close to accomplishing their purposes.  It has proven to be a  
huge waste of time and money.

The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes a reasonable  
alternative to use a valuable resource.  The BLM is a steward of the  
land and should consider economic impacts and alternatives in their  
planning.  The proposed plan does just that.



No clear consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth  
thinning hasr been shown. Language being used by the Oregon Forest  
Heritage to defeat the plan is merely designed to be inflammatory.



Sincerely,

John Babin
EM-361 "John Carroll" <johnc@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 8:50:00 John Carroll
14222 S. Buckner Creek Rd.
Mulino, OR 97042-9628


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Carroll
503 799 1d203

EM-362 "John Stafford" <johns@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 9:01:39 John Stafford
1540 Marigold Way
Redding, CA 96003-9389


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


John Stafford
775 721 4052

EM-363 "Dennis Lange" <dennyl@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 9:14:05 Dennis Lange
P.O. Box 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 19, 2007

Edward Shepard
OR/WA State Director
Bureau of Land Management
PO Box 2965
Portland, OR 97208


Dear Edward Shepard:

Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for
Western Oregon.

None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements
of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of
timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable
timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act.

Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not
available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed
species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of
listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive,
reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should
be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species
within the species entire habitat range.

The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes
the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county
governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation.

Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is
finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully
implemented.

When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was
made to local counties.

Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding
that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis.

All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of
catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private
lands.

Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private
land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as
hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing.

In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the
overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I
ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the
final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans
for the Western Oregon BLM Districts.

Sincerely,


Dennis Lange

EM-364 "Bill Bishoprick" <bb@hsarchitect.com> comment on the WOPR 10/19/2007 10:49:04 I would like to voice my opposition to the unsustainable increase in the logging of our ancient forests as put forth by your "preferred alternative". Alternatives to timber production and protection of watersheds, fishing and biodiversity should be given more weight in your decisions.
Bill Bishoprick    Salem , Or
EM-365 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Freeland bio and subject matter 10/19/2007 14:22:49 Sandy Banks <sandyrocks@earthlink.net>

10/19/2007 02:05 PM

To
William_Freeland@or.blm.gov
cc

Subject
Re: Freeland bio and subject matter








Hi Bill -

Here is a tough question, that you may have to do a little checking  
on, but which is sure to be of concern to the Little Butte Creek  
Watershed Council folks.

The figures for Riparian Management Area differ dramatically between  
Table 207 (p. 718)  and the Summary pie charts at XLVIII .
For instance, Alternative 1 has either 20% of the land base in  
Riparian Mgmt, or 9%.

What gives???


Thanks,
Sandy



EM-366 Steve Smack <smackdis@hotmail.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/19/2007 14:58:15 Hello!
 I know that the end of the public comment period on the WOPR is drawing to a close soon, so I wanted to put in my two cents.  For the record, I'm against this plan. It seems to me that the WOPR will be a boon for the timber industry and a major loss for the forests of Oregon and all those who love the forests. I believe tha