E-Mail-400-799

# Sender Subject Date Body
EM-400 "Cameron Krauss" <cameron.krauss@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/24/2007 7:26:28 Cameron Krauss
1957 Robertson Bridge Rd.
Grants Pass, OR 97526-7207


October 24, 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,


Cameron Krauss

EM-401 "Robert Desrochers" <bobde@rfpco.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/24/2007 11:53:34 Robert Desrochers
1960 Moorea Drive
Roseburg, OR 97470-8845


October 24, 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.

As a transplanted mid-westerner, I have come to love the timberlands of
the Pacific NW. Please let us use these lands for what the Creator put
them here for- to enjoy, and as a natural resource base to use, allowing
economic growth and prosperity for the communities that used to thrive
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,


Robert L. Desrochers
541-679-2784

EM-402 "Bill Foulds" <billf@nielsenbrothers.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/24/2007 11:59:15 Bill Foulds
P.O. Box 2789
Bellingham, WA 98227-2789


October 24, 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 Foulds
360-671-9078

EM-403 "Don Berg" <donb@colheli.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/24/2007 12:49:25 Don Berg
PO BOX 3500
Portland, OR 97208-3500


October 24, 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.

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,


Don Berg
503-678-1222

EM-404 Julie Dahlman <jujudahlman@hotmail.com> protect ancient forests 10/24/2007 18:37:04 Please stop and consider the great impacts of deforesting our old growth.  Let' s have some consideration for this planet.  Why do we have to keep going over and over this issue.
 
 Let's keep our forest.  Climate change is vastly affected from removing old growth trees.
 
  Thank you!
 
Julie Dahlman


Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! Try now!
EM-405 "Larry Fors" <larryf@rfpco.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/25/2007 5:06:04 Larry Fors
3750 Carnes Rd.
Roseburg, OR 97470-4520


October 25, 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.

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,


Larry Fors

EM-406 "Rick Richardson" <rick.richardson@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/25/2007 7:02:20 Rick Richardson
1277 SE Reservoir
Roseburg, OR 97470-4316


October 25, 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.

Why does the BLM not have to pay attention to the O&C act?

They are hurting a vialable industry in the state of oregon.

Our Forest lands are a renewable resource.

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 Richardson

EM-407 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/25/2007 7:38:54 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/25/2007 07:38 AM -----

Jennifer Lance <jlance@hughes.net>

10/23/2007 04:06 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,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
EM-408 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov 10/25/2007 7:39:38 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/25/2007 07:39 AM -----

"Steve Bush" <Steve.Bush@scds.org>

10/23/2007 04:34 PM

To
<Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject









Dear Mr. Hoffmeister,
The BLM's plan for the Rogue River in Oregon will clearly adversely effect this beautiful river.  As a school teacher I am thinking of the kids and their future - their river.  Please insist on managed logging and wild roadless areas.  We can have out timber and protect the land for future generations.  Don't let the greed of others force you into a compromised position with our children.
Thank you,
 
Steve Bush
Kindergarten Teacher
Sonoma Country Day School
 
 
EM-409 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/25/2007 7:40:06 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/25/2007 07:39 AM -----

Judy Heumann <jheumann@teleport.com>

10/23/2007 04:47 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,
Judy Heumann
2402 NE 26th Ave.
Portland, OR 97212
EM-410 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/25/2007 7:40:39 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/25/2007 07:40 AM -----

Jonathan Levann <earth2love@opendoor.com>

10/23/2007 11:20 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,

                Jonathan Levann
                PO box 232
                Ashland, Oregon, 97520
EM-411 "Michael Cleaver" <michaelryanc@gmail.com> WOPR is wasteful mismanagement of federal resources 10/25/2007 11:31:44 The Western Oregon Plan Revision is wasteful and poor management of public lands.  The Oregonian reported this new plan would increase logging on trees over 200 years old seven fold.  Ancient forests are valuable for recreation, wildlife, and drinking water.  As these forests disappear around the country and world their value increases even more.  Using them for short term timber profits is poor management of the United States public land.  Logging these ancient forests and removing stream side protections harms Federally protected salmon species by increasing erosion and siltation of their spawning habitat. 

Long term value and protection of endangered species or short term private profits?  This is not a difficult management decision for the country's few ancient forests.
  No on WOPR.

Sincerely,
Michael Cleaver

8550 Marine View
South Beach OR 97366
EM-412 Eleanor Lowe <ellycatherine1@yahoo.com> please stop logging our land 10/25/2007 11:55:19 To all at the BLM,
    I am shocked that you would even consider logging this much of our old growth forests.  Do you realize that we are a state known for our natural beauty? If you take away our trees you will take away the identity and spirit of Oregon. I come from a family of Oregon loggers but even they realize that the time has come to practice preservation.  If you want to make more money how about logging all of the disastrously re-planted areas? Please don't take our trees away.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Lowe
(3rd generation Oregonian)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-413 avnwmn@budget.net WOPR Draft DEIS Comments from the Public 10/25/2007 13:53:23 Submitter: Frances K. Taylor
email: avnwmn@budget.net
Location: Grants Pass, OR 97526-9715
Comment: The WOPR would be a disaster for southern Oregon forests. None of the three "action alternatives" offer responsible, sustainable management for healthy forests and watersheds.
Alternative 2 (BLM\'s \"preferred alternative\") is unacceptable because it relies entirely on clearcutting, would drastically reduce riparian buffers, and would increase fire danger more than any other alternative. The best alternative is \"No Action Alternative\", to continue present management, based on the Northwest Forest Plan.

Relevant Section/Page: See tables on pages XLIX and L and the matters referenced there.
EM-414 "Richard Schneider" <rschneider@mcsi.net> WOPR comments 10/25/2007 20:04:27 Dear BLM,
 
I would like you to hear my comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR).  I am very strongly against the WOPR.  I do not support this plan, and I want permanent protection of our ancient forests and other public lands.  I oppose the logging of Oregon's old growth forests under any circumstances.
 
I spend a lot of time hiking and camping in Oregon's old growth forests.  It is my understanding that only 5% of Oregon's old growth forests remain.  Haven't you logged enough of our old growth?  When will enough be enough?  Will you not be satisfied until every last old growth tree is chopped down?
 
I cannot state strongly enough that I oppose any logging of old growth stands.  These trees are majestic, beautiful, and holy, and must be protected.  The WOPR would greatly increase the logging of old growth and cause lasting harm to public lands.  As a citizen, I must insist that these forests be protected for me, my family, and my children's children.  My preference would be that all remaining old growth forests (there is not much left!) be designated wilderness areas and permanently protected.
 
Thank-you.
 
Richard Schneider
2103 Coos Bay Wagon Road
Roseburg, OR  97470
 
rschneider@mcsi.net
EM-415 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers, hands off our old growth forests 10/26/2007 7:38:25 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/26/2007 07:38 AM -----

Tom Peil <tompeil@opendoor.com>

10/25/2007 03:08 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM forests and rivers, hands off our old growth forests








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
EM-416 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: NO to the WOPR 10/26/2007 7:57:05 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/26/2007 07:56 AM -----

Sam Smith-Rowe <samsmithrowe@hotmail.com>

10/25/2007 09:50 AM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
NO to the WOPR








Greetings,

As a lifelong Oregonian I do not support the WOPR.  As well, public opinion supports logging practices that are more in tune with the reality of climate change.  We need healthy old-growth stands of trees as the backbone of our local ecology and climate.  There are not many of these stands left and they should be protected.  We should move forward with smarter logging that thins forests to reduce fire danger around communities and uses the small diameter logs to produce the products we need.  Logging practices that benefit big corporations as short sighted and do not benefit the communities where the logs will be extracted from.  Please do not leave my children with forests that lack long term stability and increased fire danger.  Please protect the streams, rivers, and habitats that my son has the right to enjoy.  We need wood products, but lets harvest them in a way that makes long term sense.  Thank you

Sincerely,

Sam Smith-Rowe
7007 Hugo Road
Grants Pass, OR  97526
541.479.0249



Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!
EM-417 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/26/2007 9:48:22 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/26/2007 09:47 AM -----

Deborah Filipelli <dfilipelli@mcn.org>

10/26/2007 09:09 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,

The following represents my OPPOSITION to the Western Oregon Plan Revisions.

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,
Deborah Filipelli
p.o. box 341
the sea ranch, ca 95497

EM-418 "Ryan Champion" <rhino919@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/26/2007 11:30:51 Ryan Champion
110 Paradise Point Lane
Roseburg, OR 97470-8631


October 26, 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,


Ryan Champion

EM-419 "Scott Parcell" <scottparcell@yahoo.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/26/2007 12:21:51 Scott Parcell
1055 Longridge Dr.
Springfield, OR 97478-8503


October 26, 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,


Scott Parcell
1-541-520-4332

EM-420 "Pete Reyneke" <peter@drjlumber.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/26/2007 13:28:41 Pete Reyneke
P.O. Box 66
Riddle, OR 97469-0066


October 26, 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.

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.

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,


Pete Reyneke
541-874-8260

EM-421 "Dury Cords" <dury@caltiimberline.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/26/2007 16:51:43 Dury Cords
4650 Edison Ave.
Chino, CA 91710-5707


October 26, 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,

It never ceases to amaze me how the "environmentalists" just don't 'get
it'. I live in Southern California and if you have been watching the news
lately, you have seen the wildfires and forest fires turn Southern
California into a moon-scape. The environmentalists were successful in
seeing to the elimination of logging in the San Bernardino National Forest
back in the early '60's. Since that time, we have seen the pine beetle
kill more than 1/2 the standing pine population because there has been an
over population of the indingenous conifers, because there has been no
forest management in terms of managed harvest, because the over population
has caused a competition for water resources by the vegetation, causing
unhealthy tree stock, causing susceptibility to disease, permitting the
beating infestation, and making more than half the San Bernardino National
Forest dry fire fuel.

If that were not so, we would not have seen such wildfire devastation in
the San Bernardino Forest's timbered area as we have, not once, not twice,
but three times in just 10 years. Had that region been logged and
maintained as it had been in the years leading up to the early '60's, the
standing timber wouldn't be dead from the pine beetle, there would be
'thinner' fuel resources, and the fuel resources there might be would be
less flamable because it would be greener.

Logging isn't just about greed. It is about sound forest management. If
you and the rest of your committee don't believe it, I invite you to
Southern California, as my guest, to view first hand what a forest fire
(repeated forest fires) do to a forest that has been protected from sound
management. What we do not do, nature will do; i.e., thin the forest.

I was asked to contact you regarding a variety of issues. One was to
state that the alternatives in the DEIS don't meet this or that. And that
the O&C Act is being circumvented by other proposals. I'll let all the
others who were (likewise) asked to contact you, tell you about all that.

Just drop to some basics here with me for minute, will you?

How much wildlife you think died this last weekend, over the 400 square
miles that burned here in Southern California? I don't know and you don't
either. But you and I both know it was a lot.

We have bear, cougar, bob cat, deer, elk, antelope, racoon, and so on, and
on. It was a mis-managed forest that caused the death of countless
wildlife.

The bottomline Mr. Shepard is, the forests must be harvested. If that
harvest supports an economy, great! But that is not the most important
reason to harvest timber. It is to preserve the forest and all the
critters living in it by reducing the likelihood of repeated, catastrophic
wildfire; by keeping it fit, and healthy.


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,


Dury Cords
909.591.4811

EM-422 Richey Bellinger <richbell@spiritone.com> forest management choices 10/27/2007 8:51:13 To whom it may concern,

I am a resident of multnomah county in the fine state of Oregon. I want
to urge the BLM to preserve and protect any remaining old growth forest
on BLM land. We have so little old growth left that it is obscene to
consider cutting or disturbing in any way the last few pieces that
remain. Any other remaining wilderness areas should also remain
undisturbed. These wild lands will be highly valued in the future...
and you will have the good feeling of having had the foresight and
courage to protect them.

Thank you for your time,

Richey Bellinger
EM-423 "Dan Pittman" <pitt@lewislumber-mt.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/29/2007 7:58:01 Dan Pittman
PO BOX 905
HAMILTON, MT 59840-0905


October 29, 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 support a fiscally responsible management of BLM lands in accordance
with the O&C Act. The O&C lands haave historically been an economic
mainstay of the rural communitites in which they are located and it is
vitally important to these communities and the forest industries that
these lands be managed in accordance with the O&C Act as orginally enacted.


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 Pittman, CF

EM-424 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Don't log old growth- Please!! 10/29/2007 10:16:19 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 10:16 AM -----

liza capizzi <eacapizz@peak.org>

10/27/2007 08:30 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Don't log old growth- Please!!








Hi
I'm writing to ask that our public old growth forests not be logged.
   Longer rotations for the other matrix lands would be much better too
- How about 150 years instead of 40 ?( Much less damage to soil and life.)
They are the only natural native forests with their diversity intact...
Never sprayed or planted with farm trees...
I love to hunt and hike and mostly i care for the plants and animals
that call Oregon home, as well as the extirpated ones.
As our population grows and the private forests are cut - these remnant
old growth will be the last of their kind...
We will need the elbow room!It's hard to find a place to hunt . Old
growth is the best for concealment and thermal cover. The plants and
critters that live there are important beyond what we know. The soil
regeneration and oxygen production +other processes we are just learning
about are enhanced by the big trees The water quality that these places
provide is also important as filters as you surely know...I could go on....
Thanks for listening...
Native daughter,
Liz Capizzi
EM-425 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 10/29/2007 10:17:35 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 10:17 AM -----

T3W@webtv.net

10/28/2007 12:05 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 Areasall 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,

Judith Schlacter
P.O.Box 10253
Eugene, Oregon 97440




EM-426 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 10/29/2007 10:18:12 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 10:17 AM -----

Paul Moss <paul@themailpath.com>

10/28/2007 05:05 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








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

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

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,

Paul Moss

1849 Whitaker St.

White Bear Lake, MN 55110
EM-427 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 10/29/2007 10:20:10 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 10:16 AM -----

"Lori Purifoy" <purefoi@gmail.com>

10/28/2007 11:11 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








Dear Mr. Hoffmeister,
I'm concerned about the direction that the Bush Administration is taking once again regarding our national treasure - our old-growth forests.
They are not replaceable and we have so few left.  These changes will affect over 2.6 million acres that have been protected by the NW Forest Plan and will
contaminate watersheds, degrade habitat and affect our scenic and recreational areas that we love and treasure here in Oregon.
 
These old-growth forests would be clearcut every 80 years under the proposed "Timber Management Areas" which is hardly enough time to replace 200+ year old
trees.  The changes within this proposal would devastate not only the terrain, but the wildlife, flora and fauna as well, many which are endangered or indigenous only to Oregon.
We treasure the diversity and natural beauty that is so much a part of Oregon and why many of us choose to live here.  There are many other reasons to oppose this change in protection, such as fire prevention, erosion, focusing on thinning of second growth overgrown trees, etc.
 
Please maintain the protection that currently exists for those of us that live in Oregon and those that want to experience the beauty that we know and love.
 
Thank you for your time~
Lori Purifoy
4534 NE 39th Ave
Portland, Oregon 97211
EM-428 "Ken Munyon" <ken.munyon@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/29/2007 11:04:53 Ken Munyon
Po Box 763
Glendale, OR 97442-0763


October 29, 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,


Ken Munyon
541-659-0427

EM-429 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM oldgrowth forests and rivers 10/29/2007 12:31:09 ---- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 12:30 PM -----

Beeara <behomesong@yahoo.com>

10/29/2007 12:28 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Protect BLM oldgrowth 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,

Barbara Edmonds                
2017 SE Stone St.
Corvallis, OR 97333

EM-430 "Billy Rodgers" <billy.rodgers@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/29/2007 13:24:36 Billy Rodgers
P.O. Box 245
Butte Falls, OR 97522-0245


October 29, 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,


Billy Jess Rodgers
(541)890-1478

EM-431 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: DO NOT ALLOW OLD GROWTH 10/29/2007 14:26:47 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/29/2007 02:26 PM -----

Rhine Chesshire <rhinewc@msn.com>

10/29/2007 02:24 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
DO NOT ALLOW OLD GROWTH








less than 1% of old growth still standing. global warming, pollution, waste, depleation of natural resources, etc. there all in the same ship and someone wants to shoot at it! you can be the hero! please do not let them cut out natural wonders to the ground so one of the worlds richest nations can have a few extra board feet and some revenue that it has plenty of. these marvels of earth DONT NEED TO BE CUT  why must this go on, enough is enough, please help stop this!!

Rhine Chesshire
119 N.E. Columbia Ave.
Adair Village
Oregon
97330

541 745 -3813



Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today!
EM-432 "Cindy Williams" <CWILLIAMS@mp.usbr.gov> Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/29/2007 16:31:20 I'm not interested in items west of the Cascades, but I am interested in items EAST of the Cascades.  Please put me on the mailing list for EAST side issues.  It doesn't make sense to me that one plan would cover 2 significantly different ecotypes with completely different precip and hydrology patterns, not to mention climate and soil types.
 
Cindy A. Williams
Chief, Fisheries Resources Division
Bureau of Reclamation
Klamath Basin Area Office
6600 Washburn Way
Klamath Falls, OR  97603
541-883-6935
EM-433 "Cindy Williams" <CWILLIAMS@mp.usbr.gov> Wood River wetland 10/29/2007 16:35:24 I suggest you seriously consider how you are managing the Wood River wetland area.  I understand you cut a deal with Ducks Unlimited, but given all the work the USFWS, Reclamation, TNC and others have contributed to restoration of the Williamson River Delta, your current management of Wood River continues to isolate the important wetlands of the area.  There is an opportunity here to partner with the other agencies in the Department of Interior to manage cooperatively to improve water quality and habitat conditions for all species.
EM-434 "Darren LaSorte" <spotteron.sendit@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/29/2007 17:35:25 Darren LaSorte
11628 A Cavalier Landing Ct
Fairfax, VA 22030-8575


October 29, 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.

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,


Darren LaSorte

EM-435 "Holden Caulfield" <SuzCreamChees@msn.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 10/29/2007 18:49:39  
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,
 
Joel, Amanda and Elijah
352 SW Butterfield PL    
Corvallis, Or 97333
EM-436 Stelliumpress@aol.com Reject WOPR 10/29/2007 19:26:42 To Whom This May Concern, and to Governor Kulongoski

          Please do all you can to stop the Bush administration's rape of our last forests.
There are so few left! I am outraged that such a large "take" is on the block. This is
an outrage at a time when the environment is going to hell in a hand basket.
Please do all you can to prevent the logging of our ancient, lovely forests.

                                   I voted for Governor Kulongoski and strongly urge him
to continue his fine work in service of our last great trees.

                                             Best Regards,   Judith Davis




**************************************
See what's new at http://www.aol.com
EM-437 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Comment on WOPR 10/30/2007 8:06:10 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/30/2007 08:05 AM -----

"Christina E. E. Shetterly" <snaketotem@yahoo.com>

10/30/2007 06:45 AM

To
alan.hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Comment on WOPR








Dear Sir,
 
Please include my comments in the public record regarding the Western Oregon Plan Revisions.
 
I must add my voice to the many others who disagree with the content of this plan, which will weaken and/or remove environmental protections.  There is no justifiable reason to log old-growth timber, which must remain protected. Clear-cutting must not be an option for our Oregon forests.  Clean water and wildlife habitat protection must be at the forefront of any forest management plan.
 
Instead of the proposed plan, we encourage you to protect mature and old growth forests and pursue second growth thinning. Streamside protections must remain in place. Protection of the forest ecosystem must be put ahead of logging.
 
This is our public lands. They deserve respect and protection for generations to come. I urge you NOT to place the WOPR strategy into effect.  Thank you.
 
Sincerely,
Christina E. E. Shetterly
33 Willamette Ave
Medford, OR  97504

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-438 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: forest management 10/30/2007 8:35:12 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/30/2007 08:34 AM -----
----- Forwarded by Teddi Duling/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/30/2007 08:27 AM -----

Joy Agner <joylynnagner@hotmail.com>

10/29/2007 12:21 PM

To
<or912web@blm.gov>, <or_coosbay_mail@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
forest management






Dear BLM Directors and Staff,
 
I am concerned about BLM's readjustment of the Northwest Forest Plan, allowing more clear cuts in Oregon, and my primary reasons are not environmental.  
             I am from Coos Bay, Oregon, a town that used to survive off of logging and fishing.  I have seen the economy crash as fishing and logging jobs dwindle year after year.  Welfare lines grow as do methamphetamine addictions; people are desperate to find work.  The story is the same in many Oregon coastal towns.  
Environmental restrictions and icons like the spotted owl are often blamed for the economic ruin, but the true problem is a history of irresponsible resource management.  Within the past century we Oregonians have exhausted our fish and our forests.  Now we have to pick up the pieces.  If we harvest forests in a sustainable way, timber jobs will sustain future generations.  
Besides logging responsibly (aka reducing clear cuts and maintaining riparian protections), we should be creative about how we can use our Old Growth Forests to generate new sources of income.  For example, old growth provides a unique habitat for different wild mushrooms that can be marketed.  The wild mushroom market steadily grows.  According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the total value of Oyster and Shitake Mushrooms was 49.2 million dollars in 2001.  I am not proposing wild mushroom sale as Oregon's economic panacea.  My point is that there are ways we can use the forests to open new markets, without destructive and unsustainable clear cuts.  
Also, preservation of Old Growth Forests is important to human health and safety.  Old growth forests root systems provide more water in streams, available for human consumption.  They also decrease risk of flooding.  There are several reasons why we should not cut down our remaining old growth stands, reasons that have nothing to do with the Spotted Owl.  I urge you at the BLM as a concerned Oregonian to think of the human elements to sustainable forestry, and to keep protective resource management practices laid out by the Northwest Forest Plan.  
 
Thank you,
Joy Agner
joylynnagner@hotmail.com




Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!
EM-439 "Randy Crockett" <randy.crockett@gmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/30/2007 8:59:07 Randy Crockett
1837 Whistlers Park Road
Roseburg, OR 97470-7971


October 30, 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,


Randy Crockett

EM-440 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: The WOPR plan to log old-growth 10/30/2007 9:04:50 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/30/2007 09:04 AM -----

"joelsheila" <joelsheila@casco.net>

10/30/2007 09:02 AM

To
<Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc

Subject
The WOPR plan to log old-growth








    We are very against this new plan of BLM to log old-growth.  It's not necessary to cut the last remaining old-growth to supply timber for the mills.  Instead clean up what has already been logged.  Some of that stuff badly needs help.  DO NOT TAKE SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE REPLACED.  If we cut all the old-growth, our grandchildren will never have the chance to see what a real tree looks like.  RETHINK THE PLAN before it's too late!  Joel and Sheila Evans.  
EM-441 Tami Blauser <blausers@hotmail.com> Draft EIS 10/30/2007 10:44:34 Good Morning,
I was not able to get on your website (most likely the fault of my computer or my own error.)  But, I have read the Summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.  It appears that the research has been well done.  As a resident of Josephine County I Support Alternative Two. 
I believe the No-Action Alternative and Alternative Three are too far reaching from the needs of the area and would not meet the requirements of the land or the fiscal desires for the counties involved.  Alternative One is a favorable choice to me also, as its "Late-Successsional Management Area" is greater than that of Alternative Two which may be preferable.  However, I support Alternative Two because its "Timber Management Area" is greater and the "Riparian Management Area" is less which is more practical. 
Thank you for your time,
Mrs. Tami Blauser
Grants Pass, OR 


Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook - together at last. Get it now!
EM-442 diane conrad <mydiane@q.com> wopr 10/30/2007 11:24:19 Do not allow more cutting of trees in old-growth areas! Do not enact the Western Oregon Plan Revision!  Diane Conrad
EM-443 "Stuart Feaver" <nzpilot1@aol.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/30/2007 11:29:47 Stuart Feaver
2832 County RD 94
International Falls, MN 56649


October 30, 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.

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,


Stuart Feaver
5037780809

EM-444 Chandra LeGue <chandralegue@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 14:58:56 I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Chandra LeGue
2610 Adams St.
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-445 "Diana Partin" <d.partin@comcast.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/30/2007 15:40:18 Diana Partin
17890 Royce Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97034-7313


October 30, 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,


Diana Partin
503-638-5566

EM-446 dietrich ayala <autonome@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:32:27 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

dietrich ayala
5918 ne 13th ave
portland, OR 97211

5032064393
EM-447 Lynne Brannan <lynnesline@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:32:52 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Lynne Brannan
6023 SW 174 ave
Beaverton, OR 97007

503-649-0184
EM-448 "Please, do not lethi Yodis" <mactown@mac.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:33:42 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

What a suppresive President. Don't be his robots of no will.

Please, do not lethi Yodis
17019 S. Bradley Rd.
Oregon City, OR 97045
EM-449 Jim Funk <spartankayaker@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:35:47 Dear BLM,
I grew up in Oregon. I lived in the midwest during college and law school and returned to my home state for many reasons, first and foremost of which is its beauty. I now live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jim Funk
1828 NE 113th Ave.
Portland, OR 97220

503-222-9115
EM-450 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/30/2007 16:37:15 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 Miller
441 cromwell cir. unit 1
bartlett,ill. 60103-7450
laziej@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://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-451 Zeta Seiple <zseiple@bendbroadband.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:37:53 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Zeta Seiple
15916 Pinion Jay Lane
Sisters, OR 97759
EM-452 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/30/2007 16:38:04 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,

Dana Nordine
240 Sherwood Pl.
Pomona CA, 91768
Micrathena@verizon.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-453 Brock Roberts <broberts@zgf.com> Please protect old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:38:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Brock Roberts
2268 NW Pettygrove Street
Portland, OR 97210
EM-454 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/30/2007 16:38:44 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,

Tim Nordine
240 Sherwood Pl.
Pomona CA, 91768
--
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-455 Jeremy Kamil <jeremy.kamil@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:39:08 Dear BLM,
The BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions is terrible for many reasons. Too much logging of old growth and too few protections for endangered species and affected watersheds. As a US Citizen, I vehemently oppose the Western Oregon Plan Revisions as they are currently written.

I urge the BLM to immediately withdraw this myopically-conceived plan from consideration and send it back to the drawing board. As it currently stands, the Western Oregon Plan Revisions are an outright insult to future generations and to our National Heritage.

Sincerely,

Jeremy P. Kamil, Ph.D.
Boston, MA USA

Jeremy Kamil
87 W Cedar St Apt 4A
Boston, MA 02114-3314
EM-456 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/30/2007 16:39:24 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,


Tao Orion
80574 Hazelton Rd
Cottage Grove, OR 97424
duality0@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-457 Sara Leverette <saral@oeconline.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:39:58 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Sara Leverette
3726 SE 16th Ave
Portland, OR 97202

5033810281
EM-458 Gayle Jolley <gaylejolley@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:43:18 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Gayle Jolley
1 Jefferson Parkway #287
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
EM-459 Rob Harp <earwigz@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:43:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Rob Harp
962 rainbow drive
springfield, OR 97477
EM-460 Dan Swerbilov <dan.swerbilov@sas.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:43:44 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Dan Swerbilov
2828 NE 69th Ave
Portland, OR 97213
EM-461 Jill Charvat <jcharvat@bpninc.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:44:34 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jill Charvat
3381 SE Francis St.
Portland, OR 97202

503-417-8223
EM-462 Jason Selwitz <waterbird11@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:46:39 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jason Selwitz
818 SW 3rd Ave. #280
Portland, OR 97204
EM-463 Gwen Wolfram <gewolfram@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:48:44 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for the old-growth forests, the mountains, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will severely hamper my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- Special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging roads and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Gwen Wolfram
1525 NW 23rd Street
Corvallis, OR 97330
EM-464 Larry Bulling <larry.bulling@oregonstate.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:48:44 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Larry Bulling
2321 NW Mulkey Ave.
Corvallis, OR 97330
EM-465 Karen Thomas <ktonmaui@hawaii.rr.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:50:49 Dear BLM,
The WOPR is a drastic return to controversial forest management that benefits very few and damages resources, public trust, and quality of life for many. I urge you to scrap this plan.


Karen Thomas
760 S. Kihei Rd. #403
Kihei, HI 96753
EM-466 laurie meyer <lbethm@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:51:40 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

laurie meyer
221 ne fremont st apt 107
portland, OR 97212
EM-467 "Rael Nidess, M.D." <rnidess@swbell.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:52:05 Dear BLM,
I don't live in Oregon, but think it would be nice for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade people's ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Don't sell our national heritage to industry!

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Rael Nidess, M.D.
100 StoneCreek Drive
Apt. 239
Marshall, TX 75672-4586
EM-468 Fran Kievet <frankie@spiritone.com> Sanctity of the land 10/30/2007 16:53:45 Dear BLM,
I know you are all aware of the many reasons that we concerned Oregonians have about the proposed devastation of the lands we hold sacred in exchange for money going into the coffers of a few. If you will make your decisions based on common sense, and a reverence for this planet, our only source of sustenance, then good will prevail. I will thank you in advance for making decisions that you know to be for the greater good.

Fran Kievet
8826 SE 16th Ave
Portland, OR 97202
EM-469 Lee Musgrave <leesartstudio@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:55:50 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Lee Musgrave
P.O. Box 256
Lyle, WA 98635
EM-470 Richard trupp <richardarpan@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:56:40 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Richard trupp
5125 SW Scholls Ferry Road
Portland, OR 97225
EM-471 William Boismier <w_boismier@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:56:41 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

William Boismier
87572 Muse Dr.
Veneta, OR 97487
EM-472 Crystal Dowd <cldowd@earthlink.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:57:31 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Crystal Dowd
1402 Oak St
Santa Monica, CA 90405
EM-473 Crystal Dowd <cldowd@earthlink.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 16:58:45 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Crystal Dowd
1402 Oak St
Santa Monica, CA 90405
EM-474 Kevynne Layne <jonkevlayne@verizon.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:03:21 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kevynne Layne
15051 SE WyEast Av
Damascus, OR 97089
EM-475 Amanda Hardman <hardmana@onid.orst.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:03:46 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Amanda Hardman
542 NW 11th
Corvallis, OR 97330
EM-476 Mailie La Zarr <gzarr@sbcglobal.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:09:12 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Mailie La Zarr
2805 Yosemite Blvd. #178
Modesto, CA 95354
EM-477 "Geert Aerts, P.E." <belg2@juno.com> Don't cut old-growth. 10/30/2007 17:10:02 Dear BLM,
The new WOPR is a bad idea for America and Americans.

Geert Aerts, P.E.
818 SW 3rd #214
Portland, OR 97204

210 789 2078
EM-478 Arran Thomson <Neshama11_11@WildlifeRehabilitators.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:12:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Arran Thomson
4613 NE 19th Ave
Portland, OR 97211-5807
EM-479 christopher hiatt <dchiatt@hughes.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:15:53 Dear BLM,
I am a hiker and fisherman very interested in forest policy for the past 35 years. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

christopher l hiatt
34524 deerwood
eugene, OR 97405

541-726-8067
EM-480 Michele Boderck <mboderck@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:17:09 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Michele Boderck
668 McVey Ave.
Apt 207
n/a, OR 97034
EM-481 Jerry Brule <j-brule@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:17:35 Dear BLM,
I think that the BLM forest service plan would be a disaster. Instead we should be planning for the climate changes that will soon occur because of global warming.
Water will become scarce and we need to protect more of our watersheds indstead of reducing buffer zones.
We should also consider planting more diverse drought resistant trees. Douglas Firs that are all cloned from a single tree is a recipe for disaster.
We should also maintain old growth and if any cutting is done in old growth forests it should be selective cutting of only the trees that are diseased or those needing thinning.
As a matter of fact, clear cutting should be banned and use of herbicides eliminated. Rampant herbicide use is creating herbicide resistant weeds. A diverse forest with many different species of trees eliminates the need for pesticides. Clear cuts result in loss of topsoil, landslides, and the herbicides get into our streams effecting fish and people. Our old diverse forests are the best habitat for threatened and endangered animals. Turning them into a single mono-crop will be susceptible to disease, insects and will be a fire hazard. Old growth forests don't burn very well.
We should be planting more trees to try to reverse global warming not cutting more. You need to think of the future of the planet. not just the wellbeing of the saw mills and loggers.

Jerry Brule
1002 Tiara St.
Eugene, OR 97405

541-681-9345
EM-482 Thomas Lofton <trlofton@verizon.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:20:54 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Thomas Lofton
4500 West Road
Lake Oswego, OR 97035

971-322-8918
EM-483 "George B. Hutchinson" <gbhutch@charter.net> Comments on WOPR 10/30/2007 17:21:19 Dear BLM,
The plan revisions I'm now aware of hold great dangers for water and watershed quality for Oregon streams and rivers. This current BLM proposal is wrong-headed as a management plan for the nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan. The changes the agency is contemplating will unravel the citizen requested and scientifically supported protections of the Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to extreme water pollution, much degraded habitat, and tremendously increased conflict and controversy between the citizenry, BLM, and timber corporations who might obtain short-term benefits from this WOPR.

As WOPR would likely allow an increase of logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests and connectivity corridors, it appears that the BLM will ignor the precepts of both the Endangered Sp[ecies Act and the NFPA. Allowing another two thousand square miles of forest to be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized is foolishly unsustainable, unecological, and politically a can of worms.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis (that's where my family lives), Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. As all of your wildlife biologists know, salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests, as do my family for hiking, camping, and fishing. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping heavy equipment and soil erosion out of what's remaining of Oregon's old-growth forests.



George B. Hutchinson
44 SW Brook Street
Newport, OR 97365
EM-484 Peter & Mary Alice Belov <beltek@gorge.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:24:14 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions and plan to destroy much of our forests, I am appalled that an agency chartered to protect and maintain stewardship of these forests - our forests, not the BLM's forests - would consider such destruction. This is destruction of the forests, the environment, water, old growth, everything most Oregonians hold dear. AND THESE ARE OUR FORESTS!!!!!

I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Peter & Mary Alice Belov
325 W. Darland St.
Goldendale, WA 98620
EM-485 Meg Turner <greengoddess44@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:27:35 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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. Once cut, they will not be able to regenerate and the damage to wildlife and fish hatcheries will be irreversible. Our children and the future of our old-growth forests demands that we take accountable action NOW. We cannot afford to plunder the remaining lands we have left.

Meg W. Turner
56616 E. Fernwood Circle
Sandy, OR 97055-8797

503-622-1714
EM-486 Elizabeth Pollock <cosmic_girl_82@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:30:06 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Elizabeth Pollock
1550 Main
Springfield, OR 97477
EM-487 Gary Powell <joaquinpowell@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:31:20 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Gary Powell
562 A Street
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-488 Wendy Holzman <wendomere@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:32:35 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Wendy Holzman
324 E Wapato Loop
Sisters, OR 97559
EM-489 Margaret Stephens <mlstep@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:36:21 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Margaret Stephens
1830 23rd St NE
Salem, OR 97301
EM-490 Carl Fagerskog <redwinecarl@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:38:01 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Carl Fagerskog
280 Tawnee Way
Crescent City , CA 95531

707-458-3729
EM-491 sean peterson <tijuana_moods@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:42:12 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

sean peterson
1029 jackson st.
eugene, OR 97402
EM-492 Michale Pate <mpate747@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:43:02 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Michale Pate
1128 NE 2nd st, 104
corvallis, OR 97330
EM-493 Skye Coe <mauiskye1@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:48:04 Dear BLM,
I lived in Oregon for many yearsa variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Skye Coe
2200 Haukai Place
Kihe'i, HI 96753
EM-494 Daryl Yodis <daryly@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 17:55:59 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Daryl Yodis
17019 S Bradley Rd
Oregon City, OR 97045
EM-495 John Schlosser <schla98@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:07:41 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

John Schlosser
4118 NE 114th Ave
Portland, OR 97220

503-380-3581
EM-496 RICHARD CAHALL <rcahall@bendcable.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:08:31 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

RICHARD CAHALL
64100 TUMALO RIM DRIVE
BEND, OR 97701
EM-497 Kevin Ebel <kevebel@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:11:52 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kevin Ebel
3212 SE 170th Ave.
Portland, OR 97236
EM-498 William McMullin <wmcmullin@wmcmullin.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:13:07 Dear BLM,
I love in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

William McMullin
5802 Monticello Ave.
Portage, MI 49024
EM-499 anne may <annemay35@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:22:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

anne may
706 union st.
seattle, WA 98101
EM-500 ron martin <rwmartin@mtu.edu> Be Smart! protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:34:40 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

ron martin
1401 cross creek ln
hood river, OR 97031

541-386-9517
EM-501 "Stephen Kingsford-Smith, and family" <big_summits@hotmail.com> ARE YOU SERIOUS?!? 10/30/2007 18:35:15 Dear BLM,
In this age of climate change and dwindling, fragmented remnants of Northwest old growth habitat, my family and I are dumbstruck that your organization is considering increasing old growth logging on Oregon public lands. Know that we completely endorse the below statement drafted by Oregon Wild and vehementently oppose this type of "management" on our public lands. Your reply is expected...

I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Stephen Kingsford-Smith, and family
651 NW Sundown Lane
White Salmon, WA 98672
EM-502 robert strebeck <chinook76039@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:42:36 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

robert strebeck
509 aransas
euless, TX 76039
EM-503 John Bowden <jacbowdens3@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:45:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

John Bowden
1096 Diamond Street
Springfield, OR 97477
EM-504 Reuel Kurzet <rkurzet@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:45:57 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade everyone's ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon, now and for future generations. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will eliminate the necessary protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that not all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) will be protected from logging under WOPR. All of these areas contain unique values and public natural and recreation resources that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution. Preserving the wilderness creates more on-going family-wage jobs than does destroying forests. Once you've cut down the old growth, it's gone forever, as are the logging jobs. Keeping old growth provides forest stewardship and related wilderness recreation jobs in perpetuity.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Reuel Kurzet
8675 SW Cecilia Terrace
Portland, OR 97223
EM-505 robert strebeck <chinook76039@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:46:47 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

robert strebeck
509 aransas
euless, TX 76039
EM-506 Dennis Pennell <dennisnpennell@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 18:55:18 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clear cutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clear cuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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 clearcut these natural treasures.

Dennis Pennell
402 NE 136th Way
Vancouver, WA 98685
EM-507 eileen miller <ebmiller1@verizon.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:02:24 Dear BLM,
I visit Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to visit, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

eileen miller
98 tuckahoe road
dorothy, NJ 08317
EM-508 serge vrabec <vrabec1@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:04:04 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

serge vrabec
5902 SE Milwaukie ave.
portland, OR 97202

503-239-6009
EM-509 Doug Butler <dbutler2@stny.rr.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:05:09 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Doug Butler
25 Katie Lane
Painted Post, NY 14870
EM-510 stuart phillips <stulips@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:11:00 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

stuart phillips
212 benjamin
eugene, OR 97404

541-461-1384
EM-511 Richard Spotts <spotts@infowest.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:12:15 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Thank you for considering my comments.


Richard Spotts
1125 W. Emerald Drive
St. George, UT 84770
EM-512 JOHN BOWDEN <JCB010234@AOL.COM> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:13:40 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

JOHN BOWDEN
4525 ONYX AVENUE
KLAMATH FALLS, OR 97603
EM-513 T om Handel <tchandel@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:19:26 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

T om Handel
5833 NE 16th Ave
Portland, OR 97211
EM-514 Sandra Joos <joosgalefamily@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:28:13 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Sandra Joos
4259 SW Patrick Pl
Portland, OR 97239-7202

503-274-8803
EM-515 "VIRGIL STEMMERMAN" <virgilstemmerman@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 10/30/2007 19:30:35 VIRGIL STEMMERMAN
61717 edwards mill road
coos bay, OR 97420-7394


October 30, 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.

THIS IS OUR LAND AND IT WAS SET ASIDE FOR USE FOR THE SCHOOLS WE NEED THAT
REVENUE. IF YOU TAKE IT YOU MUST REPLACE IT WITH MATCHING FUNDS "IT'S THE
LAW SITCK WITH IT"


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,


VIRGIL STEMMERMAN
541-404-6000

EM-516 pinky jain pan <pinkyscout@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:42:00 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

pinky jain pan
7412 Bodega Avenue
sebastopol, CA 95472
EM-517 Richard Huston <bigusricus@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:45:50 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Richard Huston
1900 W 29th Ave
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-518 Eric Casler <ericorange@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:51:55 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Eric Casler
1415 SE Cora #4
Portland, OR 97202
EM-519 Steve Aydelott <staydelott@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:54:26 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Steve Aydelott
20782 Liberty Lane
Bend, OR 97701-8064
EM-520 Ian Shelley <ianjs@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 19:55:16 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Ian Shelley
9158 SW Wilshire St.
Portland, OR 97225
EM-521 Kyle Haines <kfaeastside@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:01:17 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Kyle Haines
1415 Johnson Ave
Klamath Falls, OR 97601
EM-522 ivan J Kamil <jkamil@earthlink.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:04:37 Dear BLM,
I live in California for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

ivan J Kamil
2810 Forrester Dr

Los Angeles , CA 90064
EM-523 beverly andrews <vebros43@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:07:58 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

beverly andrews
3639 kendra st
eugene, OR 97404

6862989
EM-524 WILLIAM RENNINGER <renninger@zoominternet.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:10:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

WILLIAM RENNINGER
660 MAIN ST
DUKE CENTER, PA 16729
EM-525 William Howld <howald@u.washington.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:14:54 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

William Howld
13309 47th Dr NE
Marysville, WA 98271
EM-526 Deborah Nemens <debnemens@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:14:54 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Deborah Nemens
Kerby Ave.
Portland, OR 97217
EM-527 Deborah Nemens <debnemens@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:15:04 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Deborah Nemens
Kerby Ave.
Portland, OR 97217
EM-528 Amy Peradotta <amyperadox@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:15:19 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Amy Peradotta
2106 Clarke Street
Murphysboro, IL 62966

6185340905
EM-529 Kelly Riley <khanlon74@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:20:06 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Kelly Riley
704 Alison Ave.
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
EM-530 ".John M. Sully" <sullyjm@jeffnet.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:22:50 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

WOPER not only threatens old growth forests and the resources dependent on old growth habitat, but it threatens the livelihood of those dependent on clean water, salmon spawning habitat, and the salmon runs that are a product of of clean water and silt free streams.

As an ardent fly fisherman, prayerfully ask that WOPER BE ABANDONED. It is too destructive to be carried out. There are many acres of trees to keep the timber industry employed with out sacraficing the valuable habitat of the acres proposed for clear cutting in WOPER

.John M. Sully
P.O. Box 3600
365 Granite Street
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-531 Kelly Tanugay <kellydan1@bendcable.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:25:45 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kelly Tanugay
2352 NW 5th St
Bend, OR 97701
EM-532 Susan Kegley <skegley@panna.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:30:46 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susan Kegley
2768 Shasta Rd
Berkeley,, CA 94708
EM-533 Brooks Murrell <bromur53@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:37:02 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Brooks Murrell
23126 Hwy 36
PO Box 171
Cheshire, OR 97419

541-998-3606
EM-534 Kevin Bell <kevinbell1@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:42:37 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Kevin Bell
1485 Poplar Drive #6
Medford, OR 97504
EM-535 Barbara Wilson <wilsonbn@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:44:08 Dear BLM,
The Bush Administration is at it again!
More anti-environmental policies which exploit and destroy our natural resources.

The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Barbara Wilson
12820 SW 20th Court
Beaverton, OR 97008
EM-536 Isaac Walker <iwalker@lithiawater.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:44:58 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Isaac Walker
PO Box 372
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-537 Beverly Bauman <baumanb@teleport.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:52:09 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Beverly Bauman
P O Box 3035
Reno, NV 89505-3035
EM-538 john di Fruscia <john@mtashland.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:52:59 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

john di Fruscia
10631 yank gulch rd
talent, OR 97540
EM-539 Hardin King <hardinking@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:53:04 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Hardin King
765 N Pershing St #6
Mt Angel, OR 97362-9598

503-845-9340
EM-540 James Roberts <jimrobj@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:55:55 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

James Roberts
215 S Ellis St
Palouse, WA 99161
EM-541 Sean Stevens <sean.stevens@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 20:57:14 Dear BLM,
I just read Ed Shepard's latest opinion piece in the Register Guard. It is truly disappointing that government officials--those who should be accountable to the public that pays their salaries--don't listen to the will of the people.

Oregonians do not want their old-growth forests cut down; not for timber, not for gigantic Christmas trees, not for giant log-rolling competitions. They belong where they are. Standing tall for centuries to come they are worth more to our communities as sources of clean water, wildlife habitat, carbon sinks, and of course as recreation havens.

To say that the Northwest Forest Plan allows for clear-cutting may be true. But it also didn't "promise" anything to the BLM or the timber industry you are so happy to please. It set up goals, potentials that could be met if the BLM planned smart timber sales that met scientific standards for protecting species. If you look at your own numbers, you would realize that you have largely been meeting targets. The exceptions are districts like Medford where an unwillingness to design sensible, community supported sales has lead to a lower cut.

I urge the BLM to pay more attention to what Oregonians support when it comes to our publicly owned lands. And that means scrapping the WOPR.

Sean Stevens
4320 SW Corbett Ave #312
Portland, OR 97239

5034907135
EM-542 Kyia Clayton <Kyiaclayton@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:06:46 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kyia Clayton
3537 SE Belmont Street
n/a, OR 97214
EM-543 Susan Florentino <susanf@easystreet.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:14:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susan Florentino
6837 NE Alameda
Portland, OR 97213

503-249-1864
EM-544 Don Jacobson <donj@donjacobsonphoto.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:28:53 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Don Jacobson
941 SE 55th Ave
Portland, OR 97215

503-235-6234
EM-545 Jennifer Lance <jlance@hughes.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:31:50 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jennifer Lance
P.O. Box 139
Hyampom, CA 96046
EM-546 Jesse Donohue <jessedonohue1@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:38:05 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jesse Donohue
880 W 23rd Ave
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-547 Jenya Lemeshow <jenya@efn.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:47:42 Dear BLM,
I love Oregon's old-growth forests!!! After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.
Sincerely, Jenya Lemeshow

Jenya Lemeshow
1673 Wilson St.
Eugene, OR 97402
EM-548 Bob Rosen <afterswift@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 21:51:02 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Bob Rosen
4431 Fox Hollow Road
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-549 Shirley Sonnichsen <jssonn.dawgs@verizon.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:02:19 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk, black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Shirley Sonnichsen
1150 Englewood Drive
Richland, WA 99352-9484

5096271473
EM-550 Judy Schribman <midnight26@netzero.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:03:34 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Judy Schribman
10618 se home ave
milawukie, OR 97222
EM-551 Michael Leeson <mleeson@alum.bu.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:04:50 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Michael J. Leeson
111 NE Graham St.
Portland, OR 97212

503-281-3582
EM-552 Ellynne Kutschera <ekutsche@uoregon.edu> Old-growth forests don't have alternatives; counties do!!! 10/30/2007 22:07:19 Dear BLM,
When our old-growth trees are gone, they're gone. What then will local governments sell off to fund themselves?

I have done some reading on WOPR, and now I have to ask, is the easiest way right, or just easiest? There are other ways to find money for towns, cities, and counties, ways that may take more time and effort - yet continuing to view nature merely as a resource (while keeping slices of wilderness here and there so people still have a place to visit on the weekends) we cheat everyone. We ought to be finding ways to preserve as much as possible, not cut corners and milk nature for everything we can get out of it!

I also am in agreement with the following statements offered by a conservation group:

I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Ellynne Kutschera
745 E 15th Ave
Apt 25B
Eugene, OR 97401
EM-553 Dane Roubos <drdane@earthlink.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:07:19 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Dane Roubos
850 Neil Creek Rd
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-554 sheri white <sheriwhitelight@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:24:27 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

sheri white
10880 Corp Ranch Road
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-555 David Winston <dlwimages@opendoor.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:26:57 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

David Winston
105 Brooks Lane
Ashland
OR, OR 97520
EM-556 Bev Hedin <bevhedin@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:29:02 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Bev Hedin
829 NW 4th Ave
Camas, WA 98607

?360-210-7415
EM-557 Paul Norup <hiking.2@juno.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:37:23 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Paul Norup
1043 K st
#313
Crescent City, CA 95531
EM-558 veronica owen <vera1899@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:37:48 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

veronica owen
84 dewey
ashland, OR 97520
EM-559 Paul Norup <hiking.2@juno.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:37:48 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Paul Norup
1043 K st
#313
Crescent City, CA 95531
EM-560 Philip Simon <philsimtpr@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:41:09 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Philip Simon
Box 9473
San Rafael, CA 94912
EM-561 Nancy Press <ansula@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:46:10 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Nancy Press
5533 NE 30th Ave
Portland, OR 97211
EM-562 Susan Kuhn <susak32799@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 22:46:10 Dear BLM,
I was shocked to learn of the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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. Short-term economics can no longer reign, work for the future.



Susan Kuhn
9807 NE Skidmore St.
Portland, OR 97220
EM-563 Sarah Hafer <charityh@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 23:03:37 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Sarah Hafer
4913 Cowell Blvd #A
Davis, CA 95618
EM-564 "David Grant. MD" <d2avid@charter.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 23:31:21 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

David Grant. MD
129 Oxford Place
129 Oxford Place, Medford, OR 97504
Medford, OR 97504

541 772-5339
EM-565 rachel blythe <rblythe76@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/30/2007 23:45:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

rachel blythe
2706 SE Yamhill St.
Portland, OR 97214
EM-566 Nicola Grobe <nicolagrobe@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 0:40:45 Dear BLM,
After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Nicola Grobe
1043 K Street
Crescent City, CA 95531
EM-567 Spencer Selander <spencerselander@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 1:19:50 Dear BLM,
I live in the Northwest for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

As a lifelong resident of the region, I am keenly aware that only a tiny fraction of the old-growth forests still exist; and I have seen again and again the destruction wrought by clearcut logging and road building to watersheds, wildlife habitat, and scenery.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to visit, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Spencer Selander
P.O.Box 363
341 Pioneer Av
Castle Rock, WA 98611
EM-568 Dorothy Anacleto <dottie2a@charter.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 3:23:47 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Dorothy Anacleto
POB 2714
Grants Pass, OR 97528
EM-569 Clark Canright <ccanright@adelphia.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 3:32:13 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Clark Canright
1106 Essex Lane
Newport Beach, CA 92660
EM-570 Clark Canright <ccanright@adelphia.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 3:32:58 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Clark Canright
1106 Essex Lane
Newport Beach, CA 92660
EM-571 julie butche <butche2@netzero.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 4:32:36 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

julie butche
4 Woodstone drive
newfoundland, PA 18445
EM-572 Helen Lyman <bettyhelen@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 5:22:33 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Helen Lyman
7425 SE 20th Avenue
Portland, OR 97202

503-235-4056
EM-573 E Smith <ivagator@verizon.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 5:43:05 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

E Smith
61 Fayette Ave
Oakdale, PA 15071
EM-574 Diana Kaye <eostredog@fastmail.fm> No old-growth cuts 10/31/2007 5:47:41 Dear BLM,
As an Indiana forest owner, I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the "management" of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

As you are aware, BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of OUR remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

By the way, my oldest son lives in Oregon and I visit frequently so am not disassociated with this issue.

Diana Kaye
11580 Rabbit Hash Road
Elizabeth, IN 47117
EM-575 Albert Honican <Alhonican@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 5:50:26 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Albert Honican
316 Lakeview Lane S.E.
same
Winter Haven, FL 33884
EM-576 Harmony Thayer <harmonythayer@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 6:24:16 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Harmony Thayer
115 Rogue River Hwy
#201
Grants Pass, OR 97527

541-472-9716
EM-577 Kristin Garley <kristingarley@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 6:45:35 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kristin Garley
2602 SW Umatilla Ct
Redmond, OR 97756
EM-578 Christian Fulghum <fulghums@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 6:49:45 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Christian Fulghum
PO Box 99217
Seattle, WA 98139
EM-579 Gloria Wiemann <grembil@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 6:50:35 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Gloria Wiemann
39857 SE Louden Rd.
Corbett, OR 97019
EM-580 Laurie Turner <Laurel.Turner@pdxtrans.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 6:54:21 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Laurie J Turner
11333 SE Powell Ct.
Portland, OR 97266

503-823-1767
EM-581 Shelly McFarland <shelly.m.mcfarland@rbcdain.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:07:42 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Shelly McFarland
1057 N. Shore Place
Lake Oswego, OR 97034

503 636-5567
EM-582 LUKE MUNSON <DJTWISTED1@HOTMAIL.COM> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:08:08 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

LUKE MUNSON
1218 AUTREY LN. APT#3
Apt#3
HOUSTON, TX 77006
EM-583 Dianne Ensign <ensign@lclark.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:09:02 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Dianne Ensign
11010 SW Boones Ferry Rd
Portland, OR 97219-7727
EM-584 Tia Triplett <tia@anlf.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:11:29 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Tia Triplett
4073 Bledsoe Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90066
EM-585 david h jones <dhj47@comcast.net> Protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:14:04 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

david h jones
4007 densmore ave n
seattle, WA 98103
EM-586 Jason Mann <wulfenite14@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:44:03 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jason Mann
6040 Tennyson Drive
Knoxville, TN 37909
EM-587 Alan Hoffmeister <alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:49:10 Dear BLM,
Take this message to Alan Hoffmeister - Fax from: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/1780/t/430/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=20179

Alan Hoffmeister
P O Box 2965
PTL, OR 97208
EM-588 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Leave America's old growth alone 10/31/2007 7:51:35 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/31/2007 07:51 AM -----

"Joshua Tussing" <joshua_email@fastmail.fm>

10/30/2007 06:25 PM

To
alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
Leave America's old growth alone










Is this department really going to cut down our old growth forests in
oregon and washington? Are you seriously thinking about making an 700%
increase in logging? In protected land? This is insanity. I want to
tell you right now, whoever you are that is reading this letter, this
is the type of stuff that makes islamists want to bomb the existance
out of America. This is the type of stuff that makes the world scream
"death to Americans !".

Does this really reflect the opinion of Americans? Is this really what
enviromentalists have fought  for in the past 100 years, to preserve
America's natural beauty for the next
generation? Is every single one of you in charge sold out to the lumber
industry?

You in charge, why don't you make some noise about hemp farming if you
need wood so bad? You do know how hemp is a much better solution to the
wood problem then destroying the habitats of wild animals and needless
clear-cutting and destruction of a type of forest that can take hundreds
of years to regain, DON'T YOU ?? If not, you certainly do not belong in
office.

If you like nature, why are you destroying it all America?
--
 Joshua Tussing
 joshua_email@fastmail.fm

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Does exactly what it says on the tin

EM-589 harriet miller <harrietm247@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 7:54:12 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

harriet miller
pob 493953
redding, CA 96049
EM-590 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 10/31/2007 7:57:24 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/31/2007 07:57 AM -----

James McCamy <deenaye2012@yahoo.com>

10/31/2007 07:39 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








Dear BLM,
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.

These protected areas are a huge draw for tourists.  I would like to think the government does not want to tarnish the state of Oregon's world-renowned reputation by further destroying what is left of the old growth forests.  Perhaps I am wrong?
Whose opinion does the government value more? The vast majority of people it is supposed to represent, or a small minority of timber companies?

Sincerely,
James McCamy
PO Box 1306
Madison, Wisconsin 53701

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-591 Sean Bagshaw <sean@outdoorexposurephoto.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:14:03 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Sean Bagshaw
30 Steinman Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-592 Des Murphy <dmurphy109@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:22:24 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Des Murphy
8645 SW Leahy Rd.
Portland, OR 97225

503-292-9345
EM-593 George Kausch <gkkausch@rosenet.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:32:27 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

George Kausch
235 W. Center
Roseburg, OR 97470
EM-594 Eric Marley <eric@aspenmeadowsconstruction.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:34:33 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

--Eric Marley
Bend, Or

Eric Marley
60841 Yellow Leaf Street
Bend, OR 97702

5419487445
EM-595 Matt Stansberry <mattstansberry@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:47:33 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Matt Stansberry
2165 Adams St.
Eugene, OR 97405

330-620-5293
EM-596 Matt Stansberry <mattstansberry@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:47:34 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Matt Stansberry
2165 Adams St.
Eugene, OR 97405

330-620-5293
EM-597 Vic and Lauren Clarke <clarkl15@morley.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 8:54:36 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Vic and Lauren Clarke
1233 SE 49th
Portland, OR 97215
EM-598 Jessica Martin <jmart9@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:33:31 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jessica Martin
1218 SE 34th Ave
Portland, OR 97214
EM-599 Vonda Welty Welty <vwelty@oregon.uoregon.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:33:56 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Vonda Welty Welty
PO Box 3266
4096 E 17th
Eugene, OR 97403
EM-600 Emily Platt <platte@ohsu.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:36:52 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Emily Platt
2808 SE 18th Ave
Portland, OR 97202
EM-601 Michael Cooper <coopermb@bendbroadband.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:39:47 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Michael Cooper
14911 Pommel
Sisters, OR 97759
EM-602 Justine Avera <flickerboxpdx@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:49:04 Dear BLM,
I moved to Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, outdoor recreation and green spaces, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. I am a landscape photographer, and feel very strongly that we need to protect wild places and forests as a haven of peacefulness and natural beauty in a world that is becoming increasingly stressed by a number of unsustainable living practices.

Even though we refer to forests as a "renewable resource", we have to bear in mind that if the ecosystem is disturbed enough it never regains the full health, beauty and diversity of life that it had prior to its disruption. We need to focus more on land stewardship, and to be honest we need to not touch the few largely undisturbed ecosystems that we have left. I would challenge anyone to look at the globe and show me one place where "restoration" efforts were fully successful, with before and after pictures, and hard independent data to support the full life cycle of disruption to restoration.

After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will curtail my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Justine Avera
4829 SE 63rd Ave
Portland, OR 97206

503-758-2250
EM-603 Barbara Mason <DMason6942@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 9:54:51 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Barbara Mason
1493 westmont Ave
Campbell, CA 95008
EM-604 scott shambaugh <spawningpool@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:02:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

scott shambaugh
2070 center st ne
salem, OR 97301
EM-605 Heidi Hartman <nachurgrl@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:05:42 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Heidi Hartman
72097 Hwy 74
Ione, OR 97843
EM-606 Dwight Long <oh_otter@charter.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:08:14 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Dwight Long
6523 Valhalla Ave
Klamath Falls, OR 97603
EM-607 Melanie Bates <melindamelania@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:11:35 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Melanie Bates
6127 NE 12th St.
Portland, OR 97211
EM-608 Marilee McGillivary <mountainsunsets@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:18:20 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Marilee McGillivary
1500 Norkenzie Rd #28
Eugene, OR 97401

541-485-7927
EM-609 Lisa Bagwell <purplewiety@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:34:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Lisa Bagwell
61535 SE Admiral Way
Bend, OR 97702
EM-610 Gary Bagwell <gbagwell@amfam.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:40:49 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Gary Bagwell
61535 SE Admiral Way
Bend , OR 97702
EM-611 Janet Kruse <janet.kruse@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:47:30 Dear BLM,
After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will destroy forever the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) will not be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a natural treasure - offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place where I would want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Janet Kruse
PO Box 15294
Portland, OR 97293

503-752-4650
EM-612 Dale Wagner <dalewagner@covad.net> Stewardship does not mean DESTROY 10/31/2007 10:49:35 Dear BLM,
It's hard for me to believe, after all these years, that the BLM is actively trying to pay well-heeeled timber companies to mine publically owned old-growth. Show me the science where air and water quality are enhanced, fish and wildlife habitat are improved, or fire safety is enhanced. It's pretty well known that the only ones who benefit from cutting old growth are the mills and the politicians that receive their kickbacks-er campaign contributions.


I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Dale Wagner
10 Granite Street
Quincy, MA 02169
EM-613 Katie Clarkson <katie.clarkson@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 10:54:56 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Katie Clarkson
5516 SE Center ST
Portland, OR 97206

503-238-4664
EM-614 Linda Hunn <linda_hunn@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 11:18:45 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Linda Hunn
3085 NW Autumn Street
Corvallis, OR 97330
EM-615 Karen Minihan <kminihan59@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 11:33:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Karen Minihan
40 W. 36th Ave.

Eugene, OR 97405
EM-616 David Moen <davidharpy@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 11:46:18 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands.

After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my right to enjoy the public lands of my home in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased public conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under your WOPR plan. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging, period.

- The increased, widespread clear-cutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape for decades and even centuries.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry.

A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

David Moen
3933 NE Hassalo
Portland, OR 97232
EM-617 Tara Farmer <earthgirlga@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 11:46:43 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Tara Farmer
3731 SE Cora St
Unit C
Portland, OR 97202

503-734-0256
EM-618 Alaina Smith <writersmith@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:03:06 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. More than 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. The WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Alaina Smith
300 SW 192nd Place
Beaverton, OR 97006

503-533-5361
EM-619 John Long <johnl@samhealth.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:05:38 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

John D Long
1480 SW Allen
Corvallis, OR 97333

541-753-4569
EM-620 Tom Anderson <tomsmail@qwest.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:10:14 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Tom Anderson
1414 SW 3rd Ave
Apt 2303
Portland, OR 97201
EM-621 Andrew Land <aland@afs.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:18:58 Dear BLM,
Absolutely not! I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Andrew Land
228 N. Shaver St.
Portland, OR 97227
EM-622 John Hallin <birdnird@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:19:03 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

John Hallin
2174 NW Davis Street, #505
Portland, OR 97210

503-222-0143
EM-623 e semon <ge@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:24:00 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

e semon
186 river sq
portland, OR 97068
EM-624 Susan Moen <sueomoen@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:41:57 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susan Moen
4715 N.E. Everett St.
PORTLAND, OR 97213
EM-625 kim kittredge <kittredk@peak.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 12:48:14 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

kim kittredge
24245 Ervin Road
Philomath, OR 97370
EM-626 james thompson <jetwoodshop@spiritone.com> An Oregon Lifestyle Depends on Healthy Old-Growth Forests! 10/31/2007 13:05:25 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including a quality of life directly related to old-growth forests on public lands: excellent recreation, clean water and air, healthy wildlife poulations.

After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will seriously degrade the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique biological assets that should be protected from the damaging effects of logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR would create over 1,000 miles of new logging roads and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone, scarring Oregon's spectacular landscape, damaging watersheds, and threatening endangered wildlife.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

james thompson
2743 nw thurman street
suite 7
portland, OR 97210-2252
EM-627 Darcie Hildreth <darcie_h_koala@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:09:31 Dear BLM,
I am disgusted and sickened to learn that once again Bushies are trying to destroy the state I was born and raised in! 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions that will wreak havoc on the environment and animal habitat. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized. This is NOT management, but destruction!

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. Another alternative whose time is here is controlled growing (on private land) of renewable products such as Bamboo.

Instead, 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.

Darcie Hildreth
4150 SE 72nd AVe.
Portland , OR 97206
EM-628 Tom Peil <jm@oregonwild.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:13:17 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Tom Peil
P.O. Box 3395
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-629 Kirk Danielsen <kmdanielsen@gmail.com> Protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:33:01 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Kirk Danielsen
6823 SE 22nd Avenue
Portland, OR 97202

503-969-8987
EM-630 Dusty Washburn <ravenslore65@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:40:31 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Dusty Washburn
6090 Terry Rd #1208
Jacksonville, FL 32216-4989
EM-631 Ann Steffen <annsteffen@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:41:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Ann Steffen
3612 NE 44th Ave
Portland, OR 97213
EM-632 Pam Super <pstktwohearts@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:45:57 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Pam Super
5830 E. Friess Drive
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
EM-633 Mary Conroy <tmconroy@frontiernet.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:53:53 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Mary Conroy
P.O. Box 780
Selma, OR 97538

541-597-2614
EM-634 Marcy Morgan <mjmpenguin@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:54:19 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Marcy Morgan
P.O. Box 4463
West Hills, CA 91308
EM-635 "J. Robert Moore" <jrobertore@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 13:55:59 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
As usual, the Bush Administration is concerned with profit for corporate business above all else. Oregon does not agree with you!

- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

J. Robert Moore
443 Brookside Dr.
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-636 Philip Lewin <pmlewin@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 14:00:10 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Philip Lewin
612 Russwood Street NE
Grand Rapids, MI 49505
EM-637 jim bowne <t.herzl1@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 14:10:59 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

jim bowne
PO Box 741
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-638 Yuliya Kostromitina <kostromy@onid.orst.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 14:13:39 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Yuliya Kostromitina
5141 Hayesville Dr
Salem, OR 97305
EM-639 Vera Kewene <verak@uoregon.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 14:21:25 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities. Many thanks for your consideration.

Vera Kewene
443 Brookside Dr.
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-640 Jessica Scherer <jbirdscherer@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 14:26:53 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jessica Scherer
606 NE Ivy
Portland , OR 97212
EM-641 steven sundin <ssundin@cob.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 15:03:11 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

steven sundin
1525 east illinois
bellingham , WA 98226
EM-642 Steve Jones <steve.jones@rbcdain.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 15:03:22 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Steve Jones
975 Oak St.
#450
Eugene, OR 97401

541-685-2018
EM-643 "Craig & Alice (mother) Downer" <ccdowner@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 15:07:22 Dear BLM,
I live near Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Craig & Alice (mother) Downer
P.O. Box 456
Minden, NV 89423
EM-644 tom sullivan <tmpsull@hotmail.com> comment on WOPR 10/31/2007 15:17:55 I am writing in OPPOSITION to the "preferred alternative" for the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision. Greatly boosting the level of logging of Oregon's ancient forests is an irresponsible act at a time when mature forests are needed to reduce global warming, maintain water quality, and provide habitat.  Use of BLM land for timber should be balanced with other uses.  Areas currently protected from logging should remain so, and forest protections under the NW Forest Plan should remain intact.
 
Thank you,
Thomas Sullivan
Portland, OR  


Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today!
EM-645 Lydia Garvey <wolfhowlmama@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 15:45:48 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Lydia Garvey
429 S 24th
Clinton, OK 73601
EM-646 Clarence Crandall <cesc.outdoors@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 16:05:28 Dear BLM,
I have lived in Oregon for almost 45 years. I choose to live here for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I have serious concerns about this plan and its effects on the natural state of public lands in western Oregon. I understand there are less drastic ways to achieve at least the principal goals of the plan through thinning and would strongly prefer to keep the old growth areas intact.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Clarence Crandall
14155 SW Yearling Ct
Beaverton, OR 97008
EM-647 Lee Jay Stone <lee.stone@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 16:22:35 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Lee Jay Stone
4223 sw 54th pl
portland, OR 97221
EM-648 Ron Torretta <rontorretta@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 16:35:07 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Ron Torretta
200 Centner Court
Canon City, CO 81212
EM-649 Dan Sherwood <dan@dansherwood.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 16:36:27 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Dan Sherwood
1719 SE 35th Ave.
Portland, OR 97214
EM-650 Shannon Bartow <zcanoe@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 17:01:26 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Shannon Bartow
1375 W 13th Ave
Eugene, OR 97402

541-337-4415
EM-651 Donald Wood <dwood@wideopenwest.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 17:04:46 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Donald Wood
2102 Coach Dr
Naperville, IL 60565
EM-652 Greg & Becky Zahradnik <greg2nd@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 17:13:32 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Greg & Becky Zahradnik
1239 Royal Ave
Louisville, KY 40204
EM-653 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/31/2007 17:23:55 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,

Julia A. Russo
1324 S. West St.
Mishawaka, IN 46544
hale_barar@sbcglobal.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-654 Samuel Turner <strider1957@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 17:24:49 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Samuel Turner
56616 E. Fernwood Circle
Sandy, OR 97055
EM-655 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/31/2007 17:25:14 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,

Barbara S. Hale
1324 S. West St.
Mishawaka, IN 46544
hale_barar@sbcglobal.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-656 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/31/2007 17:26:26 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.

WE SHOULD NEVER FUCKING LOG OLD GROWTH AGAIN. EVERY FUCKING
BOARD-FOOT IN OLD GROWTH FORESTS SHOULD BE LOCKED AWAY UNTIL OUR SUN
IS COLD AND GREY. OUR PLANET NEEDS TO LEARN HOW TO GET BY ON LESS
RESOURCES, NOT MORE.
Sincerely,


Kristian Skybak
88899 Conrad Rd.
Veneta, OR 97487
--
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-657 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 10/31/2007 17:27:41 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 are all we have left to sustain the wild habitat many animals
need to keep their species alive. If that isn't enough than we beg
you to look at what this forest does for us. It provides us with
clean drinking water,(which truly is a delicacy in the US),provides
recreation for the outdoor enthusiasts that are oh so common all over
this state. And most of all, people that come to visit Oregon simply
come to see our old growth forests that you can't find very
commonly,Which helps support a lot of our business here in Oregon.
If we pass the law to make this happen, we are contributing to
the downfall of what all of this beautiful state stands for, what
it's bare essence really is.

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

Sincerely,

Austin E Young
phoooonebooktpot@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://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-658 Joy Brandt <joybrandt@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 18:51:47 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Joy Brandt
2029 SE 88th Avenue
Portland, OR 97216
EM-659 Tara Farmer <earthgirlga@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 18:53:37 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Tara Farmer
3731 SE Cora St
Unit C
Portland, OR 97202

503-734-0256
EM-660 Charissa Newell <cutielilcha@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 20:03:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Charissa Newell
711 E. 23rd
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-661 Donna Crane <d.crane@care2.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 20:52:28 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Donna Crane
1576 Beebe Ln
Eugene, OR 97404
EM-662 Josh Cohen <joshcohen76@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 21:23:53 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Thanks for taking the time to consider not just the immediate economic gains but the long term as well. Think of the legacy you could leave behind by saving these old growth forests. Do you the right thing help save the trees.

Best Regards,

Josh and Corinne Cohen


Josh Cohen
chocolate freeride productions
2310 SE 22nd Ave.
Portland, OR 97214

503 998 5222
EM-663 Jesse Gore <jessegore@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 10/31/2007 21:53:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jesse Gore
6013 Kenwod dr.
Nashville, TN 37215-5703
EM-664 "Jonathan King" <jon.king@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/1/2007 6:27:22 Jonathan King
PO box 665
Glendale, OR 97442-0665


November 1, 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.

To whom it may concern:
I am the third generation
in my family to work in the timber industry. My lively hood and the lively
hood of many small communities depend on a healthy timber industry.
Therefore it is very important that the BLM 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. 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.

Thankyou for your time


Jonathan King

EM-665 Jeremy Schwenker <mojo3698@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 8:05:07 Dear BLM,
Our public lands are not for sale. I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade our ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- Clear cutting is barbaric and should have no place in forest management. The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jeremy Schwenker
6527 NE Broadway St. Apt. 23
Portland, OR 97213
EM-666 Maynard Freemole <mfreemole@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 8:29:31 Dear BLM,
The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing in their Western Oregon Plan Revisions will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests offer wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Maynard Freemole
2002 SE Crystal Circle
Corvallis, OR 97333-1825
EM-667 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers 11/1/2007 9:21:06 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/01/2007 09:20 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-668 Wade Stoddard <wadestoddard@yahoo.com> Save our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 9:52:24 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Wade Stoddard
4105 N. Massachusetts Ave.
Portland, OR 97217
EM-669 Randy Pearson <randy@odman-hecker.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 10:08:06 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Randy Pearson
1016 W. Tremont
Champaign, IL 61821
EM-670 Chris Keck <Chris_Keck2000@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 10:28:34 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Chris Keck
5735 N. Montana Ave.
Portland, OR 97217

503-830-5833
EM-671 Amy Benjamin <amybenjamin@LANDAM.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 11:05:30 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Amy Benjamin
11772 SE 222nd Drive
Damascus, OR 97089

503-853-9003
EM-672 Bill Erickson <azcanyondreamer@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 11:25:23 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Bill Erickson
5913 SE Holgate
Portland, OR 97206-3831
EM-673 "Darryl DeFea" <darryl.defea@swansongroup.biz> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/1/2007 11:34:03 Darryl DeFea
208 Nicholas Ct
Sutherline, OR 97479-8716


November 1, 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 trust you will keep in mind that real people's livelihoods are greatly
influenced by the policies chosen. Let's be wise about these decisions.

Thank you.
Darryl DeFea

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,


Darryl DeFea
541-459-3655

EM-674 Ashley Mitchell <dark_divinity@alloymail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 11:49:37 Dear BLM,
I am a concerned third-generation Oregonian writing to express my deep concerns over recent proposals to log some of this state's oldest trees. I don't think the benefits outway the costs in this situation. The changes the Bureau of Land Management are proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Ashley Mitchell
SE Cochran Drive, Apt. 203
Gresham, OR 97080

503-757-7268
EM-675 "William Maule" <bmaule@jeffnet.org> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/1/2007 12:08:14 William Maule
1840 Wilbur Rd.
Roseburg,, OR 97470-7802


November 1, 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.

BLM policies are strapping or counties for funds.
Trees are a renewable resource-they "do grow back"!!
Please support Afrc's plan for 1 billion board feet per year and get our
counties back on their feet. Bill Maule

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 Maule
541-672-8368

EM-676 James Goodwin <jegwin@aol.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 12:08:24 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.
As BLM employees, you want to be able to tell your children that you protected a forest from the actions of our poor benighted soul of a president, by stopping this assault on this forest. Stop the madness !

James Goodwin
1575 Fairview Place
Cottage Grove , OR 97424
EM-677 Robin Nelson <plop468@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 12:18:26 Dear BLM,
As a resident of the willamette valley I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests, which stand as truly unique ecosystems. There are no other forest quite like these of the entire planet. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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, which are a deeply treasured part of our national heritage.

Robin Nelson
1648 Alder St Rm#8
Eugene, OR 97401
EM-678 Andrew Jurash <andjurash79@msn.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 12:30:39 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Andrew Jurash
1929 Grand Prairie Rd SE
Apt 107
Albany, OR 97322

541-928-3906
EM-679 Loretta Huston <lizardlandus@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 12:33:04 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Loretta Huston
601 Woodleaf Ln.
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-680 Brad Bush <robotfuel@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 12:44:21 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Brad Bush
52 se 57th ave
#6
portland, OR 97215

5033477490
EM-681 Loretta Huston <lizardlandus@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 13:06:59 Dear BLM,
To the BLM,

We have been given this planet of life to steward, not to sell off for short-term monetary gains. The chain saw is a very modern tool within this disastrous experiment of sacrificing our old growth forest ecosystems, which can never be replaced by all the billions of dollars in the world. Please take the time to deeply reach within, and question, what will we leave for our future generations? We will never be able to "pay" for what we've already been given.
We do have solutions for our growing consumptive demands, we need to remain open to more sustainable choices, such as industrial hemp, bamboo, and other more durable structural plant material. Now is the time to seriously investigate and consider another direction for stewarding our most unique, complex and life sustaining planet.

Please act wisely, before we are left with less and less choice to maintain some form of balance on this planet of life.

Loretta Huston



Loretta Huston
601 Woodleaf Ln.
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-682 Marvel Loftus <marvel.loftus@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 13:18:41 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Marvel Loftus
9705 Lake Bess Road
#473
Winter Haven, FL 33884
EM-683 Jane Steadman <janesteadman@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 15:21:05 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jane Steadman
2500 NE Hoyt #40
Portland, OR 97232
EM-684 Elizabeth Maier <lizrainmaier@hotmail.com> Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/1/2007 17:00:12  
To Whom It May Concern,
I write to ask you, the Bureau of Land Management, to continue to assure that the land we love remains unlogged and protected.  Please do not allow this threat to our forests to occur.  I appeal to you as people who love Oregon too.  Please do not ignore the impact of global warming on our economy and the enormous amount of carbon that trees hold.  I urge you to reject the Western Oregon Plan Revision and instead protect the land that we hold dear.
 
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Maier
2524 SE Yamhill St.
Portland, OR, 97214
 


Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. Stop by today!
EM-685 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/1/2007 17:02:24 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,


Alan Test
anywhere
anywhere, OR 97777
--
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-686 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/1/2007 17:03:04 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,


Jesse Carmine
1335 Kings Blvd. Apt. B11
Corvallis, OR 97330
carminej@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-687 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/1/2007 17:03:41 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,


Katie Baum
4175 Wagner 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-688 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/1/2007 17:04:24 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,


stuart 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-689 "Paul Furrer" <pfurrer@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/1/2007 17:23:59 Paul Furrer
PO Box 1031
Creswell, OR 97426-1031


November 1, 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,


Paul Furrer

EM-690 Ellynne Kutschera <ekutsche@uoregon.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 17:59:34 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Ellynne Kutschera
745 E 15th Ave
Apt 25B
Eugene, OR 97401
EM-691 jessica zay <jessicazay@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 18:53:06 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

jessica zay
436 west d st
springfield, OR 97477
EM-692 Susan Montgomery <sue.windwalkers@att.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 19:02:43 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susan Montgomery
495 W Walnut St.
Zionsville, IN 46077
EM-693 Derek Severson <derekseverson@msn.com> PROTECT OLD GROWTH! 11/1/2007 21:14:56 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Derek Severson
928 S Ivy St
Medford, OR 97501-3735
EM-694 Kari Olsen <fizgig5@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/1/2007 22:31:46 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

I get my drinking water from the Corvallis area. The WOPR is unacceptable.

Kari Olsen
2681 Rose Crest Dr.
Philomath, OR 97370
EM-695 olaya garcia <ireth_alcarin1@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 3:38:48 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

olaya garcia
falo moro
pola de siero, ot 33510
EM-696 olaya garcia <ireth_alcarin1@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 3:42:34 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

olaya garcia
falo moro
pola de siero, ot 33510
EM-697 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Protect Old Growth/ No WOPR 11/2/2007 7:50:29 --- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/02/2007 07:50 AM -----

"Jimmy MacLeod" <roriimor@gmail.com>

11/02/2007 12:03 AM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc
lesley@kswild.org
Subject
Protect Old Growth/ No WOPR








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,

Before you get to the form part of this letter I would like to add my own two cents. No old growth logging. Maintain current riparian buffers. unless you can get an alternative that protects the environment better than the Northwest Forest Plan stick with it. Just say no to bad, undemocratic policy. This plan revision is clearly not about the needs of the forest or the general public. The majority of the general public wants old growth preserved, wants habitat for endangered species preserved, wants salmon habitat restored not degraded This is a back door deal between the Bushies and Big Timber to rake some more cream at subsidized prices while the environment and the public get the shaft. You know there is a nightmare of overstocked second growth land that needs to be dealt with. Get the wood from there.

You say it's not profitable. That's because you mismanaged it in the first place. The solution to mismanagement is not more mismanagement. It's time to admit that by allowing clear cutting so much public land you have aided industry in off loading the downside of industrial forestry onto the backs of the public and the the environment. This takes the form of endangered, extirpated or already extinct species. degraded waterways eroding mountainsides, lost fisheries, lost beauty but lots of ugliness etc. etc. All these costs are conveniently left out of the equation and if you do add them in, it is by saying we need to log big trees to pay for the restoration  of the mess you made by logging big trees. I suggest you go to all the timber companies that have been getting a free ride on public forest land and fattening themselves at the public timber trough that the bill is coming due for all the cut and run harvesting and the endless miles of roads that have helped them get rich while causing the land to bleed. Tell Big Timber that when they've paid their fair share of the havoc they've wreaked on our public lands then maybe we can talk about them getting more. But right now judging by the rate at which they seem to be stepping up and taking responsibility for the past damage they have caused, that is going to be a long way off.

The funny thing is that what I have just written is probably considered a radical point of view. But to me, what is radical is what you would call normal forestry practice. Here is an analogy. Suppose you loaned your teenager the car and he brought it back, out of gas, covered in mud, broken tail light and with a flat tire and said nothing about it. When you confronted him about it he said he'd take care of it but he had no money to pay for it. But if you gave him the other car he could get a paper route and pay you off from that. When you suggest that he use his bike since as far as you're concerned his car use credit is all gone, he complains that the extra time and effort it takes to do the route by bike will cut into his rate of earning so much that after paying you off for the damage he won't have any money left for entertainment unless he uses the other car and maybe some free gas besides. When you shake your head no, your wife comes along and takes his side and hands him her set of keys. Does this feel fair to you? If your answer is yes then you are probably BLM or Forest Service Management material. Heck you might even be ready for a shot at politics.

Putting sarcasm aside, I know you folks don't make the bad policies that dominate the timber programs, you just carry them out. You just follow orders. But isn't it about time that just following orders is not sufficient grounds for absolution from responsibility. No I am not suggesting you all quit your jobs or get yourselves fired by mouthing off like I am doing. But just maybe there is a middle road.  What about  a round robin anonymous  petition by BLM employees  saying that this WOPR  is a flopper.  Maybe a small symbolic act but at least you are rattling the cage from within. Why not show folks and your bosses that not all of you want to participate in seeing how fast we can convert ancient forest into strip malls, McMansions, housing tracts and ultimately land fills. And all to feed the ravenous god named ECON OMY

I'll turn this over to the more serious members of my tribe. Those who know your jargon better than I do and who like to forward sensible arguments based on specifics since what I have said is probably too general for your keen analytical instruments to measure and therefore probably useless or irrelevant. After all if it can't be easily rendered into money what good is it anyway.

Have a nice day,



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,

--
Jimmy MacLeod


EM-698 kim kittredge <kittredk@peak.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 9:21:04 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

kim kittredge
24245 Ervin Road
Philomath, OR 97370
EM-699 Benjamin Zumeta <bzumeta@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 9:36:07 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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. Show you respect the interests of the citizens of your agency serves and not just those of corporations and stand against this horrible plan.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Benjamin Zumeta
5529 Coniston Road NE
Seattle, WA 98105

206-913-3359
EM-700 "David Jordan" <coosbay1997@verizon.net> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/2/2007 9:58:31 David Jordan
360 1st Avenue
Coos Bay, OR 97420-4302


November 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.

Hello,

Of all the alternatives that are availalble on this plan, Alternative 2
is the closest to what is needed to both manage the lands in the BLM for
multipurpose and still provide timber and finances for local goverments
which is the focus of the O&C Act when they it was formed.

The future of timber harvests and the monies that are obtained from them
are very important to me.

My job is based on having a sustainable supply of timber available. In
addition, the services provided by Coos County, which receives money from
these O & C Act land payments are critical to our way of life and safety
here.

Thank you foe taking the time to read my opinions.



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 Jordan
541-269-1571

EM-701 "Carl Buchanan" <dbucaaa@msn.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/2/2007 10:28:19 Carl Buchanan
295 south 72nd street
Springfield, OR 97478-7470


November 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.

There are countless families
that depend on the Timber
Industry and I am one of
those families. When you make your decisions please
consider the families, cities
and counties that depend on
the Timber lands for their
way of life.


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,


Carl A Buchanan
(541) 744-5904

EM-702 "kathryn hurd & pam peterson" <meripah@cascadeaccess.com> WOPR 11/2/2007 12:02:32 To the Bureau of Land Management

 

I strongly urge you to oppose the WOPR design and the Bush administration's plan to log our last ancient forests. 

 

This plan will destroy some of Oregon's most priceless natural resources, and will have a negative effect on the environment by fouling the water, removing habitat for wildlife and threatening numerous species, including salmon.  Furthermore, it is now clear that cutting trees in large numbers depletes the earth's oxygen supply and adds to global warming.

 

Please do the right thing for us and for generations to come.  Stop the Western Oregon Plan Revision.

 

Kathryn Hurd

38540 SE Squaw Mountain Road

P.O. Box 883

Estacada, OR  97023

 
EM-703 Maureen Thompson <bingopajama@care2.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 12:06:22 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Maureen Thompson
526 Rogers St. NW
Olympia, WA 98502
EM-704 Jane Van Dusen <janevand@epud.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 12:15:58 Dear BLM,
As a resident of rural Oregon (Dexter), I watch out my window the devastation caused by unsustainable logging practices -- the damage to beautiful vistas, healthy water supplies, wildlife, ecosystems. The BLM's WOPR plan terrifies me! I cannot imagine the devastation of such massive increases in logging. The plan not only calls for huge increases in logging at a time when global warming is making the recovery/regrowth of logged areas very difficult but does not even mandate sustainable practices that protect wildlife habitat, biodiversity, water quality, and the health of the forests themselves (which in turn would make logging a long-term possibility!). I strongly oppose this plan and ask that you read the rest of this text provided by Oregon Wild to help me send this message. It speaks eloquently of my concerns and position:

I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Jane Van Dusen
82233 Rattlesnake Rd.
Dexter, OR 97431
EM-705 "M. Aulenbach" <shree.krishnaa@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 12:37:42 Dear BLM,
In regards to the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR), I am expressing my opinion about how this will not protect our last remaining Ancient Forests.
These original forests do not need to be included in any proposal to "manage" them, as they are perfect in themselves. These patches of our original forests on our Public Land have long stood the test to preserve water quality and habitat for the diversity of species we have in Oregon. I have never seen one of these Old-growth forests causing any animal to go on the Endangered Species or Threatened Species Act. On the contrary, these Native Forests are the very home for them.
I enjoy these towering forests for recreation, and love the ability to explore the groves of giant towering trees in my nearby area of Alsea Falls and Mary's Peak. I have found many trees between 3 and 6 feet in diameter, and a few dozen between 7 and 10 feet in diameter. These forests are our Oregon Gems. I do not support any plan to log them off and haul them away.

Sincerely,

M. Aulenbach
P.O. Box 408
Monroe, OR 97456

M. Aulenbach
25358 Cherry Creek Road
Monroe, OR 97456
EM-706 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions 11/2/2007 13:21:55 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/02/2007 01:21 PM -----

"MaryJi" <maryji@mind.net>

11/02/2007 12:23 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc
<lesley@kswild.org>
Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








 

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

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

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,

NAME: Lewis Anderson

ADDRESS: 835 Timberlake Dr

                  Ashland, OR 97520
----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/02/2007 01:21 PM -----

"MaryJi" <maryji@mind.net>

11/02/2007 12:24 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc
<lesley@kswild.org>
Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








 

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

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

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,

NAME: Julia Anderson

ADDRESS: 835 Timberlake Dr

                  Ashland, OR 97520
----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/02/2007 01:21 PM -----

"MaryJi" <maryji@mind.net>

11/02/2007 12:25 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc
<lesley@kswild.org>
Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








 
 

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

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

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,

NAME: Pyar Anderson

ADDRESS: 835 Timberlake Dr

                  Ashland, OR 97520
----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/02/2007 01:21 PM -----

"MaryJi" <maryji@mind.net>

11/02/2007 12:26 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov>
cc
<lesley@kswild.org>
Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions








 
 

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

Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

Dear BLM,

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,

NAME: Voe Denis

ADDRESS: 845 Pavilion Plc

                  Ashland, OR 97520
EM-707 does-65369@mypacks.net Citizen response opposing WOPR 11/2/2007 14:38:30 As a concerned, tax paying citizen, I would like to encourage the BLM and Gov. Kulongoski to strongly oppose the WOPR design, and the Bush administration's design to log our last ancient forests ("WOPR"); foul the water and threaten numerous species, especially the salmon.

Thank you!

Janet A. Mennona
2207 SE 45th Ave.
Portland, OR 97215
EM-708 "Cote, Randy R. OR-ARNG" <randy.cote@us.army.mil> (UNCLASSIFIED) 11/2/2007 14:48:08 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: NONE



I'm strongly opposed to the WOPR.  The permanent protection of ancient forests is vital to the overall health of the environment.  Please stop this assault on our environment.  It is our duty to save the ancient forests for future generations.

 

Randy R. Cote

 



Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: NONE
EM-709 Carla Wenzlaff <cjwenzlaff@earthlink.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 15:21:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Carla Wenzlaff
1642 E 43rd Ave
Eugene, OR 97405
EM-710 Lakshmi Jagannathan <lakshmij@yahoo.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/2/2007 15:30:32 I am writing to oppose your plan to throw out the
Northwest Forest Plan. Your preferred alternative (#2)
to "produce the highest economic return to local
communities from a sustained yield of timber" by
increasing the clear-cutting old growth forest
reserves is unacceptable.

According to the BLM's own analysis,the impact of this
alternative would be severe. It would increase
fragmentation of the forest, decrease habitat for the
marbled murrelet and the spotted owl over the next 50
years, result in the extinction of some plant and
fungi species, and would allow logging closer to
streams, ponds, and wetlands than is currently
allowed.

As it is, the BLM is not careful about counting
endangered species. Volunteers with the Northwest Eco
System Survey Team have found that they have to do an
inventory of red tree vole nests themselves in order
to protect old growth forests.

The BLM's comment page asks for a "substantive
comment" - meaning a solution, not an opinion.
Here it is: No Action
The Northwest Forest Plan was was developed by experts
to protect forests that were damaged by years of
non-sustainable over-cutting and unrealistically
optimistic claims of reforestation. Leave it alone.

According to your web site this is your mission "To
sustain the health and productivity of the public
lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future
generations of Americans." Please work towards the
goal.

Sincerely,

Lakshmi Jagannathan
Beaverton, Oregon


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-711 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/2/2007 15:35:41 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,


Mary Addams
2137 W 16th Way
Zip: Eugene OR 97402
maryaddamsor@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-712 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/2/2007 15:36:17 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.
There are far more reasons than are mentioned here not to press
forward with ill conceived plan.

Sincerely,


Alice Pueschner
1512 Barber Dr,
Eugene, OR 97405
paljack@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-713 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/2/2007 15:36:53 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,


Lorin Lindner
1521 Crest Dr
Los ANgeles, CA 90035
docllindner@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-714 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/2/2007 15:37:35 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,


bev andrews
3639 kendra st
eugene, ore 97404
vebros43@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://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference!
EM-715 Mary Addams <maryaddamsor@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 15:43:06 Dear BLM,
I am horrified with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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. Along with the burning of fossil fuels, cutting old forests are the primary cause of global warming. Those areas of the world with forests-especially older forests-have a responsibility to every species on the planet (humans included) to protect this resource that helps the planet to keep itself at the corect temperatures.

People need money to pay for their social services. But destroying our old-growth forests is a suicidal way to do it. Surely the BLM management, the federal gov't, and the state gov't leaders can find a better way.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Mary Addams
2137 W 16th Way
Eugene, OR 97402

541-343-2813
EM-716 Joseph Auth <jauth@vt.edu> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/2/2007 21:08:12 Dear BLM,
In the Western Oregon Plan Revisions, please exclude the Molalla River Recreation Corridor from any timber harvesting or thinning proposals. Volunteers from community and recreational organizations have spent many hours maintaining these trails. Timber harvesting or thinning in this corridor will destroy the scenery of these trails.

I am also very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Joseph Auth
3026 SE Clinton Street
Portland, OR 97202

(503)929-2913
EM-717 Celeste Lear <oneearlear@yahoo.com> Please end the destruction of our forests 11/3/2007 0:06:11 Dear BLM,
I choose to visit Oregon for a variety of reasons, including experiencing the beauty and wonder of the old-growth forests, the excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Celeste Lear
654 San Juan Ave.
Venice, CA 90291
EM-718 Cynthia Ignatovich <goodhiker@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/3/2007 12:37:03 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Cynthia Ignatovich
719 NE 110th Ave.
Portland, OR 97220
EM-719 Terrea Zumeta <tzumeta@comcast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/3/2007 16:14:08 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Terrea Zumeta
5529 Coniston Rd NE
Seattle, WA 98105
EM-720 Nancy Herzberg <heartmtn@oregonfast.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/3/2007 19:11:27 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Nancy Herzberg
P.O. Box 425
Florence, OR 97439
EM-721 Takuji Soyama <tsoyama@desu.ne.jp> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/3/2007 21:05:52 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Takuji Soyama
2-14-15 Higashiabiko
306 PatioSquareTennoudai
Abiko-si, ot 270-1144
EM-722 Robbin ll Lacy <surfdog@mind.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/4/2007 5:51:55 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Robbin ll Lacy
173 hUMMINGBIRD LANE
t, OR 97540
EM-723 "ART COLBURN" <artbcolburn@hotmail.com> BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision 11/4/2007 7:04:50 ART COLBURN
p.o. box 3500
PORTLAND, OR 97208


November 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.

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.

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,


ART COLBURN
503-816-5269

EM-724 Samantha Gunning <lunabee_11@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/4/2007 7:05:16 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Samantha Gunning
35 Hearth Cr
Kit, ON N2M 1G7
EM-725 Thomas Coutts <thomascoutts@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/4/2007 13:39:02 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Thomas Coutts
1729 SE Cobb St.
Roseburg, OR 97470
EM-726 Bianca Dolan <biancd80@yahoo.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/4/2007 14:04:20 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,
 
Bianca Dolan
2805 SE Oak St
Portland, OR 97214

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-727 "Adi Fairbank" <adi@peacearms.org> public comment 11/4/2007 14:19:20 I am writing to submit a public comment on the BLM's proposed Western
Oregon Plan Revision.

I believe an increase in logging of ancient forests at this time is at
best imprudent, and at worst immoral, due to the fact that these forests
are enormous carbon sinks. The threat of global warming is quickly
becoming acknowledged as the single biggest threat to civilization. We
should be doing everything possible to prevent it's full effects from
being realized.

The preservation of all remaining forests, especially ancient forests
should be on the top of the list of actions to mitigate global warming.

To do anything else is at best a disservice to the younger generations,
and at worst a crime against the future of humanity.

Thank you for considering my comment.

Adi Fairbank
5023 SE Kelly St
Portland, OR 97206

EM-728 Sarah Davidson <witchazelnut@yahoo.com> public comment 11/4/2007 16:54:07 I am writing to submit a public comment on the BLM's
proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision.

I believe an increase in logging of ancient forests at
this time is at
best imprudent, and at worst immoral, due to the fact
that these
forests are enormous carbon sinks. The threat of
global warming is quickly becoming acknowledged as the
single biggest threat to civilization. We should be
doing everything possible to prevent it's full effects
from being realized.

The preservation of all remaining forests, especially
ancient forests
should be on the top of the list of actions to
mitigate global warming.

To do anything else is at best a disservice to the
younger generations,
and at worst a crime against the future of humanity.

Thank you for considering my comment.

Sarah Davidson
5023 SE Kelly St
Portland, OR 97206

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
EM-729 RDCFarris <rdcfarris@comcast.net> Forests and WOPR 11/4/2007 17:42:43 Sirs, Madams,

The idea of submitting any of the remaining remnants of the state's
-- the world's -- primeval forests is unconscionable. The WOPR must
be shelved. It will take hundreds of years for these rare climax
ecosystems to again occur. Forest management is indeed a choice -- a
hard one. Courage is required.

David Farris
Portland, OR
503.299.5903
EM-730 David Hipply <djhipply@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/4/2007 18:30:33 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

David J. Hipply
8870 SE Hite Ct
Boring, OR 97009-8447

503-225-5555
EM-731 Joy Thomson <happyjoy@clearwire.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 9:01:46 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Joy Thomson
127 bauer ln
eugene, OR 97404
EM-732 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Little North Fork Wilson River 11/5/2007 9:43:29 
----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/05/2007 09:42 AM -----

MoonGM37@aol.com

11/04/2007 06:37 PM

To
orwopr@or.blm.gov
cc
guyorcutt@mac.com, karl@nwmotionproducts.com
Subject
Little North Fork Wilson River








Attached are my responses to the WOPR.
 
Gene McMullen
Bend, Oregon

Gene McMullen

22285 White Peaks Drive
Bend, OR 97702
541-312-8939
MoonGM37@AOL.Com

November 4, 2007

Bureau of Land Management
Subject:  Little North Fork Wilson River

Dear BLM
I recently was able to peruse your "Western Oregon Plan Revision".  While I most assuredly would probably not agree with many of the areas you have planed to reassign from Conservation Reserve to active cutting, in most cases I am probably not qualified to comment.  However, on the Little North Fork Wilson I am.
A fishing trip along this stream presented me with beautiful older forest and stable riparian in 1986 (except for the lower mile that had been poorly logged by the State in the early 60's).   Another trip in 1988 showed a clear-cut riparian (the buffer strip required by state law pretty much all blew down during a storm in the early 90's) and totally denuded hills in a section from the State boundary to several miles upstream.  Only a small portion remained in the section up to one half mile above White Creek.
To make a long story short, a concerted effort was put forth to save this last remaining piece of older forest.  Local Steelheader Chapters, BLM (especially y Daha Shuford and John Rodosta), Hampton Lumber and Simpson Lumber, local citizens and other interested parties finally agreed to a trade of the 500+ acres along the Little North Fork for 800+ acres of BLM land elsewhere. (This included the already logged portions of private land.)  We were basically told that this area would be put in a "Conservation Reserve" status, which would mean it would stay as it was unless there was a national emergency.  It is incredulous to me that now the BLM can go back on this promise with a single computer entry.
The Little North Fork is a vital fish-bearing stream on in the Tillamook Bay systems.  It has wild spawning populations of Chum Salmon, Chinook Salmon, Steelhead, Coho Salmon and Cutthroat Trout. (A recent program quoted an ODFW biologist with an estimate of 2,000,000 out-migrating juvenile Chinook)  In addition several threatened plants plus Bald Eagles and Marbled Murrilets use this area.
If your evaluation of other areas has been the same as that for the Little North Fork it would appear that no care is involved.  If we have come to the point where these last small areas must be included then the days of reckoning are not far away.  Please reconsider your decisions.

Respectfully,
Gene McMullen
Bend Oregon

Two attachments.  Riparian as it was several years after lower area was clearcut.  Another showing how an uncut area looks.


See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.[IMAGE][IMAGE] - C.jpg - C.jpg
EM-733 denny kasunic <dennykaz@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 10:55:35 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

denny kasunic
206 se 74th ave
apt B
portland, OR 97215
EM-734 Perry Bream <pbream@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 12:17:57 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Perry Bream
4937 Elkhead Road
Yoncalla, OR 97499
EM-735 "Susanne K. Fahrnkopf" <kindi@siskiyou.org> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 13:48:11 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susanne K. Fahrnkopf
11720 Takilma Rd.
Cave Junction, OR 97523
EM-736 William Howald <howald@foxinternet.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 14:02:18 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

William Howald
13309 47th Dr NE
Marysville, WA 982718670
EM-737 John Forsyth <jlforsyth@charter.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 14:20:28 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

John Forsyth
4611 Cloudcrest Dr.
Medford, OR 97504
EM-738 Jason Reynolds <icefauna@pacifier.com> Improve BLM lands, protect Oregon's old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 15:24:48 Dear BLM,
As an environmental scientist, avid outdoorsman and Oregonian, I disagree with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. Much of the BLM lands I have visited represent "old school" management at its worst. The WOPR is simply more of this same poor management. The changes the agency 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. PLEASE improve BLM lands by properly managing their forests and improving habitat.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jason Reynolds
5114 NE Mallory Ave
Portland, OR 97211
EM-739 Sarah Aspholm <moonlitfirefly@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 17:01:42 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Sarah Aspholm
461 NE Edison St
Hillsboro, OR 97124
EM-740 Jane Almquist <jane@ashlandhome.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 18:37:40 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Jane Almquist
1237 Ashland Mine Rd.
Ashland, OR 97520
EM-741 roy wheeldon <roy@wheeldonkarate.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 19:58:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Washington for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

roy wheeldon
3920 n.e. 10th street
renton, WA 98056
EM-742 Susan Cohen <crssusan@charter.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/5/2007 22:18:35 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Susan Cohen
1624 NW Olmar Dr
Grants Pass, OR 97526
EM-743 Abraham Bettinger <musicalfarming@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 3:18:57 Dear BLM,
Hello, I wanted to speak my voice against the WOPR This plan is criticaly dangerous to oregons ecology, If the blm doesnet realize the environmental havoc its already created in some places it will just degrade more of our heritage. I dont suport logging of old growth forest, and will be willing to buy alternative building materials or susrainably harvested wood. I hope the bureau make the right choice here and i beleive the wopr should change with no logging of old growth forest

Abraham Bettinger
1350 Iowa st.
ashland, OR 97520
EM-744 Rachel Griffin <rgsquared@gmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 7:33:44 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Rachel Griffin
12 Harper Canyon Rd.
Salinas, CA 93908
EM-745 Deborah Newell <djnewell@cavenet.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 8:21:12 Dear BLM,
I am very concerned with the direction the BLM is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the agency 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.

BLM lands in western Oregon contain about 1-million acres of our remaining older forests. The WOPR would increase logging of forests over 200 years sevenfold, and threatens some of Oregon's best remaining ancient forests. Two thousand square miles of forest would be put in "Timber Management Areas," where clearcutting is emphasized.

By logging closer to streams the WOPR reduces important protections for clean water and Pacific salmon. High quality drinking water originates on BLM lands for the citizens of Salem, Corvallis, Eugene, and 70 other Oregon communities. Salmon need cool, clean water, but the WOPR would remove stream buffers that shade streams and keep sediment from the water. Please leave the existing protections for riparian areas in place.

Wildlife such as elk and black bear and threatened species like the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet rely on BLM forests. The WOPR would reduce protections for wildlife populations and diminish habitat for countless plant and wildlife species. Please choose an alternative that leaves habitat protections for wildlife, especially in existing old-growth forests, in place.

There are many less sensitive and more practical places to generate wood fiber than our last remaining ancient forests, like the millions of acres of young, even-age tree plantations that have grown since previous clearcuts. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - the BLM would provide wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests.

Instead, 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.

Deborah Newell
1270 Dick George Rd
Cave Junction, OR 97523
EM-746 Giancarlo Panagia <js2952@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 8:44:44 Dear BLM,
I live in Wisconsin but I visit Oregon at elast once a year for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Giancarlo Panagia
2229 E 5th St #A
Superior, WI 54880
EM-747 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: Off Road Vehicle proposal 11/6/2007 9:27:08 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/06/2007 09:25 AM -----
----- Forwarded by William Freeland/MDFO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/05/2007 01:23 PM -----




"Roger  and Marylou Schnoes" <schnoes@jeffnet.org>

11/03/2007 10:07 AM

To
<kristi_mastrofini@blm.gov>
cc
"Vroman Dennis P." <dpvroman@budget.net>
Subject
Fw: Off Road Vehicle proposal








Kristi,
Attached is a public comment sent to my home email address, as the sender didn't know to what BLM address to send his comment.  Dennis Vroman used to work in Silviculture at the Siskiyou National Forest, has probably banded more birds than any other person in the Klamath Province and is a  well-respected avian ecologist/published author.  Please see his comments attached.  Thanks for asking the decision-maker to consider them.
Marylou Schnoes
 
[Dennis, Kristi is the Lead Planner in the Ashland Resource area.]
----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis P. Vroman
To: Marylou and Roger Schnoes
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 4:48 PM
Subject: Off Road Vehicle proposal

Hi Marylou,

Saw in the paper about the locations for proposal off road vehicle use.  One I see is the Anderson Butte area.  After spending a lot of time looking at the Medford BLM web page, I couldn't find any connection for a reply by e-mail.  Would it be possible for you to get this to the person handing comments for this proposal.

Thanks a bunch, Dennis

To Whom it May Concern,

I will keep this short and sweet.  I'm concerned about the use of the Anderson Butte area by Off Highway Vehicles.  For one, the south facing slope off Anderson Butte is a lovely site to behold in its natural state.  In addition to this, it is an Oregon National Audubon Important Bird Area (IBA).  My feelings are that off road vehicle users would have little concern for any flora and fauna that are part of this unique area's egosystem.  See the following web pages for additional information on Oregon's IBA and Anderson Butte IBA.

http://www.oregoniba.org/oregonibamap.htm

http://www.oregoniba.org/andersonsterling.htm

Sincerely,

Dennis P. Vroman, 269 Shetland Drive, Grants Pass, OR  97526

EM-748 Gretchen Hillard <gretchen.hillard@gmail.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/6/2007 10:51:51 November 9, 2007

To: orwopr@or.blm.gov

From: Gretchen Hillard@gretchen.hillard@gmail.com
Greensprings area, near Ashland, OR

My home is located on private land that is surrounded not only by a BLM
forest in the Medford District, but by the Cascade Siskiyou National
Monument and is near the proposed Soda Mountain Wilderness Area. I am
concerned that changing the Western Oregon Plan would undermine or prevent
the Monument from achieving its mandated goals, especially ecological
diversity. I am also concerned that any logging in the Soda Mountain
Wilderness Area will adversely affect the wilderness features that now can
be preserved by making it a roadless area. To prevent these impacts I
recommend that the Plan not be altered, and that an independent observer
position be created to ensure that all logging that does take place meets
the criteria In the Plan and those in plans for other designated areas, such
as the Monument.

The Monument Resource Management Plan states the objective to preserve,
protect and restore lands, especially Research Nature Areas, as stated in
the Oregon Natural Heritage Plan. Two are in the Monument: Jenny Gulch Area
and Scotch Creek Area. Equally important, conservation measures that must
be observed for any tree harvest are enacted in the Monument Resource
Management Plan. Old Growth and Diversity Emphasis Areas are identified in
the Monument Plan. These conservation measures must continue to be observed
to protect the forests and the wildlife and plants that depend on them.

I would like to see nearby forest managed to protect my home from wildfire
and to preserve the Emigrant and Bear Creek watersheds, scenery, and
recreation opportunities. This BLM forest, like all BLM managed lands, is in
the public trust. All publicly managed land needs to be protected not only
for its neighbors, but for future generations to enjoy.

Finally, selling off Oregon's ancient forests and damaging the watersheds
and other public land anywhere in the Plan area will undermine the State¹s
future. Protecting communities from fire and creating jobs in restoring
damaged landscapes, while protecting ancient forests and species, should be
the top priority of federal land management agencies.


EM-749 "Barb Morris" <barbmorris@jeffnet.org> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/6/2007 11:11:02 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,

Barbara E. Morris

2203 Dollarhide Way

Ashland, OR97520

 

 

 

 
EM-750 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/6/2007 11:39:21 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,


Joshua Welch
1995 Grant St.
Eugene, OR 97405
joshuawelch@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-751 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/6/2007 11:40:22 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing to express my concern over the WORP. As an outdoor
enthusiast, I greatly enjoy time spent hiking and bicyling outdoors,
especially in old growth 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.

Sincerely,


Lucas Willett
friend and neighbor
866 Clark St
Eugene, OR 97402
lukewillett@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-752 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/6/2007 11:42:00 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.

When I moved to Oregon just over 3 years ago, I was drawn to the
ancient old-growth forests and the wildlife that they sustain. The
thought of losing these precious treasures saddens me deeply.

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

Sincerely,


Ashley Shaw
655 Goodpasture Island Rd. Apt. 117
Eugene, OR 97401
ashtree_8@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-753 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/6/2007 11:42:43 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

I am writing in regard to the proposal to open a million plus acres
of old-growth and watershed areas to logging in my part of Oregon.

The possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on
western Oregon BLM lands is alarming. 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, why isn't it our highest
priority to protect them for future generations to enjoy?

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

Sincerely,


Teresa Mueller
2059 Friendly
Eugene, OR 97405
treeonly@ram-mail.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-754 Steve Kingsford-Smith <big_summits@hotmail.com> RE: ARE YOU SERIOUS?!? 11/6/2007 12:17:21 Hi Alan,

Thank you for your reply. I certainly appreciate you taking the time to respond individually. However, I don't sense that local environmental groups build on controversy. Given climate change, the increasing threat from dry and fuel-filled forests, and dwindling virgin habitat, the cutting of old-growth trees IS controversial. Period.

Mature stands are far too valuable as sequesters of carbon, filters of clean water and air, islands of biodiversity, and the last small pockets of the wild temperate forests that used to stretch unbroken from southern Alaska to northern California. I understand the bureaucracy and limitations the BLM is operating under, but I know many Americans would like to see efforts refocused towards massive fuel reduction and habitat rehabilitation. These efforts could yield significant timber for local communities while reducing fire danger and protecting mature stands and the invaluable service they provide standing, not cut. I will continue to peruse the information you provided and will continue to monitor the BLM's activities. Please add these comments to the public record and consider them judiciously as you make decisions affecting forest health.

Regards,

Steve Kingsford-Smith
651 NW Sundown Lane
White Salmon, WA 98672big_summits@hotmail.com
EM-755 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: ARE YOU SERIOUS?!? 11/6/2007 13:10:33 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/06/2007 01:04 PM -----

Steve Kingsford-Smith <big_summits@hotmail.com>

11/06/2007 12:27 PM

To
<alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov>
cc

Subject
RE: ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?






Hi Alan,

Thank you for your reply.  I certainly appreciate you taking the time to respond individually.  However, I don't sense that local environmental groups build on controversy.  Given climate change, the increasing threat from dry and fuel-filled forests, and dwindling virgin habitat, the cutting of old-growth trees IS controversial.  

Mature stands are far too valuable as sequesters of carbon, filters of clean water and air, islands of biodiversity, and the last pockets of the wild temperate forests that used to stretch unbroken from southern Alaska to northern California.  I understand the bureacracy and limitations the BLM is operating under, but I know many Americans would like to see efforts refocused towards massive fuel reduction and habitat rehabilitation.  These efforts could yield significant timber for local communities while reducing fire danger and protecting mature stands and invaluable service they provide standing, not cut.  I will continue to peruse the information you provided and will continue to monitor the BLM's activities.  Please add these comments to the public record and consider them judiciously as you make decisions affecting forest health.  

Regards,

Steve Kingsford-Smith
651 NW Sundown Lane
White Salmon, WA 98672
big_summits@hotmail.com
EM-756 Laura Vitale <earthmomma79@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 14:33:57 Dear BLM,
After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming.

A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Laura Vitale
1609 N 46th St
303
Seattle, WA 98103
EM-757 Kyle Haines <kfaeastside@yahoo.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 16:56:50 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Kyle Haines
1415 Johnson Ave
Klamath Falls, OR 97601
EM-758 Randy Tashjian <envirohero@hotmail.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 19:04:22 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Randy Tashjian
1031 Trafalgar Drive
Glendale, CA 91207
EM-759 Milton Nelson <mas@webenet.net> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/6/2007 20:57:53 Dear BLM,
Perhaps this WOPR proposal should be called "No tree left behind." Claiming that this plan is a solution for lack of funds for counties and schools is an excuse to satisfy desires of logging companies. It is an old way of thinking and we need new ways to solve problems.
Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won't be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon's spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. Old growth trees are fire-resistant and help store carbon instead of releasing it into the atmosphere as logging does. Live trees release oxygen. Over 90% of our old growth trees have already been logged.
The WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Milton Nelson
PO Box 1471
Port Orford, OR 97465
EM-760 Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions concerns 11/7/2007 7:49:41 ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 11/07/2007 07:49 AM -----

"diana@sparksandsparks.com" <diana@sparksandsparks.com>

11/06/2007 11:26 PM

To
Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov
cc

Subject
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions concerns








Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions

I am by no means a radical environmentalist, but I am alarmed by the devastating effect the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions will most assuredly have on federal forests in our region. While the Northwest Forest Plan is not perfect, WOPR Alternative 2 and 3 proposals are downright dangerous. 

I have no doubt that the Bush Administration is looking for an "easy fix" for O&C communities, but this is most definitely not the answer to our economic woes. Such massive clear-cutting is not only extremely hazardous to the health of water as well as to the resident flora and fauna, but is a step backward in modern attitudes toward forest management. Public opinion is clearly in favor of thinning second growth forests--both to supply updated mills and as a safeguard against wildfires--and protecting our remaining old growth as much as possible. And forward-thinking forest managers are working to do exactly this. 

The damage which the Administration-preferred WOPR proposals will wreak on our state's forest health is irreversible. But the BLM's present course is not, if it is changed in time. Please go back to the drawing board and consider options which the average American (not the extremists on either side) would be more comfortable with, and which unbiased forest scientists can support. Thinning reprod is clearly the best of all options. Providing jobs and protecting our environment are not mutually exclusive.

To non-Oregonian decision-makers in Washington, D.C., the long-term quality of life out here is apparently a non-issue. But I know that Oregon BLM personnel love this state as much as I do, and I urge you to resist the pressure that could push you into making a decision you know is not the best for your home state.

Sincerely,

Diana Sparks
17360 Upper Cow Creek Road
Azalea, OR  97410

cc: Oregon Congressional delegation, Governor Kulongoski
EM-761 "jessica willhite" <jkwillhite@gmail.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/7/2007 10:00:53 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,
Jessica Willhite
 
904 NW 21st #106
Portland, OR 97209
EM-762 "McKee, Kerri" <Kerri.McKee@PPMEnergy.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/7/2007 10:09:42 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.

As an Oregonian I am absolutely against the loss of these ancient forests!

Sincerely,

Kerri McKee

5458 SE Stark

Portland, Oregon97215
EM-763 "Warner, Heather" <Heather.Warner@PPMEnergy.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/7/2007 10:20:28 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 clear cutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.

Sincerely,

Heather Warner

1559 SE Elliott Ave.

Portland, OR97214
EM-764 "Gillen, Christine" <Christine.Gillen@PPMEnergy.com> Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests 11/7/2007 11:10:03 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,

Christine Gillen chrismelg11@juno.com
EM-765 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/7/2007 12:44:25 Dear Western Oregon BLM,

Please keep the remaining old-growth forests as they are.
I am writing to express my deep 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,


Debra Beers
6020 S.E. Johnson Creek Blvd.
Portland, Or. 97206
nisebeers@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-766 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/7/2007 12:45:10 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,

Amy Lodholz
208 Mill St.
Silverton, OR 97381
amsby17@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-767 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/7/2007 12:45:44 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.

While there is a need for timber production, the small amount of
remaining old growth is critically valuable for wildlife and
recreation.

Selling old trees for timber is a waste of public money, and poor
management. The BLM can instead use these areas to attract paying
visitors and avoid protected wildlife lawsuits.

Sincerely,


Michael Cleaver
3340 SE Morrison #512
Portland, OR 97214
michaelryanc@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-768 Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> WOPR comment 11/7/2007 12:46:21 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,


Tina Rosa
94065 Deadwood
Deadwood, OR 97430
tinrose04@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-769 Tammy Smith <tamara.j.smith@intel.com> Please protect our old-growth forests! 11/7/2007 18:06:14 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

Tammy Smith
7051 NE Rocky Brook Street
Hillsboro, OR 97124
EM-770 brent small <bretsmaw@yahoo.com> PROTECT OUR OLD GROWTH !!!! 11/7/2007 18:28:07 Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon for a variety of reasons, including the old-growth forests, excellent recreation, and opportunities to view wildlife on public lands. After learning about the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I am very concerned this plan will degrade my ability to enjoy the public lands in western Oregon. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is proposing will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan for old-growth forests and wildlife, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy.

Some of my concerns include:
- I'm disappointed that all special areas (Research Natural Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) won?t be protected from logging under WOPR. These areas contain unique values that many people seek out to enjoy. These areas should not be opened to logging.

- The increased, widespread clearcutting of forests under WOPR could reduce property values and the quality of life of thousands of Oregonians living near BLM lands. Over 1,000 miles of new logging road and 140,000 acres of clearcuts in the first decade alone would scar Oregon?s spectacular landscape.

- Clearcutting of old growth forests and proposed "Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas" threaten the peace and quiet for rural residents, visitors, and wildlife. Oregon needs rural residents and tourism to feed our economy - catering to the timber and motorized vehicle industry alone is not a solution.

Oregon's remaining old-growth forests are a treasure -- offering wonderful recreation opportunities, clean water, homes for wildlife, and offsetting global warming. But the WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting this amazing resource, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. A better way is to protect our heritage forests and focus on thinning and restoration of the plentiful unhealthy plantations left over from the last logging boom. This approach would safeguard the many values of old-growth forests that make Oregon a place I want to live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities.

brent small
1526 se 40th ave.
portland, OR 07214