E-Mail-6700-7099
| # | Sender | Subject | Date | Body |
| EM-6700 | morreale21@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:09:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: Please listen to this message. I am fully aware of this planets need for paper products and the jobs that proucing these products generate..but this is not the answer. The worlds population will continue to grow and so will the need for such products and services, the problem is that this earth cannot keep up. These forests which have stood pure through are pestilence need to be taken care of and not destroyed. I plead with you as one human to another. Thank you for listening. I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home.Please...listen to this message. Sincerely, michael morreale 2263 burgess rd waterloo, NY 13165 |
| EM-6701 | ciaosly@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:11:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, sylvia delgadillo 7105 owens street tujunga, CA 91042 |
| EM-6702 | afgetsalocal1@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:12:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Brian %pa_first_name% Rita Cohen 3852 E Alamos Ave Apt 125 Fresno, CA 93726 |
| EM-6703 | dave.murray@comcast.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:16:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, David Murray "229 Selby Ranch Road, No. 4" Sacramento, CA 95864 |
| EM-6704 | m35beirg@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:18:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Michael Grieb Po Box 48202 Burien, WA 98148 |
| EM-6705 | Christina E. E. Shetterly <snaketotem@yahoo.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 18:21:36 | To Whom It May Concern:
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for 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. We are indeed lucky to have the vast and diverse wilderness that we do here in Oregon. It deserves full protection for the health of our state, for the health of our planet and for many generations to come. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Christina and Derek Shetterly 33 Willamette Ave, Medford, OR 97504 Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. |
| EM-6706 | rahicks@charter.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:21:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Robert Hicks 2999 E Ocean Blvd, #1740 Long Beach, CA 90803 |
| EM-6707 | Richard Perry <rmperry@mac.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/10/2008 18:23:35 | Dear BLM,
I am a long time Oregon resident who is stridently against the WOPR. The long-term negative effects of this retrograde legislation would far out weigh any benefits touted by its creators. Some downsides of this plan are: -It will further stymie wild salmon recovery. - It will reduce habitat and diversity in our forests. - It will reduce water quality. - It will further threaten endangered species. - It will increase fire danger. - It will increase landslide danger - It will degrade areas used for non-motorized recreation - It will increase global warming. Most importantly, passage of this legislation will send yet another message to the citizens of this state and of this country, that our opinions and values are of no consequence to the Bush administration. The majority of people in this nation want old growth forests preserved. Please do not jeopardize our natural heritage by facilitating another resource grab by an administration intent upon enriching it's cohorts and cronies. Please do not approve the WOPR. Richard Perry 6325 N.E. Oregon Street Portland, OR 97213 |
| EM-6708 | joseph flaherty <josephflaherty@yahoo.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 1/10/2008 18:26:36 | Dear BLM,
I am an avid outdoor enthusiast living in the Illinois Valley in Oregon. I frequently hike, swim, birdwatch, and raft in the forests managed by the BLM in my area. I want to comment on the proposed revisions to your Western Oregon management plans. I am strongly opposed to any logging operations that take place in old forests--especially the forests that lie within the roadless areas of the Rogue watershed and tributaries. These forests provide habitat for a diverse variety of wildlife including some of the healthiest wild salmon runs in the contiguous United States. Several species of birds feed on these salmon. The diversity of wildlife makes the Rogue River area a delight to visit and enjoy. A considerable volume of timber can be extracted instead from the areas that have already been logged over the years. Please focus your timber plans in these areas and leave the wild areas alone. Thank You Joseph Flaherty PO Box 346 O'Brien OR ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs |
| EM-6709 | bigdaddy69_77@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:29:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Big Daddy 1813 Venice Drive Concord, CA 94519-1424 |
| EM-6710 | William Triest <williamht@earthlink.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 18:34:26 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, William H. Triest |
| EM-6711 | Bill Rodgers <wrodgers@umich.edu> | Comments on the WOPR | 1/10/2008 18:41:40 | As a relatively new resident of Oregon, I value many things about our state and region, including the mountains, the forests, and the water. I value them not just because they are beautiful to look at and to walk among, but because in a very real way they support human life here in the Northwest. Most immediately, we need fresh water, water that is not contaminated by runoff from poorly managed forest areas. Longer term, I am deeply concerned about global warming, and mismanagement of our forests will contribute to increases in the greenhouse gases that exacerbate that threat to our future.
For these and other reasons that I will not try to recount in this letter, I am distressed by what I see as terribly misguided changes in forest management that would be introduced by the WOPR. It seems to be part of a continuing pattern of the present administration's effort to put the immediate financial interests of corporations ahead of the long-term health of our environment, long-term economic stability, and the interests of citizens. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and to develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Bill Rodgers 2050 W 22nd Ave Eugene, OR 97405 (541)-654-0405 |
| EM-6712 | Heather <pisces_rock_princess@yahoo.com> | WORP | 1/10/2008 18:42:09 | Dear BLM,
I am very concerned about the Western Oregon Plan Revision. The threat to Oregon ancient forests is too great. The increase in logging in our old growth forrests is unacceptable! In order to preserve our forrests for further generations, protect vital salmon habitat, protect the surrounding areas drinking and prevent green house gas pollution from the massive amount of big rigs that will be going in and out of our forrests for logging, I strongly urge you to oppose the Western Oregon Plan Revision. Oregon ancient forests deserve permanent protection! Please protect western BLM forests and maintain the Northwest Forest Plan reserve system. Please use your power in Congress to rein in the Bush administration and prevent them from spending money to log old growth forests, and stop the BLM from selling off Oregon's ancient forest heritage. Sincerely, Heather Portland Oregon Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. |
| EM-6713 | jimilogsdon@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:48:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, jimi logsdon 1884 humboldt rd Chico, CA 95928 |
| EM-6714 | Regina Castellon <castellon.rg@gmail.com> | NO NO WOPR | 1/10/2008 18:49:56 | Greetings,
I live in the beautiful Illinois Valley,Oregon. I enjoy its pleasent fresh air and rushing river. I want to comment on the proposed revisions to your Western Oregon management plants. I do not want logging operations on old growth forests especially those on the Rogue watershed. These forests I enjoy walking in with family and friends. In addition, these forests provide homes for diverse wildlife and plants. I hope the next generation may also be able to walk on the beautiful Rogue watershed with limited roads. Please keeps these areas wild! Oregon will not be the same if all its old growth gets cut down for capitalistic reasons. Do not disappoint Oregon residents or all its wild creatures! Regina Castellon O'brien, OR 541-817-9136 |
| EM-6715 | tanaz_luvs@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 18:59:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Tanaz Polson 5919 N.E. Alton St Portland, OR 97213 |
| EM-6716 | heal@heal-online.org | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:01:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Angela Smith PO Box 58502 Seattle, WA 98138 |
| EM-6717 | frankie19492@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:01:58 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Frances Elder 1330 Avenue D #34 Snohomish, WA 98290 |
| EM-6718 | bgraystar@sbcglobal.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:12:59 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Brian Gray 7540 Amy Avenue Fair Oaks, CA 95628 |
| EM-6719 | Beth Hoffman <healinghands4you@jeffnet.org> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 19:15:04 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Elizabeth A. Hoffman 140 Lincoln Street Ashland, OR 97520 p.s. Another aspect of the WOPR proposal that I find very disturbing is the designation of a vast amount of terrain, over 100,000 acres, for off-road recreation. The large amount of noise from this usage interferes with other recreational use, and potentially increases erosion and terrain destruction as well. |
| EM-6720 | johncathy@infowest.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:15:59 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Cathy O'Leary Carey 17696 Cumana terrace San Diego, CA 92128 |
| EM-6721 | jbass@muddycat.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:17:00 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, jennifer bass 827 Venezia Avenue venice, CA 90291 |
| EM-6722 | Joanna Rodgers <j_rdgrs@yahoo.com> | Do better than the WOPR--protect OUR old growth! | 1/10/2008 19:28:12 | Dear BLM,
The Western Oregon Plan Revisions fly in the face of our current reality that only a small percent of our old growth forests remain, that climate change is upon us and we need our big trees now more than ever, and that the habitat threatened by the Revisions are priceless. Please hit pause on these plans! You will degrade the very things that bring many people to live in and visit Oregon, including recreation, natural beauty, and a temperate old growth/rainforest. We need the BLM and other government entities to be prudent with the precious lands. We can create more jobs and a longer-term healthy economy by protecting these areas for their ecological functions, the restoration jobs they can create (e.g., thinning old plantations and 2nd growth forest, tree planting and habitat restoration), and the tourism & recreation they attract. Please do NOT PASS WOPR. Protect our old growth!! Thank you for reading and taking my concerns seriously. Joanna Rodgers 2145 Garfield Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-6723 | Theodore Purdy <teodoropurdy@yahoo.com> | Do better than the WOPR--protect OUR old growth! | 1/10/2008 19:28:41 | Dear BLM,
The Western Oregon Plan Revisions fly in the face of our current reality that only a small percent of our old growth forests remain, that climate change is upon us and we need our big trees now more than ever, and that the habitat threatened by the Revisions are priceless. Please hit pause on these plans! You will degrade the very things that bring many people to live in and visit Oregon, including recreation, natural beauty, and a temperate old growth/rainforest. We need the BLM and other government entities to be prudent with the precious lands. We can create more jobs and a longer-term healthy economy by protecting these areas for their ecological functions, the restoration jobs they can create (e.g., thinning old plantations and 2nd growth forest, tree planting and habitat restoration), and the tourism & recreation they attract. Please do NOT PASS WOPR. Protect our old growth!! Thank you for reading and taking my concerns seriously. Theodore Purdy 2145 Garfield Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-6724 | yosemitepup@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:29:00 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, LeeAnn Lopez 20460 elkwood Street Winnetka, CA 91306 |
| EM-6725 | Cathy Bergman <cathmegberg@yahoo.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 19:32:30 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Cathy Bergman Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. |
| EM-6726 | marianneslaughter@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 19:37:00 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Marianne Slaughter 1656 Riente St. Camarillo, CA 93010 |
| EM-6727 | Terry Anderson <terryander@aol.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/10/2008 19:43:13 | Dear BLM,
I am writing to express my concerns with the BLM's preferred version of the Western Oregon Plan Revision. BLM's proposal does not represent responsible stewardship of public resources. 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. In particular, proposed timber sales and road building under the Kelsey-Whisky project threaten water quality and recreational values in an area I frequently visit. - 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. Clearcutting increases the danger of catastrophic wildfires, whereas careful thinning in non-old-growth areas can reduce this risk and provide ongoing employment opportunities. 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. Terry Anderson 3434 NW Franklin Ct. Portland, OR 97210 |
| EM-6728 | Tina Giese <olhodemacaco@mac.com> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 19:48:26 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Christine Giese 2620 Alder Eugene, Or. 97405 |
| EM-6729 | Tina Giese <olhodemacaco@mac.com> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 19:49:26 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Michael David 2620 Alder Eugene,Or 97405 |
| EM-6730 | Tina Giese <olhodemacaco@mac.com> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 19:50:39 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Eloise Mayer 87 E 33rd Ave. Eugene, Or 97405 |
| EM-6731 | Sumodeb1@aol.com | Forest plan | 1/10/2008 19:54:34 | Hello.
As a resident of Oregon and public employee, I am sending my voice to enourage you to take the No Action plan when it comes to the Forest management plan. I have friends who live in the Mount Hood corridor, and I believe that this would have a negative impact on that ecosystem as well as other wilderness areas throughout the state. I work for the Portland Water Bureau. The proactive stance that my employer has taken in managing the Bull Run watershed in cooperation with BLM and other agencies is commendable. The watershed provides clean clear, cold, and constant water for about a third of the state's population through good management practices. I am concerned that the increase in deforestation outlined in the plan could negatively affect this pristine source by further depleting the surrounding areas. Again, please vote No Action on the Forest management plan. Thanks for listening. Deborah Przepasniak Portland Oregon Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year. |
| EM-6732 | carol mcbrian <cmcbrian@efn.org> | comment on Western Oregon Plan Revision | 1/10/2008 20:10:19 | 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 Officials, I urge you to take the "no action" alternative on the Western Oregon Plan Revision )WOPR). My reasons are as follows: 1) The deforestation resulting from Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, particularly Alternative 2, would contribute to global warming. Here is what several authorities on the subject have to say about the relationship between climate change and deforestation: NASA: "Deforestation is the second major way we increase atmospheric carbon dioxide." Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: "Between 25 and 30 percent of the greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere each year -- 1.6 billion tonnes -- is caused by deforestation." --Sir Nicholas Stern, Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change for the British Government: "The loss of natural forests around the world contributes more to global emissions each year than the transport sector." A recent die-off of trees in Mississippi and Louisiana as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita makes it even more important to hang on to our Oregon forests. The following information is taken from an article by Marc Kaufman of the Washington Post, which appeared in the Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon, on November 16, 2007: I have paraphrased some of the information for the sake of brevity. The article in Science mentioned here is "Hurricane Katrina's Carbon Footprint on US Gulf Coast Forests", Science 16 November 2007: Vol. 318. no. 5853, p. 1107. Here is the information: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita produced the largest single forestry disaster on record in the US, with nearly 320 million trees killed or severely damaged in Louisiana and Mississippi. The amount of carbon that will be released into the air as a result of the dying trees and other vegetation will be about 1.1 billion tons, which is equal to the amount of carbon that all the trees in the US remove annually from the atmosphere. Attempts to mitigate the damage have been unsuccessful, largely because only $70 million of the $504 million allocated for this purpose has been processed or dispensed so far. An article on this subject, written primarily by researchers at Tulane University in New Orleans who studied images from two NASA satellites, appeared in the journal Science on November 16, 2007. 2) Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, particularly Alternative 2, would lead to deterioration in water quality all over western Oregon. According to the "Top Ten Reasons WOPR is a Bad Idea", www.oregonheritageforests.org, drinking water for over 70 Oregon communities, including the cities of Salem, Corvallis, and Eugene, originates on BLM lands. Clearcutting these watersheds would allow runoff to get into our drinking water and cause it to deteriorate. The following quote is from a comment on the 2007 Draft Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl written by Michael F. Gearheard, Director of the Office of Water and Watersheds, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, in August of 2007: "The measures under the NWFP (Northwest Forest Plan). . . have successfully demonstrated improvements in water quality on federal land. We consider that to be a very important achievement. We are deeply concerned that revisions proposed in the Draft Recovery Plan (as proposed in WOPR) could delay or even reverse this positive trend. That would be a big step backwards for water quality in Oregon." 3) Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, particularly Alternative 2, would increase flooding in Oregon. Flood control is one of the ecosystem services provided by older forests mentioned in a letter by five economics professors to the members of the Regional Interagency Executive Committee. The letter is dated February 15, 2000. The five professors are: Daniel A. Hagen, Western Washington University Gardner Brown, University of Washington Ed Whitelaw, University of Oregon Thomas M. Power, University of Montana, Ray Mikesell, University of Oregon The letter can be found at www.oregonheritageforests.org. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita revealed the Bush Administration to be spectacularly incompetent both at preventing flooding and at mitigating the damage from flooding. Before the flooding, President Bush set the stage for a disaster by allowing a man with no experience in disaster management become the head of FEMA, cutting funding to the Army Corps of Engineers for levee construction in New Orleans, and ignoring warnings that Katrina would be bringing about flooding. After the flooding, FEMA and other federal agencies made the disaster worse by responding too slowly to the flooding; frustrating the offers of help from AMTRAK, Wal-Mart, and a host of state, local, and international governments; and giving contracts for helping with the flood mitigation to firms with direct links to administration officials. Now the same administration that made such a mess of the flooding from Katrina and Rita wants to cut down the old-growth forests that have been preventing flooding in Oregon. This is really bad public policy. If any references are needed for my statements about Katrina and the Bush Administration, the events leading up to the flood are mentioned in "Bush and Katrina", September 6, 2005, www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_09/007060.php. I was unable to access this directly, and if there is any problem, it can be Googled under Katrina, Bush. The responses to Katrina are mentioned in "Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina. Instead of insisting that western Oregon counties sacrifice their old-growth forests as a condition for continued federal payments, the federal government should be paying the Oregon counties to keep their old-growth forests in order to prevent floods that would be even more embarrassing to the federal government than those caused by Katrina and Rita. Judging from the incompetence that the federal government has shown in its efforts to mitigate the damage caused by these two hurricanes, the old adage "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" gives ample reason to pay Oregon counties to keep their old-growth forests. Not only would Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 make flooding worse, but they would probably make winter landslides worse as well. My husband was reading a recent story in the Register-Guard about landslides on Highway 126, and he remarked to me that the photos of the hillsides where the landslides occurred showed areas that appeared to be bare of trees. Now I don't know whether this is due to logging or to highway construction, but I don't really think it makes any difference in the big picture. The fact is that mudslides do happen on Oregon slopes in the winter, and they will be worse if there are no tree roots to absorb the rainwater or tree trunks to slow down the sliding mud. 4) Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, particularly Alternative 2, would be be disastrous for Oregon's economy, particularly in the recreation and fishing industries. The paper by the five economics professors mentions the maintenance of salmon runs as one of the ecosystem services provided by older forests. It also has the following to say about the economic benefits provided by these forests: "Old growth forests provide uncommon opportunities for recreation. Recreation yields direct benefits to users, and also generates commercial opportunities for outfitters and others who sell goods and services to recreationists. The presence of recreational amenities can also provide benefits indirectly by helping to foster regional economic development. Such amenities provide a 'second paycheck' in the form of nonpecuniary compensation, which makes it easier for firms to attract highly qualified workers." The highly skilled workers who are attracted by Oregon's old-growth forests help to keep Oregon's economy more diverse, and therefore more stable and resilient than an economy based on only a few industries. In particular, a diverse economy is more stable and resilient than one built mainly around the timber industry, which tends to have boom-bust cycles. The loss of the benefits provided by Oregon's old-growth forests would be devastating to its economy. The county payments provided by WOPR would be small compensation for the loss of our old-growth forests. 5) Instead of cutting down our last old growth forests, the BLM should be thinning the second growth forests that it already owns. These forests need to be thinned anyway to decrease the danger of fire, and by concentrating on these forests, the BLM will avoid destroying the old-growth forests that support hunting and fishing, recreation, water quality, and overall quality of life in Oregon. A plan for doing just this is outlined in the Community-Conservation Alternative found on www.oregonheritageforests.org. 6) Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, especially Alternative 2 would be destroying an irreplaceable treasure. To cut down Oregon's old growth forests for a brief time of profit for a few timber mills and a few year's worth of operating expenses for the O & C counties is like killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. It is like Esau selling his birthright to Jacob for a mess of pottage (a bowl of lentil soup in modern-day language). It is selling an irreplaceable treasure for a few years of fast money. Sometimes I hear people who make their money destroying ancient forests saying that trees are a renewable resource. They are wrong on three counts. First of all, we are not talking about isolated trees. We are talking about the interconnected web of life that is a forest. This includes trees of many species and many ages; many types of shrubs, ferns, mosses, lichens, and wildflowers; many species of birds, mammals, fish, insects, reptiles and amphibians; all the microscopic soil life -- fungus, arthropods, bacteria, protozoa --everything that breaks dead trees down into new soil for the new plants coming up. Second, an old-growth forest is not renewable in our lifetime. If they were, the timber companies would be content with harvesting second-growth timber instead of looking for excuses to cut our last remaining old-growth forests. When an old growth forest is cut down and replaced with a tree farm, the result is an impoverished echo of the original forest. When I was younger and stronger, I used to do a lot of hiking in different types of forested areas. On one occoasion, I visited Curt Mitchell, who had been growing timber sustainably in Lorane, Oregon for over twenty years. As we were touring his property, he told me that we were approaching the fence between his property and a conventional timber grower. Even before I saw the fence I could tell where the boundary was, because I could see a straight line with ferns and wildflowers on one side, and thistles on the other. Third, a forest is not a mere resource. It is a treasure. Anyone who is incapable of recognizing this fact is literally unable to see the forest for the trees. Carol McBrian 1875 W. 15th Ave. Eugene, OR 97402 |
| EM-6733 | jessiruth@earthlink.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 20:22:05 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. I lived in Oregon for 10 years in 80's and was heart sick when we drove by clear-cut hillsides where every single tree was cut down and a bald hillside remained. Please don't let that happen again. Please rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Cynthia Barbera 254 Clay ST Sonoma, CA 95476 |
| EM-6734 | paul3d@comcast.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 20:26:05 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Paul G. Murphy 6100 Soundview Dr. Gig Harbor, WA 98335 |
| EM-6735 | Gina de Grassi <degrassi@epud.net> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 20:28:06 | Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM: The draft of the Western Oregon Plan Revisions us unacceptable. The Bush Administration is headed in the wrong direction with these proposed management changes to nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests. Your proposal increases old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, promotes building 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and allows clear-cutting at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This proposal depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks, and salmon. The proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the global climate. Your proposal should instead focus on managing previously logged public forestlands and the use of thinning second growth forests. This wood could be provided to local mills while simultaneously improving wildlife habitat. We have worked so hard to preserve what is left of our forests. The world is in the midst of a climate change crisis, several species are at risk of extinction, and the world's clean drinking water supply is diminishing and your proposal. Consider using your efforts to protect remaining old-growth forests, search for alternatives to profits from clear-cutting, and concentrate on creating job opportunities in recreation, restoration, and watershed management that would benefit all of us. Please, help protect our Oregon heritage forests and learn from our past mistakes. Don't destroy Oregon for the sake of short-term economic gain. We will all regret it. Sincerely, Gina de Grassi PO Box 2077 Jasper, OR 97438 email: degrassi@epud.net |
| EM-6736 | Seven Root <rhizomehommz@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 1/10/2008 20:30:55 | Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue, 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. I use these forests. My son and I have spent countless hours exploring and learning from these ancient groves. My family and circle of friends frequent these public lands: hiking, camping, plant-studies and wildlife observation is a few of the many reasons I love these wild places. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Let's come together as a nation and protect what is left of a beautiful and majestic legacy. Tree farms are already available. All of our grandchildren and their children will thank us for taking the long view. Do the right thing here folks. Protect these lands for public use. Sincerely, Jarret Stevens PO Box 11144 Eugene, OR 97440 "Every Child Has Known God Not The God Of Names Not The God Of Don'ts Not The God Who Ever Does Anything Weird, But The God Who Only Knows Four Words And Keeps Repeating Them, Saying 'Come, Dance With Me!' Come Dance..." -Hafiz- Make distant family not so distant with Windows Vista® + Windows LiveT. Start now! |
| EM-6737 | Heidi Haehlen <flutecat8@yahoo.com> | Comment Letter on WOPR | 1/10/2008 20:32:26 | Dear BLM Personnel,
Attached please find my comments on your proposed WOPR; I mailed this letter on Tuesday to you and my senators and representatives via USPS, but decided to email it also, due to the late date. I would like to add belatedly that, in the new approach of conservationism we hope the BLM will soon take, the Anderson Butte area in the Medford district remains protected and does not become any type of OHV area. It is yet another beautiful, fragile spot, already of great benefit to many people enjoying non-motorized outdoor activities. Please protect it. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Haehlen P.O. Box 1444 Jacksonville, OR 97530 Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. - WOPR Comments.pub |
| EM-6738 | Sfaithros@aol.com | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 20:42:38 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon.Sincerely,
Susan Manske ************** Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 |
| EM-6739 | jspragens@enigmaterial.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 20:43:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, John Spragens P.O. Box 50311 Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-6740 | scoopmcg@comcast.net | forest management plan | 1/10/2008 20:47:55 | The language isn't mine but it says it better than I could.
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, James McGuire Eugene, OR |
| EM-6741 | jeffh@deepdomain.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 20:50:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Jeff Hummel 3814 Sunnyside Ave N Seattle, WA 98103 |
| EM-6742 | Alan Wasner <awoz2@charter.net> | Comment on Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the "Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). | 1/10/2008 20:53:44 | Hi I would like to Comment on Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the "Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR).
It is very important to me and my family to maintain what little older growth forest we have left in Oregon. I strongly support the No Action Alternative, and I wish total rejection of the BLM's Preferred Alternative." I wish BLM would work to protect mature and old-growth forests. The reasons for this are because I spend a lot of time with my family hiking in some of these areas, as well as hunting in areas where it's allowed. Also, other states are far ahead, in my opinion, on their management of older growth and mature forests. Just driving south on Hwy 101 into California and the difference is striking. We don't need to log every square inch of Oregon. Thanks Alan R. Wasner 115 Sea Crest Dr. Otter Rock, OR 97369 541-765-7644 |
| EM-6743 | Jim Reed <jpreed@epud.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 1/10/2008 20:57:22 | Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions
Dear BLM: Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the WOPR. Your proposed option is unacceptable. There should be absolutely no cutting of old growth anywhere in the US. As a commercial salmon fisherman, who is directly impacted by the decisions of land mismanagement, I know that streams need additional protection from increases in temperature and siltation, not less. Therefore: The riparian setback should be increased not decreased. Increasing roads leads to more landslides and silt in the water, don't increase the amount of roads in the watershed. Eliminate clearcutting as it also increases turbidity. Use staggered cutting of second growth instead. Sincerely, Jim Reed, PhD 37370 Wallace Creek Rd Springfield, OR 97478 -- Jim Reed, Ph.D Mapping and GIS Consulting The Hydrologic Group PO Box 2077 Jasper, OR 97438-0299 541-988-4332 |
| EM-6744 | lisac@mac.com | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 20:58:04 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Lisa Caballero Portland, OR 97201 |
| EM-6745 | nicholas_william@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:01:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Nicholas Williams 44108 Fenhold Street Lancaster, CA 93535-4367 |
| EM-6746 | John adams <sos2010@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/10/2008 21:02:32 | 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 share the concerns and assertions above however,I just wanted to share my thoughts on the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR). I will start by noting that I am a 30 year resident of Oregon. It is appalling that the situation has come to this. Everyone involved shares a degree of culpability as well. A weak Northwest Forest Plan for the bioregion was implemented years ago. Today this current manifestation of petulance and disregard for scientific and conservative management of our forests on the part of the timber industry is reprehensible. The WOPR is merely powerful established interests attempting an end around on a weak Northwest Forest Plan. Truly the representatives involved, senators, governors, the BLM ought to be ashamed. You have failed in your responsibility to protect this region. Providing an end around for the timber industry does not serve the interests of the region. From a pure economics standpoint the trees and ecosystem are worth far more as tourism and as carbon sequesters than in serving the narrow interests of the timber industry. Besides, there is timber to be cut in this state. The whole west is littered with mismanaged tree farms, where the trees are chocking each other out and a fire hazard after being haphazardly replanted after clear-cut. Leave the big trees alone. There is no excuse to allow any more cutting of these marvelous carbon sequesting giant old growth trees. To do so is reckless. We do not even have a way to quantify the value of these great trees. You have to protect the ecosystem because the ecosystem is what keeps us alive. To even entertain the WOPR plan is irresponsible on the part representatives and the people charged with protecting the public interest. You need to dismiss this WOPR as a blatant and misguided attempt to abuse power. The region is everyone?s and that needs to be remembered. Come up with a more well thought out and responsible plan. Start consulting with the forward thinking people of Oregon Wild. I support the conservative approach they promote in managing or ecosystem. John Adams 1931 nw29th n3 Portland, OR 97210 John adams 1931 nw29th n3 portland, OR 97210 |
| EM-6747 | AimVB@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:03:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Aimee Van Buren 1501 Christina Ave Stockton, CA 95204 |
| EM-6748 | Scott & Geri Vasak <svasak@starband.net> | Comments re WOPR | 1/10/2008 21:03:07 | `
Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue, Portland, OR 97208 Re: BLM Western Oregon Plans Revisions Dear BLM, It is with disappointment that I write this letter. I am disappointed that the BLM has put forth the WOPR which proposes a great amount of clear cutting and general relaxation of stewardship values in the face of public opinion and scientific evidence that what our forests really need are strong protection measures,an increase in innovative timber harvesting methods, and real stewardship by private parties and public agencies. Here are some things I think are wrong about the WOPR: 1. WOPR proposes shrinking riparian zones. I think riparian zones should be larger if anything. These buffers are needed to keep soil erosion to a minimum and to keep fish bearing streams healthy. Make a note: Salmon are an Oregon icon. 2. WOPR proposes much more clear cutting. Clear cutting promotes soil erosion, and landslides in some cases. Clear cutting also disrupts wildlife and can change the microclimate in the area necessitating a shift in tree species to something more heat tolerant. Clear cutting is also disruptive to the human visual appreciation of the outdoors. Make a note: Tall green trees are an Oregon icon. 3. WOPR doesn't adequately address the use of small diameter trees. After all, if all the old growth trees are taken lumber mills will have no choice but to change their operations to milling smaller trees. Engineered lumber is a much used product not requiring large diameter trees and the mills that produce it seem to be doing well. 4. WOPR doesn't face the reality that thinning for fire safety as well as the sustainable harvest of small diameter trees is a good way to move into the future. Please reconsider this plan revision. I would like to see a green Oregon where the forests and waters can be enjoyed for values other than resource extraction. Sincerely, Scott Vasak P.O. Box 512 Eagle Point, OR 97524 |
| EM-6749 | klof581@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:03:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Kim Loftness 19814-15th Ave NE #206 Shoreline, WA 98155 |
| EM-6750 | wayne conlee <jconlee@msn.com> | Forest Management Plan | 1/10/2008 21:08:36 | I support the No action alternative
Thwnk you, Wayne C Conlee 2829 SE Belmont St. 105 Portland, OR 97214 |
| EM-6751 | norarn51@msn.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:10:07 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Nora Regan 1331 Olympic St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 |
| EM-6752 | kali lamont <kalimay10@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/10/2008 21:19:14 | 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. kali lamont cherry creek rd. monroe, OR 97456 |
| EM-6753 | Richard Chenoweth <dickchen@mind.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 21:33:14 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Richard G. Chenoweth, M.D., Ashland, Oregon |
| EM-6754 | Litak <litak@cavenet.com> | comments on WOPR | 1/10/2008 21:34:06 | To Whom it May Concern,
As a resident of the Illinois Valley in rural Josephine County, I would like to offer a few comments about the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. After reviewing the proposed alternatives, and speaking with BLM representatives here in Cave Junction, I have concluded that the "preferred alternative" seems to be nothing more than a plan to do large scale clear cutting in our area. I STRONGLY object to clear cutting - especially cutting our few remaining old-growth forests - for several reasons. First, clear cutting has a huge negative impact on the soil - both temperatures and erosion. It muddies the waters of our salmon bearing streams, and the preferred alternative seems bound to ignore any reasonable area of restraint in riparian areas. It drastically WORSENS our fire resistance, due to removing the most fire resistant, large trees. And lastly, it destroys the beauty of our area. Our forests are the major reason tourists frequent this area and people move to live here! Looking at a bunch of clearcuts is certainly not going to help our economy in that regard. My understanding is that the BLM is a public agency, managing public lands for the benefit of the people - not for short sightedly making a few bucks by logging our last remaining big trees... How about approaching the project by thinning some small diameter trees? That would really reduce fire risk as well as promoting local employment. I urge you to please act now to protect our forests. Sincerely, Carolyn Litak 4403 Dick George Rd Cave Junction, OR 97523 (541) 592-5370 |
| EM-6755 | one_ocean8@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:35:11 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Judith Gustafson 6231 188th St SW Lynnwood, WA 98037 |
| EM-6756 | kathy@clearcreekfamily.com | from Katherine Mechling, M.D. | 1/10/2008 21:36:48 | To whom it may concern:
I feel compelled to let you know why I oppose the BLM's WOPR plan 2. Medicine is also a politicized field, with plenty of money at stake. Tampering with the endangered species act, so one industry can profit from the limited resources is parallel to doctors and hospitals increasing their income through Medicare fraud. The endangered species act is the law of the land, and it is a very good law. Logging old growth and allowing OHVs in the roadless areas violates the ESA. It is my job to let my patients know the facts of their situation, help them sort out the false and often dangerous claims of the drug industry, and help them pursue long, good quality lives. I study the facts so I can steer them away from dangerous "Lose 50 lbs now!" drugs, and promote positive lifestyle changes that will carry them well for the long term. WOPR plan 2 is the timber and real estate industries "get-rich-quick" proposal. Good, non-biased science has shown us hundreds of reasons to not log the old growth forests for the health of our region in the long term. A forest is not just a collection of trees; it is a poorly understood web of interacting plants, fungi, bacteria, molds and animals. This may seem silly to you, but I need to inform you it is not. Every human medication is based on how fungi, bacteria and molds interact on animal cells. There are hundreds of emerging infections, but there are no emerging novel antibiotics. (You can call Dr. Sellinger, our infectious disease specialist, or any physician to confirm this). Destroying an old-growth ecosystem is like burning down the library. When someone's coronary artery is blocked (like when they are having a heart attack), the Cardiologist uses a stent to open the artery to restore the heart's circulation. There are only 2 drug-coated stents. One is the Taxus stent, coated with a drug derived from our Pacific Yew Trees, and the other Cypher stent is coated with sirolimus which is derived from a bacteria found on the forest floor on the Island of Siro (Syros). The roots of all trees and most other plants in an old-growth forest are connected by a network of fungal mycelia, so an infection in one tree can be felt many trees away. This obligate relationship is why our native orchids, herbs, ferns and mushrooms cannot be transplanted. It also allows the trees to communicate with each other. The mycelia webs can only thrive in undisturbed forest. How they interact is still a mystery. The "environmentalists" are not stupid profiteers. They are some of the most intelligent people I have met (and I socialize with Jo County's brightest). The environmental attorneys are making significantly less money than the timber industry attorneys, but they have repeatedly won in courts because they have the best science of their side. The environmental lawsuits would go away if the BLM and forest industries would stop violating the laws of the land. To dismiss all "environmentalists" is not in your best interest in the long-run. I understand your job is a political one, but you are expected to act with some integrity and intelligence. When a patient comes to me demanding an immediate cure, I can easily make more money if I do what they ask me, but I have taken an oath to do the right thing, which often means doing nothing. There are medications which will cause rapid weight loss, or whatever, but the long-term cost can be unacceptable. PAN> First, do no harm. The "do nothing" alternative will not sacrifice our most precious resource, one that does not exist any place else on the planet, to make a few quick bucks for timber and real estate industries. These forests may contain the bacteria or fungus that some day may hold the cure to someone's great granddaughter's illness. Katherine Mechling, M.D. (President, Josephine County Medical Society, Vice Chief of Staff, Three Rivers Community Hospital, private practice, Selma) 541-597-2464, 18173 Redwood Highway, Selma, OR 97538 |
| EM-6757 | Carrie Jo Stairs <mirzaminx@q.com> | Please take seriously | 1/10/2008 21:42:12 | 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. Carrie Jo Stairs 5716 NE 35th Ave. Portland, OR 97211 |
| EM-6758 | dmlifecoach@lycos.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 21:42:14 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Diana Maenhout "4530 Carpinteria Ave, #39" Carpinteria, CA 93013-1847 |
| EM-6759 | Phillip Hoff <seusuwa69@mac.com> | 1/10/2008 21:42:48 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Phillip H. Hoff 19605 River Rd. #101 Gladstone Or.97027 |
|
| EM-6760 | Kathy Schaeffer <heres_ot@yahoo.com> | Please protect our very precious old-growth forests! | 1/10/2008 21:52:13 | Dear BLM,
I live in Oregon becuase I value what the state has to offer, 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 saddened and concerned that 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.It will also eliminate this State Treasure . Once these Old growth froests are gone they are gone. this is an irreplacable loss, denying our children, grandchildren and generations to come the chance to enjoy what we have enjoyed and appreciated. 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, more than it is already scarred. - 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, contributing to landslides 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. Please consider the fate of not just this Sate, but the whole globe and how destroying these forests will contribute to the warming of the planet and the associated consequences. Let the forests continue to provide us with clean water, an irreplacable habitat for wildlife, an economic basis for our tourism, hunting, fishing and recreation, and a protection of our water and the homes bordering it. Tbhe short term gain is not worth the short and long-term consequences. I am looking forward to your reply. Kathy Schaeffer P.O. box 932 Silverton, , OR 97381 |
| EM-6761 | Jo Moorefield <jomoorefield@mac.com> | Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 21:52:14 | It is very distressing to hear of the plan to increase logging on old
growth forests in Oregon. The original primeval forest has almost completely disappeared, along with its unique habitats, its opportunity for wilderness experience and appreciation of the earth's beauty. Having access to untouched places keeps us whole. There is already too little left. The protections on our forests are already minimal, in my opinion, and it would be a travesty to remove the protections that are there now, in order to benefit the few in the short term. Logging old growth is no longer a sustainable practice. Start planning for what we want our environment to look like in the future. Thank you for listening - please take the proper and responsible action - we need true stewardship for the public lands that belong to all Americans. Sincerely, Jo Moorefield jomoorefield@mac.com 455 SE Richland Corvallis, OR 97333 |
| EM-6762 | Daniel Wise <wisedan@yahoo.com> | Protect Public Forests, Rivers and Wildlife | 1/10/2008 21:59:55 | WOPR Comments attached
Daniel Wise 579 James St Talent OR 97540 541-535-9473 - WOPR-010908.doc |
| EM-6763 | Russ Youmans <youruss@hotmail.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:02:36 | To: The BLM
I am very concerned about the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)'s proposed management plan for the 2.6 million acres of BLM managed forests in Oregon. There are good reasons for not cutting into the small amount of old growth timber that remains. They are the American cathedrals and for future generations they need to remain including for history lessons, ecosystem maintenance, water and fish protection and as representative areas for locking up carbon. The potential of reducing the forest cover bordering streams and rivers is a horrible event for the BLM to permit. The issues of erosion, water temperature, water quality, fish habitat including spawning reaches of the streams and the shade, diversity and bank protection are characteristics that are in too far a short supply. We need more trees on the banks not fewer. We do need timber products, family supporting jobs and economic vitality for our communities and there can be strong efforts to have management to have sustained timber yields from forest lands that have been logged recently. And there is a huge need for additional efforts to clear the fuel on the forest floor and thinning of the dog hair thickets to protect the forest and surrounding lands from the super hot and unnatural fires. And these fire prevention programs will provide jobs, reduce the fire potential and release the thinner stand to achieve greater timber production. But talk to the those who have thought deeply about forest management, salmon recovery, jobs and community economics, recreation and the NW identity of forests and fish. The BLM needs to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Russell Youmans 3025 NW Firwood Pl. Corvallis, OR 97330 |
| EM-6764 | claudiacleaver@comcast.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:03:22 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Claudia Cleaver 14 Queens Lane Petaluma, CA 94952 |
| EM-6765 | wadestoddard@yahoo.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:07:23 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Wade Stoddard 4105 N. Massachusetts Ave. Portland, OR 97217 |
| EM-6766 | d2avid@charter.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:08:23 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, David Grant, MD 129 Oxford Place Medford, OR 97504-9333 |
| EM-6767 | jbabson@att.net | WOPR | 1/10/2008 22:15:21 | I strongly urge the BLM to maintain current management, the "No Action Alternative." The cutting of any of Oregon's remaining old growth is unconscionable, given what we now know about the value of those forests in sustaining life. We should protect what is left of our old growth forests and restore those forests that have been degraded.
Thank you for considering my comments. James Babson 40237 Reuben Leigh Rd. Lowell, OR 97452 |
| EM-6768 | cindy belles <sjo.belles@verizon.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:15:56 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
I am concerned that the changes the BLM has proposed in its Western Oregon Plan Revision will lead to the loss of Oregon's irreplaceable ancient forests, water pollution, degraded habitat, increased erosion/landslides and increased conflict and controversy. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Cindy M. Belles Tigard, Oregon sjo.belles@gte.net |
| EM-6769 | CATHLEEN ROSE <crose27@msn.com> | Western OR Plan Revision | 1/10/2008 22:17:18 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. As a life science teacher, I have spent years learning about and teaching my students about the ecological functions of northwest coastal forests and their relationship to salmon and water quality. I was dismayed to learn about the BLM's plan to dramatically increase logging in western Oregon, much of which has already been converted to tree farms. Any plan for managing western Oregon forests needs to maintain old growth forest reserves, which were created to conserve the many important values of intact forests, as well as riparian buffers, which were required in order to protect sensitive salmon bearing streams. It is no wonder that forest management is an area of constant litigation; the public simply has seen little reason to trust federal agencies to think about the future when managing our public lands. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Coulter Rose Corvallis |
| EM-6770 | Tom Phillips <TPAves8480@msn.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:34:02 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, |
| EM-6771 | mendozason@hotmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:37:24 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Steve Mendoza PO Box 406 Cardiff, CA 92007 |
| EM-6772 | Tom Phillips <TPAves8480@msn.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:38:15 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Tom & Laurie Phillips We are also concerned about too much giveaway to OHV use. |
| EM-6773 | Peter Nelson <peter.nelson@oregonstate.edu> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:38:39 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. The changes the BLM has proposed in its Western Oregon Plan Revision will lead to the loss of large tracts of irreplaceable ancient forests, increasing water pollution, degrading habitat, and increasing conflict and controversy. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners, who would like to see nearby forests managed to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, who would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Peter and Susan Nelson 2605 SW Morris Ave Corvallis, OR 97333 |
| EM-6774 | AimeeBGurl@aol.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:41:24 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Yvette Contreras 24800 Somavia Rd #1 Salinas, CA 93908 |
| EM-6775 | cpc@otenet.gr | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 22:50:26 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I have visited Old Growth forests many times in my life and I believe they are a heritage we must leave to our grandchildren's grandchildren. I love the Earth and also know that as we destroy her, we destroy ourselves. Therefore, I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, carol p. christ 2147 parker st. Berkeley, CA 94704 |
| EM-6776 | Dan Sherwood <dsphoto@spiritone.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 22:53:27 | To Whom It May Concern;
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Dan and Debbie Sherwood 1719 SE 35th Ave. Portland, OR 97214 |
| EM-6777 | Steve Brodsky <asanctuaryforhealing@gmail.com> | lesley@kswild.org | 1/10/2008 22:55:45 | 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 federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Steve Brodsky 28653 Sutherlin Lane Eugene,Oregon 97405 |
| EM-6778 | bigman1@netscape.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 23:10:28 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Clifford Holzhauer 2474 Oregon ave Long Beach, CA 90806 |
| EM-6779 | Lou Levison <luckylou26@hotmail.com> | WOPR comments | 1/10/2008 23:18:21 | I am a property owner in the Cave Junction area of Oregon. I am very troubled by the management alternative popularly called WOPR. The specific issues I have are the old-style clearcuts, proposed level of timber harvest, and overall focus on timber production at the expense other science and economic based considerations. The OHV elements do not concern me so much, although I personally don't like them. You can change the OHV policy 10 years from now. But if you cut down a 300 year-old tree, there is not much you can do about it 10 years from now. I have not heard BLM experts in the various fields of concern really defending this proposal, rather they seem to say it is just what they are being told to do, it is just their job. I feel the current Bush administration has very little credibility as far as programs for the good of the masses, they blatantly structure policies for certain private interests, including their own pockets. This is not right. It is also not right, that agencies such as the BLM violate the public trust and allow themselves to be manipulated by this administration. So please don't make excuses, please do the noble thing in your piece of the history of our great nation and stand up and let your qualified scientists and experts try to do things the right way, and not be involved with this insulting sell-out. Cutting the remaining old-growth, and going after the big trees under the guise of "thinning" or "forest health" or any kind of "management" is a crime against the American people in general and those of us that live in and enjoy this beautiful area. We can harvest wood from our forest lands in a sustainable and justified manner, and we must work toward that goal. Percieved problems with the NWFP do not justify these short-sighted wacko proposed WOP-Revisions.
Thank You, Lou Levison 6837 Westside Road, Cave Junction, OR 97523 Make distant family not so distant with Windows Vista® + Windows LiveT. Start now! |
| EM-6780 | Mark Duncan <temple_rod@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 1/10/2008 23:25:53 | Mark Duncan
PO Box 1651 Yreka, CA 96097-1651 January 11, 2008 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mark William Duncan 530-842-2676 |
| EM-6781 | James Jacobson <jamesjac@gmail.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/10/2008 23:41:38 | BLM
Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue, Portland, OR 97208 I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. The changes that 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. Your current proposal is unacceptable. The agency proposes to increase old-growth logging on public lands in western Oregon by 700%, build 1,000 miles of new logging road in the next decade and clearcut at a 9-1 ratio to thinning. This is a myopic and backwards proposal that depletes our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and salmon. 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. 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 forestry that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, James Jacobson Eugene, Oregon |
| EM-6782 | loanforu@earthlink.net | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/10/2008 23:50:28 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, carol SHIAMAN 1114 12th STREET SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 |
| EM-6783 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:02:11 | 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, Name: Sally Allwardt Street: 174th Ave NE City,_State,_Zip: Redmond, WA, 98052 Email_Address: sally86@u.washington.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-6784 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:02:34 | 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, Name: Lauren Kramer Street: 1353 Walnut Lane City,_State,_Zip: Macungie, PA 18062 Email_Address: lakrugratsfan@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-6785 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:03:02 | 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, Name: Margo Snow Street: 2880 King Rd City,_State,_Zip: Chehalis, Wa 98532 Email_Address: margo_snow@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-6786 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:03:26 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am very concerned about the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, habitat for many wildlife species, and a legacy for future generations. , It is critical that we protect the few old-growth forests remaining for future generations to enjoy. Our existing stock of younger, mixed age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open additional older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Name: Clayton O'Brien-Smith Street: 516 East Union St, City,_State,_Zip: Seattle, WA 98122 Email_Address: cobriensmith@gglo.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-6787 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:03:50 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Name: Susan Marett Street: Susan Marett City,_State,_Zip: Port Townsend, WA 98368 Email_Address: marett@cablespeed.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-6788 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:04:20 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Name: Ronald Stepchuk Street: 1507 E 12th Ave City,_State,_Zip: Spokane, Wa 99202 Email_Address: naldr@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-6789 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 1/11/2008 0:04:46 | 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, Name: Sara Hayes Street: 370 Temple Ave. #1 City,_State,_Zip: Long Beach, CA 90814 Email_Address: louve14@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-6790 | linda@grassrootswest.org | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 0:26:32 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Linda Russell 624 W Railroad Ave Cotati, CA 94931 |
| EM-6791 | Heidi Weiss <hkj@pdx.edu> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:36:19 | 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. Heidi Weiss 2531 SE 18th Portland , OR 97202 |
| EM-6792 | Jeff Walton <jeff@remotemgr.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:37:00 | 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. Jeff Walton 936 NE Failing St. Portland, OR 97212 |
| EM-6793 | judy meredith <jmeredit@bendnet.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:38:15 | 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. judy meredith 63460 bridle lane bend, OR 97701 |
| EM-6794 | Susan Kuhn <susak32799@aol.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:42:51 | 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 Kuhn 9807 NE Skidmore St. Portland, OR 97220 |
| EM-6795 | Michael Leeson <mleeson@alum.bu.edu> | I urge you to please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:45:46 | Dear BLM,
The WOPR is not just bad for the people of Oregon but for every citizen of the United States of American and the world! The old growth forests that would be lost are a state necessity, national treasure and important on a global scale. Please, I beg you to protect these forests and stop the unwise WOPR. 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-6796 | Nicola Grobe <nicolagrobe@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:47:26 | 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. Nicola Grobe 1043 K Street Crescent City, CA 95531 |
| EM-6797 | Terry Woods <twoodswalker@triad.rr.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 1/11/2008 0:48:16 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Terry Woods 7300 US 158 Apt 410 Stokesdale, NC 27357-9378 |
| EM-6798 | steve lanusse-siegel <lanusse60@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:48:41 | 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. steve lanusse-siegel 320 oak st. ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-6799 | Terry Woods <twoodswalker@triad.rr.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 1/11/2008 0:50:21 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Terry Woods 7300 US 158 Apt 410 Stokesdale, NC 27357-9378 |
| EM-6800 | Scott Jones <scones100@gmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 0:51:37 | Dear BLM,
Your WOPR is completely unacceptable. The citizens of this state have fought long and hard to preserve our roadless areas & old growth forests. The value - yes, economic as well as biological - of protecting these trees and wildlands far exceed that of harvesting them for consumer products. You are supposed to work for and serve the people, not the logging companies and not the President with a 30% approval rating. Do you want to keep your job a year from now? Get a clue! Throw your plan in the recycling bin. Adopt whatever plan Oregon Wild proposes. 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 Jones 878 Peachtree ST # 724 Atlanta, GA 30309 |
| EM-6801 | kt weidman <yikes_its_katie@yahoo.com> | Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 1/11/2008 1:00:10 | 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 disapprove of the direction which you are attempting to take in all three of the action alternatives proposed in your draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions. In a planning process that affects over 2 million acres of our country's magnificent federal forest lands, it is crucial that you give significantly more attention and thought to the non-timber, non-motorized uses of these areas, because supporting non-timber uses of forest lands helps protect the long-term sustainability of our economy, our natural resources, and the commercial timber industry itself. Protecting our commonly-owned forestlands as reserves for old growth dependent species also allows private timberland managers to keep their lands in the short-rotation timber production they are accustomed to, while assuring the future that late-successional dependent species will continue to have a place in their ecosystem. Many of the changes proposed in the draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions document are highly controversial and scientifically corrupt in their reasoning. They carry nasty ecological impacts to all regions involved. The proposed plan revisions would destroy most of the bare-minimum environmental protections that were established under the Northwest Forest Plan, created to maintain viable, genetically diverse populations of our rare and specialized old-growth forest species. They would ravage many valuable natural recreation sites, lower local land values, add further instability to small-town boom-and-bust industries and rural economies, and waste taxpayer money on projects aimed at helping the rich become richer. Only 5% of native forests remain in Oregon, nearly all of it on federally owned forestlands set aside as old-growth and late-successional reserves under the Northwest Forest Plan. These areas are crucial for old-growth-dependent species' continued existence and to recover their populations. Many of these remaining older forests are located on the least-productive, steepest, most difficult-to-reach hillsides where timber production is relatively unsustainable (and highly destructive) compared with most of the areas throughout our state that are already being used solely for commercial timber production. Not only is it highly costly to attempt logging and road-building in these areas, but it also has a disproportionately huge negative impact on soils conservation, water quality, catastrophic wildfire prevention, and maintaining the original diversity of these forests. In the few areas where BLM owns coastal low-lying older forest lands, these forests should also be protected for their ecological value, since they are some of the last remnants of their regional coastal ecosystems. It is a huge mistake to be selling out both the fragile, slow-growing inland forests, and the last of our lowland coastal old-growth reserves, for timber, when they are severely needed as biological reserves. To put it lightly, all of the proposed action alternatives involve dramatic, highly destructive increases in mature and old-growth forest logging in the next 10 years, in some of the most beautiful, diverse landscapes all over western Oregon's majestic hillsides. These losses would occur during a time when it is crucial that these very places be protected for the threatened and endangered species they support, the watersheds they hold intact, and the climate system itself. Under the plan's proposed alternatives we are "given a choice between," streamside buffers (crucial in protecting water temperatures so that the last healthy salmon runs in the state can continue thriving), would be reduced up to 75%, opening the most fragile, crucial habitat areas up for logging and leading to sedimentation, heightened water temperatures, and loss of cool, moist areas where fish, mollusks and amphibians hide during hot summer months. These buffers are especially crucial in protecting streams during disturbances such as logging, so that all aquatic species-including the last healthy salmon runs in the state-can continue to thrive. They are the absolute last places anyone should consider clear-cutting, or even thinning. Furthermore, within our lifetimes, the intergovernmental panel on climate change predicts a 50% reduction of Oregon's snow packs, which means there will be less-and warmer-water in rivers, making streamside shade and vegetation even more crucial for protecting shade and maintaining moisture in and around these streams. Weakening stream-side buffers in timber sales is one of the most ecologically stupid choices the BLM could do. Such management may even drive many Coho runs to extinction. The only thing we ought to allow is increasing streamside buffers, on all watersheds. Under all proposed (except the no-action) alternatives, there is a predicted 40% reduction in Marbled Murrelet nesting habitat and Northern Spotted Owl dispersal habitat after 100 years. Northern Spotted Owls, used as the indicator species for the health and longevity of Oregon's historical ancient forest ecosystems, show by their disappearance that we are loosing the potential to restore the true diversity of these forests. Although the Western Oregon Plan Revisions would possibly strengthen a few local economies in the short term, in the long run it would still be as unsustainable as the timber revenue generated by the now tree-farmed biodiversity-deserts of private lands checkerboarded throughout the same areas in Southern Oregon. To many Oregonians, the description of a "200-year old forest" does not begin to describe the beauty of these areas. Their towering, structurally complex Douglas-fir trees support thriving canopies of thriving lichen, insect, bird and small mammal species, as well as incredible understories of beautiful hardwoods, hundreds of shrub and herb species, ferns, mosses and lichens, and an amazing wealth of forest floor and soil-dwelling insect species. Bear, dear, squirrel, vole, owl, woodpecker, songbird, and other species also thrive in these forest reserves, while fish and other aquatic species seek refuge in the many tiny headwater streams and brooks that run down the steeply sloped hillsides. For the amount of timber to be gotten out of these areas, it is difficult for me not to see the entire project area as a biological tragedy, because there is a lot to be destroyed in the harvesting of the far-spaced commercially viable fir trees. To us it does not matter what a very narrow-minded interpretation of a lawsuit suggests this land "must" be used for, rather it matters that the integrity of these forest lands be preserved as permanent, healthy, mature forests. This summer, as a citizen volunteer, I worked with a group called Northwest Ecosystem Survey Team, collecting scientific data on rare and sensitive species, such as the Red Tree Vole (Arborimus longicaudus), in proposed timber sales. Having spent nearly all of my summer hiking through and camping in a small portion of the most beautiful, ecologically diverse, ancient forests in Western Oregon Plan Revisions' proposed timber sales (including South Deer, Althouse Sucker, Granite Joe, and Boney Skull timber sales), the destruction which thinning/clearing these less-productive public forestlands would lead to is sickening and unbelievable to me. In the rolling hillsides of southern Oregon, I found amazingly diverse forests, unlike any I had ever seen, a beautiful convergence of cascade Douglas-fir/true-fir forests, California's Yosemite-like hardwood oak & maple forests, and coast-range salal, huckleberry, and cedar forests. Every day several species of insects I'd never seen before would crawl across my path. I saw spotted owls, tree voles, salamanders, squirrels, songbirds, hawks, eagles, bats, etc. The sorts of species one never sees in acres of recently harvested and nearly-mature forests. If there were hiking trails through many of these places, I would love to go hiking through them more often. These thriving, diverse gems of forest are places I want to take my friends to, show to my east-coast relatives, and hopefully one day, share with my children, nephews or nieces. I continue to hope against all hope that these forests, in whose canopies I witnessed beauty, peace, contentment, and an entirely different fragile world of thriving animal, bird, and insect communities this summer, will go on being protected as the old-growth reserves they ought to be. For this reason alone, I strongly hope those who need more money in Oregon find more sustainable ways of getting it. While it is true that 200 years ago the Pacific Northwest was built on bountiful natural resources of the area, it is also true that the beaver & animals that the first white Oregonians came here to hunt have been nearly wiped out, that the salmon runs have shrank to a mere shadow of their former selves, that 95% of our giant, ancient forests have been entirely logged over at least once if not three times in 200 years. It is worthwhile to note that our short history already includes the collapse of a wealthy, prosperous fishing industry at the mouth of the Columbia River, that the fur trade built around Astoria, Oregon (the oldest settlement west of the Rockies), is long gone, and that the until-recently bountiful timber industry is currently teetering on the brink of having to shut down its once incredibly industrious old growth mills in formerly flourishing mill towns. While it was natural resource extraction which built this state, the end of these resources has arrived. We cannot afford to base intelligent management of the future's resources on this model of unsustainable management practices of the past. I grew up surrounded by clearcuts across the highly productive forest lands of the coast range. As atrocious as they look for the first 10 years, and as biologically boring as they may be for the first 40 years after harvest, I always kept in mind that they would grow back, that the hundreds of species preferring older forested habitat would move back in when they were old again, and that the salmon runs that were thrashed might come back some day when rivers were again clear, clean, and cold enough. But by destroying the last of these rare species' habitat on lands formerly protected as old-growth reserves and for their long-term livelyhood, we are destroying this possibility, FOREVER. Should the timber economy ever collapse (as I think it is bound to do, even if we cut down every possible tree as quickly as it reaches marketable diameter), we will be left with a ravaged landscape AND lack of sustainable timber revenue. And when I consider possible futures for Oregon, tourists, outdoor enthusiasts, wealthy retirees, fishermen, hunters, and treehuggers alike have little interest in visiting or living near acre upon acre of clear-cut hillsides and highly flameable tree plantations. The vast majority of Americans want federal land managers to focus on restoration thinning in second growth plantations, protecting communities from wildfire by reducing flameable young stands, maintaining natural forests to combat climate change, and preserving what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Many Oregon forest managers are already appropriately moving beyond the conflicts and poor management practices of the past, focusing instead on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning. In this way they can provide extra wood for local mills, improve conditions for fish and wildlife, and allow our precious few remaining old-growth forests to stand, protected for their highly valuable habitat, carbon storing capabilities, and scenic wonders. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for short-term economic gain, at the expense of nearly everything and everyone else. We need and want to protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land. Clearcutting, "regeneration-harvesting" (or whatever cutting most of the commercially valuable timber in an area is called these days) these natural treasures is a sickeningly shortsighted and destructive decision. A quote on the Oregon Wild website states that "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." I think that this statement says exactly what has been on many of our minds for quite a while. Many, many, many of us truely love this state because of its incredible forests, wild hillsides, and scenic rivers, and we sincerely want them to be protected in an ecologically sustainable fashion. While participating in the planning process of the WOPR, I have been frustrated to witness so much greed represented by a small handful of individuals who hold agency & governmental positions of great influence. It is sickening that these individuals choose to trade short-term personal wealth & an archaic notion of "sustainable forestry" for the last stands of large tracts of ancient Oregon forests, biodiversity, endangered species protection, fire prevention, soils conservation, water quality and carbon sequestration. I am frustrated to hear, again and again, throughout this planning process, that the industry & BLM's corrupt science would even suggest that logging the larger trees in these areas would possibly help the rare threatened and endangered species like spotted owls, marbled murrelets, red tree voles, hundreds of species of rare lichen & flowers, insects, amphibians, fish, and songbirds. Or that such logging would help a fire prone ecosystem. These forests that would be logged if the WOPR were implemented are some of the most beautiful, biodiverse, interesting forests I have ever seen. Logging them would be a loss to the majority of Americans, and it would take at least 200 years, if not longer in many places, to restore them to their present day majesty and diversity. Over the longer term, WOPR would neither be economically nor environmentally sustainable. The three proposed alternatives in the draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions are not viable, sustainable, or intelligent alternatives. All would have incredibly negative impacts on threatened species, soil retention, fire prevention, water quality, and non-motorized recreation opportunities. Additionally, they would release vast amounts of currently sequestered carbon (in soils, below-and-above-ground biomass, and through the timber milling process itself), which we ought to be protecting in order to combat climate change. Therefore, unless a MORE ecologically sustainable alternative is developed, the only acceptable alternative mentioned in this plan isthe no-action alternative. Plea |
| EM-6802 | Katie Weidman <yikes_its_katie@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 1:06:39 | Dear BLM,
I disapprove of the direction which you are attempting to take in all three of the action alternatives proposed in your draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions. In a planning process that affects over 2 million acres of our country's magnificent federal forest lands, it is crucial that you give significantly more attention and thought to the non-timber, non-motorized uses of these areas, because supporting non-timber uses of forest lands helps protect the long-term sustainability of our economy, our natural resources, and the commercial timber industry itself. Protecting our commonly-owned forestlands as reserves for old growth dependent species also allows private timberland managers to keep their lands in the short-rotation timber production they are accustomed to, while assuring the future that late-successional dependent species will continue to have a place in their ecosystem. Many of the changes proposed in the draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions document are highly controversial and scientifically corrupt in their reasoning. They carry nasty ecological impacts to all regions involved. The proposed plan revisions would destroy most of the bare-minimum environmental protections that were established under the Northwest Forest Plan, created to maintain viable, genetically diverse populations of our rare and specialized old-growth forest species. They would ravage many valuable natural recreation sites, lower local land values, add further instability to small-town boom-and-bust industries and rural economies, and waste taxpayer money on projects aimed at helping the rich become richer. Only 5% of native forests remain in Oregon, nearly all of it on federally owned forestlands set aside as old-growth and late-successional reserves under the Northwest Forest Plan. These areas are crucial for old-growth-dependent species' continued existence and to recover their populations. Many of these remaining older forests are located on the least-productive, steepest, most difficult-to-reach hillsides where timber production is relatively unsustainable (and highly destructive) compared with most of the areas throughout our state that are already being used solely for commercial timber production. Not only is it highly costly to attempt logging and road-building in these areas, but it also has a disproportionately huge negative impact on soils conservation, water quality, catastrophic wildfire prevention, and maintaining the original diversity of these forests. In the few areas where BLM owns coastal low-lying older forest lands, these forests should also be protected for their ecological value, since they are some of the last remnants of their regional coastal ecosystems. It is a huge mistake to be selling out both the fragile, slow-growing inland forests, and the last of our lowland coastal old-growth reserves, for timber, when they are severely needed as biological reserves. To put it lightly, all of the proposed action alternatives involve dramatic, highly destructive increases in mature and old-growth forest logging in the next 10 years, in some of the most beautiful, diverse landscapes all over western Oregon's majestic hillsides. These losses would occur during a time when it is crucial that these very places be protected for the threatened and endangered species they support, the watersheds they hold intact, and the climate system itself. Under the plan's proposed alternatives we are ?given a choice between,? streamside buffers (crucial in protecting water temperatures so that the last healthy salmon runs in the state can continue thriving), would be reduced up to 75%, opening the most fragile, crucial habitat areas up for logging and leading to sedimentation, heightened water temperatures, and loss of cool, moist areas where fish, mollusks and amphibians hide during hot summer months. These buffers are especially crucial in protecting streams during disturbances such as logging, so that all aquatic species?including the last healthy salmon runs in the state?can continue to thrive. They are the absolute last places anyone should consider clear-cutting, or even thinning. Furthermore, within our lifetimes, the intergovernmental panel on climate change predicts a 50% reduction of Oregon's snow packs, which means there will be less?and warmer?water in rivers, making streamside shade and vegetation even more crucial for protecting shade and maintaining moisture in and around these streams. Weakening stream-side buffers in timber sales is one of the most ecologically stupid choices the BLM could do. Such management may even drive many Coho runs to extinction. The only thing we ought to allow is increasing streamside buffers, on all watersheds. Under all proposed (except the no-action) alternatives, there is a predicted 40% reduction in Marbled Murrelet nesting habitat and Northern Spotted Owl dispersal habitat after 100 years. Northern Spotted Owls, used as the indicator species for the health and longevity of Oregon's historical ancient forest ecosystems, show by their disappearance that we are loosing the potential to restore the true diversity of these forests. Although the Western Oregon Plan Revisions would possibly strengthen a few local economies in the short term, in the long run it would still be as unsustainable as the timber revenue generated by the now tree-farmed biodiversity-deserts of private lands checkerboarded throughout the same areas in Southern Oregon. To many Oregonians, the description of a ?200-year old forest? does not begin to describe the beauty of these areas. Their towering, structurally complex Douglas-fir trees support thriving canopies of thriving lichen, insect, bird and small mammal species, as well as incredible understories of beautiful hardwoods, hundreds of shrub and herb species, ferns, mosses and lichens, and an amazing wealth of forest floor and soil-dwelling insect species. Bear, dear, squirrel, vole, owl, woodpecker, songbird, and other species also thrive in these forest reserves, while fish and other aquatic species seek refuge in the many tiny headwater streams and brooks that run down the steeply sloped hillsides. For the amount of timber to be gotten out of these areas, it is difficult for me not to see the entire project area as a biological tragedy, because there is a lot to be destroyed in the harvesting of the far-spaced commercially viable fir trees. To us it does not matter what a very narrow-minded interpretation of a lawsuit suggests this land "must" be used for, rather it matters that the integrity of these forest lands be preserved as permanent, healthy, mature forests. This summer, as a citizen volunteer, I worked with a group called Northwest Ecosystem Survey Team, collecting scientific data on rare and sensitive species, such as the Red Tree Vole (Arborimus longicaudus), in proposed timber sales. Having spent nearly all of my summer hiking through and camping in a small portion of the most beautiful, ecologically diverse, ancient forests in Western Oregon Plan Revisions' proposed timber sales (including South Deer, Althouse Sucker, Granite Joe, and Boney Skull timber sales), the destruction which thinning/clearing these less-productive public forestlands would lead to is sickening and unbelievable to me. In the rolling hillsides of southern Oregon, I found amazingly diverse forests, unlike any I had ever seen, a beautiful convergence of cascade Douglas-fir/true-fir forests, California's Yosemite-like hardwood oak & maple forests, and coast-range salal, huckleberry, and cedar forests. Every day several species of insects I'd never seen before would crawl across my path. I saw spotted owls, tree voles, salamanders, squirrels, songbirds, hawks, eagles, bats, etc. The sorts of species one never sees in acres of recently harvested and nearly-mature forests. If there were hiking trails through many of these places, I would love to go hiking through them more often. These thriving, diverse gems of forest are places I want to take my friends to, show to my east-coast relatives, and hopefully one day, share with my children, nephews or nieces. I continue to hope against all hope that these forests, in whose canopies I witnessed beauty, peace, contentment, and an entirely different fragile world of thriving animal, bird, and insect communities this summer, will go on being protected as the old-growth reserves they ought to be. For this reason alone, I strongly hope those who need more money in Oregon find more sustainable ways of getting it. While it is true that 200 years ago the Pacific Northwest was built on bountiful natural resources of the area, it is also true that the beaver & animals that the first white Oregonians came here to hunt have been nearly wiped out, that the salmon runs have shrank to a mere shadow of their former selves, that 95% of our giant, ancient forests have been entirely logged over at least once if not three times in 200 years. It is worthwhile to note that our short history already includes the collapse of a wealthy, prosperous fishing industry at the mouth of the Columbia River, that the fur trade built around Astoria, Oregon (the oldest settlement west of the Rockies), is long gone, and that the until-recently bountiful timber industry is currently teetering on the brink of having to shut down its once incredibly industrious old growth mills in formerly flourishing mill towns. While it was natural resource extraction which built this state, the end of these resources has arrived. We cannot afford to base intelligent management of the future's resources on this model of unsustainable management practices of the past. I grew up surrounded by clearcuts across the highly productive forest lands of the coast range. As atrocious as they look for the first 10 years, and as biologically boring as they may be for the first 40 years after harvest, I always kept in mind that they would grow back, that the hundreds of species preferring older forested habitat would move back in when they were old again, and that the salmon runs that were thrashed might come back some day when rivers were again clear, clean, and cold enough. But by destroying the last of these rare species' habitat on lands formerly protected as old-growth reserves and for their long-term livelyhood, we are destroying this possibility, FOREVER. Should the timber economy ever collapse (as I think it is bound to do, even if we cut down every possible tree as quickly as it reaches marketable diameter), we will be left with a ravaged landscape AND lack of sustainable timber revenue. And when I consider possible futures for Oregon, tourists, outdoor enthusiasts, wealthy retirees, fishermen, hunters, and treehuggers alike have little interest in visiting or living near acre upon acre of clear-cut hillsides and highly flameable tree plantations. The vast majority of Americans want federal land managers to focus on restoration thinning in second growth plantations, protecting communities from wildfire by reducing flameable young stands, maintaining natural forests to combat climate change, and preserving what remains of our nation?s ancient forests. Many Oregon forest managers are already appropriately moving beyond the conflicts and poor management practices of the past, focusing instead on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning. In this way they can provide extra wood for local mills, improve conditions for fish and wildlife, and allow our precious few remaining old-growth forests to stand, protected for their highly valuable habitat, carbon storing capabilities, and scenic wonders. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for short-term economic gain, at the expense of nearly everything and everyone else. We need and want to protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land. Clearcutting, "regeneration-harvesting" (or whatever cutting most of the commercially valuable timber in an area is called these days) these natural treasures is a sickeningly shortsighted and destructive decision. A quote on the Oregon Wild website states that "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." I think that this statement says exactly what has been on many of our minds for quite a while. Many, many, many of us truely love this state because of its incredible forests, wild hillsides, and scenic rivers, and we sincerely want them to be protected in an ecologically sustainable fashion. While participating in the planning process of the WOPR, I have been frustrated to witness so much greed represented by a small handful of individuals who hold agency & governmental positions of great influence. It is sickening that these individuals choose to trade short-term personal wealth & an archaic notion of ?sustainable forestry? for the last stands of large tracts of ancient Oregon forests, biodiversity, endangered species protection, fire prevention, soils conservation, water quality and carbon sequestration. I am frustrated to hear, again and again, throughout this planning process, that the industry & BLM?s corrupt science would even suggest that logging the larger trees in these areas would possibly help the rare threatened and endangered species like spotted owls, marbled murrelets, red tree voles, hundreds of species of rare lichen & flowers, insects, amphibians, fish, and songbirds. Or that such logging would help a fire prone ecosystem. These forests that would be logged if the WOPR were implemented are some of the most beautiful, biodiverse, interesting forests I have ever seen. Logging them would be a loss to the majority of Americans, and it would take at least 200 years, if not longer in many places, to restore them to their present day majesty and diversity. Over the longer term, WOPR would neither be economically nor environmentally sustainable. The three proposed alternatives in the draft Western Oregon Plan Revisions are not viable, sustainable, or intelligent alternatives. All would have incredibly negative impacts on threatened species, soil retention, fire prevention, water quality, and non-motorized recreation opportunities. Additionally, they would release vast amounts of currently sequestered carbon (in soils, below-and-above-ground biomass, and through the timber milling process itself), which we ought to be protecting in order to combat climate change. Therefore, unless a MORE ecologically sustainable alternative is developed, the only acceptable alternative mentioned in this plan is the no-action alternative. Please listen to what the knowledgeable people of Oregon want and what the environment needs, and refuse to destroy the forested ecosystems, soil and water quality, and natural beauty of our state. Katie Weidman 35630 Little Walluski Lane Astoria, OR 97103 541-683-0642 |
| EM-6803 | robert strebeck <robert_strebeck@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 1:14:10 | 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. robert strebeck 509 aransas euless, TX 76039 |
| EM-6804 | robert strebeck <robert_strebeck@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 1:27:06 | 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. robert strebeck 509 aransas euless, TX 76039 |
| EM-6805 | snoopy123456789@email.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 2:04:40 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Hazel Chase 8145 E. Camelback Rd. Apt. #310 Scottsdale, AZ 85251 |
| EM-6806 | quaker1@mindspring.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 2:22:40 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: Of course, I can't answer for you or your families, but I very much prefer to breathe the air as God intended. We simply cannot do that if the trees go missing. I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Richard Lyons 995 Pine St. #101 San Francisco, CA 94108 |
| EM-6807 | Kathy Ging <kathy@kathyging.com> | Opposed to the WOPR | 1/11/2008 2:41:59 | Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon 97208 and Oregon Congressional Delegation Jan. 11, 2008 Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions: in Opposition to the W.O.P.R. TO THE BLM: I am astonished that you would even consider logging more of our precious old growth forests! The other logging outlined in the W.O.P.R would also be a mistake. Old growth forests have been found as Paul Stametes has outlined in numerous public lectures in recent years to produce mycelium that may even cure anthrax attacks. ** These forests are more valuable to us alive than dead. He has been under the employ of the Dept. of Homeland Security for his pioneer work in this regard. Paul has had several patents approved by the US Patent Office and many others under consideration and has written books such as Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World available in paperback, the results of a lifetime of research. Also see fungi.com I am totally outraged and alarmed with the direction the Bush Administration seems to be pointing with the _supervision_ of apx. 2.5 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. As a Realtor selling country property for 21 years in Western Oregon, I have seen the degradation of our waterways and hillsides from the silting and sliding of clay soils. I have been stunned to observe within one season hundreds of trees blown down because of clearcuts on adjacent parcels when high winds strike. Constructing 1,000 miles of new logging roads would also be a misguided action that would deplete our natural resource base for future generations by weakening protections for forests, creeks and fish for an immediate monetary rush. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's special areas. It is a travesty against the people to whom you are responsible that now when consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning is at its historical apex that the BLM is proposing to clear-cut these national treasures, forests older than our country, degrading complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Your stewardship requires that you practice restoration forestry and protect the remaining small fraction of old-growth forests, focus active management in already logged-over areas that would benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Your close reading of Mycelium Running and attention to Paul Stametes' research about how mycelium seeded on already logged areas can help restore soils advantageously effected as birds drawn to insects help in this natural restoration that can be assisted by human endeavors. This kind of forest planning and implementation needs to be explored and applied as soon as possible! Taking the wrong path to the forest can only result in our collective loss. Do not continue the wasting of our forest habitats and the decimation of sentient beings: birds, fish and other wild creatures. The activity under the forest as mycelium and bacteria is as important to the vitality of forests and the maintaining of crucial hydrologic cycles as Bill Mollison, founder of permaculture has so wisely described. Also consider YOUR PERSONAL CONTRIBUTION TO GLOBAL WARMING BY PROMOTING THIS HEINOUS AGENDA: this destruction would be a tragic mistake. Thank you for seriously considering this letter and recommendations in your current and future forest planning. ** from: http://books.google.com/books?id=NPI8_-omzvsC&pg=PP14&lpg=PP14&dq=mycelium+old+growth+anthrax+stamets&source=web &ots=38jv-_fj4K&sig=4tJ_NDgQvDZpG9ZGsDUeM4QsXDs "...fungi especially fungi from old growth forests, may be sources of new medicines that are active against a range of germs, including HIV/AIDS and the causative agents of smallpox and anthrax, potential bioterrorist threats." Sincerely, Kathy Ging, M.A. POB 11245 Eugene, OR 97440 541-342-8461 kathy@kathyging.com |
| EM-6808 | Abraham Bettinger <musicalfarming@yahoo.com> | Please listen to the oregonians- save our trees | 1/11/2008 2:59:21 | Dear BLM,
Hello, im another voice against the wopr,this plan needs to be revised , old growth logging is unexceptable. please listen to this basic plea, this situation is potentially disasterous. I would rather have the forest instead of a shortly postponed economic colapse. cutting the trees would be just like a cokehead takeing their final devastating dose of there drug. please please please Abraham Bettinger 1350 Iowa st. ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-6809 | Marcia Denison <Forest@poetworld.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 2:59:47 | 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 turbulant conflict and controversy. Maybe even loss of human life. 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, Class A Theft of Government Property. I am appauled. 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. Hands off, please!! 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. Marcia Denison PO Box 1463 Rainier, OR 97048 |
| EM-6810 | Claire Smith <horvath@pioneer.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 3:58:39 | 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. Claire Smith PO Box 721 311 se 35th st south Beach, OR 97366 |
| EM-6811 | Jeff Lyles <bldegl@gmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 4:28:43 | 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. Also, the recent flood near Clackskanie happened because of logging and leaving the land in a situation where it has nothing holding it together so that when the rains comes, a mud slide will happened. The damage from the mud slide did far more monetary damage then the amount of money that was collected from the trees that were harvested there. We need to do things that use common since and stop doing things in the name of a fast buck that ends up biting us in the tail. Jeff Lyles 17300 NE Hooper Wollam Rd. Yacolt, WA 98675 |
| EM-6812 | Sharon Hawks <hawks@4j.lane.edu> | Clasification of "Grandmothers Grove" | 1/11/2008 5:10:26 | U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Western Oregon Plan Revision Dears Sirs, I am writing you out of a concern for a grove of trees familiarly referred to as the Grnadmothers of Wolf Creek. I just recently heard that this grove of trees was reclassified and so could be harvested. This group of trees is so very beautiful and old - some more than 300 years old and it would be a real loss to those living in the Eugene area as they are possibly some of the oldest trees in the immediate area. We live in town but feel we can experience the wonder of an old grove by going here when we do not have the time or opportunity to go long miles for this experience. Words cannot express the feeling we have for this forest - I beg of you, do not let this lovely area be destroyed. Please keep T. 195.R.06W. sec. 17 as a Late Successional Management area. Thank you very much for your consideration, Sincerely, Sharon Hawks and James Christopher O'Neill |
| EM-6813 | olaya garcia <ireth_alcarin1@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:12:37 | 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. olaya garcia falo moro pola de siero, ot 33510 |
| EM-6814 | Judy Premo <sukkkie@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:15:58 | 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. Judy Premo 4744 Pretentious way sacramento , CA 95842 |
| EM-6815 | Theresa DeMello <experienceawareness@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:20:58 | 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. Theresa DeMello 12505 SW North Dakota Apt 1610 Tigard, OR 97223 5035210889 |
| EM-6816 | Janene Willey <janene@bendcable.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:34:45 | 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. Janene Willey 910 NW Greenbriar Pl Bend, OR 97701 |
| EM-6817 | Diana Kaye <eostredog@fastmail.fm> | Re:old-growth logging | 1/11/2008 5:36:26 | Dear BLM,
My adult son has lived for decades in Eugene and heads east to camp every weekend that weather permits. It is the bright spot in his life. There is absolutely no reason except for corporate greed that ANY lands in Oregon need to be logged. I live in southern Indiana and have forest lands protected (more or less) by Indiana's Classified Forest prgram. (Our acreage is the beauty spot on our road.) I am not a city person and am aware of the high value of timber but we cannot continue to denude America for the sake of foreign usage and corporate profits.So 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. In addition, 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. 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. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. Diana Kaye 11580 Rabbit Hash Road Elizabeth, IN 47117 |
| EM-6818 | Kathy Westervelt <mkrwest@qwest.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:38:56 | 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. Kathy Westervelt 853 E. 20th Avenue Eugene, OR 97405 541-345-3646 |
| EM-6819 | Betsey Norton <bewild@frontiernet.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 5:41:02 | 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. Even of greater concern to ALL residents is the dramatic increase in fire danger if this plan is followed. Right now, with a mix of older fire-resistant trees, our forests are at risk, but if you take out the fire-resistant trees,we will all be at GREATLY increased risk.(See Pepper Trail's fire analysis) Has anyone forgotten the Biscuit Fire and the terrible threat to our beautiful valley?? There will be nothing left on which to build a diversified economy without our old-growth and large tree forests. This plan IN NO WAY helps the residents of So. Oregon, only a few logging/timber companies. This is supposed to be a democracy, of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE!!! 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. Betsey Norton 10401 Takilma Rd Cave Junction, OR 97523 |
| EM-6820 | john ritter <ritter@gorge.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:19:30 | 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. john ritter 109 MONTELLO Hood River, OR 97031 |
| EM-6821 | john ritter <ritter@gorge.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:20:10 | 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. john ritter 109 MONTELLO Hood River, OR 97031 |
| EM-6822 | Katie Clarkson <katie.clarkson@gmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:27:27 | 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. Katie Clarkson 5516 SE Center ST Portland, OR 97206 503-238-4664 |
| EM-6823 | Neil Kagan <neil825@earthlink.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:29:47 | 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. Neil S Kagan 1439 Covington Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48103 734-327-9325 |
| EM-6824 | jere grimm <jereray@spiritone.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:34:32 | 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. jere grimm 1734 NW Aspen Portland, OR 97210 503-223-1614 |
| EM-6825 | Pamela Hickman <pvhickman@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:42:43 | 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. Pamela Hickman 7834 SE Stephens Street Portland, OR 97215 |
| EM-6826 | Laurie Turner <Laurel.Turner@pdxtrans.org> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:43:43 | 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. Laurie J Turner 11333 SE Powell Ct. Portland, OR 97266 503-823-1767 |
| EM-6827 | shane.dixon@dca.state.fl.us | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 6:43:52 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Matthew Dixon 610 East 63rd Street Marathon, FL 33050 |
| EM-6828 | steve brasch <sbrasch@centurytel.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:47:04 | 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. steve brasch town road gg dousman, WI 53118 |
| EM-6829 | Richard Chenoweth <dickchen@mind.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:48:44 | 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. Richard Chenoweth 2305-C Ashland St, PMB 407 Ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-6830 | organic family <organicfamily@comcast.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/11/2008 6:50:39 |
To whom it may concern, Save the wild woods for the benifit of our future! Mine, yours, your grandchildren. Save our legacy! I am a somewhat conservative 48 year old Oregonian. I grew up and currently live in Oregon. I lived in Portland as a child. I was a CampFire Girl. I feel so lucky to have been a part of that organization. While a participant of CampFire Girl (I know this is dating me!) I had the wonderful opportunity to go on many hikes, camping trips and to attend summer camps in the great outdoors of the Oregon Old Growth Forests. I feel so thankful that the wild places remain today and that we were able to take our child -now a college student in state - to visit these ancient forest. I pray that those ancient forest will be protect our watersheds, cleaning our air and providing a home for many species of animals, plant life and incests. I pray that when I become a Grandparent that I can share the wonders of the Western Oregon forest with my Grandchilren. Many tourists come to Oregon to see Oregon's beauty, what a shame it would be if they come and find there are no more Beautiful Old Growth Forest left to marvel at. I think that protection is in order for the remaining Old Growth Forest. I feel so lucky to be living in Eugene, Oregon, now. I look out my window every day and see the magnificant old growth. It would be irrresponsible to open up more area to logging, in western Oregon - my home. I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Christie Foster |
| EM-6831 | MARGARET CASAS <CASAS43@GMAIL.COM> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:50:50 | 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. MARGARET CASAS 186 HANSEN LANE EUGENE, OR 97404 |
| EM-6832 | Trevor Poulsen <eugenetrevor@gmail.com> | Local currency is the only way to protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:51:04 | Dear BLM,
I am a Eugene resident and I believe the BLM?s Western Oregon Plan Revision recommendations are not in the long term best interests of the people and the environment. Oregonians are too dependent on logging revenues. We must pursue economic self-sufficiency if we want to preserve our resources for the next generation. The way to do this is with local currency. Therefore, I urge you to consider offering your support to Ron Paul for President. He will give alternative currencies a chance to compete against the debt-ridden, environmentally-destructive Federal Reserve Note. Trevor Poulsen 3015 Willamette Eugene, OR 97405 541-497-3597 |
| EM-6833 | Ruthann Roka <sunshine648@juno.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:51:04 | 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. Ruthann Roka 648 Circlewood Drive Venice, FL 34293 |
| EM-6834 | Brett Brownscombe <brett@ortrout.org> | Oregon Trout comments on WOPR | 1/11/2008 6:51:13 | Please accept the attached letter from Oregon Trout in reviewing public
comments on the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision. Thank you. -- Brett Brownscombe Conservation Director Oregon Trout 65 SW Yamhill Street Suite 300 Portland OR 97204 www.oregontrout.org 503-222-9091 ext. 17 503-222-9187 fax - WOPR Comments.doc |
| EM-6835 | Jacqueline Medill <medill@cmc.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 6:55:40 | 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. Jacqueline Medill 18160 Cottonwood Road, #114 Sunriver, OR 97707 |
| EM-6836 | Djohariah Toor <djotoor@peak.org> | clear-cutting | 1/11/2008 6:56:54 | Dear Friends,
Please count me in on a no-vote regarding Bush's agenda to clear-cut thousands of acres of new and old growth forest. Our forests are our national treasure. This administration thinks that national treasure is all about money. As an Oregon resident, I disagree. I want to see these forests in tact for two reasons; for the sake of preserving the gift of nature, and in support of preserving healthy air (by cutting down the now high levels of dangerous carbon dioxide, which is the job of forests). Please see the December issue of Science News for an article called Falling Behind: North American terrain absorbs carbon dioxide too slowly. Please weight in against the desecration of our natural resources. Sincerely, Ms. Djohariah Toor, MFT Waldport, OR |
| EM-6837 | David Winston <dlwimages@opendoor.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:02:20 | 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. David Winston 105 Brooks Lane Ashland OR, OR 97520 |
| EM-6838 | Kelly Tanugay <kellydan1@bendcable.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:03:21 | 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. Kelly Tanugay 2352 NW 5th St Bend, OR 97701 |
| EM-6839 | Terri Pyne <territpyne@msn.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:03:36 | 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 live, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities. Terri Pyne PO Box 155 Bayview, ID 83803 |
| EM-6840 | Eric Marley <eric@aspenmeadowsconstruction.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:08:21 | 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. Eric Marley 60841 Yellow Leaf Street Bend, OR 97702 5419487445 |
| EM-6841 | Craig Schellsmidt <csessences@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:09:01 | 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. Craig Schellsmidt 3324 SE Lincoln Portland, OR 97214 |
| EM-6842 | dennis kramer <dakramer1@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:13:22 | 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. dennis kramer 9830 sw 158 place beaverton, OR 97007 |
| EM-6843 | Diane Frank <dnfrank@nventure.com> | Scrap the plan....please, for all Oregonians | 1/11/2008 7:14:02 | Dear BLM,
I am a lifetime Oregonian and one of the blessing of this state is the wonderful opportunity to hike and explore old-growth forests and see wildlife on public lands. I am deeply concerned about the proposed BLM plan which will no doubt degrade my both the environment and 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. In addition, I am introducing my grand nephews to the joys of outdoor recreation which they have enthusiastically embraced. It would break my heart to see them turned away from the same opportunities I have had in my lifetime. While I understand the so called economic benefits of this plan in all reality, in the past the track record for these economic benefits have not been borne out. There are other ways to bring economic stimulus to rural communities than to strip our state of its natural treasures. 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, Diane Frank Diane Frank 5819 NE 27th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 |
| EM-6844 | Earl Willey <earlw@bendcable.com> | Save Old Growth Forests for the Next Generation | 1/11/2008 7:15:17 | Dear BLM,
I am appalled by the approach the BLM is taking 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. Earl Willey 910NW Greenbriar Bend, OR 97701 |
| EM-6845 | Mary Conroy <tmconroy@frontiernet.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:15:52 | 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. Mary Conroy P.O. Box 780 Selma, OR 97538 541-597-2614 |
| EM-6846 | Patricia Williams <pattowil@earthlink.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/11/2008 7:16:50 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Patricia Williams, Salem, Oregon |
| EM-6847 | emtank@ca.rr.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 7:16:53 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Ethel Tankenson 4035 Meier St Los Angeles, CA 90066 |
| EM-6848 | James B Davis <jim@jbdavisconstruction.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:17:22 | 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. James B Davis 636 NW Saginaw Ave Bend, OR 97701 |
| EM-6849 | lorraine.gilbert@va.gov | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 7:19:54 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, lorraine gilbert 2930 sunset view Signal Hill, CA 90755 |
| EM-6850 | Laura Hisrich <laurarose@jeffnet.org> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:21:33 | 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. Laura Hisrich 306 High St. Eugene, OR 97401 |
| EM-6851 | nikki carpenter <carpenter.nikki@gmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:25:04 | 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. nikki carpenter 300 mallory hts drive grants pass, OR 97526 541-441-9911 |
| EM-6852 | Paula Brown <paulaj_brown@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:26:09 | 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. Paula Brown P.O. Box 69442 Portland, OR 97239 503-705-5672 |
| EM-6853 | William Howld <howald@u.washington.edu> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:28:24 | 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. William Howld 13309 47th Dr NE Marysville, WA 98271 |
| EM-6854 | Cassandra Portner <casleportner@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:30:04 | 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. Cassandra Portner Po Box 152 Scotts Mills, OR 97375 |
| EM-6855 | Tanya Earle <earlet@molallariv.k12.or.us> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/11/2008 7:36:27 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, Tanya Earle Molalla, OR |
| EM-6856 | Steve Aydelott <staydelott@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:37:35 | 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. Steve Aydelott 20782 Liberty Lane Bend, OR 97701-8064 |
| EM-6857 | David Castles <castlesbiz@comcast.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:42:02 | 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. David Castles 1537 SE 22nd Ave # Portland, OR 97214 |
| EM-6858 | Shari Sands <s.sands@comcast.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:45:07 | 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. Shari Sands 1117 NE Burke Pl Corvallis, OR 97330 |
| EM-6859 | Mike Higgins <higgins@pinetel.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:47:53 | 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. Mike Higgins 35901 Valley View Ln. Halfway, OR 97834 |
| EM-6860 | James D Carpenter Carpenter <jimcarp@efn.org> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:48:17 | 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. The WOPR is a step back to the unsustainable days of clear-cutting our amazing resources, endangering wildlife, muddying streams, and fueling public outcry. It is also extremely short-sighted - trading sustainability for short-term economic gain. Let's start trying to think beyond the next few years to what is really good for the future of our forests and economy and people. Please do not pass the WOPR alternative!!!!!!!! Thanks, Jim Carpenter James D Carpenter Carpenter P.O. Box 11079 Eugene, OR 97440 |
| EM-6861 | Bruce Andersn <brucewa@hevanet.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:50:32 | Dear BLM,
We must save the remaining old growth forests! 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. Please don't give in to political and business pressures to clear cut old growth forests! 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. Bruce Andersn 1972 SE 30th Ave Portland, OR 97214 |
| EM-6862 | Erin Madden <erin.madden@gmail.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 1/11/2008 7:50:47 | I oppose the BLM's plan to remove the protections of the NW Forest Plan from BLM lands in Western Oregon! Some of my favorite hiking and recreational areas in Oregon are on low elevation BLM lands. In the fall and spring, I enjoy mushroom hunting. In the summer, I raft and hike through BLM forests. The mature and old growth forests on BLM lands are some of the only low elevation forests of these types left in Oregon. As such, they provide some of the best habitat for old growth dependent species. Offering these forests up to the highest bidder for logging makes no sense (except to the timber industry and the Bush administration). The O&C Act does not mandate logging on every inch of BLM lands. At the very least, the BLM should be maintaining the protections of the NW Forest Plan including LSRs and Riparian Reserves on BLM lands. The BLM should also consider an alternative that provides additional protections for old growth and mature forests. With so few of these forests left, particularly at low elevations, they are worth far more standing than laying on the back of a log truck.
Sincerely, Erin Madden 3756 SE Lafayette Ct. Portland, OR 97202 |
| EM-6863 | harriet miller <harrietm247@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:53:18 | 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 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. harriet miller pob 493953 redding, CA 96049 |
| EM-6864 | Mary Hayden <baytovin@comcast.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:53:43 | 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. Mary K. Hayden 18347 S. Redland Rd. Oregon City, OR 97045 503-631-7040 or |
| EM-6865 | Margaret Stephens <mlstep@msn.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:54:18 | 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 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-6866 | Samantha Johnson <samlynn25@aol.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:54:33 | 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. Samantha Johnson 5727 NE 27th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 |
| EM-6867 | Tracie Brasch <tbrasch@centurytel.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:56:38 | Dear BLM,
I travel to 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 and maybe move to one day, while providing sustainable jobs and other economic benefits for rural communities. Tracie Brasch w342-s4140 Moraine Hills Dr Dousman, WI 53118 |
| EM-6868 | Kit Staples <kitstaples@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:56:48 | 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. Kit Staples 3105 Lincoln St Eugene, OR 97405 541-521-9213 |
| EM-6869 | Alaina Smith <writersmith@yahoo.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 7:58:28 | 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. I strongly disagree with the increased levels of logging and the destruction of our old-growth forests. I don't want to see clean water, salmon, wildlife, and Oregon's beautiful, majestic places destroyed. Please do not implement these plans! Alaina Smith 300 SW 192nd Place Beaverton, OR 97006 503-533-5361 |
| EM-6870 | Spiruman@aol.com | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 1/11/2008 7:58:39 | Dear BLM:
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I am opposed to the BLM's preferred alternative for the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I urge the BLM to maintain the existing scientific framework of the Northwest Forest Plan's late successional and riparian reserves on BLM lands, and develop an option that protects all remaining mature and old growth forests on BLM lands in Oregon. Sincerely, William Drabkin Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year. |
| EM-6871 | John Fiskio-Lasseter <jflasset@willamette.edu> | Comment on WOPR | 1/11/2008 7:58:43 | Dear BLM,
I am flatly opposed to your agency's Western Oregon Plan Revisions. 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. 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. Leave the few remaining ancient watersheds alone. John Fiskio-Lasseter 2986 Riverview St. Eugene, OR 97403 |
| EM-6872 | Cheryl Thoen <cthoen@teleport.com> | WOPR | 1/11/2008 8:01:39 | Dear BLM,
I am very concerned the Western Oregon Plan Revisions proposed by the BLM 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. Cheryl Thoen 2933 NW 53rd Dr. Portland, OR 97210 5039395767 |
| EM-6873 | Karl Poehleman <karl.poehleman@gmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:03:54 | 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. Karl Poehleman PO Box 693 Eugene, OR 97440 |
| EM-6874 | Mark Scantlebury <scantle@earthlink.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:05:09 | Dear BLM,
I'm president of the Lower Columbia Canoe Club, an organization of more than 200 Oregon families who canoe all over the state and participate in many other outdoor recreational activities. We all choose to 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. I am expecially concerned and perplexed as to why the Preferred Alternative would seek to reduce protection for riparian areas by reducing the width of streamside "buffers". A 25' standard is much too small. On the one hand the report talks about restoration of stream habitat for fish, which I assume means adding wood and wood structures to streams, and on the other hand, reducing streamside buffers reduces the potential for natural introduction of wood into streams. This is illogical and would seem to me to be strange economic logic. In addition, narrow buffers are MUCH more susceptible to wind damage and landslide issues. Some of my other 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. Mark Scantlebury 1710 SW Westwood Ct Portland, OR 97239 |
| EM-6875 | Stacy York <email4stacy@aol.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:05:59 | 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. Stacy York 2054 Jupiter Terrace Redding, CA 96002 |
| EM-6876 | greek1@ix.netcom.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 8:07:11 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. Sincerely, Kevin Greek 1221 Manet Dr. Sunnyvale, CA 94087 |
| EM-6877 | taylorjane@gmail.com | Opposition to the WOPR: Protect Our Ancient Forests | 1/11/2008 8:14:13 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions Bureau of Land Management
To whom it may concern: I am writing in opposition to the BLM's attempt to put our nation's beloved forests at-risk through the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). This misguided and unacceptable plan would unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) and threaten the magnificent forests, diversity of life, and clean salmon-rich waters of the region. Without the NWFP, we could see a return to logging of ancient forests and the degradation of hundreds of miles of rivers and streams up and down the Pacific coast. This proposal would take us backwards to the days of rampant old growth clear-cutting, destructive road building, and local controversy, and would fail to provide real stewardship of these resources. I urge you to reject this and every attempt to undermine science-based protections for our nation's natural resources. Clear-cutting over 100,000 acres of old-growth forest every decade is simply an unsustainable rate of logging that would destroy these ancient forests. I am also concerned that the proposal fails to appreciate how important these intact forests are in helping to slow global warming. Please do not allow the destruction of our old-growth forest heritage to be our legacy, and rewrite the plan to protect our ancient forests, clean water, and the wildlife that call these areas home. I send this letter not only for myself, but on behalf of my children. I know that they want beautiful forests to hike in and a strong, healthy planet to grow up on. Consider this letter signed not only by me, but by these future constituents as well. Sincerely, Taylor Rutledge 2942 Kincaid St. Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-6878 | Tom Keys <tom.keys@landstarmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:14:21 | 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. Tom Keys 1103 SE 21st Ct. Gresham, OR 97080 503-665-9933 |
| EM-6879 | Stefan Aumack <stefan_aumack@hotmail.com> | Please leave a legacy of forest management we can be proud of! | 1/11/2008 8:14:47 | Dear BLM,
I want to continue to be a proud Oregonian. I am proud to show visitors the old growth forests, to send boasting photos of salmon and steelhead in Oregon's streams, and to showcase MY (the public) forests and streams that should be managed primarily for the benefit of wildlife and recreation. I was proud to extol the benefits of the Northwest Forest Plan, and want to strongly encourage NO CHANGE to that plan. 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. Stefan Aumack 38671 Place Rd. Fall Creek, OR 97438 541-937-2251 |
| EM-6880 | Samantha Johnson <samlynn25@aol.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:16:17 | 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 Johnson 5727 NE 27th Avenue Portland, OR 97211 |
| EM-6881 | Randye Jensen <randye@mind.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:16:26 | 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. Randye Jensen 2305-C Ashland St PMB 407 Ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-6882 | Kevin Bell <kevinbell1@hotmail.com> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:16:51 | 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. Kevin Bell 1485 Poplar Drive #6 Medford, OR 97504 |
| EM-6883 | Randi Fitch <randi@gorge.net> | Please protect our old-growth forests! | 1/11/2008 8:17:57 | 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. Randi Fitch PO Box 455 Trout Lake, WA 98650 |
| EM-6884 | sthunber@allstate.com |