Web-comments-201-300

# SenderID Ref.# Comment Tool Date Comment
WC-201 WID-309 W-a00d8e29-3f46-41b5-8fc7-8d8b40387b0f Draft EIS 10/1/2007 3:04:00 PM I'm disappointed in the three alternatives:More logging using the outdated methods of timber removal that destroys the natural environment. We know enough now about the delicate balance that is achieved naturally in a forest, yet we extract timber in very destructive ways: I think that if logging practices were improved in order to save ecosystems from total destruction, we could have sustainable logging. It might be more expensive but still well worth it. The only choice to be made here under the circumstances is the no action alternative: leave it as it currently is.
WC-202 WID-309 W-5e2ddbb0-6eba-4140-87b3-e83b9595c9ac Draft EIS 10/1/2007 3:19:00 PM After reviewing the draft proposals the only prudent choice, although not a great one, is to take no action: leave it as it currently is. The problem with the proposals is that they still use destructive logging practices: The real problem is that you are not focusing on alternative timber extraction practices that disturb the forests the least, but rather still allowing clear cuts and other practices that disturb the delicate balance of the forest ecosystem. If you would only allow practices of timber removal that selectively extract timber from a forest left largely intact,including the leaving of snags, and nurse logs on the forest floor, logging could be sustainable: Of course it does cost more and greed precludes these gentler practices. So, if you log smarter you can log more, and many of us who are concerned with being a good steward of God's creation will support more timber extraction.
WC-203 WID-106 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_government|cb_ranching|tb_gen_ans:
WC-204 WID-316 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-205 WID-319 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-206 WID-319 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_government|tb_gen_ans:
WC-207 WID-319 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-208 WID-265 None Interactive Map 10/2/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_tourism|tb_gen_ans:
WC-209 WID-315 W-eb838a69-4be5-4537-a995-b5dacd0b9eb7 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 8:42:00 AM Cultual properties are too fuzzy. you can bet that the Greens will invest huge sums in hunting for cultural sites, just to stop any resource extraction. Consider known sies only plus any that are signigicant that come to your attention later. Define 'significant'.
WC-210 WID-315 W-d0da3f0a-7ce0-485c-81a9-b31ecf1e6779 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 8:48:00 AM Recognize that any growth of human activity is limited by availability of sand and aggregates for concrete. This is an absolute must and should be provided for early, lest other activities preclude the development of a gravel pit later.
WC-211 WID-315 W-46cd05fd-f9a8-4525-a258-3c2b92508c5f Draft EIS 10/2/2007 8:56:00 AM I would suggest that it is counter to the Concept of Wilderness to have any fire control at all. Wilderness areas are places where Nature rules., so if a fire starts, let it burn, always. If the fire endangers local homes or other facilities outside of the designated area, then is the time to start control.
WC-212 WID-315 W-0723bb00-4c14-4182-9270-b0b354350b04 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 9:19:00 AM I note that seveal allotment in the Medford District,and I assume in other districs, are less than 80 acres. These lands should be sold to the surrounding landowner at a propitious time when Green canot purchase the land to use as a sore to agrevate. Further, it must be emphasized that non-use is not a land treatment. In every semi-desert or desert area where it has been used as a treatment, it has resulted in dead perennial grasses and replacement by noxious weeds and grsses. Always,always, always. If one demands diversitry and healthy ranglands you MUST have livestock. Use livestock because they can be controlled in numbers and time. Wild animals or feral animals cannot be conrolled and will wreck the soil and vegetation.
WC-213 WID-323 W-3df14a8f-1780-41e3-82f9-d0a16e9bf93c Draft EIS 10/2/2007 4:10:00 PM the plan for the future of oregon's public lands should not include logging of virgin forests. period. we have too much to lose and too little to gain by the logging of old growth. we should focus on recreation in these areas, and leave timber production to land that has already been disturbed. even after fire, virgin forests should remain intact. their reproduction after such a catastrophe as the biscuit fire is fascinating and beautiful, and worthy. thank you.
WC-214 WID-315 W-2cfb0642-b2ad-49a0-b0ac-44ec6af4d1f9 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 5:15:00 PM For 'snags' read 'lightning rods'. None should be left on ridges.
WC-215 WID-315 W-5794b31d-77bc-472e-8622-89d31542f9cc Draft EIS 10/2/2007 5:26:00 PM I agree that salvage of dead and dying trees is essential to forest health. There are very adequate scientific studies documenting this. Use these studies. See me for the study.
WC-216 WID-315 W-e49b1f11-78cb-442b-8b24-f2f733b7bec9 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 7:07:00 PM No cutting of trees over 80 years means it will burn. You have two choices, either manage or watch it burn. For those who worship AlGore, recognize that old trees do not capture as much carbon dioxide as young trees. Trees reach maximum at about 40-80 years of age. Old growth sequesters little or no CO2. So these should be harvested, made into boards to sequester the CO2 for another 100-300 years. Scientific facts.
WC-217 WID-325 W-2f6fcfaa-bd08-4e74-9354-079943875416 Draft EIS 10/2/2007 10:09:00 PM please don't cut any old growth on any blm lands in western oregon ever, thankyou, stu phillips, eugene. no old growth logging of any kind. thanks. Stu phillips, eugene. keep away from the old growth, those trees over 60 years old , or older, thanks for leaving these species alone. stu phillips, eugene
WC-218 WID-124 None Interactive Map 10/3/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hiking|tb_gen_ans:
WC-219 WID-330 W-380689af-002e-4f01-9780-ed60f0cb3c2d Draft EIS 10/3/2007 11:34:00 AM The proposed alternatives to existing environmental protection safeguards is of extreme concern to me. i have lived in southern oregon since 1975, raised children here + now have grandchildren residing in this area. over the years i have seen encouraging progress in forest management policies with consideration for late succesional old growth forests, threatened + endangered species, clean water, + climate change. the proposed alternatives seem to consider none of these factors. my own homeplace borders BLM lands with unique ladys slipper orchid, spotted owl habitat + much wildlife. i ask that the old growth forests will continue to be protected/ that riparian zones will remain intact, protecting water + aquatic habitat, including northwest salmon species/ that roadless areas will remain undisturbed, preserving connectivity + indiginous + endemic species/ + that our native lands will be preserved as a legacy for future generations. please consider other options for the harvest of timber resources through the thinning of young second growth to safeguard communities + wildlands from fire, helping habitat to improve + generate income by the proper management of BLM second growth plantations, harvesting the many acres of existant second growth through ecoforestry based on ecologically viable practices. Please consider the broader spectrum of resource value of our beautiful ancient forests such as fisheries, tourism, clean air + water. PROTECT ANCIENT FORESTS!
WC-220 WID-330 W-f71da29a-ccab-4e05-8d32-b5af36a831a6 Draft EIS 10/3/2007 11:34:00 AM The proposed alternatives to existing environmental protection safeguards is of extreme concern to me. i have lived in southern oregon since 1975, raised children here + now have grandchildren residing in this area. over the years i have seen encouraging progress in forest management policies with consideration for late succesional old growth forests, threatened + endangered species, clean water, + climate change. the proposed alternatives seem to consider none of these factors. my own homeplace borders BLM lands with unique ladys slipper orchid, spotted owl habitat + much wildlife. i ask that the old growth forests will continue to be protected/ that riparian zones will remain intact, protecting water + aquatic habitat, including northwest salmon species/ that roadless areas will remain undisturbed, preserving connectivity + indiginous + endemic species/ + that our native lands will be preserved as a legacy for future generations. please consider other options for the harvest of timber resources through the thinning of young second growth to safeguard communities + wildlands from fire, helping habitat to improve + generate income by the proper management of BLM second growth plantations, harvesting the many acres of existant second growth through ecoforestry based on ecologically viable practices. Please consider the broader spectrum of resource value of our beautiful ancient forests such as fisheries, tourism, clean air + water. PROTECT ANCIENT FORESTS!
WC-221 WID-331 W-1bd8cd38-2de8-49f6-ad05-e6f35a46ec66 Draft EIS 10/3/2007 12:54:00 PM I urge you to stop the harvest and maintenance of ALL OLD GROWTH TREES AND FORESTS. We should leave these forests alone, and protect them. We should only harvest in areas that have been harvested before.
WC-222 WID-333 W-8e29caa3-12c9-40c1-ac69-924450c28fcc Draft EIS 10/3/2007 3:25:00 PM It MUST be alternative #2. The citizens of the various communities and welfare of the timberland must have alternative #2 adopted. It's time to cease listening to the extremist views and do what's right for everyone concerned.
WC-223 WID-335 W-2ad381f7-42b3-4002-b9e2-020ecd263d29 Draft EIS 10/3/2007 10:07:00 PM please DO NOT cut any old growth trees on any western oregon blm lands, they must be kept intact, revise wopr to NOT cut any old growth mature trees on any blm lands in western oregon, they are irreplaceable, mature, clean our air, house wildlife, clean water, and improve quality of life, leave the trees alone. Let them live, thankyou. Stuart Phillips, Eugene
WC-224 WID-336 None Web Forum Exit 10/4/2007 1:02:00 PM Since I'm doing this during lunch, at work, I didn't have much time to do anything except sign in. The process was mercifully short and easy! I'll be returning to the site.
WC-225 WID-337 W-ac111f3a-6478-4c3d-9965-9e72f2f3b246 Draft EIS 10/4/2007 4:32:00 PM I would like to encourage the BLM to incorporate Alternattive 1 as the next step in managing our timber lands. The decision to proceed with anything else is going to cause the WOPR to be extensively mitagated. There are very few provisions for maintaining fish habitat in Alternatives 2 and 3. I am concerned that wilh the likely listing of the Cojo, that any steps to harvest more late sucessional reserve that does not provide for fish habitat, will be litagated for years to come. Thank you for your time. Dr. Mary Herrera
WC-226 WID-347 None Interactive Map 10/6/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_dirtbiking|cb_hiking|cb_fishing|cb_camping|cb_ohv|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans:
WC-227 WID-352 None Interactive Map 10/7/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-228 WID-352 None Interactive Map 10/7/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-229 WID-352 None Interactive Map 10/7/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-230 WID-360 None Interactive Map 10/8/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from undefined: Please, no more cutting of old growth forest%21%21%21%21%21%21%21%21%21%21
WC-231 WID-354 W-0a74060d-af8b-4f6d-8f66-214a89032632 File Upload 10/8/2007 8:21:00 AM Please see the attached letter with detailed specifications why I support the No Action plan and strongly oppose Alternatives 2 and 3. Thank you! Ariana Sutton-Grier Native Oregonian currently residing in North Carolina for graduate school

Uploaded File:  BLM letter.pdf
WC-232 WID-357 W-2fe6b23a-a3df-4166-a10e-5732bbff394c Draft EIS 10/8/2007 4:16:00 PM I highly object to your (Bush's) plan to reduce the old growth forests in Oregon by half. That may be what people from Texas want, but they don't know anything about our dwindling trees. Try flying over the coast range. It is getting bare. Why can't they tree farm and have sustained yields for future use? Marisu Terry
WC-233 WID-366 None Interactive Map 10/9/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_timber|tb_gen_ans:
WC-234 WID-368 None Interactive Map 10/9/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-235 WID-361 W-0f0251b8-3442-4e69-bd5c-40959b9d97ca Draft EIS 10/9/2007 8:01:00 AM It is unacceptable to me that the Bureau of Land Management now appears to exist for the benefit of the private timber industry, using national forests as nurseries for timber production. If we are going to subsidize the timber industry, let's do it in the most visible manner, not by giving away our forest heritage. If BLM charged per foot the same price as what it costs private timber companies to cut their own trees, we would have more forests still standing. We undercut the private timber tree market by giving away the trees that belong to a whole nation. Management of the forests needs to focus on preserving species and forest health. Forests help drive our weather systems and watersheds. It is extremely shortsighted of our current government to clearcut that which affects human populations in regions far wider than the geographical boundaries of a particular forest. I am not a forester nor a biologist and can not therefore speak to specific elements of the plan. As a citizen of this country, I find none of the current alternatives offered acceptable. It is my hope that someone in management will have the courage to look the Bush administration in the eye and say just this: If we follow your plan, all we will have left in the next 50 years are "Bushes". Please, please, see the forest for the trees, not their timber value.
WC-236 WID-112 W-ffc5fa7d-41f9-4a03-951f-4fb007fb8d30 Draft EIS 10/9/2007 3:39:00 PM I would like to see the BLM publish documents that record the costs and effects of not proceeding with land management actions due to litigation hold-ups. This would include the cost of defense for attorney fees, loss in revenue, and overall time spent in the process. The public needs to see how many tax dollars are spent on defending against extreme environmental groups. I feel it is too easy to stop management activity on federal land. The BLM needs to work with partners to make sure processes can proceed as planned without expensive, and time consuming litigation.
WC-237 WID-371 None Interactive Map 10/10/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Areas of Critical Environmental Concern: I think that Alternative 2 goes a little too far as far as timber harvest is concerned. Despite the real need for timber to feed local mills, this must be balanced with the global significance of this ecoregion.%0DAccording to the WWF, "The Klamath-Siskiyou ecoregion is considered a global center of biodiversity (Wallace 1982), an IUCN Area of Global Botanical Significance (1 of 7 in North America), and is proposed as a World Heritage Site and UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (Vance-Borland et al. 1995). The biodiversity of these rugged coastal mountains of northwestern California and southwestern Oregon has garnered this acclaim because the region harbors one of the four richest temperate coniferous forests in the world (along with the Southeastern Conifer forests of North America, forests of Sichuan, China, and the forests of the Primorye region of the Russian Far East), with complex biogeographic patterns, high endemism, and unusual community assemblages."%0Dsource%3A http%3A%2F%2Fworldwildlife.org%2Fwildworld%2Fprofiles%2Fterrestrial%2Fna%2Fna0516%5Ffull.html
WC-238 WID-377 None Interactive Map 10/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_fulltime|cb_spiritual|cb_scenicbeauty|tb_gen_ans:
WC-239 WID-377 None Interactive Map 10/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_onceamonth|tb_gen_ans:
WC-240 WID-374 None Interactive Map 10/10/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_1_other: recreation|tb_gen_ans:
WC-241 WID-8 None Interactive Map 10/10/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_government|tb_gen_ans:
WC-242 WID-371 W-e483efab-2884-4a29-821c-c103c7bdc653 Draft EIS 10/10/2007 12:22:00 PM I don't like the fact that there is such a disparity between Alternative 2 and 3 as far as job creation goes. I guess I would rather see some middle ground there. Jackson County certainly could use O&C dollars for our libraries, but there are several other revenue streams that remain as yet untapped. I do not see this as a legitimate reason to expand timber production by such a large margin.
WC-243 WID-376 W-949bb172-c123-4d12-b539-7f7b9c422556 Draft EIS 10/10/2007 1:44:00 PM Moved to Jacksonville a few years ago from Tucson. Had miles and miles of riding area's there of course. I'm 40 years old and been riding since I was 6. Both my sons 5 and 9 and my wife ride motorcycles and an atv. It is something that we enjoy to do as a family and felt lucky to have moved so close to John's Peak. We are not in anyway the dirtbag outlaws that the Jacksonville paper makes us out to be. Its very frustrating to read how they think Jacksonville as a whole is so against an OHV area. Just in our little area in Nunan square there are at least 6 different homes here that I know for a fact utilize John's Peak for riding. A problem is it is hard to get people who would rather not cause problems to speak up and voice there opionions on this subject. It's crazy to think we are somehow lowering the quality of life for the people protesting when most of them probably don't even know how to get to John's Peak. Some are even confusing the loud pipes of Harley riders that come through downtown on the weekends with off-road enthusiasts. Thanks you for the time to allows us to comment. Let's go Riding... Joey Taylor
WC-244 WID-381 None Interactive Map 10/11/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|cb_fulltime|cb_relax|tb_gen_ans: The John's Peak area is close to my house and has a history of OHV use and just needs to be managed. It's a great area for all skill levels and give a desination place to ride, where we know it's legal.
WC-245 WID-381 None Interactive Map 10/11/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Off-Highway Vehicles: I think the Johns' Peak%2FTimber Mountain area makes a good OHV area because it have a varity of terrian for beginners to expert. It's a great family area.
WC-246 WID-367 W-dd4af53f-3937-4a4b-b754-2ab77a302c20 Draft EIS 10/11/2007 6:13:00 PM The no action alternative is what would be preferred. We don't want anymore of Oregon with swaths cut to a line before the highways so the tourists think there is still a forest rather than a clear-cut. What most loggers know now and even the timber companies with their "super grow" trees (which are not doing as well as initially claimed), once an area is clear-cut especially old growth with deep root systems, it often times will not come back. The deep root systems of the old growth trees move groundwater into the atmosphere by way of capillary action and evaporation. When this process is removed the water table drops. The Sahara desert was once forested but was clear-cut for grazing... This land belongs to the people not the corporation who can bid the highest to destroy the beauty of our forests to deny our children and theirs. Beyond the beauty, and the water tables, if that were not enough reason the erosion that will be caused and silt deposits ruining fisheries should be a major consideration. Is one sale in that the product may end up offshore somewhere like China so a few people can line their pockets with cash enough reward to destroy the small amount of old growth forests we have left? I should say not! Thank you, Mick
WC-247 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_hunting|cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: this is my favorite place to ride in the state, I always see deer and elk every time I go riding, it really suprises me to see how the deer and elk use the OHV trails. Thank you BLM and ARRMC for making this possable
WC-248 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: Even more dunes
WC-249 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: Kingsey Res. park good riding here but could be a larger area
WC-250 WID-387 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_timber|cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans:
WC-251 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: All of the Oregon Dunes what fun they are, the spring beach clean up is our favorate time, clean the beach then ride for the day
WC-252 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: Sand lake good times for all
WC-253 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans:
WC-254 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans:
WC-255 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: Rock creek %21%21%21%21%21%21%21
WC-256 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: More dunes more fun
WC-257 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans: Goat mountain going to be lost soon if we don't work together and make it into OHV use, I've been riding there for 30 years
WC-258 WID-389 None Interactive Map 10/12/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_ohv|tb_gen_ans:
WC-259 WID-389 None Web Forum Exit 10/12/2007 10:54:00 AM Please lets keep the public involved this is a great place to start
WC-260 WID-402 None Interactive Map 10/13/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hiking|cb_birdwatching|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|cb_1-4timesyear|tb_gen_ans:
WC-261 WID-403 None Interactive Map 10/13/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_farming|cb_timber|cb_fulltime|tb_gen_ans: This BLM land adjoins our farm. The reason for 5 to 35 year growth adjoining this property is a serious mudslide caused by clear cut timbering in the higher elevations. The mudslide covered our hay fields and thru to the adjoining neighbor. The result was mud into the Cow Creek salmon spawning beds. This land is currently listed at late successional reserve land. Options 2 and 3 are proposing making this land available for regenerative harvest. The steep hillsides in this area would threaten additional mudslide damage both to the property around the BLM, and the Cow Creek tributary across Yeust Road. This area has started striving with large raptor populations and has an excellant mix of multi-tree species - Douglas Fir, Cedar, Maples of many types, myrtle, dogwood etc. Please consider keeping the late successional designation for this area to prevent collateral mudslide damage, and maintain its healty mix of wild life.
WC-262 WID-402 W-18ae9704-f85c-4b1a-935a-f18e7b90e6de Draft EIS 10/13/2007 3:06:00 PM First and very first; the assumption is wrong; we do not need to increase timber harvest to meet more demand. This assumption is wrong on two levels; 1. Construction will demand more lumber and 2. Other uses will also increase demand. Construction: Timber is an important part of construction but we have other natural resources, mainly steel, that will eventually replace wood. Steel structures hold up better in all respects - earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and even flooding because it will not mildew or rot. Concrete, brick, will still be used in areas where it is practical. Other: Plastics are replacing and will replace wood in many areas of manufacturing. Steel prices are unusually high but this is only a temporary situation as Asia will develop its raw materials to replace what they import from us. Lumber prices also rise and fall as demand dictates. The overall trend is for lumber prices to rise, as they have, to a point where steel again become the cheaper construction material. Conclusion; To assume we will need greater and greater supplies of timber is wrong. Demand will actually decline over the decades being replaced with steel. This makes your conclusions wrong as well. Your interests should be in establishing alternative uses for our great forest. Integrating timber with recreational use carrying the higher priority. Recreation includes protecting species as those who will travel across states to experience what this country has to offer. It is time to look to the future and abandon the money hungry errors of your past. Richard Fife
WC-263 WID-408 None Interactive Map 10/15/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 2: I would like to express support for Alternative 2.%0D
WC-264 WID-415 None Interactive Map 10/15/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Off-Highway Vehicles: I'm concerned with the process used to determine "open" and "closed" area. This seems to be a capricious process that is not based on input by the public, but a designation by whomever holds the keys to the gates accessing trails and roads. I believe that all current roads and trails should be considered "open." Closing a road should be a case by case scenario.
WC-265 WID-413 W-f173b1d7-2e29-44e9-aa9d-56c57460363c Draft EIS 10/15/2007 12:30:00 PM Dear BLM, BLM wants to use a computer model to predict what level of logging is sustainable. Clearly, the real goal is to increase logging by gaining access to areas that are currently protected, using a model that underestimates impacts and overestimates production. The plan calls for an *annual, */sustainable /harvest level of 727 million board feet. That's *triple *the amount of timber in the Northwest Forest Plan and *seven times* the harvest actually achieved. I must comment on these flaws and bad assumptions that the BLM presents. This isnt highly technical, just poking holes in the BLM's presentation to show its nothing but an unrealistic timber harvest model. Here are some major problems for anyone who cares about plants or wildlife: It shrinks the late successional reserves, with no wildlife impacts included. This is a direct impact on wildlife and endangered species, and the BLM isn't including it in the planning assumptions. Basically, anything over 110 years old is available for cutting. It eliminates streams protections for intermittent streams, which form a large portion of the streams in Oregon. This allows clearcutting through streambeds. There are only two classes of stream here: year-round and intermittent, with no concept of how long and when streams flow. There is also a reduction in logging buffers for streams. Its a return to 1970s era logging practices and means a big rollback of protections for both plants and wildlife. The model is supposed to show sustainable harvest. To maximize the harvest you've eliminated anything with negative impacts, or ignore factors unrelated to timber production. This model is supposed to guide the entire planning process. The model assumes perfect regrowth. The only thing you have that kills trees is cutting. No fire, disease, insects or road construction is factored into the model. This is a turnaround after your pandering for fire reduction money using the threat of fire to their timber plantations. It supposedly models in roads, but then doesnt look at helicopter logging, yarding, or anything else that requires more cutting. It doesnt have any stream sedimentation modeling, which means the fishery / salmon impact is ignored - a direct impact on both endangered and non-endangered species. Since most roads follow or cross streams, this is a huge flaw. All the roading and logging that clogs streams with soil runoff is ignored. Conifers only. Since you care only about marketable timber, there is nothing in the model about impacts on deciduous trees or shrubs since these dont matter when the goal is timber volume. Please take a look at this plan and fix these glaring probelms. Thank you for your time. Bob Hatton Portland, OR
WC-266 WID-414 W-8a97931c-6e30-47a2-84b3-b1cb4de79081 Draft EIS 10/15/2007 2:52:00 PM I am a 4x4 land user and backwoods camper, but the private timber companies can close public lands with no regard for us, the owning public, to have access to these areas. This needs to be changed in the next travel management plan. Also, the BLM has asked to have all roads and trails mapped with the assistance of volunteers, we can't map the trails that we enjoy if they are now locked behind private gates.
WC-267 WID-414 W-293014bb-635d-4355-8a8f-6a713a9a6fed Draft EIS 10/15/2007 2:57:00 PM I am in favor of alternative plan #2 because it gives the best return from the land and still gives plenty of habitat for fish and wildlife.
WC-268 WID-152 W-78b3c06f-3c4a-4fd2-9a62-d3f5a0a3245a Draft EIS 10/15/2007 3:47:00 PM I am extremely worried about land closures in Oregon. The change from always open unless posted to always closed unless posted is just begging to be abused. Why would the BLM even be considering closing down our PUBLIC lands? I feel very strongly about this, why are people who like to take there family's out to enjoy their chosen hobby's on public lands being punished? What does this say for the future of our sport. This state has always had a history of being able to enjoy the outdoors. It would be a real shame if that were to all be taken away.
WC-269 WID-418 W-5dd9941e-0d88-46c0-88b6-a1964ae770a9 Draft EIS 10/15/2007 6:06:00 PM Please do not change current management practices.
WC-270 WID-419 W-bf548b7b-6006-40b9-8a03-a5ad7dea586e Draft EIS 10/15/2007 10:27:00 PM October 15, 2007 Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon 97208 To Whom It May Concern: As a citizen of Oregon, I greatly value the incredible natural beauty of our state. For many of us, part of that beauty consists of our majestic old growth forests. Flying over Oregon, however, one unfortunately sees clearly how these forests are sadly diminishing through the many acres of past clear-cutting practices. For this reason, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). It seems clear that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan, and will most likely lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The current Administration would place 1/2 of the public land that the BLM manages - and most of our best old-growth BLM forests - in "Timber Management Areas" to be clearcut every 80 years. The Administration´s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon´s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 miles of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas - all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation´s ancient forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to increase old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. I feel strongly that we should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. For these reasons I urge you to protect remaining old-growth forests, and to focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas. Sincerely, Martin Mack
WC-271 WID-419 W-71b1a356-5a0e-4e21-9020-c781dd1ec328 Draft EIS 10/15/2007 10:27:00 PM October 15, 2007 Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon 97208 To Whom It May Concern: As a citizen of Oregon, I greatly value the incredible natural beauty of our state. For many of us, part of that beauty consists of our majestic old growth forests. Flying over Oregon, however, one unfortunately sees clearly how these forests are sadly diminishing through the many acres of past clear-cutting practices. For this reason, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions (WOPR). It seems clear that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan, and will most likely lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The current Administration would place 1/2 of the public land that the BLM manages - and most of our best old-growth BLM forests - in "Timber Management Areas" to be clearcut every 80 years. The Administration´s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon´s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 miles of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas - all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation´s ancient forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to increase old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. I feel strongly that we should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. For these reasons I urge you to protect remaining old-growth forests, and to focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas. Sincerely, Martin Mack
WC-272 WID-420 None Interactive Map 10/16/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-273 WID-52 None Interactive Map 10/17/2007 12:00:00 AM tb_gen_ans:
WC-274 WID-427 W-d5d56cd6-08c9-4cad-9596-b7592191ea11 File Upload 10/17/2007 11:11:00 AM

Uploaded File:  Ltr.BLM.pdf
WC-275 WID-427 W-9ef29e42-4706-4f3c-a1d7-64178a69e7c7 File Upload 10/17/2007 11:12:00 AM

Uploaded File:  Ltr.BLM.pdf
WC-276 WID-432 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 1: This looks very extreme. I cannot understand why one would want to cut so much timber for such negligible justification.
WC-277 WID-432 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 2: this alternative is no better than the first. It seems a recipe for flooding and degradation of what is currently relatively pristine countryside. Have you considered the possibility of floods with the increased rainfall that has been occuring in some years%3F
WC-278 WID-432 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 3: This looks somewhat better depending on your definition of landscape. Pristine uncut landscape would be the best.
WC-279 WID-433 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 2: Rotation rates are too short to sustain Spotted Owl populations. You expect court challeges if you implement this alternative.
WC-280 WID-433 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 1: Rotation rates are too short to sustain Spotted Owl populations. You can expect court challenges if you chose this alternative.
WC-281 WID-433 None Interactive Map 10/18/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 3: Given the state of Spotted Owl populations, this should be the alterrnative put in place.
WC-282 WID-431 W-93ed91b5-501f-4af2-b48e-60fe92e560ad File Upload 10/18/2007 12:15:00 AM The spotted owl requires substantial, connected habitat of old growth forest to survive. It is imperative that federal agencies use the best science to determine the means to ensure the survival of this species. To cherry-pick from obscure studies that suggest that spotted owls survive outside old growth forests is disingenuous and fraudulent. Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 massively increase land for intensive logging with little concern for the spotted owl. As well, while interactions between other owl species and spotted owls may account for some population decrease in the latter, this is most certainly not the cause of the original decrease in spotted owl populations. That reduction can be directly tied to logging of old growth forests in decades past. Finally, it is important to note that North West communities value federal lands as increasingly important for recreation, hunting, hiking, and more. To excessively give away lands to timber companies -- as Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 do -- is a poor and unrealistic option. It is highly likely that the Democratic Party will capture both the Presidency and both chambers next year. It is prudent and wise for so-called "scientists" and other Bush lackeys to recognize the coming change in the political winds. To be on the pro-logging side, as Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 most certainly are, is to be on the wrong side, career-wise, of the government.

Uploaded File:  comments.txt
WC-283 WID-435 W-67f0a198-69a0-49ff-ade4-6ed52471904f Draft EIS 10/18/2007 11:58:00 AM Much of the justification to revise the plan hinges on objectives for timber harvets not being "predictable and sustainable". It is ludicrous to think for one second that logging old growth forests is in any way sustainable. It takes 200 years or more to re-grow those trees.
WC-284 WID-435 W-a3cdee1b-38f0-43cb-98c6-f209054fbd5e Draft EIS 10/18/2007 12:00:00 PM Wouldn't fire risk and severity be increased as the BLM converts healthy ancient forests into dense, flammable tree plantations - post logging?
WC-285 WID-435 W-480cecda-8622-4454-ac3c-0482ba3d9092 Draft EIS 10/18/2007 12:17:00 PM "To the extent the BLM can provide a substantial stream of revenue to the counties through the revenue sharing provisions of the O&C Act, the ability of county governments dependent on these revenues to provide services will be improved." The intent is good. But clearcutting old growth forests does not produce a steady flow of old growth trees, it is a temporary solution to a much larger funding formula problem. It will give a quick fix and in the meantime valuable watersheds and other natural resources are threatened or destroyed. Logging in Oregon must be suatainable, and we must do what we can to preserve what cannot be replaced.
WC-286 WID-435 W-e615166e-5768-4ab7-a604-b338b1322ee5 Draft EIS 10/18/2007 12:25:00 PM Clearcutting or "regeneration harvesting" in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks should not be allowed. The Northwest Forest Plan's protections should remain in place for BLM lands. To remove them is an easy, but temporary quick-fix for the county payments funding crisis. Rural communities in particular are suffering and they deserve a long-term solution to the funding issue, not just delaying tactics. Oregon ancient forests deserve permanent protection and should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in forest restoration, fire safety and tourism. When we log in Oregon, we've got to make it sustainable. Our natural watersheds are invaluable, and our ancient forests are irreplaceable.
WC-287 WID-444 None Interactive Map 10/19/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_tourism|cb_spiritual|cb_importantspecies|cb_scenicbeauty|cb_relax|tb_gen_ans:
WC-288 WID-442 None Interactive Map 10/19/2007 12:00:00 AM cb_photo|cb_hunting|cb_hiking|cb_camping|tb_gen_ans: There needs to be better access to the camp creek area I enjoy this area alot and it is getting very difficult to access it. pft has put in a gate and it will be very difficult to walk in that far to enjoy the national monument.
WC-289 WID-451 W-356c8617-e82c-41b5-ae8f-d8cb8f11dc11 Draft EIS 10/20/2007 1:54:00 PM I strongly disagree regarding BLM's selection of a preferred alternative. In a case such as this (management of our nation's public forests of western Oregon) BLM can best serve the public interest through a conservation-based management strategy. Any alternative other than Alternative 1 (No Action alternative) would put at risk now rare undisturbed areas that are currently withdrawn from active management. BLM should adopt Alternative 1, the No Action alternative, in their Western Oregon Plan revisions.
WC-290 WID-460 None Interactive Map 10/22/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from No Action: This is by far the best of the alternatives, as all of the other alternatives are harmful to the environment. At a time when we should be protecting all old-growth forest that remains for its biological value and its value in combating global warming, the BLM's "preferred alternative" would more than double the area of old-growth forests clearcut on BLM lands. It would open up currently protected streamside forests and forest reserves to logging. Fire risk and severity would increase under the BLM plan, as old-growth forests are converted to dense tree plantations full of flammable materials. Only the No Action option serves the public interest and avoids further damage to an already heavily compomised resource.
WC-291 WID-459 None Interactive Map 10/22/2007 12:00:00 AM Comment on DEIS excerpt from Alernative 2: Alternative 2 is a bad idea. I urge the BLM to protect, not cut, old growth forests, and be responsible to the public who taxes fund your agency, not special interest timber companies. Protect what little old growth remains for the next generation.
WC-292 WID-88 W-b297e771-ebab-4380-9c56-bfaed4cee6f5 Draft EIS 10/22/2007 12:22:00 PM It would appear that clear cutting is not only the preferred alternative, but really the only alternative considered. Clear cutting is not the way to manage our forests! More revenue is great. Coos County needs all the help we can get, but not at the expense of the loss of the forests. The science used to create these alternatives is suspect. Indeed, even Fish and Wildlife have questioned it. It looks like you need to start over. The only acceptable alternative is the no action one.
WC-293 WID-464 W-7f872683-882d-461f-9bc3-9ba34f034538 Draft EIS 10/22/2007 1:26:00 PM I prefer "no action" if (as I understand it, from wading thru the staggering quantity of bureaucratic mire that comprises this EIS) "no action" is the option which preserves the very few stands of 200+ year old trees left on BLM property.
WC-294 WID-469 W-42cc44fc-e398-41ce-91bb-54dcddf28a0d Draft EIS 10/22/2007 9:28:00 PM I support a path forward where roadless and old growth lands remain out of timber production. The BLM is proving once again that they are in the pockets of the timber industry and want to manage our lands for resource extraction. The State of Oregon has already lost most of our old growth forests and the Timber Industry appears to be bent on removing the little that remains. Higher value in tourism and recreation dollars are obtained, by leaving our roadless areas and old growth groves intact. It's time the BLM did the right thing for the environment and the state of Oregon. Stop the senseless removal of ancient trees and leave our lands alone. The timber industry has enough of their own land to destroy without touching the few remaining priceless lands that haven't been clear cut. Removing old growth ecosystems and replacing them with factory timber farms is a net loss to the people of Oregon and this country. I urge the BLM to take a different course and preserve the remaining old growth stands of timber and roadless areas.
WC-295 WID-472 W-0cce0d37-c465-4cbc-bfb0-e1acd71049c5 Draft EIS 10/23/2007 12:36:00 PM I have written previously, but after further study of the proposal, I am now able to be more specific in expressing my feelings. In short, I think the status quo is preferable to any of the three alternatitives presented. I previously stated that I object to clear cutting and harvesting old growth. Maintaining the present policy seems most in accordance with these views.
WC-296 WID-475 W-25a097ec-6d0d-4105-8905-71ab6145a2bc Draft EIS 10/23/2007 3:23:00 PM I am opposed to the proposed WORP. Clearcutting tens of thousands of acres of land among mountains that are already severely butchered by the timber industry will only decrease the quality of life for myself and other Oregonians. These forests, particularly the old growth forests, are the economic engines of the regional economy that is shifting from resource exploitation to quality of life attributes. These intact forests also support things like wild salmon, spotted owls, and many other species that do best in lands that are unmanaged and unlogged. The new roads that will be created will become routes for ORVS that will destroy the peace and quiet of these forests. They create "noise litter". New research is demonstrating maintaining intact unlogged forests reduces the spread of wildfires by maintaining cool and moist conditions. Logging and the plantations that result increase forest fire risk. Finally these lands are just beautiful. To butcher them with clearcuts is a national disgrace and should be as illegal as defacing the Washington Monument or any other national shrine. George Wuerthner
WC-297 WID-478 W-50df964c-1196-4a89-97da-ecb0b1d41d17 Draft EIS 10/24/2007 9:07:00 AM As one of the owners of the property involved in the Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I wish to inform the BLM that I am against any changes, provisions, or debate which will allow for the destruction of any trees! The BLM does not own the land or the resources upon or within it any more than any other citizen. I oppose ALL logging on public lands! BAN ALL LOGGING!!
WC-298 WID-479 None Web Forum Exit 10/24/2007 10:08:00 AM I would like a way to be notified about up-coming revisions to current policy, especially when concerning land in my region. Is there any way that I can recieve information about significant issues like this one before they move to comment period. It would allow time to consult with my fellow local and prepare intelligent comments. Thank you.
WC-299 WID-480 W-cc31e68f-a12a-482d-972d-6f28d6991d98 File Upload 10/24/2007 2:32:00 PM

Uploaded File:  WOPR.doc
WC-300 WID-483 W-0252ae89-d450-4cc9-8b6d-522568149000 Draft EIS 10/25/2007 4:38:00 PM There is absolutely no scientific basis for stating that none of the alternatives would increase fine sediment greater than 1% of baseline. Removing any stand of trees or disturbing plant life at any scale contributes to an increase in entrainment of suspended sediment due to associated water escapement from root networks which would no longer be present at predisturbed levels. This increased volume of surface flow or subsurface flow which eventually daylights as a spring downslope has an increased erosional ability due to laws of mass and energy relative to increased volumes of discharge especially in higher gradient systems which typifies the terrain in question. There would be an immediate increase of surface water discharge at connection points such as tributary junctions because waters previously retained within living vegetation or transpiring into the atmosphere upslope have less biological facilitator for transporation or incorporation of vegetation mass if logging is engaged in any capacity. 1% in an inaccurate number. 1% is too low.
USA.GOV  |  No Fear Act  |  DOI  |  Disclaimer  |  About BLM  |  Notices  |  Get Adobe Reader