A couple weeks ago, Matt Stansberry and I were interviewed by Meghan Kalkstein of KVAL News about our opposition to the Western Oregon Plan Revision affectionately known by it’s acronym “WOPR.” For those of you outside of our region, the WOPR is an attempt by the BLM to increase clearcutting and other logging on Oregon and California Railroad lands by an astounding 700%. The O&C lands as they are called are 2.5 million acres of public land in western Oregon. To give you an idea of the scope of the area, Delaware is approximately 1.6 million acres (I rounded up). Rhode Island is approximately .8 million acres (I rounded up again). So, the area covered by the WOPR is larger than the total combined area of two, albeit small eastern states.
The WOPR would reduce riparian buffer zones along salmon bearing streams along many of Oregon’s cherished rivers. Affected watersheds include the: Umpqua; Siuslaw; Alsea; Smith; Nestucca; Rogue; Mckenzie, and countless other smaller rivers and streams. Currently, no logging is allowed within 360′ of a fish bearing stream on any public land in the Northwest. The new plan, specific to BLM/O&C lands would allow logging (but not clearcutting) within 25 feet of fish bearing streams.
The story is called ‘Thousands Comment on Western Oregon Plan Revision.’ The link below will allow you to view the story and the video of the local broadcast. They used Matt alot more than me–I hope it wasn’t because I sounded like an idiot and was because it was absolutely pouring when I spoke and I pretty much looked like a drowned rat or maybe like I just got through running a 10K. In any event, I wasn’t pleasant to look at. To sum that up, I hope Matt got more face time because I looked hideous and not because I sounded stupid.
www.kval.com/news/local/13691512.html
Our view is that the current protections are helping to restore long suffering fish populations. Given all the challenges these species face from overharvest, habitat destruction and global warming, we do not feel a rollback of current regulatory protections is justified or warranted. We are not against logging. We just want it done in a responsible manner.
For an example of responsible forest managment, the BLM needs look no futher than the Siuslaw National Forest. BTW, both the BLM and the SNF manage land in the Siuslaw basin so they wouldn’t have to look real far. Maybe it’s a vision thing.
