E-mail-001-399
| # | Sender | Subject |
Date |
Body |
| EM-1 | "Comcast Mail" <Reshal@comcast.net> | 2.5 million acre logging project | 8/10/2007 9:44:45 | Hello,
I do not believe that you are doing the right thing by logging that 2.5 million acres of trees. Although the land is federal forest, that forest has grown to support a larger number of animals, and logging 54% of it will confine them to a much smaller space. By doing this, you are setting the stage for Oregon animal numbers to drop dramatically. Please review your plans. Some very unique animals live in that forest, such as owls. A small portion of the forest's animal population have continually decreasing numbers. By logging this forest, you are helping them to disappear from the face of the earth for good. Please do the better thing for the environment. Sincerely, A Caring Citizen |
| EM-2 | joseph@kswild.org | WOPR Draft DEIS Comments from the Public | 8/11/2007 12:12:11 | Submitter: Joseph Vaile
email: joseph@kswild.org Location: Ashland, OR 97520 Comment: Please don\'t log the old-growth. Instead, thin the plantations. Choose the Citizens Conservation Alternative submitted in scoping. Thanks, Joseph Vaile Ashland Oregon 97520 Relevant Section/Page: all of it |
| EM-3 | info@abolishpoverty.us | Priority Invitation August 30 Eugene Radio Town Hall | 8/19/2007 11:23:53 | BLM rep,
I am the event designer for a radio town hall we are having on federal forest policy in Eugene, Oregon. We are very interested in having a Bureau of Land Management spokesperson as a panelist. Are you interested in discussing with me BLM's possible participation? Copied below is information on the event. Thank you, Michael Smith August 30th Radio Town Hall Event Designer 1630 Arthur Place Eugene, Oregon 97402 541-653-6315 To: Event Advisers From: Michael Smith, Event Designer Re: August 30th Radio Town Hall Note: Comprehensive and updated report next week. Event Name:Our Forests, Our Economy, Our Future Event Description:A radio town hall conversation with community members and panelists representative of different perspectives on current federal forest policy and the impact on communities within O&C counties. The recent Bureau of Land Management report and the status of Secure ! Rural Schools legislation are essential topics of conversation with radio listeners, audience and panelist members perspectives on environmental, economic, humanitarian and county government impacts woven into the pattern of discussion by moderator Brian Shaw throughout the evening. Panelists field questions from moderator, audience members and call-in listeners. Event is open to the public and no reservations are required. Sponsors include the Eugene Weekly and KOPT 1600-AM. Other locally owned media concerns are being asked to consider sponsorship. After the meeting, everyone is invited to the Oak Street Speakeasy, a jazz bar right down the street from the county courthouse, for an informal "get together" hosted by the Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station). Admission is free. Must be 21. Event Purpose: To engage the greater community in a critical conversation about federal forest policy within O&C counties and encourage open, tolerant, and effective participation to influence local, state, and federal officials on future policy to make our communities a better place to live, attend school, and work in a sustainable environment. Event Panelists 1) Pete Sorenson, Lane County Commissioner 2) Jay Lininger, Executive Director, Cascadia Wildlands Project. 3) Open Chair for Bureau of Land Management Spokesperson 4) Open Chair for timber products industry member Sue Kupillas, Citizens For Sustainable Forests and Communities, a timber products industry group, recently withdrew as a panelist because of travel considerations. Brian has an invitation extended to a Douglas County commissioner and expects to hear from him soon. Martin Desmond, former director of the Northwest Forestry Contractors Association and a member of this advisery group, is putting together a list of people that might be interested in filling the chairs. I am also putting together a list. Thank you Martin and welcome to the group. Let me use this space to welcome Travis Diskin, with the Independent Party of Oregon to our advisor group. Travis, feel free to comment about the town hall and I will contact you soon with ideas on how your group can help. Event Time and Location:Town hall meeting begins promptly at 6:30 p.m and concludes at 8pm. Broadcast live by KOPT 1600-AM from Harris Hall inside the Lane County Courthouse and Public Service Building at 125 East 8th Avenue. Eugene, Oregon. "Get Together", hosted by the Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station), is at the Oak Street Speakeasy located at Broadway and Oak in downtown Eugene and begins right after the town hall, 8pm. More details soon. Event Contact List Primary Press Contacts Brian Shaw- Event Producer and Moderator "Brian Shaw" <shawsound@att.net>, Pete Sorenson- Lead Adviser, Panelist "SORENSON Peter" <Peter.SORENSON@CO.Lane.OR.US>, Michael Smith- Designer, info@abolishpoverty.us Rose Wilde- Contact for "Get Together" at Oak Street Speakeasy, "Rose Wilde" <rose_wilde@hotmail.com>, Technical Brian Shaw Joe Harper- 1600 KOPT-AM (Technical) "Joe Harper" <j.harper@churchillmedia.com> Dan Banducci- Harris Hall (Technical), Daniel.Banducci@co.lane.or.us , Advisers Pete Sorenson- Lead Adviser Mike Biglan- Lane Bus Stop (Bus Project) "Mike Biglan" <mike@biglan.org>, Travis Diskin- Independent Party of Oregon "Travis Diskin"- <travis@indparty.com> Martin Desmond- Micro-Business desmondm@lanecc.edu Sponsors KOPT 1600-AM - Sadie Dressekie- "Sadie Dressekie" sadie@arlie.com Eugene Weekly- Bill Shreve Bills@eugeneweekly.com "Get Together" Oregon Bus Project (Lane Station), Host of "Get Together" at Oak Street Speakeasy, "Rose Wilde" <rose_wilde@hotmail.com>, |
| EM-4 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/20/2007 12:31:11 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
As a member of the taxpaying public, and thus partial owner of BLM lands, I am writing to express my grave concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. However, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Western Oregon Plan Revision (WOPR) proposes to dismantle the reserve system across 2.5 million acres of low elevation western Oregon BLM lands. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not implement the WOPR. Thank you for your time and attention. Greg Lief PO Box 2685 Salem, OR 97308 greglief@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-5 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/20/2007 12:32:45 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
Hello. I am sending this message to say that your fabricated plans at destroyed Oregon's Old Growth, is NOT GOING TO WORK. Once Bush is OUT, which we are working on...you will be stopped. Go tell your Industrial Tree Farm friends that we are PREPARED THIS TIME, YOU WILL NOT DESTROY OUR FORESTS AND WILDLIFE TO FATTEN THE POCKETS OF BIG TIMBER. -below are the polite comments I hope you will please record into the record, along with the above...coastal mountains are some of the steepest you can find - stay out of our forests! I would like to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, catherine koehn 40153 Little Fall Creek Fall Creek, OR 97438 catfish@efn.org -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-6 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/20/2007 12:33:18 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Travis Herb 751 Clay St. Ashland, OR 97520 travis.herb@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-7 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/20/2007 12:34:18 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I've lived in Oregon for 17 years now. I spend as much time in the woods as I can...hiking, skiing, mushrooming, etc. I'm also a carpenter and a woodworker who clearly understands the commercial value of our forests. I strongly oppose any expansion of old-growth cut in our western forests. I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, David Stucky Street: 2624 Harris Eugene, OR 97405 david.stucky@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-8 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/20/2007 12:35:06 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Will McDonald 9505 245th Ave SE Monroe,WA 98272 william.mcdonald@bastyr.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-9 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/21/2007 9:36:04 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. My concern is for Oregon's future and my children's future. I understand that many Oregon counties are in dire financial straits in light of the loss of Federal monies, but clearing out the principal on our proverbial forest bank account (cutting any of the remaining old growth trees on BLM lands) is not a way to balance the budget. These forests on western Oregon BLM lands provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, as well as a legacy for future generations. Please remove the old growth forests from the logging plan. Instead, plan to log even-age tree plantations. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Patrick McIlrath 2675 Adams Eugene, Oregon 97405 pmcilrat@efn.org -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-10 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/21/2007 9:37:46 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am a businessman and a resident of Eugene. I am deeply concerned about the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. They provide commercially valuable fungi. They also help build soil carbon and protect it from loss by erosion and runoff, thus contributing to climate stabilization. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them. Wood products can be more sensibly and sustainably generated in even-age plantations of young trees. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Mr. Randall Wayne Street: 2720 Onyx St. Eugene, OR 97403 rushwayne@comcast.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-11 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/21/2007 9:38:37 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Philip Simon Box 9473 San Rafael, Ca. 94912 philsimtpr@aol.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-12 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/21/2007 16:49:03 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my extreme concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. It is short-sighted and greedy in the extreme to log old growth trees. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Dr. Sasha Tavenner Kruger 1287 8th St. Springfield, OR 97477 physics_duck@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-13 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/21/2007 16:49:44 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Adam Marlow 1208 W.28th Ave. Eugene OR 97405 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://cascwild.org/support/support.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-14 | Ken Goldsmith <kenconserv@charter.net> | Western OR Plan Revisions comment | 8/22/2007 11:09:57 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Ken Goldsmith Simmons 75 Route 197 Woodstock, CT 06281 |
| EM-15 | Stephanie Smith <pseudoluslucy@yahoo.com> | BLM Forest Planning | 8/23/2007 9:30:08 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Stephanie Smith 3714-F Sand Creek Road Kettle Falls, WA 99141 509-230-2653 |
| EM-16 | "Kassandra Olsen"
<greengoddess12@care2.com> |
Protect Our Heritage for generations to come! | 8/23/2007 22:20:33 | Dear BLM,
Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan and I believe the Plan's reserve system should remain in place. These forests should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in management, fire safety and tourism. These forests can provide jobs and material as a by-product of forest restoration, such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, and we would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy. Please protect western BLM forests and maintain the Northwest Forest Plan reserve system. Sincerely, Kassandra K Olsen (an Oregon Native) "And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -- Anais Nin http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free). http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 7 million members! |
| EM-17 | "Kassandra Olsen"
<greengoddess12@care2.com> |
Protect Our Heritage for generations to come! | 8/23/2007 22:20:37 | Dear BLM,
Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan and I believe the Plan's reserve system should remain in place. These forests should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in management, fire safety and tourism. These forests can provide jobs and material as a by-product of forest restoration, such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, and we would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy. Please protect western BLM forests and maintain the Northwest Forest Plan reserve system. Sincerely, Kassandra K Olsen (an Oregon Native) "And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -- Anais Nin http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free). http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 7 million members! |
| EM-18 | Chris Norden <cnorden@lcsc.edu> | Don't clearcut BLM Forests!! | 8/24/2007 10:05:52 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear Trusted Fellow Citizens working for BLM, In response to your proposed Western Oregon Plan Revisions, I and my family strongly oppose any clearcutting of BLM forests, in the northern Rockies, Cascades, Oregon's Coast Range, or anywhere ewill result in degradation of habitat, watersheds, and aquatic ecosystems. The proposed changes in forest management would represent a huge step backward, as these forests presently enjoy better protection for water quality as well as fish and wildlife. As a former resident of Western Oregon, now living in Northern Idaho, I look to the BLM for progressive, science-based, and ethically responsible ecosystem based management of our federal public lands. Please keep the faith. Current political and industry pressures to abuse public lands for profit will pass soon enough. January 2009! By contrast, damage to these lands will endure well beyond that date, and will constitute a negative legacy for future generations of Americans, who would otherwise enjoy, value, and sustainably use these lands. Thank you for your good work, and please keep the faith. Public lands are our greatest resource and legacy as Americans. Chris Norden 428 E. 7th St. Moscow, ID 83843 |
| EM-19 | Rolf Skar <rolf.skar@sfo.greenpeace.org> | DEIS comment submissions | 8/24/2007 15:16:39 | Hi Alan,
I know that, in addition to traditional mail, BLM has set up a web-page interface for Western Oregon Plan Revisions DEIS comment submissions. Is there an email address that can be used to submit individual comments on the DEIS as well? The web interface may be awkward for some, and I want to offer our members several options to choose from. Thanks for your help, -Rolf -- Rolf Skar Senior Forest Campaigner Greenpeace USA 75 Arkansas Street, Suite 1 San Francisco, CA 94107-2434 office: 415.255.9221 x305 mobile: 415.533.2888 rolf.skar@sfo.greenpeace.org www.greenpeace.org |
| EM-20 | "Josh Weber" <offbeatunity@hotmail.com> | 8/25/2007 11:34:40 | Dear BLM,
Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen very concerned with the management of these lands. I live in a community that has BLM old-growth forest literally in my back yard, and I DO NOT want to see these lands clear cut! For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Most Sincerely Yours, Josh Weber _________________________________________________________________ More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail. http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_2G_0507 |
|
| EM-21 | HolgerTSo@aol.com | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 8/26/2007 11:43:35 | August 26, 2007
Dear Commissioners, Your agenda for Monday August 27, 2007 shows : Monday, August 27, 2007 COMMISSIONERS, BOARD OF COUNTY (8:30 AM - 10:00 AM) General Discussion & Possible Actions** (BCC Conference Room ) 1) ACTION ITEMS: a) Bikeways Committee Appointment b) AMR mileage waiver request c) JosephineCountyClaims d) EA Environmental Assessment Alternate I am not clear what Item 1) d) is about, but if this regards the BLM Draft Environmental Impact Statement here are my 5ct on that issue. This BLM’s planning process revises the resource management plans (RMPs) for the six BLM districts in western Oregon. This process will address over 2.5 million acres of forest lands. I did, like many other, provide comments as an individual to the BLM last October 20, 2005. My comments focused on understanding the planning and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. I hope my comments at that time helped to lead to an informed public and informed decision making. This revision looks quite scientific, but I believe the BLM process at this point of the draft EIS is mostly a political process for the design of the important Preferred Alternative. There is already so much time and money invested by the BLM that it can not change its Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2) in any significant way. I belief the big allocation picture will not change. The BLM informed the public about a year ago and said that part of the reason for the planning process was to satisfy a settlement agreement resolving long-standing litigation of the Northwest Forest Plan (Clinton Plan) (AFRC v.Clarke, Civil No. 94-1031-TPJ (D.D.C.)) that alleged the current RMPs violate the O&C Act). The BLM’s RMP evaluations showed the BLM’s timber harvest levels directed by existing plans were not being achieved. Except for the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District, BLM’s evaluations for the other districts documented that regeneration harvest was 30 to 60 percent of the levels anticipated. Even when thinning volume was added, except for the Klamath Falls Resource Area, BLM’s evaluations showed that the timber offered from the harvest land base was 40 to 70 percent of the anticipated allowable sale quantity (ASQ). The BLM states that "This failure to meet the harvest levels is largely due to unanticipated legal and practical implementation issues involved in managing designated critical habitat for the northern spotted owl that was different then the land use allocations in the Northwest Forest Plan, and court decisions regarding the survey and manage mitigation measure, and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy." (Page 4, Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I). The BLM’s Purpose and Need Statement identified that the goals for the Northwest Forest Plan were broader than the specific requirements of the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act and sought to provide more consistent management of federally-managed lands by applying National Forest Management Act (U. S. Forest Service) requirements to BLM-administered lands. The preferred alternative for the Northwest Forest Plan was selected because it would "maintain the late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystem and provide a predictable and sustainable supply of timber, recreational opportunities and other resources at the highest level possible." The BLM’s Purpose and Need Statement for this effort to revise the BLM’s western Oregon plans identified that the need for this plan revision is focused on specific legal requirements and intended benefits of the BLM’s unique mandate under the O&C Act, distinct from the mandate to the U.S. Forest Service under the National Forest Management Act. The bottom line is that the Bush Administration has decided to change the BLM’s land use policy allocations and prescriptions for BLM lands in western Oregon just as other administrations have in the past (i.e., Clinton Northwest Forest Plan). The BLM has now identified Alternative 2 as its Preferred Alternative. It believes that based on the language of the O & C Act, the O & C Act’s legislative history, and the decision by the Ninth Circuit in Headwaters v. BLM, (914 F.2d 1174 (9th Cir. 1990), that it is clear to BLM that the management of timber (including harvesting) is the main use of the O & C lands in western Oregon. (Page 12, Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I). Implementation of the Alternative 2/Preferred Alternative probably means that the land base for management of timber will increase from 25 percent of the lands to 48 percent of the lands and the ASQ will increase from 268 million board feet a year to 727 million board feet a year. (Page XLVIII, Summary, Page 112, Chapter 2 - Alternatives, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume I). I believe the only way to maintain the Northwest Forest Plan’s harvest levels versus those for Alternative 2/Preferred Alternative of the revised BLM plans is to demonstrate that the assumptions in Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need are in error. Because BLM has develop the alternative based on wrong assumptions, and the legislature has not changes with regard to the Court decisions cited above, this preferred Alternative (2) will revert the process back to the timber wars of the 1980s and early 1990s,. Instead of the County supporting a lost cause, the county should support Non-Action Alternative and focus its activities to become self-sustained, independent of O&C funds and from timber sales. Our most important assets in Josephine County is our rural beauty. We have not actively promoted tourism. It is time to stop the destruction of our forests an rivers when only a few individuals benefit form these destructions. Regards Holger Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. |
| EM-22 | Fred Fleetwood <waterrat1@earthlink.net> | Comments on the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of Western Oregon"... | 8/29/2007 6:17:48 | Alan Hoffmeister, Communications and Public Outreach Coordinator for Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project:
The following are my comments about the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the BLM's Resource Management Plans of Western Oregon." (I have decided to submit my comments directly to you, rather than try to deal with the frustrating and cumbersome web site at http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/PrincipalFramedPage.aspx?PAGECODE=DOC_EXPLORER. There is no convenient way to make comments there at that web site. In addition, I will submit a signed hard copy of this message via the Postal Service mailing address of: Wester Oregon Plan Revisions, P.O. Box 2965, Portland, OR 97208.) First, my two reactions to the document:I don't know if I should be flattered to think the BLM people would believe I could possibly adequately digest the sheer volume of text the document contains, OR... whether I should be naive enough to think commenting on it could possibly make any substantive difference in the decisions the BLM would make. I think rejection of the later is prudent, and I think acceptance of the former would be unwarranted -- unwarranted because the way the document is couched, it does amount to insincere adulation (flattery and fawning) of the public. Second, my general impression of the document and the whole process it entails: The document generally contains much bureaucratic obfuscation. But the public shouldn't have to correct the document. For example: The "Key Points" box at the top of the Introduction on page XLIII starts out with this statement: "This draft environmental impact statement has been written because (1) the BLM plan evaluations found that the BLM has not been achieving the timber harvest levels directed by the existing plans, (2) there is an opportunity to coordinate the BLM management plans with new recovery plans and re-designations of critical habitat currently under development and (3) the BLM has re-focused the goal for management to the objectives of its statutory mandate to utilize the principles of sustained yield management on the timber lands covered under the O&C Act."The "(1)" portion of that statement is just flatly untrue -- a lie! The draft environmental impact statement (the DEIS) was not written because "the BLM plan evaluations found that the BLM has not been achieving the timber harvest levels directed by the existing plans." An uninitiated reader, who doesn't know better, wouldn't realize that until he/she just happened to read footnote #2 (over at the bottom of the next page, page XLIV). That footnote reveals the real reason this EIS was written. The footnote (finally) reveals the truth. It states that this DEIS was ultimately written to: "...satisfy a settlement agreement [bold type for emphasis] resolving long-standing litigation of the Northwest Forest Plan (AFRC v. Clarke, Civil No. 94-1031-TPJ (D.D.C.)) that alleged the current RMPs violate the O&C Act. The settlement agreement requires BLM to consider revisions to the RMPs by the end of the year 2008, and include at least one alternative that “will provide permanent forest production [i.e., "timber"] across the O&C lands without reserves except as required to avoid jeopardy under the Endangered Species Act.” See Appendix A for a discussion of the Settlement Agreement."Suggestion, so you will be "true to" and "honest with" your readers: The text of "Appendix A" should be placed up front! -- in the Introduction under the heading of "Key Points." Stop trying to hide (obfuscate) the "real facts!" As for portion "(2)" of the statement of "Key Points" on page XLIII: The "opportunity" to "coordinate the BLM management plans with new recovery plans and re-designations of critical habitat currently under development" did not just serendipitously happen. It is necessary -- to make the plans "jibe" with the Administration's new Northern Spotted Owl "Recovery" Plan, which is now being formulated. That portion "(2)" of the statement is just another example of the BLM attempt to "color" the facts. And about portion "(3)" of that statement of "Key Points": The BLM's "re-focusing" of its management objectives to conform with the "statutory mandate" of the O&C Act, is, yes again, just necessary -- to make things "jibe."My general conclusion about the whole exercise of writing this DEIS and the public's commenting on it:Near the beginning of the process, the BLM asked some pertinent questions in an October 2006 Newsletter, Issue No. 5, which I subsequently answered in an e-mail message, dated November 10, 2006. I sent that message to the Team Members of the BLM's Western Oregon Resource Management Plan Revisions Project. I hereby restate those questions and my answers to them because they are still pertinent. The writing of the DEIS does not change the relevance of those questions and my answers to them. The question and answers are, and relate to: Vegetation: How can the BLM provide a sustainable supply of wood and other forest products as mandated by the O&C Lands Act while also meeting applicable laws and regulations [such as the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act]?" Answer: It can't. The O&C Act is mutually exclusive to (i.e., in conflict with) those two environmental Acts. Habitat for Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act: "How can the BLM manage federal lands in a way that contributes to the conservation of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act?" Answer: It can't. That's because mere "conservation" is not consistent with the Endangered Species Act. "Recovery" is what is consistent with the Endangered Species Act. Can you people understand that? Watershed Management and Water Quality: "How can the BLM 'manage' federal lands [translation of 'manage' is: "for permanent timber cutting"] in a way that contributes to the goals of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act?" Answer: It can't. Again, that's because the O&C Act is mutually exclusive to (i.e., in conflict with) those two environmental Acts. Wildland Fire and Fuels: "How can the BLM manage federal lands in a way that reduces the risk of wildfires and integrates fire back into the ecosystem?" Answer: By adequately reducing ground and ladder fuels without diminishing the overstory. At present BLM's excuse for not reducing ladder fuels (as exemplified by its fuel reduction actions on its property adjacent to our property), the BLM is not adequately preserving the forest overstory. Its stated reason (excuse) for not doing that, is its over-emphasis on "thinning" the tree stands and thereby allowing too much daylight to reach the ground, which in turn, diminishes water production of the watersheds. In spite of what the DEIS says (on page XLIV) the purpose and need is (for the revisions), the fact remains that the O&C Act is in basic conflict with other applicable laws and regulations [such as the Federal Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act]. Therefore, the BLM cannot possibly manage its lands in a way that contributes to the recovery of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act. Thus, either the O&C Act or the environmental laws need to be rescinded. That is just the reality of the situation. Otherwise the goals of the revisions (and those of the environmental laws) are just "pipe dreams." But in this day and age, the environmental laws must be really and honestly adhered to. The O&C Act does not permit that to happen.Consequently: Commenting on the specific details of the DEIS is a colossal waste of time and energy. However, I am nevertheless compelled to comment because I care about what happens to the BLM forests. They adjoin my wife's and my property. Moreover, I am compelled to comment simply for the purpose of "being on record" of having stated my objections to the revisions. And because I am a watershed and fish advocate, I wish to comment specifically on the statements contained in the draft regarding "Fish" and "Water" found in the document's "Summary," starting in the middle of page "LX." About the "Fish" statements: First, they are a "crock" of "you know what!" But specifically: 1. All areas in [a] watershed do not "serve as source areas that can deliver large wood to streams." That statement is just an out and out falsehood. Any discerning person knows, intuitively, such a statement is not true. The people who write this stuff are astounding in their apparent belief that people would accept such a statement -- even from "experts." What these people excel at is "not telling the truth," and they don't even do a good job of it. 2. Any increases in fine sediment delivery do degrade fish habitat, and therefore they are unacceptable! 3. Is "some localized increases in stream temperature" acceptable? No, of course they are not.About the "Water" statements: 1. About the words "Most," "where possible," and "mostly likely" found in the statement that "Most new roads would be located outside of a stream influence zone where possible, and therefore these miles would mostly likely not deliver fine sediment to streams channels.": Those quoted words are "weasel" words designed to give the author's of the Impact Statement "an out" (excuse) for doing something that shouldn't be done.2. Construction of "8 and 37 miles of permanent new roads within a distance that could deliver sediment to streams over the next 10 years ... ." is also unacceptable! 3. About the statement of "Between 8 and 37 miles of permanent new roads with a natural or aggregate surface would be constructed within a distance that could deliver sediment to streams over the next 10 years under the all four alternatives.": Again, an increase in the amount of fine sediment delivered to streams from new permanent roads is not acceptable, no matter how small the amount is.4. About "Road improvements and the decommissioning of roads near streams [being] of greater importance to decreasing fine sediment delivery than the effect of new roads": That is simply a matter of opinion, and not a fact.5. About "increases in peak flows" and "best management practices": Contrary to the picture BLM tries to convey by all its machinations and “falderal,” vegetation removals (and in particular, logging) do exacerbate seasonal extremes of water runoff from watersheds. Rhodes and Purser, in their paper titled “Thinning for Increased Water Yield in the Sierra Nevada: Free Lunch or Pie in the Sky?,” August 1998, together with the paper "Peak flow response to clear-cutting and roads in small and large basins, western Cascades, Oregon,” Water Resources Research, 32(4) 959-974, April 1996, by J. A. Jones and G. E. Grant, very well "make the case" that vegetative removals [which are, almost without exception, the result of "logging and logging-related activities " (i.e., forest "management activities")] do and/or can: 1. Dramatically increase (and "shift" to an earlier time in the year) the annual high stream discharge (i.e., the "peak flow"), and2. Diminish the "baseflow" from watersheds.Now, does anybody (besides the people at the BLM) deny that increased peak flows also increase the delivery of sediment to streams? I don't think so. Also, on page 11 of the Rhodes and Purser paper, there is this interesting discussion about the term "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) that the Federal agencies like to use (especially the Bureau of Land Management). The paper says: "...although BMPs are designed to reduce pollution, such as sedimentation, they may not eliminate cumulative effects. Espinosa, et al. (1997) documented that sedimentation continued to damage fish habitat even with application of a wide variety of best management practices. Espinosa, et al. (1997) concluded that over-reliance on best management practices together with over-estimation of their effectiveness was a major cause of habitat degradation by land management. Thus, while management practices can reduce the level of damage caused by land-disturbance, this is only relative to a “no-protection” scenario. There appears to be no compelling evidence that management practices can reduce the adverse effects of logging and road construction to biologically and ecologically negligible levels."[The bolding and underlining of the certain words in that immediately preceding paragraph are this reader’s, and they are done only for emphasis.] One frequently sees references to BMPs in Forest Service and BLM documents. To those references, my reaction is, "Well, B.F.D.!" -- which stands for "Big Fat Deal!" -- only the middle word is not "Fat."-------------------------------------------- The following statements (taken from my e-mail message, dated November 10, 2006, to the BLM's "Revision Team") pertain to some other items the Team Members of the BLM's Western Oregon Resource Management Plan Revisions Project might take into account:If any part of the O&C lands (including those portions which contain "old growth" forests) is not managed for permanent "forest production" (a BLM euphemism for permanent "timber production"), the management of that part of the O&C land is in violation of the O&C Act -- pure and simple! But also, if any part of the O&C lands which contain "old growth" forests is managed for permanent timber production, instead of for protection of habitat for recovery of threatened and endangered species, the management of that part of the O&C land is in violation of the Federal Endangered Species Act. (See BABBITT v. SWEET HOME CHAP., COMS. FOR ORE., ___ U.S. ___ 1995 at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=U10269.) In addition... When the dominant trees of old growth forests are cut (not "harvested," but "cut"), they are gone -- for ever!, as far as the general run-of-the-mill "foresters" are concerned. That is because the replacement trees will never be allowed (by "foresters" -- i.e., "timber beasts") to grow them for the length of time (i.e., multiples of hundreds of years -- generally more than 200 years) it took the original dominant trees (that were cut) to become as large as the originally cut trees were when they were cut. Therefore, to say, "The BLM is not proposing that old-growth stands be eliminated from O&C lands." is just plain... nonsense! ------------- Under the question of "Will there also be an environmentally preferred alternative identified in the draft resource management plan and EIS?", there is an admission that whatever alternative (or variation there of) is chosen, the resultant plan cannot meet the goals of: 1. Providing a sustainable supply of wood and other forest products as mandated by the O&C Lands Act while also meeting applicable laws and regulations; 2. Managing the lands in a way that contributes to the conservation of species in a manner that is consistent with the Endangered Species Act; and 3. Managing the lands for permanent timber cutting in a way that contributes to the goals of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. That admission is contained in the second sentence of the answer given in res |
| EM-23 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/31/2007 9:40:07 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Adam Marlow 1208 W.28th Ave. Eugene, OR 97405 apmarlow@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-24 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/31/2007 9:41:00 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Justin Jacobs 15 NE Monroe St. Portland, OR 97212 wharftphellow@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-25 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/31/2007 9:42:06 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, David Mildrexler PO Box 715 Joseph, Oregon 97846 dvdjosmil@netscape.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-26 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 8/31/2007 9:42:48 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Charlotte Sahnow 2756 Chad Drive Eugene, OR 97408 csahnow@uoregon.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-27 | "Luke Ward" <groovinkangaroo@gmail.com> | WOPR | 8/31/2007 14:50:28 | I am just an ordinary citizen that doesn't want to see more clear cuts. I don't think that whoever is working on the WOPR really cares about this state, its workers, and especially its greatest environmental assets. I think that you are a tool of the timber industry and are unconcerned with a sustainable future. Please reconsider your plans.
Thanks, Luke Ward Eugene OR |
| EM-28 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/1/2007 22:54:57 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, stu phillips 212 benjamin eugene, or. 97404 stulips@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-29 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/1/2007 22:55:45 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Ellen Welcker 1424 W 5th Ave Eugene, OR 97402 ellen@footzonebend.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-30 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/1/2007 22:56:28 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Emily Frost 10538 Bradbury Rd Los Angeles, CA, 90064 areyouexperienced_ef@berkeley.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-31 | "Diane Conrad" <mydiane@earthclick.net> | cutting old growth | 9/4/2007 15:26:06 | Do not include in any plan to manage forests, the cutting of old growth trees. Diane Conrad |
| EM-32 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/4/2007 15:51:48 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. DO NOT open older forests on our public lands to logging no matter what the BUSH administration does. Sincerely, Kim Kelly 5205 Cold Springs Way Eugene, OR 97405 playwright@bigplanet.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-33 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/4/2007 15:52:23 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Jorry Rolfe 3475 Mill Street Eugene, OR 97405 jorry.rolfe@linnbenton.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-34 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/4/2007 15:53:04 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Andy Neary 1728 NW 1st ST Bend, Oregon, 97701 ayndaroo@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-35 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/4/2007 15:54:06 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, John Krausser 40 E 30th Ave Eugene, OR 97405 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-36 | Joseph Vaile <joseph@kswild.org> | Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/5/2007 11:46:13 | Bureau of Land Management
Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas-all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, -- Joseph Vaile Campaign Director Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center POB 102 Ashland OR 97520 p: 541-488-5789 http://www.kswild.org |
| EM-37 | "Jean Mount" <jkmount@rascal.cc> | Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 9/5/2007 22:33:20 | BLM Managment- Portland office
Comments on the WOPR released plan. I want to register my strong objection to the WOPR plan of increased logging- 1. Clear cut logging and logging of old growth trees is not supported by the scientific community, nor by the majority of citizens. 2. We do not want to return to the timber wars of the 1960's and 70's. Infact, we really can't return there. 3. This level of logging (up to a 700 per cent increase) is not sustainable and will only confuse the public. Maybe confusion and anger is the intent. In the end the deficit in the O& C funds will not be met by this increase. 4. Cutting trees is only one part of the equation, as forests are essential for protections of our rivers, streams, and fish. Again you will be reducing protections for our salmon bearing streams. We need the EIS based on the best science, and the Clean Water Act was passed for an important reason--- to protect our public waters. 5. It's time for the timber industry to continue to use thinning of trees, second growth, retooling and use of smaller diameter trees and known practices which will not cause extreme harm to the land, forests, and water. In the end it's the smart and profitable way to go. Jean Mount 3620 Helms Road Grants Pass, OR, 97527 Lower Applegate Citizen's Advisory Committee Rogue Advocates |
| EM-38 | Trina Weiland <phantomwolf@hotmail.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 9/6/2007 9:33:29 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Graduate Student Trina Weiland Graduate Student 2848 Minnesota Ave Stevens Point, WI 54481 |
| EM-39 | "Keira Harrison " <keira@apbb.net> | Protect BLM forests | 9/6/2007 17:12:05 | Dear BLM,
Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. I have lived in Williams, OR for 30+ years, and choose to live here to enjoy the natural wild beauty of the area. My home adjoins BLM, which I enjoy hiking in regularly. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregonunder the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregonare adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Keira Harrison |
| EM-40 | Dinda Evans <dindamcp4@yahoo.com> | Oregon Plan Revisions | 9/6/2007 22:10:30 | we need to preserve open spaces and wildlife. We don't
need more roads, development. Most of america is just rows of streets and houses and malls. we need pure natural places: please ____________________________________________________________________________________Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ |
| EM-41 | "MONA JONES" <jonesmona@hotmail.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 9/8/2007 13:00:40 | To whom it may concern,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the Western Oregon Plan Revision. I grew up in the coast range and I support a no action alternative. I have watched forest after forest razed for timber leaving an altered environment that I don't believe can ever repair itself. I believe the primary problem here is that the forests are being managed under the O&C act for timber yields alone. While other considerations are made under the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act the mandate for timber overrides these consideration. Forest offer much, much more than timber in terms of their ecological services. We know more now about the importance of those services than we did in 1937 when the O&C act was first enacted. And I believe that we still don't understand the true extent of what an intact forest ecosystem offers us. Furthermore the O&C never specified a minimum timber nor revenue yield so I believe it is being used to obfuscate the true point, which is that the BLM is not making enough money from the forests. Regardless of how much revenue from logging comes back to the local govenment I do not think that we should alter our current management practices. We must find more sustainable ways to fund our local governments. Any continued logging in the coast range cannot be considered sustainable. The point is that there is much more to sustainability than how fast a trees can regenerate. The forests were never meant to be managed as crop land for a few species. I urge you to raise this issue among your colleagues and constituents and to support the no action alternative that maintaines what is left of the coastal rainforest. And if you have never been there by all means go. It is an undeniable majestic landscape that you will see is already scarred with clearcuts and roads. All my respect, Mona Jones _________________________________________________________________ Share your special parenting moments! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us |
| EM-42 | "janice cowan" <major@cavenet.com> | WOPR plan | 9/8/2007 14:35:44 | Dear BLM,
We want equal opportunities for OHV use at a local level. Especially in the Medford district. The public lands are supposed to be just that, PUBLIC LANDS. Keep the trails open to the public. That is why people live here. This is our freedom. Please put us on your mailing list and keep us informed: Jason and Janice Cowan 2975 Thompson Crk Rd Selma OR 97538 Thank you |
| EM-43 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/9/2007 21:47:59 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
Have you ever visited an old growth forest? Do you have any idea how irreplaceable they are? Do you know the ongoing value of ecosystem services an intact old-growth forest provides, as opposed to it's one-time and limited value as lumber? To log old-growth forests for lumber is a foolish use of resources. I urge your department to reconsider such a step. Once done, it can never be taken back. I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Do not destroy the ongoing basis for our well-being in favor of short term gain. It makes absolutely no sense. Sincerely, hope malkan 1300 summit st. austin, TX 78741 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-44 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/9/2007 21:48:44 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, sima Baldwin 350 foxtail dr. eugene, or 97402 hawthjewelry@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-45 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/9/2007 21:49:32 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Karalyn Walker 82061 Lost Valley Lane Dexter Oregon 97431 feelfreely@earthlink.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-46 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/9/2007 21:50:21 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Sean Parson 1678 Villard St Eugene, OR 97402 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-47 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/9/2007 21:51:26 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to let you know about how strongly against WORP I am. I am a hiker and an environmentalist who knows how irreplacible older forests are. There needs to be a legislative solution to permanently protect older forests. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. No to WORP. The greatest value in old forests is not measured in board feet. Sincerely, Leslie L. Hogan 931 Washington SW Albany, OR 97321 qwizats@peak.org -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-48 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | Re: WOPR comment | 9/10/2007 10:33:41 | Alan: These messages are forwarded to you via our website. They get routed from our website to me then to BLM (to ensure spammers don't pick up the BLM's email address). That is why it looks like they come from me. Take them as individual comment. People who visit our website may or may not personalize their comment to you regarding the DEIS.
As for what our organizational interest is... we are working to permanently protect remaining older forests (mature and old-growth) in the Northwest Forest Plan area. I'm sure you can guess our reasons why. Currently, as you may be aware, Rep. DeFazio is considering legislation that may do that. We see WOPR as a step in the wrong direction, not in the public's interest, dangerous for counties to even be considering as a funding solution, and harmful for older forest dependant species, many continuing to teeter on the brink of extinction. WOPR is a trainwreck in the making. I'd be surprised if the BLM didn't know this the day the settlement was signed. We are working towards a solution that would target logged over forest (ie restoration thinning in tree plantations) that could put people to work and deliver logs to mills unchallenged. It could also generate significant revenue for counties with a gradual phaseout. I sure hope the BLM has been getting this message as we and out colleagues have been offering this for quite some time. Bottomline, we (stakeholders) need to get more creative than selling off fragments of old-growth to fund county funding crisis and meet timber target goals. Josh Laughlin Sorry Josh: I went off half-cocked this morning with the preceeding questions I sent back to you. I now see these are not your comments, but comments I assume you are receiving through your web site. We are recording these comments but it's a bit confusing with your "signature" at the bottom of each one. The point I was trying to make is that comments that say "No to WOPR" or "save the old-growth" provide very litte for us to respond to. We know these are major issues in many people's minds. We heard it clearly during our scoping phase. That's why we included a couple of subalternatives in the Draft EIS that take older forest stands off of the table (see page 102 in the DEIS). If Cascadia Wildlands could use the analysis provided to feedback to BLM what management scenario you feel will help us meet our mandates (permanent forest production while meeting clean water standards and protection for habitat necessary for listed species - to put it into a nutshell), that would be substantive input that the BLM would have to react to. If your organization is simply out to stop WOPR, then we're right back where we started from with BLM plans that have old-growth in the intensive forest management area and timber sales that are challenged in court. Alan Hoffmeister -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-49 | George Sexton <gs@kswild.org> | Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions | 9/10/2007 13:22:23 | We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon.
The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions. The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions. It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose. Bullshit. You signed a settlement with your friends in the AFRC that pre-determines the outcome. I'll gladly bet you $100 dollars right now that the RODs that get signed will reduce the size of the reserves and increase the amount of old-growth logging. It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. Bullshit. 81-year old tree farms are not old-growth. It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands. Bullshit. You couldn't care less what most Oregonians think about turned 400 year-old stands into fiber farms. 3,000 people sent in scoping comments, and you ignorred them. Take a look in the mirror. That's what a professional liar for the timber industry looks like. Regards, George Sexton |
| EM-50 | Paul West <Paul@Mycosphere.org> | Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions | 9/10/2007 13:27:52 | Please include the Natural Selection Alternative. Thank you.
On Sep 10, 2007, at 12:20 :13PMPDT, orwopr@blm.gov wrote: We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon. The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions. The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions. It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose. It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans. (Chapter 4, Timber, Page 557) It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. (Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494) It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands. · Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf). The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives. The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission. · Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/ · Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail. Project Web Site: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr Need More Information? Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629 |
| EM-51 | Albert Kaufman <albertkaufman@gmail.com> | Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions | 9/10/2007 21:40:47 | Hello, I tried to submit these comments but your website would not take them. Albert Kaufman, Mount Hood National Park Campaign.
My organization and myself wish to see as little cutting of trees as possible in the Oregon BLM lands. Our sense is that global warming is a real threat to our species and other species on the planet and to combat it we need more trees growing, not less. Please stop cutting down our forests and calling it management. Thank you for considering this comment in your decision making on our land. We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alterantives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon. The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions. The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions. It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose. It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans. It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands. · Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf<http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf> ). The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives. The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission. · Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/<http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/> · Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail. Project Web Site: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr<http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/index.php> Need More Information? Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629 |
| EM-52 | "Sharon " <sharonlemaster@frontiernet.net> | Protect BLM forests | 9/11/2007 14:09:55 | Dear BLM,
Please accept these comment on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregonunder the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregonare adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, S. Lemaster, extremely alarmed Oregon citizen & voter |
| EM-53 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/12/2007 14:52:49 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. In particular I am concerned that the extensive science of forest ecosystems is not being taken into account and that we don't even know what we might be losing should these lands be logged. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. They also protect communities from erosion and flooding. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. If you want to understand why old growth is important read: "The Hidden Forest: The Biography of an Ecosystem" by Jon R. Luoma. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Janine Gordon 82211 Mt. Zion Dr. Dexter, OR 97431 janinegordon@earthlink.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-54 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/12/2007 14:53:27 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, richard warren 60669 river bend dr bend oregon 97702 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-55 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/12/2007 14:54:26 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I've just heard on the radio about the proposed WOPR plan to log old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. Inasmuch as over 90% of old growth forests have already been logged, gone forever, it seems short-sighted to log the little remaining. These forests provide habitat, clean drinking water to rural communities and recreation for people which also results in tourism income for those communities. The timber companies have been very vocal about their "sustainability" practices. Well, if they are so sustainable, why do they need to log old growth? And, once it is inevitably gone, where does this leave them? Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Susan Brenner 732 W. Broadway Eugene, Or. 97402 afoonman@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-56 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/12/2007 14:55:13 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Clark Kocurek 111 E. Morton St. Bethlehem, PA 18015 clarklovesfencing@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-57 | "Melo, Wes" <Wes.Melo@ingrambook.com> | BLM WOPR Comments | 9/12/2007 16:15:55 | I have reviewed the Western Oregon Plan Revision/Restoration documents and information provided by your agency. I find it appalling that the best alternative you have come up with only allocates 48% of your land base to Timber Management.
The BLM's specific mission with O & C lands is to manage the lands to provide a steady source of forest products and revenue to support the economy of western Oregon. Your agency and the U.S.F.S. have not only failed to achieve your specific mission for our nation, but your actions in severely restricting your forests from raw materials for the production of forest products has had an absolute devastating effect on the rural economy in western Oregon. Your actions have literally cost thousands of jobs in the forest products industry and have taken millions of dollars out of our rural economic base. The social as well as the economic effects of your failure to meet the mission to which your agency was directed to do in the management of O & C lands is nothing short of a dereliction of your responsibility to our citizens and our communities as well as to our nation. Beyond all of that, quite frankly with each passing year of ineffective forest management, your land base is becoming more and more of a real mess with increasing potential for catastrophic fire as the lack of management allows for continued fuel buildup in the forest. That being said, Alternative 2 is the option that I must support given the options you have developed for the management of our forests. While I am absolutely astounded that you could not find better options that would accomplish the mission directed by the O & C Act, Alternative 2 does at least provide at least some options for returning some economic activity to our rural areas from forest products, and gives our local governmental agencies some options for recovering much needed revenues to provide needed services to our communities. My education is in forestry (B.S. in Forestry, University of California-Berkeley 1966) and I spent most of my life working in the forests, or in industries related to forest products. While I have been fortunate enough to be able to find other employment outside of the forest products industry here in Oregon since the contraction of the industry lead to the closure of operations of the last company I worked for, I am saddened and disheartened by the many families in rural Oregon who have not been able to recover economically as a result of the severe restriction of raw materials from national forests and BLM managed lands. The resulting contraction of forest products manufacturing capacity now severely restricts your markets for selling timber and other forest products from your land base. That economic fact will seriously affect your ability to maximize revenues from timber management and harvesting activities, and if in fact you were to increase and stabilize your supply of raw materials, it will take many years for the capacity of the markets you serve to increase to provide adequate revenues for local governments that are a part of your mission in providing revenue to support the local economy. There are several specific issues I wish to address in the letter on line signed by Edward W Shepard regarding your planning process. Forest fire resiliency will be accomplished only through the reduction in fuel load. That means we must do everything possible to mimic the actions of nature before humans began "interfering" with the natural processes of our lands. Most importantly, we cannot allow photosynthesis to continue unabated with out some reduction in fuel load. From my perspective, the combination of controlled burns during the "off season" (spring, and more importantly fall) combined with minimizing ladder fuels and potential crown fires through thinning activity is our best approach to fire resiliency in all forests, not just in the Medford District and the Klamath Falls area of the Lakeview District. Fire from lightening was a natural part of our environment well before even the occupation of our lands by native Americans, and we need to return fire to our forests in order to get them back to some semblance of their original profile. The spotted owl controversy needs to find final resolution. The environmental activists have used the spotted owl and other "emotional" species to manipulate forest management to a state where we are no longer managing our forests for either fire prevention or raw material supply. Numerous articles in recent months pretty well spell out the ineffectiveness of restricting timber management to "save" the spotted owl. The barred owl apparently is competing effectively with the spotted owl and apparently will eventually take the majority of the habitat of the spotted owl. That is a natural part of succession. It is time to minimize the emotion of spotted owls, marbled murreletts, and all the other "single issue" emotional matters the environmental community has managed to drum up, and manage our forests primarily for Homo Sapiens, with consideration as appropriate for the optimization of all wildlife species. Structurally complex forests can be planted and/or managed just like industrial forests are planted and managed. Your agency hires foresters who have been educated to evaluate site and growing conditions and make appropriate decisions. From my perspective it is time to unshackle the skills and abilities of your professionals, give them the mission and objectives they are to achieve, and let them do their jobs without all of the interference of lay citizens and our court systems, neither of which truly have the background or education to fully understand the complexities of the ecology of our forests. Sincerely Wesley L. Melo 825 Umpqua College Road Roseburg, OR 97470 Home 541 672 5561 Cell 541 580 2081 |
| EM-58 | Fred Fleetwood <waterrat1@earthlink.net> | Re: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions | 9/13/2007 9:58:14 | To Alan Hoffmeister, BLM Public Outreach Coordinator for the BLM's Western Oregon Plans Revision Project:
Dear Alan, On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 at 14:09:58 -0700 you sent the following message (confirming receipt and acceptance of my comments relating to the WOPRs and submitted directly to you via an e-mail message dated Wed, 29 Aug 2007 at 06:17:48 -0700): "Thank you Fred. Your comments have been received. Alan Hoffmeister" Now I wish to submit additional comments, again directly through you, regarding the WOPRs, and in particular regarding the following message sent from "orwopr@blm.gov." [My additional further comments, which represent my second comment submission, appear directly and immediately under the Mon, 10 Sep 2007 orwopr@blm.gov message which is located between the dashed lines ("----") below.] ------------------------------ (Note: A "hard copy" version of this message having the same exact boldly formatted words as is contained in the following e-mail message, was received in the U.S. Postal Service mail by Fred Fleetwood on September 10, 2007.) Subject: Separating Fact from Fiction - BLM's Western OR Plan Revisions Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:43:51 -0700 From: orwopr@blm.gov We're one-third of the way through the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement which analyzes the potential effect of four management alternatives for the future of BLM-managed lands in western Oregon. The 1600 page document has an amazing amount of information that will be used for making land management decisions. The public has until November 9 to provide comments on the document that will help the BLM make these decisions. It's a fact -- No decisions have yet been made about which alternative, or combination of alternatives, the BLM will choose. It's a fact -- Each of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS would provide a different level of timber management, but all alternatives would provide more timber harvest than the current plans. (Chapter 4, Timber, Page 557) It's a fact -- The alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIS vary in the amount of old-growth forest habitat protected, but all alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitatin the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands. (Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494) It's a fact -- You can have an impact on the future of these lands. · Attend Open Houses and Workshops (schedule at http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/files/calendar.pdf). The open houses will give you an opportunity to find out more about the Draft EIS and the alternatives. The workshops will provide an opportunity for you to sit down with other folks in your area and work on developing substantive comments for submission. · Explore the Draft EIS on the Web Forum and provide comments and suggestions – http://www.daylightdecisions.com/wopro/ · Request your own paper or electronic copy of the Draft EIS and send BLM your comments through the website or postal mail. Project Web Site: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr Need More Information? Alan Hoffmeister - 503-808-6629------------------------------ My second comment submission: The third item listed in the above e-mail message and characterized as "It's a fact" is absolutely NOT a "fact!" The actual real "fact" is that the statement -- that the "alternatives would provide for more old-growth forest habitat in the future than what currently exists on BLM-administered lands" amounts to, at the very least, subterfuge, if not an outright lie! The reasons why it is subterfuge, if not an outright lie?: 1. In its e-mail messages and hard copy mailings the BLM has sent out to the public (e.g., the above e-mail message), the BLM refers to and uses the term "old-growth," but yet it purposely resists defining that term. An uninitiated person, who may just now be becoming acquainted with the very voluminous Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS of 1,604 pages), would quite naturally go to the "Glossary" of the document (p. 855) to find out "what the heck" the BLM's definition is of what it is writing about. But, "Low and behold!" When one does that, he finds out that the definition is NOT THERE! That's simply amazing! And the uninitiated person is left wondering why it isn't there. Where the Mon, 10 Sep 2007 message which appears above refers to "more old-growth forest habitat in the future," it also (parenthetically) refers the reader to a certain part of the DEIS, specifically to "Chapter 4, Ecology, Page 494." When the reader does go there to see a discussion on "old-growth forest habitat in the future," he finds there is not discussion there, in any way, of the subject of "old-growth" -- Nada! Nothing! The discussion there is about "spatial patterns of the forest structural stages" -- nothing about the absolutes of age and size of trees, and it only discusses forest spatial patterns and structural stages in the relative terms of "Young," "Mature," and "Structurally Complex." How convenient for the BLM. Discussion of forest and timber stands in "relative" terms allows the BLM to avoid the real subject at hand -- the absolutes of forest tree sizes and ages, and all their accompanying attributes -- such as, for example: "moderate-to-high canopy closure; a multi-layered, multi-species canopy dominated by large overstory trees; high incidence of large trees, some with broken tops and other indications of old and decaying wood (decadence); numerous large snags; and heavy accumulations of wood, including large logs on the ground and ecological processes that are not found in younger forests (younger than 150-250 years)." By not having the definition of "old-growth" defined in the basic documents (the DEIS or ultimately the final EIS) which are supposed to support the revisions, the BLM is not being honestwith the public. After all, old-growth habitat (for the Northern Spotted Owl and other dependent species) was the whole reason in the first place for the Northwest Forest Plan, which the revisions are now endeavoring to "bust!" Whether the BLM wants to straightforwardly and up front admit it or not, instead of burying it in the obscure pages of the DEIS or the final EIS, the fact remains that "old-growth" habitat is and was the ultimate reason for the law suit which prompted the revisions. As I pointed out in my first submission of comments, the Supplement to the October 2006 Newsletter, Issue No. 5 pertaining to the then upcoming revisions, the BLM said that: "The use of the term “old-growth” will be avoided in the resource management plan and EIS because the term means different things to different people." That is just out and out subterfuge! It is an "artifice or expedient [way] used to evade" the opening up of a "can of worms," which defining "old-growth" would do. 2. About "more old-growth forest habitat in the future": Old-growth habitat "of the future?" The BLM has to be kidding. (But, of course, it is not, in spite of the incongruity between the O&C Act and the Northwest Forest Plan.) "Old growth of the future" on BLM land under the O&C Act is an oxymoron, and therefore the phrase is just simply nonsense! Also, like I said in my first comment submission: "When the dominant trees of old growth forests are cut (not 'harvested,' but 'cut'), they are gone -- for ever!, as far as the general run-of-the-mill 'foresters' are concerned. That is because the replacement treeswill never be allowed (by 'foresters' -- i.e., 'timber beasts') to grow for the length of time (i.e., multiples of hundreds of years -- generally more than 200 years) it took the original dominant trees (which were cut) to become as large as those originally cut trees were when they were cut." So, again, to say, "The BLM is not proposing that old-growth stands be eliminated from O&C lands." is just plainly not the truth! -- a lie!Therefore, out of necessity, the BLM must define "old-growth" in its EIS documents -- themselves! -- instead of obfuscating the "facts" as it now proposes to do. [Good definitions -- there are seven of them -- can be found on the on the Internet http://www.reo.gov/library/reports/old_growth_definitions.htm. But of course the BLM will undoubtedly ignore them, it cannot do otherwise -- because of the settlement agreement. Those definitions are from the "Regional Ecosystem Office" (http://www.reo.gov/general/aboutreo.htm#What) which supports the implementation of the Northwest Forest Plan -- the very plan which, again, the revisions are attempting to "bust," -- i.e., "negate." And of "odd coincidence" -- and even of a "conflict of interest" in this instance, the Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) is sponsored by several Federal Government agencies, the BLM among them. How bizarre that is!] Fredric ("Fred") L. Fleetwood 4261 Hwy. 227 Trail, OR 97541 |
| EM-59 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/14/2007 8:37:10 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/14/2007 08:36 AM -----
"Helen Lambie" <htlambie@hotmail.com> 09/13/2007 05:28 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Helen L. Goldstein 1026 Winding Ridge Ct. Santa Rosa, CA 95404 _________________________________________________________________ Get the device you want, with the Hotmail® you love. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/mobilehotmail/default.mspx?WT.mc_ID=MobileHMTagline |
| EM-60 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/14/2007 17:10:44 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Alan Hoffmeister alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-61 | Dave Gilmour <drgilmour@mac.com> | Public Comment Re: WOPR DEIS | 9/16/2007 12:24:43 | Western Oregon Plan Revisions
P.O. Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr Sirs, At the onset, I must emphasize that the following comments do not represent a consensus of the Jackson County Board of Commissioners. They do, however, represent the opinion of the Commissioner who has historically been the most sympathetic to both the local environmental community and to the non-industrial private landowners who own properties within and adjacent to the proposed John?s Peak OHV area. From my prospective, Alternative 2 has several ?fatal flaws? that could provoke litigation that would delay implementation until well into the next Administration. These include the following: 1) OFF HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV) AREAS: Although BLM officials have stated that they are working on Alternatives for the John?s Peak OHV area, the WOPR DEIS seems to set into stone the most extreme scenario. The ?preferred? Alternative 2 sets aside 16,375 acres (page 143). The WOPR DEIS states clearly that ?Alternative 2 would result in a loss of non-motorized recreation opportunities in the Medford District due to the larger portion of land that would be designated specifically for motorized use (12% of the district?s total land base)?visitors seeking non-motorized forms of recreation would be dissuaded from using these areas.?(P.778) Because of the ?checkerboard? delineation of Federal ?O&C? lands on John?s Peak, a significant portion of lands within this designated area are privately owned. A significant percentage of those who own non-industrial private lands within this area have signed petitions opposing the OHV area. Since I am sympathetic to the strongly held concerns of private property owners within the John?s Peak OHV area and its surrounds, I could not support an Alternative that seems to ?set into stone? a 16,000+ OHV park, even if less extreme proposals were later brought forward. 2) FUEL REDUCTION AND WILDFIRE RISK: This one surprised me. It would appear that Alternative 2 actually increases long-term fire risk even more than the present management practices that most would agree are woefully inadequate. (Figure 273, page 769: look at ?high severity acres Medford? for the year 2116). Alternative 2 promotes the development ?of even-aged plantations, which would be highly susceptible to stand-replacing crown fires. This would maintain or increase the crown fire hazard in the South.? (P.770). 3) POTENTIAL WILDERNESS: The acreage within the Medford District dedicated to wilderness management is only 17,759 acres (p.219), only 1384 acres more that the proposed John?s Peak OHV reserve. An omission that could very well doom Alternative 2 is the exclusion of the ?Wild Rogue Wilderness? that is considered by many to be the largest roadless area in the entire WOPR planning area. It is not even listed in ?lands with wilderness characteristics? on table 125, Medford District (p. 418). Even if were to be designated ?wilderness,? ?the special management to maintain wilderness characteristics would not apply to portions of these units that occur on O&C lands suitable for permanent timber production.? (p.784). Since the area has developed nationwide recognition among mainstream environmental organizations, its omission could easily set off litigation that could delay implementation until long after we have another Administration in Washington. 4) RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT: The ?riparian management area? is also an area of significant concern, from both members of the environmental community and anglers. The ?steam bank zone? is only 25 feet. Within this zone, harvesting would be allowed for ?operational reasons.? (P.79, table 31) What are ?operational reasons?? Could a caterpillar tractor tear up riparian habitat just to get to the other side for ?operational reasons?? If turbidity is increased for ?operational reasons,? is the Clean Water Act violated? Does removal of up to 20% of effective shade from 25 to 60 feet and 50% of canopy from 60 to 100 feet impact water temperature? 5) REJUVINATION HARVESTING: Clear cutting has been reborn as ?rejuvenation harvesting.? Alternative 2 would allow 143,400 acres to be clear-cut per decade (14,340 acres or 22.4 square miles / year). (p.581). Although clear cutting is certainly more profitable in the short term than less invasive forestry techniques, it is no longer supported by a majority of American citizens, especially in the Northeast and upper Midwest, regions that still have significant political clout in Congress. 6) NORTHERN SPOTTED OWL: Alternative 2 allows clear cutting in areas previously reserved as spotted owl habitat. It is not clear what the impact would be. This is another area where change in policy without a clear sense of impact will result in litigation that could delay implementation well into another Administration. Although my comments may seem quite negative, I still believe that a compromise is still possible that could move the process forward. Before such a compromise can be reached that can move us beyond stalemate, several important questions must be answered. From the environmental community: What are the specific boundaries of lands that should be preserved for wilderness areas and preservation of vital habitat? How many acres would that entail? From the timber industry: How many annual board feet must be harvested yearly from Federal lands to maintain local production and local jobs? How many acres would be required to ensure ?sustainability? of production within the confines of plantation management? Is there a local capacity for processing large diameter logs, or will these logs be sent out of region or even overseas? Does such harvesting really require incursion into ?road less? areas or areas that have ?wilderness potential?? From the O&C counties: What is ?bottom line? additional income required to sustain County operations, and to provide services such as roads and sheriff patrols within the historic checkerboard of O&C lands? How many acres and what are the boundaries of ?interface? areas that need special treatment to reduce fire risk? Jackson County may be one of the few that are poised to move into a ?post-O&C? era. We have already made the painful cuts needed to move ahead without Federal moneys. If we get no further O&C moneys, we will survive, even though our resources will be stretched very thin by the need to provide services across the vast checkerboard of Federal lands. Even though our county?s fiscal survival is not threatened, the fragile societal threads that hold us together could soon be unraveled if a solution is not found that could provide both sustainability of jobs and critical habitat. The threads have already been pulled to close to the breaking point by recent demographic changes. Small remote timber dependant communities have slid into endemic poverty and hopelessness, with the loss of family wage jobs and an aging poorly educated workforce that is poorly equipped to move into post-timber economy. Larger communities have experienced a flood of immigrants from California and elsewhere who have significantly higher educational attainment and economic resources, who value the non-economic resources of Federal lands. Although the values cherished by each group are different, they need not be mutually exclusive. A well thought out compromise that produces a new ?Alternative? is still possible, but not within the Alternatives that have been proposed by the WOPR DEIS. Sincerely, David R. Gilmour, MD Jackson County (OR) Commissioner |
| EM-62 | Hefnorton@aol.com | BLM LOGGING | 9/16/2007 12:27:54 | As a land owner whose property is bound by both Blm and forest service land I am very concerned with how the agencies manage that land. I believe that the current BLM resource management plan is a good balance of retaining healthy forest habitats and removal of forest products. To allow political and corporate pressure to define how the BLM manages it's forest land would be a huge mistake. To increase the amount of timber extracted or to reinstate the practice of clear cutting would have negative results both to the environment and to the health and beauty of our forests.
Jeff Norton Applegate Oregon ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com |
| EM-63 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/16/2007 23:35:30 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, James C Taylor 78245 Rat Creek Rd Cottage Grove, Or 97424 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-64 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/16/2007 23:39:38 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. To continue to cut old-growth is not possible for much longer, so why not adjust now while they are still around for us to appreciate. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, George Langeliers 88575 Partridge Lane Springfield, OR, 97478 champion@rawfoods.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-65 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/16/2007 23:40:54 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Many sustainable and careful logging methods are used. It's crucial that you study and use them. Clear cutting damages top soils as well as the lost protections mentioned above. The cutting of old-growth is nothing more than a greedy act by one industry. PLEASE DO NOT continue thinking this way and realize that many citizens view our forests as more than money making devices. It's past time for rural areas to look into other methods of income and not fall back on old, "easy kill" methods. We expect better thoughts and plans from our government agencies. Retain our few older forests for our future generations as well as ourselves. Sincerely, David and Joan Seidel 1142 Ash Avenue Cottage Grove, OR 97424 jdseidel@efn.org -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-66 | Luke Cartmill <lukec@metrogymnastics.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 9/17/2007 10:18:02 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Luke Cartmill 10342 SW Mc Donald Ave Tigard, OR 97223 |
| EM-67 | "GAry shade" <asap7802@hotmail.com> | Johns Peak/ OHV Emphasis Area---No Way | 9/17/2007 15:36:30 | OHV is a single use management designation for Johns Peak. Bikers don't
share quit settings and environmentally sensative areas with the public. Biker use of this area causes significant conflict with neighbors and enviornmental damage. Biker abuse and lawless conduct in the Johns Peak area warrents that OHV use in this area be stopped. Just get out of the office and go see and spend some time talking to folks of Jacksonville. We understand that you are catering to the bikers and can't understand why you support this activity that disrupts lives and is causes such damage. I live in Jacksonville and I want the Johns Peak OHV Biker Destruction Area closed down. Gary Shade P.O. Box 1443 Jacksonville, OR 97530 _________________________________________________________________ Get the device you want, with the Hotmail® you love. http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/mobilehotmail/default.mspx?WT.mc_ID=MobileHMTagline |
| EM-68 | jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> | Stop the Whopper | 9/19/2007 11:04:56 | Please listen to the people! You are asking for input
- please actually implement what the people want don't just give us a token opportunity to speak and then ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700 million board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be reasonable and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy when they grow up. We often take them hiking and have seen the landscape change to accommodate more Californians - lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and leave us some beauty, some healthy forests, some recreation places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush administration is almost over - hold on - wait for the next policies before you implement evil and destroy what can not be restored. I would thank you for listening but I don't think you really are. Surprise me. Jan Wright 313 B Gangnes Talent, OR 97540 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ |
| EM-69 | Michael Connors <mconnors@opendoor.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revisions 2007 | 9/19/2007 11:10:24 | Dear BLM:
Regarding this action: Draft Environmental Impact Statement now available for Review and Comment! Formal Public Comment Period: August 10 - November 9, 2007 I am not in favor of opening areas above Jacksonville to OHV use! Please do not destroy our natural surroundings nor our quality of life! Thank you! Michael Connors Sales / CDS Publications cdspublications.com 772 Indiana Street Ashland, OR 97520 Ph/Fax: 541.488.2553 Mobile: 541.944.4563 |
| EM-70 | "Connie Lynn" <lynn@jeffnet.org> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 9/19/2007 12:04:33 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Connie Lynn 74 Granite St. Ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-71 | jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> | Re: Stop the Whopper | 9/19/2007 12:25:34 | If law is guiding you- then why the change in policy
why suddenly increase the amount of timber being cut ? What was wrong with the previous amounts were you within the law then too? And are still protecting the spotted owl and other animals who don't have a voice or a choice about where they can live????And are you actually claiming that Bush has no influence on this - Has the rate of cutting ever been higher than you are proposing since 1937? Bush obviously doesn't care a bit about the environment much less about Oregon so do not fold to his policies. The info. from the paper said your new plan would not make up for the lost O & C funds anyway. Are you training people to actually manage the forest- to do fuel reduction and good forest health practices instead of the focus being on short term revenues. In what way will my comments be considered? Statistically, morally....? Thank you for writing back. Jan Wright, Talent --- orwopr@blm.gov wrote: > Jan: > > Thanks for your comments. We are listening. We > will consider your > comments as we make final decisions. > > However, we also have to obey the law. And for most > of the lands we > manage in Western Oregon, the law that tells us what > to do with these > lands is the O&C Act of 1937. > > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/oclands.php > > Our challenge is to meet the provisions of this law > that directs us to > manage for "permanent forest productions under the > principles of sustained > yield" while at the same time meeting the Endangered > Species Act, the > Clear Water Act, and other applicable laws. These > laws don't change with > changes in Administration. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > R. Alan Hoffmeister > Bureau of Land Management > Communications - Public Involvement > Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr > alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov > Portland Phone: 503-808-6629 > > > > jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> > 09/19/2007 11:04 AM > > To > orwopr@or.blm.gov > cc > > Subject > Stop the Whopper > > > > > > > Please listen to the people! You are asking for > input > - please actually implement what the people want > don't > just give us a token opportunity to speak and then > ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT > LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700 million > board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be reasonable > and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy > when > they grow up. We often take them hiking and have > seen > the landscape change to accommodate more > Californians > - lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and leave > us some beauty, some healthy forests, some > recreation > places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush > administration is almost over - hold on - wait for > the > next policies before you implement evil and destroy > what can not be restored. I would thank you for > listening but I don't think you really are. Surprise > me. > Jan Wright > 313 B Gangnes > Talent, OR 97540 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you > sell. > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC |
| EM-72 | "Tognar Toolworks" <info@tognar.com> | I oppose designation of Johns Peak near jacksonville for OHV use | 9/19/2007 15:40:52 | I live and run very close to this area and think the use of OHV in the area would greatly diminish the beauty and sserenity of this lovely valley.
please consider my views in your deliberations yours sincerely, Cat Gould cat1sun@yahoo.com 541-512-88887 I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 11516 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try SPAMfighter for free now! |
| EM-73 | "Nick Shevchynski" <nickdotcom1@yahoo.com> | comment on wopr | 9/19/2007 16:51:35 | please DO NOT proceed with wopr to degrade all our public old growth forests on blm land, DO NOT cut any old growth at all on public old growth blm lands in western Oregon at all, thankyou. Stu Phillips, eugene, 5414611384, stulips@hotmail.com, only, this comment page on draft eis does not work at all, I'm sure that's your doing of course, do not go ahead with WOPR, no old growth logging on any public BLM lands in western Oregon at all, thankyou. Stu Phillips, Eugene! |
| EM-74 | "Jacksonville Mercantile" <foodlover@jacksonvillemercantile.com> | OHV Use at John's Peak in Jacksonville | 9/19/2007 18:19:43 | As a small business owner and home owner in Jacksonville, it is truly distressing to think that the BLM would allow the OHV usage on the land near John's Peak. Overwhelmingly, the people who live, work and play in Jacksonville have made it perfectly clear that we do not want this type of destructive activity. It hurts everyone. The businesses, the home owners and of course the land itself. It does not bring people into Jacksonville, quite the oposite. If people discover that this is a huge OHV park, Jacksonville definately loses its appeal to visitors and people living here.
Please listen to the majority of people living and working in Jacksonville and don't allow the OHV park to go through. Thank you for listening. Constance Jesser Owner Jacksonville Mercantile |
| EM-75 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/20/2007 13:44:58 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/20/2007 01:44 PM -----
Naomi Rowden <nrowden@uoregon.edu> 09/20/2007 01:20 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Naomi Rowden 1526 Willamette Alley #1 Eugene OR 97401 |
| EM-76 | "Peter Gibb" <pgibb@ashlandhome.net> | WOPR | 9/21/2007 18:12:32 |
As a local resident, I want to register my strong objection to the proposed useage of John's Peak for Off Highway Vehicles. This is not what most local residents want or need. Please listen to and follow the wishes of local residents on this matter. Peter Gibb www.petergibbart.com |
| EM-77 | Ed Miller <enigmaT120@q.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision, comments | 9/23/2007 11:10:25 | Where I live, in the Oregon coast range, the land owned by BLM (namely,
me and other citizens) is just about the only forest land worth visiting for hiking, bicycling, mushroom hunting, and general recreation. The private timberland owners are overlogging their property. The last thing we need around here is more clear cuts. I oppose increased logging on public lands, and particularly logging of old growth forests, or even forests that have started to develop the characteristics of old growth, say much over a hundred years old. I do not oppose management of younger tracts of timberland which frequently need thinning to lower the risk of fire and improve forest health, but I don't want to see them clear cut either. Thank you for your attention, Ed Miller Falls City, OR 97344 sx |
| EM-78 | David Fulton <nicelynicely@mac.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 9/23/2007 20:31:28 | Are you nuts!?! In light of a this recent talk about global climate
change and the importance of forests as a carbon sink you are going to permit the most lush and vibrant of forest ecosystems to be destroyed? I must say that I'm outraged. Old-growth forests are sensitive habitat for many animals and are irreplaceable. I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, David Fulton Portland, Oregon |
| EM-79 | "Kidessa Young" <kidessa@hotmail.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 9/24/2007 6:47:00 | Greetings,
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Please do not cut these vital ecosystems as doing so will destroy a legacy rightly owned by our grandchildren. Sincerely, Annette Young _________________________________________________________________ A place for moms to take a break! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us |
| EM-80 | Lynda Stevenson <lyndagarden@yahoo.com> | Comment on BLM proposed WOPR for Oregon | 9/24/2007 8:27:33 | I am opposed to all three of the alternative proposed
by BLM under the WOPR. Alternative 2 is the worst of the three. The WOPR would be a disaster for southern Oregon forests. None of the three "action alternatives" offer responsible, sustainable management for healthy forest. Sincerely, Lynda Stevenson 2101 Woodlawn Dr. Medford OR 97504 |
| EM-81 | Gael Miller <oddsend@q.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 9/24/2007 9:22:13 | We live in the OR coastal range and enjoy hiking, biking, shrooming and
other forms of recreation. Since we first moved here 17 years ago ALL of the land surrounding us has been clear cut and replanted exclusively w/douglas fir tree farns. The BLM land, with its many diverse species and beauty is the only land worth visiting for recreation and to enjoy the natural beauty of the forest. We daily see first hand the destruction of unchecked logging and the devastation it causes to the soil, our clean water, fish & other forms of wildlife. I oppose increased logging on public lands and particularly ancient forests or any forests that are in the process of becoming old growth with trees much over a hundred years old. We want our public lands protected for future generations to enjoy. Our ancient forsts CAN NEVER BE REPLACED ONCE THEY ARE LOST!! I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Please prevent any more logging or clear cutting of our ancient forests and BLM land which WE want to enjoy and preserve for all time. Gael Miller Falls City, OR |
| EM-82 | jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> | Re: Stop the Whopper | 9/24/2007 11:33:58 | I have been informed of your tactics to drown the
public with your charts and facts and label all that we say as "opinion" and therefore with out validity. Denying that Bush has anything to do with this change is disingenuous - I can't believe that you don't know that this came directly from meetings with Bush and the Timber companies. They were tired of judges (the real legal system which of course, Bush doesn't honor anyway) turning down their requests for the timber on public lands so they went to Bush and he just waved his wand and said "let's do this out of court" and let the Timber industries circumvent the legal system and the only recourse the public has. Bush told the BLM to start letting industry log public lands at record levels. Your little chart aside, this is not called the Whopper for nothing. This represents something huge. The Timber people have so mismanaged their own resources they had to turn to the public lands and will profit tremendously but will the tax payers???? NO they will not in fact - we LOSE our resources, our rights to stop something we don't want and create a mess for our grandchildren to figure out. Most people think that clear cutting is illegal - most people think that there are safeguards in place being honored to protect the land. Won't they be surprised when they find out otherwise and that the BLM agreed to let them do it. Yet, you say you are listening to the public - as long as they agree with you and as long as they have fancy charts to contend with yours. None of this will matter once the timber companies take over public lands and destroy what only God can make. Why do you trust profit making companies to do good? That is naive and even stupid not to mention morally reprehensible. If you do not stop the whopper, you can safely assume that you are not listening or heeded any warnings or honoring the trust the public has in your will to protect our lands from rape and destruction. Shame on you. Jan Wright --- orwopr@blm.gov wrote: > Jan: > > You asked about the rate of cutting. I hope you can > read this chart - if > not let me know. This shows what the harvest has > been from these BLM > lands over the years. > > > > Under Alternative 2 (heaviest harvest goals) the > Annual Sale Quantity > would approach 700 MMBF, under the other > alternatives being considered, it > would be much less. > > Alan Hoffmeister > > > > jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> > 09/19/2007 12:25 PM > > To > orwopr@blm.gov > cc > > Subject > Re: Stop the Whopper > > > > > > > If law is guiding you- then why the change in > policy > why suddenly increase the amount of timber being cut > ? > What was wrong with the previous amounts were you > within the law then too? And are still protecting > the > spotted owl and other animals who don't have a voice > or a choice about where they can live????And are you > actually claiming that Bush has no influence on this > - > Has the rate of cutting ever been higher than you > are > proposing since 1937? Bush obviously doesn't care a > bit about the environment much less about Oregon so > do > not fold to his policies. The info. from the paper > said your new plan would not make up for the lost O > & > C funds anyway. Are you training people to actually > manage the forest- to do fuel reduction and good > forest health practices instead of the focus being > on > short term revenues. In what way will my comments be > considered? Statistically, morally....? Thank you > for > writing back. > Jan Wright, Talent > --- orwopr@blm.gov wrote: > > > Jan: > > > > Thanks for your comments. We are listening. We > > will consider your > > comments as we make final decisions. > > > > However, we also have to obey the law. And for > most > > of the lands we > > manage in Western Oregon, the law that tells us > what > > to do with these > > lands is the O&C Act of 1937. > > > > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/oclands.php > > > > Our challenge is to meet the provisions of this > law > > that directs us to > > manage for "permanent forest productions under the > > principles of sustained > > yield" while at the same time meeting the > Endangered > > Species Act, the > > Clear Water Act, and other applicable laws. These > > laws don't change with > > changes in Administration. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > R. Alan Hoffmeister > > Bureau of Land Management > > Communications - Public Involvement > > Western Oregon Plan Revisions Project > > http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr > > alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov > > Portland Phone: 503-808-6629 > > > > > > > > jan wright <thedamnwright@yahoo.com> > > 09/19/2007 11:04 AM > > > > To > > orwopr@or.blm.gov > > cc > > > > Subject > > Stop the Whopper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please listen to the people! You are asking for > > input > > - please actually implement what the people want > > don't > > just give us a token opportunity to speak and then > > ignore what we are saying. I DO NOT WANT > GOVERNMENT > > LANDS TO BE RAPED NOW OR IN THE FUTURE ! 700 > million > > board feet of timber is way TOO MUCH. Be > reasonable > > and leave something for my grandchildren to enjoy > > when > > they grow up. We often take them hiking and have > > seen > > the landscape change to accommodate more > > Californians > > - lets accommodate OREGONIANS for a change and > leave > > us some beauty, some healthy forests, some > > recreation > > places, some solitude, habitat etc. The Bush > > administration is almost over - hold on - wait for > > the > > next policies before you implement evil and > destroy > > what can not be restored. I would thank you for > > listening but I don't think you really are. > Surprise > > me. > > Jan Wright > > 313 B Gangnes > > Talent, OR 97540 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you > > sell. > > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet > in your pocket: mail, > news, photos & more. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 |
| EM-83 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 10:57:57 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Judyth Hyll 3795 Wilshire Lane Eugene, OR 97405 Judyandbobber@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-84 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 10:59:41 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Please. There is no reason to. The devastation has gone on far to long. What are we leaving for our children. Trees breathe in CO2, in case you didn't know so they are absolutely critical to slowing down global warming. Logging old forests for corporate profit is the dumbest thing we could possibly do. Clear cutting seals our fate of an unihabital world. Thankyou for taking your time to listen, please, I speak with the voice of millions you do not hear. Do what is right, stop all old growth logging immediatley. Sincerely, Katey Seefeld Eugene, Oregon, 97401 omshaktima@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-85 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 11:00:41 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Bill Pfeil 1805 NE Conifer Blvd. Corvallis, Oregon, 97330 bkmjbc@comcast.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-86 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 11:01:21 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Jane Van Dusen -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-87 | "Ken Smith" <kn@oip.net> | PLAN REVISION/BLM-O&C LANDS | 9/25/2007 11:40:51 | Sir,
After reviewing the proposed plan amendment as explained by Ms. Anna Morrison, I respectfully request that ALTERNATIVE #2 be implemented for the coming years as it clearly shows a definite advantage for the citizens of Oregon. Respectfully yours, Kenneth R. Smith 31658 Beach Rd Creswell, Or. 97426 |
| EM-88 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Don't log old growth | 9/25/2007 12:07:04 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/25/2007 12:06 PM -----
Lisa Warnes User lisawarnes <lisawarnes@efn.org> 09/25/2007 11:43 AM To <Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov> cc Subject Don't log old growth Dear Mr. Hoffmeister Our last remaining and irreplaceable 10% of old growth forest need to be protected not clear-cut in order to pay off county debt. This BLM proposal is short sited and lacks wisdom. In a time when global warming is threatening our very existence we need to be doing everything we can to turn this around not put the peddle to the metal and drive right toward it at an accelerated speed. These old growth forest provide us with clean air, clean water and is home to the endangered Spotted Owl. Practicing sustainable forestry in existing tree plantations is profitable. Tourism is also very profitable and by eliminating our last few shreds old growth forests tourism will be severely impacted, who wants to vacation in a forest full of ancient stumps? If BLM is granted permission to move forward with this ill-conceived proposal to clear-cut our last and precious old growth forest then what? What can be sacrificed to pay county debt then? Oregon needs to practice sustainability and to maintain some since of its heritage and we need to be intelligent and creative in ways to finance our debt. To sacrifice these majestic, rare and finite resources for short term relief to county debt defies sensibility and reasoning. Lisa Warnes Eugene, ORE |
| EM-89 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 17:16:45 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Jane Van Dusen 82233 Rattlesnake Rd. Dexter, OR janevand@epud.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-90 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 17:17:44 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Orit Adam P.O. Box 178 Dexter, OR 97431 janevand@epud.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-91 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/25/2007 17:19:06 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I'm a resident of the Coast Range, and while I understand the importance of sustainable logging to the local economy, I also understand the importance of preserving our natural heritage, the cleanliness of our water supplies, and the habitat vital to local wildlife. I am concerned that the proposed increase in logging in my area will negatively impact quality of life for residents, wildlife, and future generations. Old growth and stream side forest must be preserved for the health of the land and those of us who depend on it. Despite the heavy logging activity in this area, the Coast Range has slowly become an example of sustainable forestry practices, and the current proposals would be an enormous setback to this progress. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Peter Bergin 23420 Highway 36 Cheshire, OR 97419 pmbwebdesign@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-92 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/26/2007 7:57:30 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 07:57 AM -----
Kim Mericle <kimm@mcmatters.net> 09/25/2007 09:34 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am agitated and disheartened with the direction the Bush Administration is heading with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Kim Mericle PO Box 414 1273 Sheraton Dr. Williams, OR 97544 |
| EM-93 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/26/2007 11:21:15 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 11:21 AM -----
Tracy P Lamblin <wrensnest2@starband.net> 09/26/2007 10:58 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, Tracy Parks Lamblin 5223 Carberry Creek Rd Jacksonville, Or |
| EM-94 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/26/2007 11:27:28 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/26/2007 11:27 AM -----
Tracy P Lamblin <wrensnest2@starband.net> 09/26/2007 10:58 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, Tracy Parks Lamblin 5223 Carberry Creek Rd Jacksonville, Or |
| EM-95 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/26/2007 14:36:29 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. And, as a resident of western Oregon, in the foothills of the Coastal Mountains, I am increasingly concerned with air and water quality, wildlife and diversity in my area. I understand the consumer demand for wood products, but I believe that it is far better harvested from tree plantations than to risk all that we lose by destroying some or our last remaining old growth forests. Thank you for taking the time to read my comments. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Teri Myers 23420 Highway 36 Cheshire, OR 97419 dancewithleela@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-96 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/26/2007 14:37:09 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Melanie McCloskey po box 921 Hood River, OR 97031 melaniemccloskey@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-97 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/26/2007 14:39:21 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Patricia Beis 82066 Lost Valley Ln. Dexter, OR 97431 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-98 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/26/2007 14:40:54 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Carlyn McCormack 2576 Potter Street Eugene, OR 97405-4166 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-99 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 9/27/2007 7:51:53 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 09/27/2007 07:51 AM -----
Faist Family <faist@magick.net> 09/26/2007 06:53 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Louann Faist PO BOX 343 Williams OR 97544 |
| EM-100 | "John & Vicki" <jvpro@dishmail.net> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 9/27/2007 9:48:59 | My husband and I attended the community meeting at the Azalea Grange a few weeks ago. The team that was there was very informative and helpful. We just wanted to go on record for having huge concerns about the water run off behind our home if the timber is cut. We live at 3808 Upper Cow Creek, Azalea, OR and during normal winters we have a small ditch that fills with water and in extreme winters it overflows and our back yard is flooded and goes into our neighbors on the west. Our neighbors above us, the Colletts, have had so much water run off that they couldn’t get in or out of their driveway. It was basically under water.
We just hope that you take into consideration our concerns and the concerns of our neighbors. Thank you for listening. John & Vicki Prohoroff 3808 Upper Cow Creek PO Box273 Azalea, OR 97410 |
| EM-101 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/28/2007 15:46:57 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Rebecca Noble Street: 9383 Nashville Road Eddyville, OR 97343 shine_rn@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-102 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/28/2007 15:47:32 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, rob miron eugene or 605 howard ave. 97404 robmiron@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-103 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/28/2007 15:48:08 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Jan Aho 82233 Rattlesnake Road Dexter, Oregon 97431 jaho@epud.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-104 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 9/28/2007 15:48:54 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, stu phillips 212 benjamin eugene, oregon, 97404 stulips@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-105 | dinda evans <dindamcp4@yahoo.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 9/28/2007 19:47:31 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, dinda evans pob 178695 san diego, CA 92117 |
| EM-106 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/1/2007 11:34:56 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, jeramy vallianos 4680 w. hillside dr eugene, or 97405 jeramyvallianos@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-107 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/1/2007 11:36:16 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Susan Marsh 8121 SW 62 Place Portland, OR. 97219 sunseeker56@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-108 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/1/2007 11:36:52 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Jacob Ritley 35551 Hood Canal Dr. NE Hansville, WA, 98340 jacobritley@gmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-109 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/1/2007 11:37:31 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Candice Cook Street: PO BOX 3011 EUGENE, OREGON 97403 candicecook@gmamil.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-110 | "Steve Hanson" <stevenjhanson@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:13:03 | Steve Hanson
36552 Cedar Hills Drive Pleasant Hill, OR 97455-9603 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Steve Hanson |
| EM-111 | "Cindi Barrett" <cbarrett@amforest.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:17:42 | Cindi Barrett
1712 NW 18th Court Gresham, OR 97030-3687 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Cindi Barrett |
| EM-112 | "Greg McGuire" <gregm@dunollieent.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:21:44 | Greg McGuire
1507 S 74th Yakima, WA 98908-1919 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Greg McGuire 5099654711 |
| EM-113 | "ALLEN PRICE" <allenp@ootci.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:23:45 | ALLEN PRICE
62663 SHELLHAMER ROAD COOS BAY, OR 97420-7326 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, ALLEN PRICE 541-269-9506 |
| EM-114 | "Ben Smith" <ben.smith@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:24:57 | Ben Smith
15555 S. Highway 211 Molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ben Smith |
| EM-115 | "Tyril Spence" <tyril.spence@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:30:14 | Tyril Spence
243701 HWY 101 west Port Angeles, WA 98363-9472 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tyril Spence |
| EM-116 | "Rick Forgaard" <rick.forgaard@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:44:29 | Rick Forgaard
3415 33rd Way NW Olympia, WA 98502-3240 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. My company operates two sawmill facilities in OR and is highly dependent on public timber. After a briefing by the American Resource Council it is clear that none of the alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirement of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving 52% for the purpose of a listed species is in violation of the Act! The O&C lands are unique and by law are not available to be part of a reserve to recover listed species. The BLM must develop an alternative that maximizes timber receipts that meets its no jeopardy obligation. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Lastly, access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Rick Forgaard 360-791-7058 |
| EM-117 | "John Ernst" <john.ernst@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:44:43 | John Ernst
Box 707 Gilchrist, OR 97737-0707 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Ernst 541/480/0779 |
| EM-118 | "Richard Steers" <rick.steers@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:47:44 | Richard Steers
8639 Blue Grouse Way Blaine, WA 98230-5726 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Richard J Steers 360-510-9984 |
| EM-119 | "John Straw" <john.straw@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:48:56 | John Straw
Box 638 Gilchrist, OR 97737-0638 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Straw 541-480-9790 |
| EM-120 | "Keith Elser" <keith.elser@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:49:21 | Keith Elser
337 McLaughlin Dr Woodburn, OR 97071-4509 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Keith Elser 503-759-2044 |
| EM-121 | "Mark Landers" <mark.landers@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 13:52:04 | Mark Landers
Box 638 Gilchrist, OR 97737-0638 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mark Landers 541-433-3312 |
| EM-122 | "Kerst, Duncan" <DKerst@zgf.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/2/2007 13:54:30 | Dear BLM,
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. I do not like your plan that would boost logging of trees 200 years and older sevenfold over the next decade. This would be an unprecedented and unsustainable increase in logging Oregon's last old-growth forests and by the BLM's own admission will open up currently protected streamside forests and 'old-growth reserves' to new clearcutting. I am against the BLM plan to move forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, R. Duncan Kerst 1933 SE 32nd Place Portland, Oregon97214 The contents of this email and any attachments to it contain confidential and/or legally privileged information from Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Architects LLP or its affiliates. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. |
| EM-123 | "Richard Svilich" <ricknroll50@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:05:38 | Richard Svilich
104 N. Dewitt Way Yreka, CA 96097-2202 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Richard Svilich 530-905-0181 |
| EM-124 | "Richard Parker" <rick.parker@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:21:19 | Richard Parker
243701 Hwy. 101 West Port Angeles, WA 98363-9472 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. I just don't get people today, they all want everything but who is going to pay for it. I have worked in the timber industry for the last 30 years and now becoming extinct. Sure there are some out there that just want to clearcut but the rest want keep living with nature and prividing for their families. You not only stop logging and their families but take away for communities for tax dollars that help our kids. But then maybe they only need learn how to sit along the streets and expect the goverment to take care of them. There needs to be middle ground both sides can not have it all. But if you decide to give it all to them we sure won't need you any more, please make sure to turn off the lights and lock the door because nobuddy will be able to make a living here. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Richard W. Parker |
| EM-125 | "Jeff Demers" <jeffd@frllc.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:27:17 | Jeff Demers
P.O.Box 876 Veneta, OR 97487-0876 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jeff Demers 541-484-4462 |
| EM-126 | "Lisa Bennett" <bennettj5@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:28:50 | Lisa Bennett
1710 South E St. Port Angeles, WA 98363-7026 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. How about preserving another endangered species: the working middle class who provide the government with revenue in the form of taxes collected? Every week more sawmills are taking downtime due to the sluggish housing market. Keep people working and not collecting unemployment to ensure economic recovery. Protecting sensitive species is important but enviromentalists need to be realistic: look at all of the measures taken to preserve the spotted owl and their numbers are still declining due to factors completely out of our control such as the migration of a competitive species. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Lisa Bennett 360-417-6181 |
| EM-127 | "Tom Partin" <tpartin@amforest.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:29:06 | Tom Partin
17890 Royce Way Lake Oswego, OR 97034-7313 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tom Partin 503-638-5566 |
| EM-128 | "Howard Hutchinson" <aznmc@earthlink.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:29:37 | Howard Hutchinson
HC 61 Box 484 Glenwood, NM 88039-9702 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Howard Hutchinson 505-539-2692 |
| EM-129 | "Louis Gilbert" <42utus@gmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:34:44 | Louis Gilbert
PO Box 2203 Port Angeles, WA 98362-0287 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. BLM should be working with each states Forestery Management team and judge what applications of use are best suited for the local juristictions. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Louis Gilbert |
| EM-130 | "Chuck Wert" <chuck.wert@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:44:32 | Chuck Wert
PO Box 250 Glendale, OR 97442-0250 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Chuck Wert 541-832-1112 |
| EM-131 | "Alexandria Sherman" <al740@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:45:31 | Alexandria Sherman
1712 NW 18th Court Gresham, OR 97030-3687 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Alexandria Sherman |
| EM-132 | "Jennifer Fryman" <jfryman@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:46:20 | Jennifer Fryman
PO Box 631 Conway, WA 98238-0631 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jennifer Fryman 3604453163 |
| EM-133 | "Edward Girrens" <eddie.girrens@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 14:55:15 | Edward Girrens
513 Jefferson St. Silverton, OR 97381-1121 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. . Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Edward Girrens |
| EM-134 | "Nick Watkins" <nick.watkins@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 15:00:02 | Nick Watkins
15555 s Hwy 211 Molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nick Watkins |
| EM-135 | "Steve McGuire" <stevemcguire@hamptonaffiliates.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 15:07:17 | Steve McGuire
P.O. Box 189 Randle, WA 98377-0189 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Steve McGuire 360-497-0204 |
| EM-136 | "Frank Pratt" <fpratt@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 15:52:58 | Frank Pratt
Po box 234 Hydesville, CA 95547-0234 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Frank Pratt 707-768-3839 |
| EM-137 | "Michael Richardson" <mike.richardson@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 16:10:51 | Michael Richardson
419 Eastview Lane NE Silverton, OR 97381-9814 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Michael Richardson 503-989-5337 |
| EM-138 | "Eric Recht" <eric.recht@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 16:34:25 | Eric Recht
1594 N Redwood Canby, OR 97013-2411 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Eric Recht 503-539-9350 |
| EM-139 | "Dean Olson" <dean.olson@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 17:59:57 | Dean Olson
1040 West 5th Street Port Angeles,, WA 98363-2115 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dean Olson 360-417-6181 |
| EM-140 | "Nick Partin" <nicksperformance@comcast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 19:17:59 | Nick Partin
3801 NE 113th Ave portland, OR 97220-2423 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Personally, I would say any area not within the set boundaries of a stream river or wilderness areas should at least allowed selective and un even age harvest methods to allow for at a minimum fire prevention and other catastrophic events that effect the growth of wildlife populations throughout the forest regardless of where it is located with in the paper trail of boundaries. setting ANY amount of timberlands aside for "wildlife areas" places the surrounding forests at risk of damage by events within the wildlife areas due to mismanagement overtime due to the inability to properly control risk factors in the areas of forest set aside for habitat and rehabilitation, all areas should be of a common goal, manage the resource to be as high of yield without reducing the annual growth of the forest, without stressing the animal and wildlife populations within the forest, and to assume the least amount of risk to the forest by fire, and to keep the areas that do inevitably catch fire by lightning or other hands to a minimum acreage. Of the acreage that will burn over time, the areas are to be properly cared fore and managed by the personnel trained in proper management techniques,. to avoid the appearance and mismanagement of the B&B complex fires that have yet to be dealt with and are effecting the surrounding forests with bug kill, windfall, fungus and a over burden of usage from displaced wildlife that used to be present in the burnt areas. The appropriate use of science and management style for the tree species with in each specific area of the forest. Nick Partin Altec Industries In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nick Partin 503-740-5472 |
| EM-141 | "Joyce McGuire" <jlmcguire@tds.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/2/2007 20:20:52 | Joyce McGuire
po box 385 Mossyrock, WA 98564-0385 October 2, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber prodction and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopary obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Joyce McGuire 360-983-3976 |
| EM-142 | "Larry Duysen" <lduysen@sierraforest.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 6:59:50 | Larry Duysen
P.O. Box 10060 Terra Bella, CA 93270-0060 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Larry Duysen 559-535-4893 |
| EM-143 | "Kay King" <royalline@hughes.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 7:21:29 | Kay King
PO Box 219 Florence, OR 97439-0008 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Dear Mr Shepard: BLM lands were set aside for timber production, principally. Timber was to be the dominant use. O&C lands are not to to be part of a reserve system for recovery of specific species. However, a good sensible management plan of the forest, will still provide for sensitive species. You, the BLM should be mandated to select the alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production. Oregon is hurting for timber receipts for county governments and taxpayers can pay no more. Be sensible--and do not bend to pressure, when you know how to best manage the forest. A token timber harvest will not meet the mandate requiring the BLM to provide for schools and roads through the production of timber receipts. I have watched the preservationist community whittle away at our forests until rural communities are suffering beyond measure. Be bold and do not bend to their pressure. Thank you for taking my input. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Kay King 5419978212 |
| EM-144 | "Zander Willis" <zander.willis@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 7:31:26 | Zander Willis
15555 S Hwy 211 Molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Zander Willis 503-759-2053 |
| EM-145 | "Tony McKague" <tonym@kinzuaresources.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 7:51:56 | Tony McKague
P.O. Drawer AA Pilot Rock, OR 97868 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tony McKague 541-443-2261 |
| EM-146 | "Tony Sims" <tsims@sierracedarproductsllc.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 8:19:34 | Tony Sims
1401 Melody Road Olivehurst, CA 95961-7406 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Our sawmill is located in Northern California where we employee 72 people. The survival of our company and small timber dependent comunities depends largely on how federal lands are managed in the future. We have great concern over the end result of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. We would like to make the following points for your consideration. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tony Sims 530 741 8090 |
| EM-147 | "Tom Insko" <tainsko@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 9:33:23 | Tom Insko
12 Pine Crest Drive La Grande, OR 97850-1300 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. I have lived in the state of Oregon for most of my life and value the many benefits our state's natural resources offer. It is disappointing to experience the impact on these resources through recent improper management. I applaud the agency for proposing alternative two which returns to a more active management regime on much of the land but it still falls short of what needs to occur. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tom Insko |
| EM-148 | "Bruce Haynes" <bhaynes@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 9:59:30 | Bruce Haynes
PO Box 10939 Anderson, CA 96007-1939 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Bruce Haynes 5303788352 |
| EM-149 | "David Sweitzer" <dasweitzer@comcast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 10:37:43 | David Sweitzer
P.O. Box 1095 Camas, WA 98607-0095 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, David A. Sweitzer 360/835-1900 |
| EM-150 | "William Lanier" <willie.lanier@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 11:01:52 | William Lanier
15555 hyw 211 molalla, OR 97038 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, William Lanier 5037023844 |
| EM-151 | "james chambers" <jim.chambers@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 13:49:26 | james chambers
4711 parkview lane mt. vernon, WA 98274-8765 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, james chambers 360-416-6954 |
| EM-152 | "Kenneth Gazzaway II" <ken.gazzaway@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 14:27:07 | Kenneth Gazzaway II
4020 newell rd port angeles, WA 98363-2465 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ken Gazzaway II |
| EM-153 | "David Kunert" <davekunert@hamptonaffiliates.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 16:24:40 | David Kunert
3111 Third Street Tillamook, OR 97141-2643 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, David Kunert |
| EM-154 | "Kristina West" <kristina.west@verizon.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 19:37:38 | Kristina West
23779 SW Shady Grove Dr Sherwood, OR 97140-6268 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Kristina West |
| EM-155 | "Todd Merritt" <merrittta@chwa.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/3/2007 20:44:26 | Todd Merritt
5022 Caribou Ct SW Albany, OR 97321-5889 October 3, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. I believe the BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented, without the funding, the Plan cannot succeed or live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Todd Merritt |
| EM-156 | "Steve Courtney" <scourtney@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 8:22:15 | Steve Courtney
14654 Ovenell Rd Mount Vernon, WA 98273-8232 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Steve Courtney 360-424-7619 |
| EM-157 | "Sharon Cork" <sharon.cork@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 8:54:11 | Sharon Cork
324 E. 10th St. Port Angeles, WA 98362-7924 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Sharon Cork |
| EM-158 | "Greer Kelly" <greer.kelly@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 12:05:41 | Greer Kelly
1453 Trail Creek Court Redmond, OR 97756-7488 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Greer Kelly 923-6487 |
| EM-159 | "Howard Peterson" <hpeterson@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 13:04:33 | Howard Peterson
3735 El Cajon Ave Shasta Lake, CA 96019-9211 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Howard Peterson 530-275-8851 |
| EM-160 | "John Phillips" <jphillips@spi-ind.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 13:07:35 | John Phillips
3735 El Cajon Ave Shasta Lake, CA 96019-9211 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Phillips 530-275-8851 |
| EM-161 | "Richard Wilfong" <richwilfong@hamptonaffiliates.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/4/2007 15:00:00 | Richard Wilfong
P.O. Box 2315 Salem, OR 97308-2315 October 4, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Richard Wilfong 503 365-8400 |
| EM-162 | rhudspethrvm@charter.netkia | WOPR Draft DEIS Comments from the Public | 10/5/2007 11:15:49 | Submitter: rae hudspeth
email: rhudspethrvm@charter.netkia Location: medford, OR 97504 Comment: None of your proposed Plans fits reasonable forests. Please cancel Relevant Section/Page: WOPR all |
| EM-163 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/5/2007 13:21:03 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Dione Armand 4006 V St Eureka, CA 95503 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-164 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/5/2007 13:21:57 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Robert Jones 67590 Spinreel Rd. North Bend, OR 97459 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-165 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/5/2007 13:23:36 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Andrew Livesay Eugene, OR 97405 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-166 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/5/2007 13:24:50 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Emily Dixon 12 NW Edgewood Dr. Corvallis, OR 97330 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-167 | "Pat Combs" <patcombs@gorge.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/5/2007 16:59:47 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Patricia F. Combs |
| EM-168 | "Jill M" <elfsgirl@gmail.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/5/2007 18:01:25 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
Sincerely, Jill Mulligan Portland, OR |
| EM-169 | hogrider <hogrider37@peoplepc.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/6/2007 1:33:36 | We are very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
Sincerely, James and Shirley Combs 4943 Pleasant Ridge Road The Dalles, Oregon 97058 ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com |
| EM-170 | "Gerald Jones" <jerry.jones@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/6/2007 5:59:51 | Gerald Jones
38055 Sandy Heights St. Sandy, OR 97055-6304 October 6, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Gerald Jones |
| EM-171 | David Neumann <dneumann@mac.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/7/2007 9:39:40 | 200 years is a really really long time to wait for something to grow.
Last time I checked, it was over two lifetimes and many more generations. As I recall, entire country isn't much older. That's how old those "old growth" trees are. This is not sustainable. Some business will get a some income in the next few years or year and the benefit for our children will be lost effectively forever. We just can't get these trees back. I completely agree with this position from the sierra club (a group I don't always agree with): I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, David Neumann 4725 Parkview Dr. #H Lake Oswego, OR 97035 |
| EM-172 | M Neumann <mneumann77@mac.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/7/2007 16:24:19 | NO MORE FREEBIES FOR BUSH CRONIES.
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Michelle Neumann 4725 Parkview, Apt. H Lake Oswego, OR 97035 |
| EM-173 | "Bill Wickman" <billwickman@sbcglobal.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/7/2007 17:41:17 | Bill Wickman
109 Cottonwood Ct. Quincy, CA 95971-9354 October 7, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Bill Wickman |
| EM-174 | "Sue Wickman" <suewickman@sbcglobal.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/7/2007 17:42:18 | Sue Wickman
109 Cottonwood Ct. Quincy, CA 95971-9354 October 7, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Sue Wickman |
| EM-175 | Sally Hawkins <shawkins@cse.unl.edu> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/8/2007 6:15:22 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS Sally Hawkins shawkins@unlserve.unl.edu |
| EM-176 | "Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 9:48:13 | Ross Mickey
2977 Ingalls way Eugene, OR 97405-6305 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ross Mickey |
| EM-177 | gretchen fidler <sugarmountainrescue@yahoo.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 10/8/2007 9:54:13 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, gretchen fidler 14189 Sugar Mtn. Rd, WC 156 West Fork, AR 72774 |
| EM-178 | "Ron Partin" <rpartin@drjlumber.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 9:56:53 | Ron Partin
PO Box 66 Riddle, OR 97469-0066 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its fiduciary obligation to the O&C counties. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ron Partin |
| EM-179 | "Larry Holmgren" <larryh@schmidbauerlumber.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 10:00:15 | Larry Holmgren
PO Box 152 Eureka, CA 95502-0152 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Larry Holmgren 707 443-7024 |
| EM-180 | "John Ernst" <john.ernst@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 10:58:17 | John Ernst
Box 707 Gilchrist, OR 97737-0707 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Ernst 541/480/0779 |
| EM-181 | "Darrel Hanson" <darrel.hanson@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 15:07:05 | Darrel Hanson
2211 rimland dr bellingham, WA 98226-5664 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Darrel Hanson 360-788-2200 |
| EM-182 | "Owen Graham" <afa@akforest.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 15:36:47 | Owen Graham
111 Stedman #200 Ketchikan, AK 99901-6549 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Owen J Graham |
| EM-183 | "Jacob Groves" <jgroves@amforest.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 17:59:49 | Jacob Groves
2300 Oakmont Way Suite 205A Eugene, OR 97401-5530 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jacob R. Groves |
| EM-184 | "Edmund Groves" <crtminc@oregonfcu.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 18:04:33 | Edmund Groves
706 Ash St. Myrtle Point, OR 97458-1135 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Edmund A. Groves |
| EM-185 | "Julie Groves" <jgroves75@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 18:09:16 | Julie Groves
706 Ash St. Myrtle Point, OR 97458-1135 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Julie A. Groves |
| EM-186 | "Elizabeth Groves" <elizabeth_erwin@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/8/2007 18:12:25 | Elizabeth Groves
520 Fisher St. Brownsville, OR 97327-2141 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Elizabeth Groves |
| EM-187 | "Jr. Malcolm R. Dick" <bdick@amforest.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/9/2007 7:35:31 | Jr. Malcolm R. Dick
606 Columbia St NW, Suite 104 Olympia, WA 98501-1093 October 9, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Our nation uses far more forest products than it produces, mainly because our federal public lands are terribly underproductive. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Malcolm R. Dick, Jr. 360-352-3910 |
| EM-188 | "Larry McBride" <lmcbride@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/9/2007 7:42:17 | Larry McBride
15555 S Hwy 211 Molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 9, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Larry McBride 503-759-3591 |
| EM-189 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/9/2007 11:21:06 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 11:20 AM -----
Samantha <samantha@efn.org> 10/09/2007 10:35 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Nancy Kaswell 1672 Wilson Street Eugene, Oregon 97402 - samantha.vcf |
| EM-190 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: BLM's new old growth logging plan is bad for people, water, land and animals | 10/9/2007 14:43:54 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:43 PM -----
JB <unibaj@yahoo.com> 10/05/2007 12:05 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject BLM's new old growth logging plan is bad for people, water, land and animals Alan- Logging old-growth is not the solution. The quality of water, land, air and life will be better if we preserve these ancient trees. Thank you. JB |
| EM-191 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 10/9/2007 14:46:05 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:45 PM -----
"John Weatherman" <weatherman@whoever.com> 10/05/2007 05:48 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear Mr Hoffmeister , I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration would place half of the public land that the BLM manages – and most of our best old-growth BLM forests – in “Timber Management Areas” to be clearcut every 80 years. The Bush Administration’s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon’s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 mile of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas – all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation’s ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon’s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, John Weatherman -- Want an e-mail address like mine? Get a free e-mail account today at www.mail.com! |
| EM-192 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Don't log old growth | 10/9/2007 14:49:20 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:49 PM -----
"Tara N. Mulski" <goldstar007@mac.com> 10/04/2007 02:43 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Don't log old growth Dear Bureau of Land Management, Please do not allow any increase of the amount of logging allowed on federal land; in our nations forests and old grown forests. Here is a list of reasons I oppose any increase or change in the current amount of logging allowed in federally managed forests: IT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE The logging levels called for in the WOPR are not sustainable. Cutting down 700% more old growth when we have so little left will leave us with zero ancient trees in a few years. THERE IS A BETTER WAY FORWARD Many areas that have been logged in the past are now overgrown and ready to be cut. By practicing restorative thinning in these areas, we can meet the demand for timber, provide an influx of money to rural counties and reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire. All of this without cutting down trees that were already giants when Lewis and Clark first came to Oregon. INSUFFICIENT HABITAT PROTECTION The BLM plan does not adequately take into account protections provided by the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Streamside logging buffers are reduced in a way that would harm water quality in streams where salmon spawn. In addition, habitat for owls and the marbled murrelet would be negatively impacted by clear-cut logging. In the Northwest Forest Plan, scientists concluded that endangered wildlife cannot be protected without adequate safeguards for old growth forests on BLM lands. HEALTHY WATERSHED BLM lands also protect water quality for communities’ drinking water. Diminished protection on these lands will affect the drinking water quality for the citizens of Salem, Albany, Corvallis, Eugene, and Roseburg, among others. Many rural residents rely on springs that originate on BLM lands. If these watersheds are not protected, their water supplies could be polluted or interrupted. THE CONTROVERSY The WOPR came as the result of a sweetheart deal between the Bush administration and the logging industry. It is a stark departure from the balanced approach of the Northwest Forest Plan. A plan to clear-cut our forest heritage is a plan that is sure to be met with controversy and skepticism. Re-opening the wounds of the 1980s timber wars won't solve anything. THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS Many businesses rely on healthy rivers, fish populations, hiking opportunities and work in the woods. The commercial fishing industry depends on high quality salmon habitat. Cottage industries that harvest tree boughs for wreath making, collect commercial mushrooms, or take visitors rafting, fishing or hiking flourish on public forests in western Oregon. Responsible thinning of tree plantations and fuels reduction in fire prone forests are important economic activities. HIGHER PROPERTY VALUES Property values in western Oregon are diminished by logging the surrounding beautiful forests, or by subjecting a property’s water source to logging, herbicides, or ammonia-based fertilizers. QUALITY OF LIFE Healthy, standing forests provide a priceless living environment. Healthy, protected forests are one of the most important natural assets that Oregon’s economy is based on. More logging on BLM lands diminish Oregon’s quality of life and will reduce property values for those living near these lands. Public lands are where people go to find solitude, to walk their dogs, to hike, to hunt, and for children to explore and learn about nature. GLOBAL WARMING Old-growth forests have been identified as an invaluable source for storing carbon. Healthy large trees help to keep carbon pollution out of the air and in their trunks and soil. As climate change becomes an increasing concern, the role of old growth in mitigating global warming is essential. LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF RURAL COUNTIES It is true that timber-dependent counties are struggling to provide services due to lagging budgets. However, forward-looking county commissioners like Dave Toler of Jospehine County and Pete Sorenson of Lane County realize that logging old-growth isn't a long term solution. Cutting down all of the big trees will put us right back in the same place a few years from now. Thank you, Tara Mulski Los Angeles, CA 90066 |
| EM-193 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: WOPR | 10/9/2007 15:03:41 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:41 PM -----
"Stephen Anderson" <hops@mcsi.net> 10/06/2007 10:27 AM To <Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov> cc Subject WOPR Dear Mr. Hoffmeister, Here we go again. I've lost track of the number of times I and the general public have asked the BLM to save the old growth forests and concentrate on thinning plantations and second growth forests. And now the BLM proposes to increase old growth cutting by 700% in the next decade? Anyone can see this is way too extreme. In fact the whole WOPR is too extreme. I live along the Umpqua River and can only imagine the detrimental affect this plan would have on the fish and river, wildlife, local environment, and my quality of life. The WOPR goes against logic, science, and the current law. Please reconsider this insane proposal. Sincerely Stephen Anderson 450 Edjon Ln. Oakland, OR 97462 |
| EM-194 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/9/2007 15:04:10 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/09/2007 02:45 PM -----
james wilhelm <rowanmorningstar@gmail.com> 10/03/2007 09:51 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, James Wilhelm; 6020 Bellsprings rd.; garberville CA 95542 YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS |
| EM-195 | "Cindy OeDell" <cindy.oedell@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/9/2007 15:55:22 | Cindy OeDell
29655 S. Molalla Avenue Molalla, OR 97038-9404 October 9, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Cindy OeDell 503-759-2041 |
| EM-196 | "Robert Smith" <bob.smith@intrfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/9/2007 16:30:48 | Robert Smith
11578 s finnegans way Oregon City, OR 97045-9770 October 9, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating Atving and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Robert L Smith 503-803-8310 |
| EM-197 | "Herb Nash" <herb.nash@charter.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/10/2007 5:56:15 | Herb Nash
1706 NE Shale Ct Roseburg, OR 97470-5751 October 10, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Herb H Nash 541-580-1491 |
| EM-198 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/10/2007 11:46:39 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Michelle LeJeune 2519 Kincaid Eugene, OR 97405 shel31337@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-199 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/10/2007 11:47:40 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. none of the best scientific evidence available purports that the measures proposed in the wopr plan are ecologically viable, NOR are the economic justifications for such a plan great enough to log LSRs or the last remaining migratory corridor's in western oregon Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, nicholas willard withrow 198 north river road cottage grove oregon backcountry_bum@riseup.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-200 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/10/2007 11:48:20 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, faye primka 1644 ash ave. cottage grove, or.97424 faye@earthclick.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-201 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/10/2007 11:49:35 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
Please retain all our old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. This is very very important and it is quite in keeping with the BLM's job. Since so few old-growth forests remain, we must protect them. I want my grandchildren to be able to experience them. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Keep our older forests on our public lands unlogged and fully available for us. Sincerely, Lisa Roehrich 2780 Potter St. Eugene, OR 97405 -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-202 | "Merridy Cross" <xxcross@apbb.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/11/2007 7:49:22 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. I live in the beautiful Williams Valley and worry that my quality of life will be adversely affected by WOPR. We are surrounded by the Siskiyous and BLM lands and are concerned about our watershed. Please do not increase logging in this area. Once the forests are gone they are gone forever. Sincerely, Merridy K. Cross 205 Holmstead Road Williams OR 97544 |
| EM-203 | "Donna Svoboda" <dmsvoboda@dmci.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/11/2007 8:31:47 |
I strongly disagree with and am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. For many reasons, including global climate, these forests should be protected to the utmost, not used for monetary gain. How sad that it has come down to this. Protect these forest for your grandchildren's grandchildren future. Sincerely, Donna M. Svoboda 34194 Meyer Rd, Cottage Grove, Or 97424 541-942-8044 |
| EM-204 | "Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net> | RE: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/11/2007 9:11:39 | Alan,
Here is the website http://www.citizensforforests.org/ It is under “Take Action.” This is our website http://www.amforest.org/ It is under “Call to Action” Ross Mickey AFRC From:Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov [mailto:Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov] On Behalf Of orwopr@blm.gov Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 11:05 AM To: Ross Mickey Subject: Re: BLM Western OregonPlan Revision Ross: We're getting quite a few of these e-mail form letters. Just out of curiosity, can you tell me which web site is generating them? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R. Alan Hoffmeister Bureau of Land Management Communications - Public Involvement Western OregonPlan Revisions Project http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr alan_hoffmeister@or.blm.gov Phone: 503-808-6629 "Ross Mickey" <rossmickey@comcast.net> 10/08/2007 09:48 AM To "Edward Shepard" <orwopr@or.blm.gov> cc Subject BLM Western OregonPlan Revision Ross Mickey 2977 Ingalls way Eugene, OR97405-6305 October 8, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the SecureRuralSchoolsand Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ross Mickey |
| EM-205 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: | 10/11/2007 11:40:08 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/11/2007 11:39 AM -----
Information Washington/WO/BLM/DOI Sent by: Peggy S Britell 10/11/2007 11:31 AM To "debraporta@netzero.net" <debraporta@netzero.net> cc Subject Re: Link Your comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revision have been forwarded to our Oregon State Office. "debraporta@netzero.net" <debraporta@netzero.net> 10/08/2007 04:08 PM To woinfo@blm.gov cc Subject Hello, I am writing you today to register my concerns and opposition to plans for the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon’s old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. The Northwest Forest Plan's protections should remain in place for BLM lands, not sacrificed in an out-of-court deal between the timber industry and the White House. Oregon ancient forests deserve permanent protection and should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in forest restoration, fire safety and tourism. Ancient forests in Oregon also serve as an important carbon storage and sequestration resource to help mitigate global warming. The BLM's plans for increased logging in these ancient forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revision will take America backwards in efforts to prevent global climate change. Clearcutting and damage to soils from logging has been shown to release tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, while old forests absorb and store carbon dioxide. I am concerned that the changes the BLM has proposed in its Western Oregon Plan Revision will lead to the loss of Oregon's irreplaceable ancient forests, water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, who would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy. Thank you. Debra Porta I SUPPORT JOHN EDWARDS FOR PRESIDENT http://johnedwards.com/ and JEFF MERKLEY FOR U.S. SENATOR http://www.jeffmerkley.com/ My page..http://notawellbehavedwoman.blogspot.com/ |
| EM-206 | "Ted Magnuson" <t.magnuson@verizon.net> | Western Oregon Revision Plan | 10/11/2007 23:13:30 | Ladies and Gentlemen-
Please do not activate the above named plan as currently outlined. We do not need a seven-fold increase in the ‘harvest’ of ancient forests. To do so would jeopardize the protection of rivers, streams, and clean water. It is time to recognize that the pace of logging that has been in effect over the past 30-50 years is not sustainable. What we would basically doing should this continue is to rob future generations of something precious. Do we really need to ‘pave paradise and put up a parking lot?’ There is beauty, majesty, and a spiritual value to maintaining lands where man is a visitor. Thank you for your attention to the legacy we leave to those who come behind us in the continuing story of democracy and justice. CC Senator Wyden Congressman Wu President George Bush Governor Ted Kulongoski Ted Magnuson t.magnuson@verizon.net Those Self Evident Truths now available at: http://cdbaby.com/cd/tedmagnuson www.tedmagnuson.com www.myspace.com/tedmag 503 590 7998 |
| EM-207 | "Lynn Ransford" <lransford@mtashland.net> | Please do not log ancient, old growth forests! | 10/12/2007 10:22:15 | Dear BLM,
Already, we have "harvested" over 80% of our old growth forests. Please, no more! We can never replace these forests, and while we attempt to re-plant, we deprive generations of children, numerous animal species, and our quickly warming environment of valuable, irreplacable resources. We need those 200 year-old trees to protect our atmosphere, our air quality, climate, recreational opportunities, fish and wild life, water... As a professional educator of young children and their teachers, I beg you to reconsider your WOPR plan. It is so clear that we are attempting to do what we criticize other nations with rapidly depleting rain forests of doing. We, like they, are being very short-sighted, ruining our future world, while concentrating on old solutions for what we define as immediate needs. Money from harvesting can be gleaned from other means. Nation-wide, we need to look at old growth forests, continue to protect what little we have not already destroyed, and designate other, previously cut or newer forests as "harvestable." We need to re-examine our re-planting attempts. I have seen for myself how futile many of these attempts have been. Planting little trees in areas that have eroded, as a result of clear-cutting, means that those trees do not survive--they do not have enough rich topsoil left, they are unprotected without larger trees, and their lack of diversity means that they compete and do not support one another. If we plot forest lands (not old-growth ones) on a 30 year cycle program, for instance, we could cut one batch of forests a year (and replant them), while 29 other batches of forests are growing, each one to mature each year. We can continue to replace our resources in a manner like this, without destroying those lands and old growth trees that will never be able to be replaced and that will continue to compromise our national (and world) environment. Please do not move ahead with plans that are very much like and as unwise as those we see being carried out in South American and Indonesian countries. We should know better! Sincerely, Lynn Ransford, M.A. Professor of Education |
| EM-208 | "Ed Tergeson" <vikingjet@aol.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 12:48:19 | Ed Tergeson
27533 Hwy 392 Gill, CO 80624-9333 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Ed Tergeson |
| EM-209 | "Erica Rhoad" <erhoad@dc.bjllp.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 12:50:23 | Erica Rhoad
1813 Monroe Street NW Washington, DC 20010-1014 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Erica Rhoad |
| EM-210 | "Judi Tergeson" <clareunion@aol.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 12:51:50 | Judi Tergeson
27533 HWY 392 Gill, CO 80624-9333 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Judi Tergeson |
| EM-211 | "Robert Rhoad" <rrhoad@crowel.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 12:55:47 | Robert Rhoad
1813 Monroe Street NW Washington, DC 20010-1014 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Robert Rhoad |
| EM-212 | "Brandi Graham Pensoneau" <bgraham@nrahq.org> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 13:20:55 | Brandi Graham Pensoneau
410 First Street, SE Washington, DC 20003-1819 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Brandi Graham Pensoneau 202-651-2581 |
| EM-213 | "Robert Graham" <beancounter7247@aol.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 13:46:47 | Robert Graham
5828 W. Atlantic Place Lakewood, CO 80227-2540 October 12, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. THIS IS, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT> In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Robert T. Graham 303-516-7095 |
| EM-214 | "Schramm, Richard : CO IR" <RSchramm@LHS.ORG> | My comments on the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/12/2007 16:25:58 | To whom it may concern at the BLM:
Please include these as my comments in the public record concerning the BLM's WOPR. I object to the proposed the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision and its emphasis on increased logging of our ancient forests. The WOPR's emphasis on clearcutting in old-growth forests, as well as its reduction in the protections for salmon-bearing rivers and streams is unwise, in my opinion. Instead, I favor sticking with the original Northwest Forest Plan's protections for these ancient forests and its protections for salmon-bearing rivers and streams. Why the BLM is trying to change the Northwest Forest Plan after so much work went into its design is beyond me. I feel that the increased logging of what little old-growth timber remains in Oregon will cause increased fire danger, threaten water quality due to erosion, and further endanger those species depending upon Oregon's old-growth forests. Please do all that you can to stop the implementation of the current, proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision by the BLM. Thank you for considering my thoughts on this important matter. Richard Schramm 3024 N.E. Bryce Portland, OR 97212 IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should contact the sender and delete the message. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. |
| EM-215 | "alice pueschner" <paljack@comcast.net> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/12/2007 23:51:17 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. There are so many reasons to stop this ill-conceived plan. Please heed the voices of Oregonians and stop this at once. Sincerely, Alice Pueschner 1512 Barber Dr. Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-216 | Jerry Harris <oregonjerry@yahoo.com> | WOPR adoption | 10/13/2007 10:30:20 | To Whom It May Concern:
I am opposed to adoption of the WOPR. It depletes the remaining ancient forests in our state and compromises salmon runs and clean water. I will increase fire risk and will have a negative impact on global warming. Please do not proceed with the WOPR. Thank you. Jerry Harris oregonjerry@gmail.com Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos. |
| EM-217 | "Leon Posey" <leon.posey@intrfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/13/2007 11:06:41 | Leon Posey
15555 s hwy 211 molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 13, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Leon F Posey 503-329-6548 |
| EM-218 | "ann blaker" <a.blaker@comcast.net> | Western Oregon Plan Revision - objection | 10/13/2007 14:05:24 | To: The Bureau of Land Management
I am writing in objection to the "Western Oregon Plan Revision". There are absolutely no redeeming qualities to this revision and it would result in the devastation of ancient forests - trees 200 years and older. I understand that the BLM is aware that it will open up currently protected streamside forests and ancient forest reserves to clearcutting. As the daughter of someone who worked within the logging industry, I am of the opinion that as a society, we must adjust to the concept of wood/timber production as crops on private land set aside for "farming", rather than cutting any additional old growth or irreplacable ancient trees on public lands. Besides losing the ancient forest environment forever, the impact on streams and rivers is inexcusable. We know better. There is no place for clearcutting in our current environment. The 1000 miles of new logging roads required to care out this plan will be destructive, in and of themselves. Please take my comments into consideration. Thank you. Ann Blaker Capacity Builders 503-771-3563 a.blaker@comcast.net |
| EM-219 | "ann blaker" <a.blaker@comcast.net> | Western Oregon Plan Revision - objection | 10/13/2007 14:09:14 | To: The Bureau of Land Management
I am writing in objection to the "Western Oregon Plan Revision". There are absolutely no redeeming qualities to this revision and it would result in the devastation of ancient forests - trees 200 years and older. I understand that the BLM is aware that it will open up currently protected streamside forests and ancient forest reserves to clearcutting. As the daughter of someone who worked within the logging industry, I am of the opinion that as a society, we must adjust to the concept of wood/timber production as crops on private land set aside for "farming", rather than cutting any additional old growth or irreplacable ancient trees on public lands. Besides losing the ancient forest environment forever, the impact on streams and rivers is inexcusable. We know better. There is no place for clearcutting in our current environment. The 1000 miles of new logging roads required to care out this plan will be destructive, in and of themselves. Please take my comments into consideration. Thank you. Ann Blaker Capacity Builders 503-771-3563 a.blaker@comcast.net |
| EM-220 | b.cade@comcast.net | 10/13/2007 14:37:38 | Please do what is necessary to portect, permanently, ancient forests and other public lands
from the Bush administration's plans. I do not want the flora and fauna, water and other natural resources harmed/destroyed/depleted. Thank you. |
|
| EM-221 | Jesse Elliott <jonsey3@yahoo.com> | wopr | 10/13/2007 21:02:28 | Regarding the Western Oregon Plan Revision I want to
submit my strong opinion that we must not cut our ancient forests down. This will not help any of us in the long run: not the environment, not the economy (think of future tourism when all we have is tree farms instead of forests), and certainly not the wildlife that depend on the forests. Please consider the recommendation of myself and almost everyone that I know (primarily long-term Oregonians) in vowing to prevent the destruction of our diverse ancient forests and thereby the defeat of the WOPR. Sincerely, Jesse Elliott Political history is largely an account of mass violence and of the expenditure of vast resources to cope with mythical fears and hopes. -Murray Edelman ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC |
| EM-222 | "Linda Kluver" <lkkpdx055@comcast.net> | ancient forests | 10/14/2007 12:22:52 | Please protect these sacred areas that are not replaceable! Treat the Earth well: it was not given to you by your parents,it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - Ancient Indian Proverb |
| EM-223 | "Pam Myers" <pammyers@freedomnw.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/14/2007 12:27:48 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS Pamela Myers P. O. Box 1427 Cannon Beach, Or 97110 |
| EM-224 | "JOHN SWEDO" <threejsswedo@msn.com> | WOPR | 10/14/2007 21:26:19 | Dear sir or madam,
I am writing this email to object to the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision. I am concerned about the danger to watersheds and ancient/older forests. I enjoy the forests for recreation benefit and do not want more roads and clearcutting in the forests of my state. I would like these older forest areas to be permanently protected. The surrounding communities could then begin to benefit economically from planned recreational tourism. Thank you, Jana Swedo 2228 13th Ave. Forest Grove, OR 97116 |
| EM-225 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/15/2007 9:14:33 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Chris Potter 1230 Ferry Street Apt. 4 Eugene, OR 97401 cpotter1@uoregon.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-226 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/15/2007 9:15:41 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Catherine Hood-Foster 8121 sw 62nd place Portland, OR, 97219 cathoodf@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-227 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/15/2007 9:16:20 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Kristina Stewart 6459 Vooscane Ave Cochiti Lake, NM 87083 miss-kris@earthlink.net -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-228 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/15/2007 9:17:16 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Erik Norris 730 Cathedral Dr. Coupeville, Wa. 98239 enorrris33@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-229 | "Tom Woxell" <tbow40@msn.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 9:59:58 | Please do not allow implementation of the Western Oregon Plan Revision which will clearcut thousands of acres thus destroying our forests, the watershed, recreational areas and adversely impact global warming.
Sincerely, Tom Woxell Eugene, Oregon |
| EM-230 | "James Hunt" <jimh@sgsc.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:07:55 | James Hunt
PO Box 1779 Grants Pass, OR 97528-0216 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, James Hunt 541-956-4300 |
| EM-231 | "H. DEAH HAGUE JR" <dean.hague@swansongroup.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:13:10 | H. DEAH HAGUE JR
27942 SPENCER CR RD EUGENE, OR 97405 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, H. DEAN HAGUE JR 541 686 3009 |
| EM-232 | "Samantha Cline" <samantha.cline@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:16:49 | Samantha Cline
163 Cline Ranch Lane Glendale, OR 97442-9732 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Samantha A. Cline 541-659-9347 |
| EM-233 | "Greg Johnson" <greg.johnson@swansongroup.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:17:17 | Greg Johnson
141 Admiral Circle Merlin, OR 97532-8747 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Greg Johnson 5414746055 |
| EM-234 | "Nicole Gallego" <nicole.gallego@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:17:18 | Nicole Gallego
PO Box 662 Glendale, OR 97442-0662 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nicole Gallego 541-660-0430 |
| EM-235 | "Michael Rudy" <mike.rudy@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:20:08 | Michael Rudy
1651 S. F st Springfield, OR 97477-5251 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Michael L Rudy Jr 541-762-3306 |
| EM-236 | "Rachelle Denys Hallock" <denys.hallock@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:20:09 | Rachelle Denys Hallock
1875 McCullough Creek Road Glendale, OR 97442-9700 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Rachelle Denys Hallock 541-932-1254 |
| EM-237 | "Michael Brinkmeyer" <mike.brinkmeyer@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:20:20 | Michael Brinkmeyer
3885 N. Clarey Eugene, OR 97402-9785 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Michael Brinkmeyer |
| EM-238 | "Bob Maurer" <bob.maurer@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:21:01 | Bob Maurer
965 NW Cooke Ave Grants Pass, OR 97526-6339 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Bob Maurer 541-660-8372 |
| EM-239 | "Andrew Eck" <andy.eck@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:24:47 | Andrew Eck
2110 Sunburst Ct. #1 Medford, OR 97504-4897 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. As an environmentalist, a veteran wildland firefighter, and a wellness coordinator for a local timber company I believe that my statements below speak for many as our forests are very important to all of my fellow Oregonians. I thank you for reading this and please feel free to contact me with any questions. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Andrew Eck |
| EM-240 | "Alyssha Swanson" <alysshas@gmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:28:37 | Alyssha Swanson
4905 SE 104th Avenue Portland, OR 97266-3509 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Alyssha Swanson |
| EM-241 | "Richard Baldwin" <dick.baldwin@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:34:20 | Richard Baldwin
837 Golden Park Dr Grants Pass, OR 97527-4783 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Richard Baldwin 541-476-6457 |
| EM-242 | "John VanWinkle" <john.vanwinkle@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:35:02 | John VanWinkle
PO Box 250 Glendale, OR 97442-0250 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Due to the loss of O&C funds, the Douglas County OSU extension service has lost county funding for their operations. The 4-H program, master gardeners, and other programs provided by the extension service are vital to Douglas County and important to many community members. Restoration of timber revenue equal to the funding through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act is critical to the funding of these and other programs. Timber supply from these lands would also be of great benefit to our local wood products manufacturing facilities and the employees that work in them. High log prices due to low supply continue to threaten the viability of the timber industry and the family-wage jobs they provide. Thank you for your consideration. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John VanWinkle (541) 832-1662 |
| EM-243 | "Chris Swanson" <chris.swanson@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:35:29 | Chris Swanson
1032 harris hill drive Roseburg, OR 97470-6807 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Chris Swanson |
| EM-244 | "Scott Pedersen" <kspeders@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:37:12 | Scott Pedersen
PO Box 459 Noti, OR 97461-0459 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Scott Pedersen |
| EM-245 | "larry rogers" <larry.rogers@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:42:28 | larry rogers
35150 pashal place wildomar, CA 92595-9515 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, larry rogers 951-316-0621 |
| EM-246 | "John Stembridge" <john.stembridge@swansongroupinc.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 10:47:23 | John Stembridge
PO Box 1779 Grants Pass, OR 97528-0216 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Stembridge 541-956-4300 |
| EM-247 | Clay Spencer <yalc97207@yahoo.com> | BLM's "Western Oregon Plan Revision" (WOPR) | 10/15/2007 10:49:18 | Dear BLM:
Although there is a little more than a year left for George W. Bush's occupancy of the White House, there's still plenty of time for him to create some serious mischief. A noted piece of his chicanery is the recently proposed "Western Oregon Plan Revision" (WOPR) that would allow massive clear-cutting of ancient forests on BLM land in Oregon. Please do not permit the passage of the WOPR. We must preserve what little remains of Oregon's (and all of America's) ancient forests. Sincerely, Clay Spencer PO Box 592 Portland, OR 97207 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 |
| EM-248 | "PATRICK CALLAHAN" <pat.callahan@swansongroup.inc> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:02:41 | PATRICK CALLAHAN
1043 quartz ave medford, OR 97501-8149 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, PATRICK CALLAHAN 541-420-1566 |
| EM-249 | "Anthony Flagor" <tony.flagor@charter.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:15:42 | Anthony Flagor
1072 Harris Hills Roseburg, OR 97470-6807 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Land Management is truly at the essence of long term success for the timber industry and the country as a whole. Timber harvesting is at the root of that success and legitimate timber industry follow all guidelines in preserving legally mandate harvesting practices. As a person of choice, I chose to allow the legal harvesting of timber for the socioeconomic stability of Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Timber Harvesting has been defaced through negative propaganda cam and the quite majority is ready to speak. Thank you for your consideration. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Anthony Flagor 541-430-0031 |
| EM-250 | "John Vogan" <flyingvog@aol.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:31:41 | John Vogan
1186 Westerly Ct Grants Pass, OR 97527-5817 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Vogan |
| EM-251 | "Gene Landolt" <gk_landolt@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:32:41 | Gene Landolt
P.O.B. 441 winston, OR 97496-0441 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Mr. Shepard The above boiler plate comments express my concerns more eloquently than I can imagine, please take them seriously. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Gene H. Landolt 541-679-4482 |
| EM-252 | "Elmer Miller" <elmer.miller@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:34:34 | Elmer Miller
2183 N.E. Vine Street Roseburg, OR 97470-5623 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Elmer B. Miller (541)440-2122 |
| EM-253 | "Heath Grafton" <heath.grafton@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:41:16 | Heath Grafton
709 Pierce Rd Medford, OR 97504-6340 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Heath Grafton |
| EM-254 | "Riley Fogarty" <riley.fogarty@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:49:52 | Riley Fogarty
PO Box 827 Glendale, OR 97442-0827 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Hi, My name is Riley Fogarty. I have a B.S. in Forest Engineering from Oregon State University. I graduated 4 years ago and am currently the Southern Region Cruiser for Swanson Group MFG. I am living in Glendale OR and spend part of my working year looking at BLM Timber Sales. With the large amount of timbered acres managed by the BLM it is baffling to me why the entire forest is not put on a sustained rotation in order to maximize timber growth and yield. This could easily be done with a combination of thinning and clear cuts. If the entire forest managed by the BLM was actually managed for timber, the diversity in forest age characteristics would provide more than adequetly for all types of species. By using 100% of BLM timbered lands for timber harvest it would alow fewer entries over longer rotation times. This would also alow a great increase in yearly allowable harvest and more timber sales, which keeps me working and paying taxes. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Riley Fogarty 541-890-1479 |
| EM-255 | "Michael Curran" <mcurran@superiorlumber.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 11:52:09 | Michael Curran
1200 SE Casey Place Grants Pass, OR 97526-4150 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Mr. Shepard, I felt the need to address the BLM's proposals as they are critical to my employement and my rural communitie's future. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. I spend a great deal of time in the woods of Southern Oregon and have been involved in all aspects of the Industry. We should not let the voice of a few radical enviros and liberal congressmen steer us away from the original plan. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Michael Curran 541-479-4680 |
| EM-256 | Ralph Parsons <rljeparsons@yahoo.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/15/2007 12:33:19 | I am very much against the Western Oregon Plan Revision for timber management that the Bureau of Land Management is moving forward. Our ancient forests are healthy forests, alive with indigenous plants and animals, a wonderful environment and clean water. You can be sure that if pressure from the Bush Administration is part of the problem, those people will be gone with the next election.
What makes us so arrogant that we would ruin the chance of animals, plants and our progeny to live? Issues important to me are: 1. Controlling clear cutting; stopping cutting of the few remaining ancient forests at once! 2. Protection of rivers, streams, watersheds, providing clean water. 3. Handing a legacy of nature to our progeny and that of plants and other animals. 4. Controlling fire damage and disease that are less prevalent in ancient forests. 5. Preventing the incredable damage that logging roads encourage in forest habitat. 6. Finally, the future demands that we control global warming. Clearcutting and road building are major CO2 releasers. Please drop plans to increase logging immediately. Respectfully yours, Ralph L. Parsons 12015 SW Faircrest St. Portland, Oregon 97225 concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Ralph Parsons 12015 SW Faircrest St. Portland OR 97225 |
| EM-257 | "Vickie Linderman" <vickiel@douglasfast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 13:29:26 | Vickie Linderman
1550 Westview Roseburg, OR 97470-8635 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Vickie Linderman 541-672-8501 |
| EM-258 | "Greg Standley" <gregstandley@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 13:43:13 | Greg Standley
4920 upper camas rd. camas valley, OR 97416 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Greg Standley 541-430-0479 |
| EM-259 | "Pat Dodge" <pat.dodge@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 13:47:23 | Pat Dodge
21411 Vaughn Rd. Veneta, OR 97487-9419 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. I have lived in the northwest my entire life. Montana, Washington and now Oregon. I believe in Multi-Purpose forest planning. I expect our state and federal land managers to rely on science rather than yeilding to pressure of emotional and uninformed groups whether they are "environmental zealots" or "timber barons". Do the job you have been trained to do and stand behind those decisions, that is what we have hired you to do. with respect, Pat Dodge In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Pat Dodge Pat Dodge 541-935-0852 |
| EM-260 | "Jeremy Marshall" <jmarshall2@comcast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 14:07:18 | Jeremy Marshall
3417 SE Midvale Dr. Corvallis, OR 97333-3195 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jeremy D. Marshall 541-829-3593 |
| EM-261 | "Eric Adams" <ric.adams@terraintamers.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 14:14:17 | Eric Adams
34854 Perkins Creek Road Cottage Grove, OR 97424-9450 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Eric P. Adams 5419429869 |
| EM-262 | "Frank Peterson" <frankpetersonhouse@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 15:06:18 | Frank Peterson
201 Eagle Ridge Dr GRANTS PASS, OR 97526-9661 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Frank Peterson 1-541-956-1369 |
| EM-263 | "ANDY RICHARDSON" <andy.richardson@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 15:13:44 | ANDY RICHARDSON
977 GARDEN SPRINGS CIRCLE MEDFORD, OR 97504-6460 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, ANDY RICHARDSON 973-3266 |
| EM-264 | "George Hewitt" <george.hewitt@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 15:15:11 | George Hewitt
3271 larue drive medford, OR 97504-5702 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, George Hewitt 541-734-5753 |
| EM-265 | "Nancy Daniels" <nancy.daniels@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 15:26:31 | Nancy Daniels
1500 N. W. "B" st Grants Pass, OR 97526-1124 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. My family, father, father-in-law, husband and myself have been employed in the lumber industry for many years. I am now still employed as a Salesperson for Swanson Group Sales. This industry is very important to the economy of our City, County & State. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nancy Daniels 541-479-5952 |
| EM-266 | "Chuck Burley" <chuck@burleyandassociates.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/15/2007 19:33:13 | Chuck Burley
131 NW Hawthorne Ave., Suite 108 Bend, OR 97701-2957 October 15, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Chuck Burley |
| EM-267 | "Elisabeth Stanek" <stanratt@easystreet.net> | Western OregonPlan Revison | 10/15/2007 21:50:05 | Dear Senators, Representative, and Governor,
The Bush Administration "Western Oregon Plan Revison" is a disaster. It would drastically increase cutting of old growth forest and eliminate protections for rivers, streams and clean water. All other uses would be subservient to the economics of timber production, meaning the value of protection of watersheds and stream flows, fishing and recreation opportunities and associated economic acitivity would be ignored entirely. This is in clear contradiction to the current understanding of the impact of global warming and it's causes and consequences, as well as creating negative outcomes for the state of Oregon in terms of fire risk and overall ecological well-being. I urge you to speak out for permanent protection of ancient forests and other public lands. Stop the threat to ancient forests, clean water and wild salmon. Please use Congress' "power of the purse" to prevent the administration from sepnding money to log ancient forests, and stop the BLM from selling off the forest, and stand up to the Bush administration to prevent them from logging Oregon's ancient forests, threatening clean water and wild salmon. Elizabeth Stanek 105 SW Brugger St Portland, Oregon 97219 |
| EM-268 | DNewlyn@aol.com | Forest | 10/15/2007 22:58:50 | October 15, 2007
Please protect the last remaining old forest, affected watersheds, and other public lands. Timber production is not paramount, global warming, sustainable harvesting, and state economics are. Rein in Bush and his administration; reject “ Western Oregon Plan Revision” Regards, David A. Newlyn 2014 NE 37th Ave Portland, Oregon dnewlyn@aol.com ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com |
| EM-269 | sara fischer <holyfirebug734@yahoo.com> | Please stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/16/2007 1:29:53 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Sara Fischer Native Southern-Oregonian, and student of Willamette University Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! |
| EM-270 | "James Dean" <jim.dean@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 6:00:29 | James Dean
1308 George Tweed Blvd Grants Pass, OR 97527-6400 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, James Dean |
| EM-271 | "Loren Olsen" <loren.olsen@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 7:24:25 | Loren Olsen
8354 Coos Bay Wagon Road Roseburg, OR 97470-9711 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. We continue to let bad policy and science with scare tactics lead us into financial crisis. Our local governments are struggling because we have allowed the enviro-wacos too much clout concerning our forests. When did it become "good science" to raise endangered species in captivity and then release them into disputed areas just to shut those areas down to management? I have seen the USFS grow rooms for the feed (mice)for "endangered" owls in Oakridge and have had contact with some of the hand raised birds in the wild. Our communities are in need of long term continued support and we have the resources available to give that support if we allow our lands to be properly managed. It is time to quit with the lies and manipulations and move forward with good management according to good science and allow our lands to be opened back up. Our communities and most importantly our schools need the additional funding that forest management provides. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Loren Olsen 541-733-6245 |
| EM-272 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: WOPR | 10/16/2007 8:02:55 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:02 AM -----
"robert thompson" <mckarob@earthlink.net> 10/12/2007 01:35 PM Please respond to mckarob@earthlink.net To alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject WOPR Dear BLM, It has come to my attention that under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions, protections of the Northwest Forest Plan would be severly compromised. To clearcut our best old-growth forests and build 1,000 miles of new logging roads is deplorable. It appears BLM is stepping backward to a bygone era when timber production took precedence above all else, including water quality, recreation and sustainable local economies. The WOPR ignores the role that our forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire, and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Our forests should not be used for an economic fix! I'm also concerned that the "quiet-type" recreation will take a back seat to OHV use when the preferred alternative disignates new Emphasis Areas. We have seen first hand the damage that can be caused by irresponsibl! e riders! I know you have all been schooled in Science and know the benefits of proper management. Stand up to the administration and express what you KNOW is the right way to manage our unique environment. Thanks for listening, Karen Mitchell (Applegate Valley) |
| EM-273 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/16/2007 8:06:22 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:06 AM -----
Liz Vesecky <eVesecky@charter.net> 10/14/2007 12:41 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Liz Vesecky 791 Faith Avenue Ashland, OR 97520 |
| EM-274 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/16/2007 8:14:40 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:03 AM -----
Michael Brown <miguelcafe@mac.com> 10/12/2007 02:40 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Michael D Brown 2850 Warren St Eugene, OR 97405 |
| EM-275 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/16/2007 8:14:55 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/16/2007 08:12 AM -----
Kenneth and Leanne Palmer <freedonia7@earthlink.net> 10/15/2007 02:26 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I, Kenneth Palmer, heartily support all groups that defend old growth forests in the US. I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Kenneth Palmer (503) 246-4629 freedonia7@earthlink.net |
| EM-276 | Jim Bender <oregonian99@yahoo.com> | WOPR | 10/16/2007 11:09:46 | Dear Friends,
I am opposed to the Western Oregon Plan Revision and the increased clearcutting of old growth forests and decreased protections for salmon-bearing creeks and streams it would allow. Please enter this email into the public comment on WOPR. Thank you! James Bender 10192 Kestrel Road Klamath Falls, OR 97601-8652 Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. |
| EM-277 | Josh Cott <joshcott@yahoo.com> | Please stop WOPR | 10/16/2007 13:29:07 | Hello,
I live in the Rogue Valley in southern Oregon, and I am opposed to the Western Oregon Plan Revision. Oregon needs to move forward towards a new economy, not perpetuate one which is supported by unsustainable harvesting of old growth trees. If we move forward with this plan, we will end up right back where we are now in another 20 years, only then we'll have permanently changed our environment for the worse--not a very forward thinking plan! We deserve better from the BLM. Please reconsider or stop this plan. Sincerely, Josh Cott ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 |
| EM-278 | "Kenneth Kent" <ken.kent@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 14:33:55 | Kenneth Kent
P.O. Box 151 Glendale, OR 97442-0151 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Kenneth Kent 5418321191 |
| EM-279 | "Mike Stewart" <mike.stewart@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 14:36:55 | Mike Stewart
POBox 702 Roseburg, OR 97470-0144 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mike Stewart |
| EM-280 | "Mike Stewart" <mike.stewart@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 14:41:33 | Mike Stewart
POBox 702 Roseburg, OR 97470-0144 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mike Stewart |
| EM-281 | joe car <newjoestonefree@yahoo.com> | WOPR comment | 10/16/2007 14:43:51 | Hello,
As an Oregon resident who loves natural beauty and a healthy environment I must express my strong disapproval of the attempt by the Bush Administration to log our last old growth forests and destroy our clean water in the proposed Western Oregon Plan Revision. We simply cannot endure the devastating impact this logging above all other concerns mentality will have on our great state. The health of our ecosystem hangs in the balance. Ancient forests are not replaceable. I thank you for your consideration and hope we can reject this outrageous plan and find a sensible alternative. Sincerely, Joseph Cartino 5822 SE Reed way St. Portland, OR 97206 503-788-7387 Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. |
| EM-282 | "John Poore" <john.poore@swansongroup.biz> |
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 14:59:18 | John Poore
P.O. Box 158 Glendale, OR 97442-0158 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. The true stewards of the timberland are those individuals who are impacted either positively or negatively by the actions of so called environmental groups, courts and government agencies. The people who use the forests to make their livleyhood need to have a greater voice in the decisions . In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Poore |
| EM-283 | chris zilka <chriszilka4@yahoo.com> | wopr comment | 10/16/2007 15:15:31 | Dear BLM,
I'm glad to see your asking for comments on the WOPR. Your proposed changes are large and will have long lasting impact on our forests. I think you know this and the BLM can do very good job. But making these radical changes is only leading to a short sighted impact for the future. The money that is generated will only lead to a boom and bust short time gain. We will lose for all time our ancient forests and protections that allow the many other economic activities to go on, not only for people but for the plants and animals that require old growth forests to exist. In this time of global warming we can't point the finger at the people cutting the forest in the S. American rain forest when we are proposing to do the same thing. We should set an example and do everything in our power not to change the NW Forest Plan. But see that the protections provided by the NW Forest Plan are maintained. I reolize there is alot of pressure to make up budget short falls with timber sales. But the changes you propose is not the kind of Oregon that most people want. We have a chance to maintain our forests and there by insuring a jewel of a place that people will pay to see for the future. All Europe has to do is maintain its buildings and people will flock there for ever. We have the same chance with our forests. I know the checker board lay out of the BLM land is difficult to manage. It would simplifie its management to consolidate. But these lands are no longer land that no body wants. Alot of the lands have been left allown, but that is the beauty of the checker board. It keeps that land protected and makes it a valuble asset. Thanks for your consideration of my views Chris Zilka Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. |
| EM-284 | chris zilka <chriszilka4@yahoo.com> | wopr comment | 10/16/2007 15:34:41 | Dear BLM,
I'm glad to see your asking for comments on the WOPR. Your proposed changes are large and will have long lasting impact on our forests. I think you know this and the BLM can do very good job. But making these radical changes is only leading to a short sighted impact for the future. The money that is generated will only lead to a boom and bust short time gain. We will lose for all time our ancient forests and protections that allow the many other economic activities to go on, not only for people but for the plants and animals that require old growth forests to exist. In this time of global warming we can't point the finger at the people cutting the forest in the S. American rain forest when we are proposing to do the same thing. We should set an example and do everything in our power not to change the NW Forest Plan. But see that the protections provided by the NW Forest Plan are maintained. I reolize there is alot of pressure to make up budget short falls with timber sales. But the changes you propose is not the kind of Oregon that most people want. We have a chance to maintain our forests and there by insuring a jewel of a place that people will pay to see for the future. All Europe has to do is maintain its buildings and people will flock there for ever. We have the same chance with our forests. I know the checker board lay out of the BLM land is difficult to manage. It would simplifie its management to consolidate. But these lands are no longer land that no body wants. Alot of the lands have been left allown, but that is the beauty of the checker board. It keeps that land protected and makes it a valuble asset. Thanks for your consideration of my views Chris Zilka 230 Myoak Dr. Eugene, OR 97404 Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. |
| EM-285 | "Donald King" <don.king@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 15:34:55 | Donald King
28809 Clear Lake Rd. Eugene, OR 97402-9502 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Donald King 5416886383 |
| EM-286 | "John Davisson" <johnd@mill-supply.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 16:23:09 | John Davisson
376 Industrial Drive Roseburg, OR 97470-7157 October 16, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John L Davison |
| EM-287 | "L Read" <lr_sayhey@hotmail.com> | Comment on proposed WOPR plan | 10/16/2007 17:40:48 | Bureau Of Land Management
October 16, 2007 Re: Western Oregon Plan Revision To BLM, Abandon the Western Oregon Plan Revision. Any ancient forest logging now being done is a serious problem. To increase current logging of 200 year old trees on 2.6 million acres, a seven-fold increase, is outrageous. We don't need 100's of new logging roads to spread more noxious weeds, more herbicide spraying and soil erosion to degrade more salmon habitat, and more loss of ancient forests. We already have a problem of second and third growth denser forest causing more flammable conditions. The forests should be managed correctly on the lands we already have in "managed timber production". Don't add insult to injury by creating more of the same. The federal national forests and BLM lands already have more than enough managed timber acreage where timber is being harvested. For god sake, 2000 more square miles to clear-cut; are you out of your mind? The small percentage of ancient forest left should stay standing for future generations, wildlife, and recreation. This new draft plan that the President and the BLM is proposing is shock and aw. And the results aren't profitable or desirable. Abandon plans for the WOPR and preserve whats left of our last ancient stands! Larry Read West Linn, Oregon |
| EM-288 | Bendcoles@aol.com | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/16/2007 21:04:53 | The BLM's WOPR plan to allow accelerated logging of old growth trees, ancient forest reserves, and riparian areas in western Oregon must be halted. Watershed protection, fishing and recreational uses of BLM lands must not take a back seat to unsustainable logging and road building (which will also increase the risk of fire). As a federal taxpayer, I should not subsidize this giveaway to the timber lobby. By protecting our old growth forests and streams, Oregon will generate more economic benefits and tax revenue from tourism than the short term benefits we get from our state's reliance on federal timber revenue.
Jeffrey D. Cole 1109 NE Locksley Dr. Bend, Or. 97701 (541) 318-7075 See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage. |
| EM-289 | "Alan Humphrey" <alan.humphrey@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 7:09:02 | Alan Humphrey
83465 Williamson Lane Dexter, OR 97431-9715 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. My family and I have been part of Lane County for over 160 years we understand the importants of a harvest plan for the BLM and are community and the future of are family. Thank you for reading this. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Alan Humphrey 953-0150 |
| EM-290 | "Dale Claassen" <dale.claassen@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 7:33:06 | Dale Claassen
PO Box 459 Noti, OR 97461-0459 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. Recent effects of the Barred Owl on Spotted Owl behaviour are evidence that, since the ecosystems are constantly changing, so will the science behind the best management decisions to protect sensitive species. Allow local resource managers some level of say in how the resources in their area are managed. The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. All BLM land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Oregon landowners work hand-in-hand with the Oregon Department of Forestry to minimize resource loss from fire, including to ODF-protected BLM lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dale Claassen 541-935-4811 |
| EM-291 | Casey Venzon <kcven@sbcglobal.net> | Protect BLM Forests | 10/17/2007 7:33:47 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Casey Venzon 1140 Maplewood Lane Algonquin, IL 60102 |
| EM-292 | "Stan Martindale" <foresterstan@earthlink.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 9:15:43 | Stan Martindale
821 Winston Section Road Winston, OR 97496-5506 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of these three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act, because they do not manage the land for the specific use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is not in accordance with the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species, not adopting massive reserves, just in case.The alternative selected by the BLM should not jeopardize continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives the funding neccessary to implement the plan. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. It is congresses responsibility to make this happen. Some think it is the counties responsibility to find alternative means to replace this missing revenue. It is not, it belongs to congress which allowed the problem to reach its current catastrophic state. They MUST step up and honor their committment to Counties. Counties should be looking at means of forcing congress and the BLM into doing what is right. That means restoring funds and or management of these lands to the counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating,sightseeing,and frog kissing, and all other forms of outdoor use by the public. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Stan Martindale |
| EM-293 | "Albert Diggle" <albertddiggle@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 10:19:10 | Albert Diggle
24917 Strike Street Veneta, OR 97487-9794 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. I perticipated in several of the past set asides and in each case we set aside a percentage of land , the next time it is a percentage of that percentage. It eventually ends in 5o % of 10 % left. In every case it has affected my family directly as I work in sawmills as part of my family does. We have moved twice directly the cause of widerness and preservation that went way to far . Some thought has to be given to family, schools, just people in general. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Albert Diggle 541-935-2130 |
| EM-294 | "Tratina Jones" <tina.jones@swansongroup.biz> |
BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 10:21:06 | Tratina Jones
PO Box 394 Noti, OR 97461-0394 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tratina Jones 541-935-9540 |
| EM-295 | "jack gordon" <jack@mill-supply.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/17/2007 12:02:53 | jack gordon
2110 cosmoledo st. eugene, OR 97402-1197 October 17, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, jack gordon |
| EM-296 | Ginny Griffin <ginnyg@townofbreckenridge.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 10/17/2007 14:41:08 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Ginny Griffin PO Box 3004 Breckenridge, CO 80424 |
| EM-297 | Elizabeth Graser-Lindsey <egraserlindsey@bctonline.com> | Ancient Forests -- public comment | 10/17/2007 14:50:58 | Dear Madames/Sirs at BLM:
I oppose the draft Western Oregon Plan Revision in that it does not protect the older trees. Not only do I want these trees saved so my children will live in a world where they may see an old forest, but also these older ecosystems contain irreplaceable elements that we loose with the trees. We may not know now how human kind might be materially benefited by these trees and the ecosystem and its components that they contain, but we have seen with many other systems and endangered species that they are valuable to use for cancer-fighting potential or genetics useful in new environmental conditions. It is not wise to waste our heritage nor not appreciate its unique specialness. Elizabeth |
| EM-298 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Please protect Oregon's Forests and Rivers | 10/17/2007 16:15:53 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:15 PM -----
"Amber Gayle" <ambergayle@gmail.com> 10/17/2007 03:44 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Please protect Oregon's Forests and Rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, We are very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of Oregon's forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. We fear that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the Northwest Forest Plan and lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new OHV Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect our nation's remaining ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands, they are providing wood to local mills and improving conditions for fish and wildlife. We can work and also keep saws out of precious old-growth forests. The WOPR proposes to inflame controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for short-term profits. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We must protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures! Public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger. The BLM cannot ethically and democratically clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests! Please focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Amber Gayle, Erich, Grace and Isaiah Mead Thalmayer |
| EM-299 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/17/2007 16:17:01 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:16 PM -----
Alison Clement <aclement@peak.org> 10/17/2007 07:17 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I'm writing to object to the Bush Administration's Western Oregon Plan Revisions, and to urge you to please protect what is left of our remaining old growth forests. The Bush Administration is proposing to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas, and we're supposed to think it's a good idea? No! We value our roadless areas. We care about our water, about threatened species and our native forests. Below is a picture of one of the trees that will be cut, if the WOPR goes forward. Yours truly, Alison Clement [IMAGE] - C.jpg |
| EM-300 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/17/2007 16:17:41 | ---- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/17/2007 04:17 PM -----
Rick Sparks <rick@sparksandsparks.com> 10/16/2007 08:41 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am apalled at the direction in which the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and serious diminishment of our natural legacy to future generations of Oregonians in particular and Americans in general. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 miles of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. I want my federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Many Oregon forest managers are already moving in this new and very viable direction. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. I thought it was the purpose of the BLM to protect all of the values inherent in our national forest lands. The WOPR will enhance timber production and mechanized off-road recreation, but will all but eliminate the many other economic, recreational and heritage values remaining in the 15% still standing of our once-mighty forests. Please don't do this. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Rick Sparks 17360 Upper Cow Creek Rd. Azalea, OR 97410 |
| EM-301 | Mike S Goodman <opeiulocal39uselesscompanyunion@yahoo.com> | Protect BLM Forests | 10/17/2007 16:50:14 | Bureau of Land Management
Oregon/Washington State Office ATTN: Western Oregon Planning Revision (OR930.1) PO Box 2965 Portland, Oregon 97208 Dear BLM, Please accept these comments on the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am a citizen concerned with the management of these lands. For the last ten years, the Bureau of Land Management administered forests in western Oregon under the Northwest Forest Plan. This ensured these forests continued to provide important public values. These forests can also provide jobs and wood products as a by-product of forest restoration such as thinning young plantation forests. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Many of these forests are currently protected for water quality, salmon and wildlife concerns. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Please continue to protect the western BLM forests that are now protected. Sincerely, Mike S Goodman IWW 540 W Olin Av #211 Madison, WI 53715 (608) 257-1927 |
| EM-302 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/17/2007 17:02:30 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Erik Norris 730 Cathedral Dr. Coupeville, Wa. 98239 enorrris33@yahoo.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-303 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/17/2007 17:03:24 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Angela Langevin 110654 Hazelton Rd. Cottage Grove, OR 97424 alangevi@sewanee.edu -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-304 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/17/2007 17:04:06 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, Evelyn McConnaughey 1653 Fairmount Blvd. Eugene, OR 97403 evelynm@efn.org -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-305 | Josh Laughlin <jlaughlin@cascwild.org> | WOPR comment | 10/17/2007 17:04:51 | Dear Western Oregon BLM,
I am writing to express my concern over the possible elimination of old-growth and streamside reserves on western Oregon BLM lands. These forests provide habitat for many wildlife species, clean drinking water to rural communities, recreation for outdoor enthusiasts, and a legacy for future generations. With so few old-growth forests remaining, it is critical that we protect them for future generations to enjoy. Young, even-age tree plantations are a sustainable place for generating wood products. Please do not open older forests on our public lands to logging. Sincerely, jason brown Hazelton Rd. Cottage Grove OR 97424 jasonbrown644@hotmail.com -- Josh Laughlin, Conservation Director Cascadia Wildlands Project P.O. Box 10455 Eugene, OR 97440 541.434.1463 (voice) 541.434.6494 (fax) The Cascadia Wildlands Project is dedicated to defending the forests, waters, and wildlife of the Pacific Northwest. Visit www.cascwild.org to learn more about wildlands issues and our leadership in the conservation movement. Become a member today at http://www.cascwild.org/donate.html. Your support makes a difference! |
| EM-306 | "NORMAN RICHARDS" <normpaulette@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 7:14:15 | NORMAN RICHARDS
1895 NW CALKINS ROSEBURG, OR 97470-6126 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, NORMAN RICHARDS |
| EM-307 | "Lynn Anderson" <p00pie727@gmail.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision comment | 10/18/2007 9:51:53 | Sirs-
As a citizen of Oregon, I am deeply concerned about the threatened approval of cutting of thousands of acres of ancient forests. We have enough managed forest to supply lumber, we MUST save the old growth forests for our children and grandchildren. The most wonderful thing about Oregon is its natural beauty, it brings in tourism, and that is why many people want to live here. We must preserve it. It is NOT SMART to gain a little extra money now, for the destruction of something that cannot be replaced. Lynn Anderson 22268 Vaughn Rd. Veneta, OR 97487 |
| EM-308 | "Max Merlich" <maxm@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:37:07 | Max Merlich
40573 SE Kubitz Road Sandy, OR 97055-8518 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Max Merlich |
| EM-309 | "Heather Case" <daremefairy@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:42:42 | Heather Case
PO Box 4063 Port Angeles, WA 98363-0997 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Heather Case |
| EM-310 | "Lisa Green" <lisag@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:43:10 | Lisa Green
PO Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Lisa Green 503-678-1222 |
| EM-311 | "Charles Bailey" <chuckb@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:45:17 | Charles Bailey
311 Cascade Meadow Dr. Sublimity, OR 97385-9807 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Charles O. Bailey 5037695641 |
| EM-312 | "Daniel Kenney" <dkenney@holheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:45:34 | Daniel Kenney
P.O. Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Daniel T Kenney 503-678-1222 |
| EM-313 | "Mike Deese" <mikedeese@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:47:03 | Mike Deese
73 romant rd Port Angeles, WA 98362-9472 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mike Deese |
| EM-314 | "Lyle Talle" <lylet@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:48:10 | Lyle Talle
PO box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Lyle Talle 503-678-1222 |
| EM-315 | "Jessie Simpson" <jdsimpson4@aol.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:48:46 | Jessie Simpson
119 south penn st apt. 16 Port Angeles, WA 98362-4634 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jessie Simpson |
| EM-316 | "Steve Bandy" <steve_bandy@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:49:03 | Steve Bandy
28484 SW Meadows Loop Wilsonville, OR 97070-7706 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Steve Bandy 503 682-4503 |
| EM-317 | "Nathan Horn" <natehorn@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:51:23 | Nathan Horn
1306 east 4th st Port Angeles, WA 98362-4706 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nathan Horn |
| EM-318 | "Cheryl Harnack" <cherylh@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:56:09 | Cheryl Harnack
9301 SW Sagert ST #45 Tualatin, OR 97062-7022 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Cheryl Harnack 503-692-0434 |
| EM-319 | "Kurtiss Dent" <kurtissd@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:56:24 | Kurtiss Dent
110 mains rd. Sequim, WA 98382-9507 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Kurtiss Dent |
| EM-320 | "Frank Nigro" <chinookpilot1@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:56:49 | Frank Nigro
7912 N. Alberta Ct. Spokane, WA 99208-9266 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Frank J. Nigro |
| EM-321 | "George Warren" <georgew@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:57:44 | George Warren
Box 1147 Warrenton, OR 97146-1147 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, G |
| EM-322 | "Stan Wilson" <stanw@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:58:51 | Stan Wilson
PO BOX 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Dear Mr. Shepard, Thank you for considering my opinions on this important issue. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM should develop and analyzes alternatives that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. We are finding more and more situations where we have left our resources unmanaged and left nature to destroy the resource. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Again, thank you for your consideration. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Stan Wilson 503-685-9482 |
| EM-323 | "Stacey Beck" <beckster@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 10:59:40 | Stacey Beck
1024 west 10th st. Port Angeles, WA 98363-5732 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Stacey Beck |
| EM-324 | "John Noonan" <ejn@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:00:03 | John Noonan
825 west 9th st. Port Angeles, WA 98363-5723 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Earl Noonan |
| EM-325 | "John Bennett" <bennettj5@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:04:12 | John Bennett
1710 south E st. Port Angeles, WA 98363-7026 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Bennett |
| EM-326 | "Heather Wheeler" <heatherw@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:06:50 | Heather Wheeler
14452 Arndt Rd NE Aurora, OR 97002-9525 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Heather Wheeler 503-678-1222 |
| EM-327 | "Anthony Alcantar" <aalcantar@wavecable.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:08:43 | Anthony Alcantar
119 south penn st apt. 3 Port Angeles, WA 98362-4604 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Anthony Alcantar |
| EM-328 | "Yvonne Myrand" <yvonnem@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:11:43 | Yvonne Myrand
1077 northshire ct ne keizer, OR 97303-1838 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Yvonne Myrand |
| EM-329 | "Josh Blunk" <rbs4207@gmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:11:58 | Josh Blunk
2355 east 6th ave. Port Angeles, WA 98362-9015 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Josh Blunk |
| EM-330 | "Jeff Lund" <lundj@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:13:01 | Jeff Lund
412 south lincoln PO box 39 Port Angeles, WA 98362-0007 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jeff Lund |
| EM-331 | "Don & Jan Venable" <venable@canby.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:17:38 | Don & Jan Venable
452 SW 7th Avenue Canby, OR 97013-4033 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Don & Jan Venable 503-266-3296 |
| EM-332 | "Nikki Ticen" <nikkit@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:19:47 | Nikki Ticen
P.O. Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Nikki Ticen |
| EM-333 | "Staci Damgaard" <stacid@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:21:54 | Staci Damgaard
po box 478 aurora, OR 97002-0478 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Staci Damgaard 5036781222 |
| EM-334 | "Kenneth Spencer" <kens@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:23:56 | Kenneth Spencer
P.O. Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Kenneth Spencer (503) 678-1222 |
| EM-335 | "Dennis Spath" <cascaceview@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:26:30 | Dennis Spath
22330 SW Chapman Rd. Sherwood, OR 97140-8689 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Please do your best to implement these actions. Thanks Dennis Spath In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dennis Spath 503 487 7736 |
| EM-336 | "John Dalton" <john.dalton@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:51:00 | John Dalton
POB 631 Roseburg, OR 97470-0133 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Dalton 541-6430260 |
| EM-337 | "Dan Razdik" <danr@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:51:58 | Dan Razdik
Box 3500 portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dan Razdik 503-678-1222 |
| EM-338 | "Dave Wilmes" <davew@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 11:56:01 | Dave Wilmes
14577 SE Anderson Rd. Damascus, OR 97089-8710 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dave Wilmes 5038167223 |
| EM-339 | "Brian Wagner" <brianw@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:05:21 | Brian Wagner
166 E. Hemlock Dr. Gervais, OR 97026-9790 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Brian Wagner |
| EM-340 | "Joe Daracunas" <joe1space@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:12:26 | Joe Daracunas
4006 fairmount rd. Port Angeles, WA 98363-8326 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Joe Daracunas |
| EM-341 | "David Norris" <daven@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:14:50 | David Norris
PO Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, David Norris 503-678-1222 |
| EM-342 | "Peter Lance" <petelance@mac.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:20:31 | Peter Lance
15128 SW Barcelona Way Beaverton, OR 97007-6852 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Peter M. Lance 503-626-7179 |
| EM-343 | "Don Breese" <donbr@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:31:54 | Don Breese
14452 arndt rd ne aurora, OR 97002-9525 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Don Breese 678-1222 |
| EM-344 | "Midge Shaughnessy" <shaughnc@amp.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 12:39:03 | Midge Shaughnessy
31 Scott Street Woburn, MA 01801-2929 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Midge Shaughnessy |
| EM-345 | "Michael Dauenhauer" <miked@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 13:11:05 | Michael Dauenhauer
949 Mt View Ln Molalla, OR 97038-7373 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Antything less is preposterous. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Michael Dauenhauer 503-708-3989 |
| EM-346 | "Donna Seberson" <dseberson@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 13:21:25 | Donna Seberson
1000 Ginko Ct Silverton, OR 97381-1487 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Donna Seberson 503-481-0452 |
| EM-347 | "Max Merlich" <maxm@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 14:10:43 | Max Merlich
40573 SE Kubitz Road Sandy, OR 97055-8518 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Max Merlich |
| EM-348 | "Marci Abel" <marcia@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 14:52:48 | Marci Abel
10808 NE 192nd Ave Brush Prairie, WA 98606-9708 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Marci Abel |
| EM-349 | "DAN BISHOP" <bishop@ortelco.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 14:56:28 | DAN BISHOP
PO BOX 340 prairie city, OR 97869-0340 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, DAN BISHOP 541.575.4510 |
| EM-350 | "FRED HEAVENS" <fheavens@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 15:44:12 | FRED HEAVENS
21122 S. Deer Creek Ln. Colton, OR 97017-9798 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, FRED HEAVENS 503-824-2453 |
| EM-351 | "Rowdy Haskins" <rowdyh@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 19:42:51 | Rowdy Haskins
115 Midvale ave Caldwell, ID 83605-6185 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Rowdy Haskins |
| EM-352 | "rehbeccah Burkhart" <indigooregon@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 20:14:37 | rehbeccah Burkhart
p.o. box 304 lowell, OR 97452-0304 October 18, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, rehbeccah Burkhart 541-937-8214 |
| EM-353 | "Jeff Reavis" <jeffr@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/18/2007 23:26:09 | Jeff Reavis
P.O. Box 1031 Mariposa, CA 95338-1031 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jeff Reavis 503-970-7263 |
| EM-354 | "MATTHEW WINKELMAN" <trishabartley@wavecable.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 2:29:15 | MATTHEW WINKELMAN
301 North Ryser Sequim, WA 98382-9102 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, MATTHEW WINKELMAN (360)477-3969 |
| EM-355 | "Jason Wickersham" <wickersham@wavecable.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 2:41:57 | Jason Wickersham
182 MacDonald Drive Sequim, WA 98382-8396 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jason Wickersham (360) 681-3548 |
| EM-356 | "Terry King" <chevy54truck@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 6:13:35 | Terry King
7908 N.E. 29 th Street Vancouver, WA 98662-7258 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Terry King 360-882-2796 |
| EM-357 | "Phil Jenkins" <philj@drjlumber.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 7:18:06 | Phil Jenkins
P.O. Box 730 John Day, OR 97845-0730 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Phil Jenkins 5415754514 |
| EM-358 | "Robert Meadows" <bobm@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 7:54:40 | Robert Meadows
box 153 Brinnon, WA 98320-0153 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Robert Meadows 503-887-1921 |
| EM-359 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/19/2007 7:57:05 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/19/2007 07:56 AM -----
Dawn Winalski <winalski@uoregon.edu> 10/18/2007 04:39 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old- growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Dawn Winalski 1284 W. 13th Ave. Eugene, OR 97402 |
| EM-360 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: BLM forests and rivers | 10/19/2007 8:08:04 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/19/2007 08:07 AM -----
D Ellen Babin <d_ellen@mac.com> 10/18/2007 10:01 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I have been a resident of Curry County Oregon for 27 years. I whole heartedly support the draft plan. After bankrupting the rural counties in Oregon by co-opting the land and then refusing to pay taxes to which they would otherwise be enttiled, the federal government is using its heavy hand in a way that is very harmful to the residents of our county and others like ours. The land has value and should be be taxed accordilng to its best use. If the county can't receive these type of taxes the fed govt. should compensate the county for such a taking. I support the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am not concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan. The Northwest Forest Plan has proven to be a supreme mistake. None of its mitigating measures have come even close to accomplishing their purposes. It has proven to be a huge waste of time and money. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes a reasonable alternative to use a valuable resource. The BLM is a steward of the land and should consider economic impacts and alternatives in their planning. The proposed plan does just that. No clear consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning hasr been shown. Language being used by the Oregon Forest Heritage to defeat the plan is merely designed to be inflammatory. Sincerely, John Babin |
| EM-361 | "John Carroll" <johnc@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 8:50:00 | John Carroll
14222 S. Buckner Creek Rd. Mulino, OR 97042-9628 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Carroll 503 799 1d203 |
| EM-362 | "John Stafford" <johns@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 9:01:39 | John Stafford
1540 Marigold Way Redding, CA 96003-9389 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Stafford 775 721 4052 |
| EM-363 | "Dennis Lange" <dennyl@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 9:14:05 | Dennis Lange
P.O. Box 3500 Portland, OR 97208-3500 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dennis Lange |
| EM-364 | "Bill Bishoprick" <bb@hsarchitect.com> | comment on the WOPR | 10/19/2007 10:49:04 | I would like to voice my opposition to the unsustainable increase in the logging of our ancient forests as put forth by your "preferred alternative". Alternatives to timber production and protection of watersheds, fishing and biodiversity should be given more weight in your decisions.
Bill Bishoprick Salem , Or |
| EM-365 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Freeland bio and subject matter | 10/19/2007 14:22:49 | Sandy Banks <sandyrocks@earthlink.net>
10/19/2007 02:05 PM To William_Freeland@or.blm.gov cc Subject Re: Freeland bio and subject matter Hi Bill - Here is a tough question, that you may have to do a little checking on, but which is sure to be of concern to the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council folks. The figures for Riparian Management Area differ dramatically between Table 207 (p. 718) and the Summary pie charts at XLVIII . For instance, Alternative 1 has either 20% of the land base in Riparian Mgmt, or 9%. What gives??? Thanks, Sandy |
| EM-366 | Steve Smack <smackdis@hotmail.com> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 14:58:15 | Hello!
I know that the end of the public comment period on the WOPR is drawing to a close soon, so I wanted to put in my two cents. For the record, I'm against this plan. It seems to me that the WOPR will be a boon for the timber industry and a major loss for the forests of Oregon and all those who love the forests. I believe that we are logging our federal forests at an unsustainable rate. I especially don't like that this plan increases logging of old growth trees. In short, please don't allow this plan to go into effect. Please consider that this is public land, not timber company land. Our forests are worth so much more when they are intact. Thank you for your time, Sincerely, -- Steve Smack 146 SE 72nd Ave Portland, OR, 97215 smackdis@hotmail.com Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em! |
| EM-367 | "Dean Friesen" <dfriesen@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 15:02:23 | Dean Friesen
9350 S. Gribble Rd Canby, OR 97013-9394 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dean Friesen 503-678-1222 |
| EM-368 | "Joanne Johnson" <joanne.johnson@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 15:46:38 | Joanne Johnson
583 Woodcrest Dr. Myrtle Creek, OR 97457-7415 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. 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, Joanne Johnson 541-643-4936 |
| EM-369 | "Rev. Doug Satre" <doug@jvillepres.org> | Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions | 10/19/2007 15:52:55 | Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office
333 SW 1st. Avenue, Portland, OR 97208 Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. The changes the Bureau of Land Management is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and will lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration would place half of the public land that the BLM manages – and most of our best old-growth BLM forests – in “Timber Management Areas” to be clearcut every 80 years. The Bush Administration’s preferred alternative proposes to clearcut 110,000 acres of Oregon’s old-growth (120+ years) and build 1,000 mile of new logging roads every decade while creating over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas – all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Shockingly, the proposal ignores the role that these forests play in regulating the climate. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation’s ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clearcutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at risk and would destroy some of Oregon’s most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clearcut these natural treasures. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clearcut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into tree plantations most susceptible to severe wildfire. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and create job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Rev. Douglas Satre 624 Sterling St. Jacksonville, OR 97530 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Senator Ron Wyden 1220 SW 3rd Ave., Suite 585, Portland, OR 97204 Senator Gordon Smith 121 SW Salmon St., Suite 1250, Portland, OR 97204 Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-4th) 405 East 8th Ave. #2030, Eugene, OR 97401 Rep. Greg Walden (R-2nd) 843 East Main Street, Ste 400, Medford, OR 97504 Rep. Earl Blumenhauer (D-3rd) 729 N.E. Oregon St., Suite 115, Portland, OR 97232 Rep. Darlene Hooley (D-5th) 315 Mission Street SE #101, Salem, Oregon 97302 Rep. David Wu (D-1st) 620 SW Main, Suite 606, Portland, OR 97205 |
| EM-370 | "Amy McLaughlin" <amy.mclaughlin@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 15:56:20 | Amy McLaughlin
PO Box 250 Glendale, OR 97442-0250 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. My entire family is supported by the timber industry. Without this industry our family and many others in this community could possibly have to leave our homes and relocate, as there would be no sources of employment left in our town. 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, Amy McLaughlin 541-832-1185 |
| EM-371 | "Bert Burkhart" <bertb@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 16:13:35 | Bert Burkhart
Box 304 Lowell, OR 97452-0304 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Bert S. Burkhart |
| EM-372 | "Val Vandehey" <valv@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 17:00:21 | Val Vandehey
1820 Fulton Newberg, OR 97132-1805 October 19, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Val Vandehey 503 678 1222 |
| EM-373 | laurietemple@comcast.net | 10/19/2007 19:07:21 | Dear Sirs/Madams,
I strongly protest the logging that is being proposed of old growth forests in Western Oregon. These ancient forests need permanent protection from logging to protect not only the forests but our watersheds and salmon as well. Sincerely, Laurel Temple |
|
| EM-374 | "Dean Olson" <deanyemma@msn.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/19/2007 21:25:29 | Dean Olson
1040 West 5th Street Port Angeles, WA 98363-2115 October 20, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Dean Olson 360-417-6181 |
| EM-375 | "byron poisel" <roosterblp@hotmail.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/20/2007 1:53:19 | byron poisel
620 w 11th st Port Angeles, WA 98362-7309 October 20, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, byron poisel 360-4575663 |
| EM-376 | "TOM" <tlferron@comcast.net> | Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/20/2007 8:57:24 | To Whom It Will Concern – I believe it would be a grave mistake to log such of large amount of old growth. We have already cut over 90 percent of our original forest. The benefits for the future biodiversity will far outweigh the present benefits of what the logging industry will gain in profits. In addition, the plan does not adequately protect our streams from erosion and fish habitat. BLM needs to better look at the whole ecology of the whole areas it plans to cut.
Tom Ferron 976 Lynda Lane NW Salem, OR 97304 |
| EM-377 | "Matt Cole" <vertolwrench@yahoo.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/20/2007 9:21:43 | Matt Cole
4043 Lombard Rd Weippe, ID 83553-9702 October 20, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Matt Cole 503-708-1727 |
| EM-378 | "Benjamin Tackett" <bentackett@gmail.com> | Stop | 10/21/2007 9:04:14 | I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks.
The Northwest Forest Plan's protections should remain in place for BLM lands, not sacrificed in an out-of-court deal between the timber industry and the White House. Oregon ancient forests deserve permanent protection and should be managed to maintain important public assets such as clean drinking water, habitat for fish and wildlife, diverse recreation opportunities, stunning scenery, and jobs in forest restoration, fire safety and tourism. Ancient forests in Oregon also serve as an important carbon storage and sequestration resource to help mitigate global warming. The BLM's plans for increased logging in these ancient forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revision will take America backwards in efforts to prevent global climate change. Clearcutting and damage to soils from logging has been shown to release tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, while old forests absorb and store carbon dioxide. I am concerned that the changes the BLM has proposed in its Western Oregon Plan Revision will lead to the loss of Oregon's irreplaceable ancient forests, water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. Much of the BLM forests in western Oregon are adjacent to private landowners who would like to see nearby forest managed to protect their home from wildfire and to preserve their water supply, scenery, and recreation opportunities. Additionally, these forests are owned by Americans across the nation, who would like to see them strongly protected for future generations to enjoy. 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, Benjamin Tackett -- Ben Tackett 503 929 8204 www.benandsarah.biz |
| EM-379 | "Benjamin Tackett" <bentackett@gmail.com> | Stop | 10/21/2007 9:20:38 | Dear BLM,
You must get tons and tons of letters regarding feedback on the use of our lands. This overwhelming amount of mail must make it difficult to sort through and collect all the opinions. I want to make this as easy as possible, so I'll be direct and to the point. The reason I moved to Oregon was it's natural beauty and the educated decisions people made about the environment. It is not just a leader in conservation, but quickly becoming a global leader in developing future technology (solar systems installed, silicon crystal mfg, etc.) that will lead us in a cleaner and more sustainable direction. I would never have expected to be welcomed as a new resident by the issues facing Oregon with the new BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision. Leave the old growth forests alone. Do not let them be harvested. These are public lands, not for personal harvest and profit to one company. There are a million other ways to generate income. I want to enjoy them as well as have them around to share with my children. Open your eyes in regards to policy making - it's not just about "finding a compromise" for both sides - it's about finding a sustainable way to go forward so we can all survive. Thanks for your time. Feel free to contact me with any questions, comments or concerns of your own. Sincerely, Ben Tackett -- Ben Tackett 503 929 8204 www.benandsarah.biz |
| EM-380 | "M GRAHAM" <grahams130@msn.com> | WOPR | 10/21/2007 16:02:51 | I cannot believe that there is an urgency to cut all uncut areas of the forest. Does the timber industry control the forests or can we the general public also have some control over our forests also. I oppose the Bush administrations plan for logging in our public forests
Sincerely, M.B. Graham 68831 Butte Place Sisters Oregon 97759 |
| EM-381 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/22/2007 8:03:42 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/22/2007 08:02 AM -----
Renee Davis <renee@greentemple.org> 10/21/2007 01:51 PM To <Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov> cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Dear BLM (or whoever gets this), First of all, let me just say that I am not a tree-hugger or hippie. I'm a student in Olympia, WA studying ethnobotany and psychology. I am originally from the East Coast, and moved to the Northwest- I immediately fell in love with a region with such a complex ecosystem, where people actually CARE about their natural surroundings- and naturally, each other. This is in response to the WOPR initiative. I please ask that the BLM not continue the logging of old-growths. There are so few left, and these complex ecosystems are vital for our region's ecological health. Having a healthy ecosystem here in the Pacific Northwest is so important for our physical and psychological health. I won't get into details about that. But as a young person growing up in this world, it breaks my heart to see this type of thing happen. I want to grow old and raise children in a clean and safe world. With the recent ecological practices, and there is a good chance that may never be. Have you ever thought about that? How others feel growing up in a world where there may not be a future? The psychological impact of such wide-scale ecological issues is also tremendous. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Please help us live our lives out in safety and peace- for my generation, and hopefully many to come. Thank you for reading. Sincerely, Renee Davis 923 Kaiser Rd. NW #6 Olympia, WA 98502 |
| EM-382 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Don't cut our old growth | 10/22/2007 8:04:21 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/22/2007 08:04 AM -----
Kevin Wagoner <kevinw66@yahoo.com> 10/21/2007 01:38 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Don't cut our old growth How could you even consider that? Don't cut our old growth, that is completely irresponsible. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
| EM-383 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/22/2007 8:04:46 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/22/2007 08:04 AM -----
ricknjen <ricknjen@dcwisp.net> 10/21/2007 10:38 AM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am very concerned with the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating will unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and may lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas–all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands - many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning - they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR puts water quality at-risk and would destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, Scott Cohan 1067 SE Main Street Roseburg, OR, 97470 |
| EM-384 | Schnauzer Harrison <schnauzerrad@yahoo.com> | Comments on WOPR | 10/22/2007 9:37:32 | I am writing to express opposition to the BLM's Western Oregon Plan Revision. This ill-advised plan would lead to a marked increase in logging of ancient forests from the Willamette Valley to the Siskiyou Mountains. Timber production would be given priority over all other uses of the forests, including recreation, fishing and hunting, and protection of watersheds. At a time when global warming it is increasingly clear that global warming is a major problem, the last thing we should be doing as a nation is diminishing the carbon sequestration value of our old-growth forests by cutting them down. The BLM's "preferred alternative" would increase fire risk and severity by replacing ancient forests with dense, flammable tree plantations. This plan does not serve the interests of the citizens of Oregon or the country as a whole. No action is far preferable to a poorly conceived, environmentally destructive plan.
Joyce Millen, PhD 585 Washington Street S Salem, OR 97302 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
| EM-385 | "Daniel Riches" <driches@earthlink.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/22/2007 11:45:30 | Daniel Riches
15176 SW Highpoint Drive Sherwood, OR 97140-8204 October 22, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyze at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Daniel Riches |
| EM-386 | "Melissa Battaglia" <melissab@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/22/2007 11:50:02 | Melissa Battaglia
26875 S LOWER JEWELL RD BEAVERCREEK, OR 97004-9757 October 22, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Melissa Battaglia 503-632-9221 |
| EM-387 | Kirk Morganson <kirkmorganson@yahoo.com> | WOPR comments | 10/22/2007 12:41:03 | I am opposed to the recent plans to increase logging of old gowth forests on BLM lands. I urge you to adopt a plan that reduces/or eliminates logging of old-growth forests, restricts logging in environmentally-sensitive areas, and logs to maintain a healthy ecosystem. Do not replace my forest with a tree farm!
Regards, Kirk Morganson 10921 SW 41st Ave Portland, OR 97219 503-245-5225 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
| EM-388 | "John Stembridge" <ryans@sgsc.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/22/2007 16:19:07 | John Stembridge
1675 George Tweed Blvd. Grants Pass, OR 97527-6389 October 22, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, John Stembridge 541-480-4630 |
| EM-389 | "David Arts" <padarts@comcast.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/22/2007 16:23:18 | David Arts
4680 Larkwood st. Eugene, OR 97405-3912 October 22, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, David S. Arts 541-683-4239 |
| EM-390 | Francis Zilla <bstgoal@yahoo.com> | WOPR | 10/22/2007 16:41:54 | Dear BLM,
It is with great sadness that I heard about the Bush Administration's instructions to you to vastly increase logging the ancient forests of Western Oregon. Ancient forests (old growth) are IRREPLACEABLE. This is just more of the same, but very serious, attempts to steal timber from our public forests by the Bush administration. It's short-term profits for their campaign contributors (the logging companies) against the overwhelming will of the public (who do not want this massive cutting of old-growth and streamside timber). Please do the morally right thing and do not give in to this EXTREMELY Unpopular Administration. Thank you for considering this comment. Sincerely, Frank Zilla Mt. Hood, Oregon. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
| EM-391 | "Coreen & Scott Hampson" <hampson@cavenet.com> | Stop WOPR - Protect BLM forests | 10/22/2007 18:04:50 |
I am very concerned about the 2.6 million acres of forest managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Oregon. The BLM is moving forward with the Western Oregon Plan Revision, which will increase logging in Oregon's old-growth forests sevenfold by clearcutting in currently protected old growth forest reserves and sensitive salmon bearing rivers and creeks. Sincerely, Scott Hampson PO Box 1791 Cave Junction, Or. 97523 |
| EM-392 | "Jim Coates" <jimc@colheli.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/23/2007 7:47:53 | Jim Coates
950 N. Grant St. Canby, OR 97013-2733 October 23, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jim Coates 503-805-0600 |
| EM-393 | Rebecca Hale <eggsprize@yahoo.com> | Ancient Forests/WOPR | 10/23/2007 8:21:59 | I live near Highway 36 and Fern Ridge dam and my sister lives in Dexter. We have commented many times over the years about stands of huge, beautiful trees in places near our homes. When we first came to the area, we asked about who owned these wonderful, ancient giants and were told “BLM”. When we heard that name, we breathed a sigh of relief that those beauties weren’t at the mercy of a private owner. That name has become synonymous, in our minds, with protection of old forest. I guess we were wrong after all, at least under the current administration. I don’t object to private ownership, but I do think there should be protection on all lands, public and private, for very old trees and forests.
I’m an Independent voter because I want creative solutions to problems, not political orthodoxy. Let’s have timber production and also protection for the remaining old forests. Rebecca Hale Junction City, OR cc: Gov. Kulongoski Rep. Peter DeFazio __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
| EM-394 | "Jim Oliphant" <treasurevalley@rosenet.net> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/23/2007 8:32:24 | Jim Oliphant
2324 Oak Hill Rd Roseburg, OR 97470-7832 October 23, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Jim Oliphant 541-672-6012 |
| EM-395 | "Mike Porter" <mike.porter@interfor.com> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/23/2007 9:43:32 | Mike Porter
15555 S Hwy 211 Molalla, OR 97038-8443 October 23, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Mike Porter 503 829-9131 |
| EM-396 | "Tod Kintz" <tod.kintz@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/23/2007 11:58:54 | Tod Kintz
541 Solitude Lane Grants Pass, OR 97527-6195 October 23, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. None of the three alternatives presented in the DEIS meet the requirements of the O&C Act because they do not manage the land for the dominant use of timber production. Reserving the majority (52%) of the suitable timberlands for the purpose of a listed species is contrary to the O&C Act. Because of the unique nature of the O&C Lands, by law these lands are not available to be part of a reserve system designed to recover a listed species. The BLM should consider active management for the protection of listed and sensitive species and their habitat before adopting passive, reserve strategies. The alternative selected by the BLM, however, should be one that will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species within the species entire habitat range. The BLM must develop and analyzes at least one alternative that maximizes the amount of land in timber production and receipts to local county governments, and meets its no jeopardy obligation. Congress and the Administration must ensure that when the Plan is finalized that the BLM receives adequate funding so that it can be fully implemented. When implemented, the Plan should live up to the full commitment that was made to local counties. Timber sale revenues must generate at least an amount equal to the funding that was provided to local counties through the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act on a yearly basis. All BLM administered land should be managed to minimize the threat of catastrophic wildfire on these lands and surrounding state and private lands. Access should be maintained through BLM administered lands for private land access, fire suppression, as well as recreational uses, such as hunting, fishing, boating and sightseeing. In summary, the economic viability of our rural communities and the overall health of our federal forests are of vital importance to me. I ask that you give these comments full consideration as you prepare the final Environmental Impact Statement and select the final management plans for the Western Oregon BLM Districts. Sincerely, Tod Kintz 5415317386 |
| EM-397 | Forwarded by alan_hoffmeister@blm.gov | Fw: Protect BLM forests and rivers | 10/23/2007 15:39:56 | ----- Forwarded by Alan Hoffmeister/ORSO/OR/BLM/DOI on 10/23/2007 03:39 PM -----
Benjamin Mercer <benrobin@sover.net> 10/23/2007 03:23 PM To Alan_Hoffmeister@blm.gov cc Subject Protect BLM forests and rivers Bureau of Land Management, Western Oregon Plan Revisions Office 333 SW 1st. Avenue Portland, Oregon Portland, OR 97208 CC: Oregon Congressional delegation Re: BLM Western Oregon Plan Revisions Dear BLM, I am writing to express my concern about the direction the Bush Administration is headed in with the management of nearly 2.6 million acres of Oregon's federal forests under the Western Oregon Plan Revisions. I am concerned that the changes the BLM is contemplating would unravel the protections of the landmark Northwest Forest Plan, and could lead to water pollution, degraded habitat, and increased conflict and controversy. The Bush Administration's preferred alternative proposes to clear-cut 140,000 acres of Oregon's old-growth every decade, build 1,000 mile of new logging roads, and create over 100,000 miles of new Off Highway Vehicle Emphasis Areas -- all at the expense of roadless areas, threatened species, water quality and non-motorized recreation. Most Americans want federal land managers to embrace thinning second growth forests, safeguard communities from wildfire and protect what remains of our nation's ancient forests. Indeed, many Oregon forest managers are already moving beyond the conflicts of the past. By focusing on previously logged public forestlands -- many of which are now overgrown and in need of thinning -- they are providing wood to local mills while actually improving conditions for fish and wildlife and keeping saws out of precious old-growth forests. In contrast, the WOPR proposes to inflame the controversy by increasing old-growth clear-cutting for a short-term economic fix. The WOPR would put water quality at risk and destroy some of Oregon's most special places. We should protect our remaining mature and old-growth forests on public land, not clear-cut these natural treasures as the WOPR proposes to do. It is disappointing that at a time when public consensus for old-growth protection and second-growth thinning has never been stronger, the BLM is proposing to clear-cut forests older than our nation and turn complex ecosystems into flammable tree farms. Please protect remaining old-growth forests, focus active management of BLM lands in already logged-over areas, and concentrate job opportunities in restoration thinning projects that benefit watersheds and generate wood products without multiplying past mistakes. Sincerely, -- Benjamin Robin Mercer P.O. Box 163 Putney VT 05346 U.S.A. (802) 387-2487 <benrobin@sover.net> |
| EM-398 | sueellen@heartspace.us | WOPR | 10/23/2007 17:28:12 | To whom it may concern:
We vote to protect the ancient forests, because there are so few left and these forests protect our watersheds, fish, and the recreation economy. We strongly urge you to VOTE AGAINST the BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision (W.O.R.P) Sincerely, James Garibbo and Sue Ellen Liss |
| EM-399 | "Jay Yates" <jay.yates@swansongroup.biz> | BLM Western Oregon Plan Revision | 10/24/2007 3:44:30 | Jay Yates
p.o.box 295 glendale, OR 97442-0295 October 24, 2007 Edward Shepard OR/WA State Director Bureau of Land Management PO Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Dear Edward Shepard: Please accept the following comments on the BLM's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans for Western Oregon. . 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. 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, Jay Yates 541 660 1712 |