Sign-on letter supporting strong conservation for Oregon’s State Forests

7 thoughts on “Sign-on letter supporting strong conservation for Oregon’s State Forests”

1. A very dismal year for me this year 2022 I haven’t seen it this bad in my lifetime I’m now 71 Hoping for a better future but I’m running out of life and would love to see some good changes NOW!

2. I have lived in the North West for over 27 years. Fishing and enjoying the outdoors has always been a passion of mine. I have four wonderful grandchildren, and they are always very excited when we get and spend time together fishing. If changes aren’t made soon……our children and grandchildren will not have the same fishing experiences/memories that we had had/seen in years past.
   The numbers don’t lie…..people do. Change is desperately needed!

   1. I am 72 yo and have fished for salmon and steelhead for 42 years. Past seasons have been declining with this year, personally the worst for me. I am aware that the decline of salmon and steelhead stocks is a multi-factorial issue. It’s time to change the things that are within our power to change to help survival of these magnificent fish!

3. We need a strong coordinated effort among all parties involved in our fisheries to start the process of recovery for our salmon and steelhead. It has to start now before we lose a valuable asset in the Pacific Northwest.

4. The sportfishing business is huge for our local communities. A recent drive north from Pacific City to Nehalem revealed many long-time businesses catering to the sports community as closed. We need an integrated community and government effort to save our fisheries and the economy and identity that goes with it. I would hate to say “you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone”.

5. I have fished the north coast for 45 years, guiding clients for 20 of those years. The fall chinook run in Tillamook has fallen on its face the last ten years, and something needs to be done now!!

6. Thanks Bob, for your leadership on this crucially important issue.

   The support for salmon, clean water, and habitat protection at today’s Oregon Board of Forestry Board Meeting in Seaside was truly inspiring. And for good reason. Supporting HCP Alternative 3 is the right thing to do RIGHT NOW.

   I agree with your assessment entirely: despite the Oregon Plan drafted decades ago, Oregon has never taken adequate action to recover species of concern including habitat protection for salmon streams within our state forest lands. This HCP, through its Alternative 3, promises to remedy that neglect, providing hope for future generations of salmon and the human communities which rely upon healthy forests, fish, and wildlife.

   Anyone who fishes western Oregon rivers knows important fish species have been driven to dangerously low levels. Long gone are the huge wild Chinook which fed the bellies and spirits of Lower Columbia families since time immemorial. Instead, local rivers frequently fail to meet minimum salmon escapement goals for key stocks. Trickle-down impacts of this loss are real and sometimes devastating. This year, limited opportunities in North Coast watersheds crippled the lucrative ($200 million annual) sportfishing industry which supports tourism revenue for hotels, restaurants, and all those who work along the waterfront.

   As a local angler, it’s heartbreaking to go fishing and catch no fish, or be forced to retain keep only hatchery coho, and pray for the fate of rare wild Chinook which may or may not survive catch-and-release. This summer, weeks went by with nary a skiff on our Lower Columbia salmon grounds. It did not feel right. Abysmal salmon returns are clear indication of a critical problem. And managing state forests to fully protect and enhance salmon watersheds is a critical solution—for the fish themselves and the rural economy those fish support. I encouraged all citizens to speak out before November 30th deadline, urging this ODF Board to remember: wild salmon and steelhead are an important forest products, too!

   I’ve read the fine print of the HCP EIS, and securing maximum protections modeled under Alternative 3 “increased conservation” is a no-brainer. The principles of Alternative 3 are simple: fully protect salmon spawning streams; manage state lands to support timber, wildlife, and clear, cold forest streams. Give our local runs a fighting chance to recover!

   I was saddened to read my Clatsop County Commissioners May 2022 scare-tactic hype about speculative, exaggerated economic impacts of standard watershed conservation measures.

   The proposed actions of Alternative 3 are supported by sound fishery science: provide stream shade; promote woody debris; prevent landslides; employ healthy riparian buffer zones; enforce sensible road design. In short, maintain state forest streams as real streams! For me, the kickback is hypocritical and short sighted: many local loggers love their wild fish as well. Many in the timber industry have worked commercial or sport fishing jobs as well. Balanced management makes sense for everybody! Still, rural Oregonians require strong state leadership to assure industry acts sensibly. And we who care for the future of salmon need to hold them accountable to provide that balanced management leadership.

   As a conservation voter and climate action advocate, I firmly believe timber harvest in 21st century PUBLIC forests should be treated as a privilege. We shouldn’t need an EIS bullet point to keep equipment out of streams. Still, profit margins and stubborn “don’t tread on me” attitudes continue to rule the day. That’s why this Board needs to immediately adopting measures to regulate those who might damage our public resources with careless speed or senseless greed. Waiting a year to employ a watered down Alternative 5 is unacceptable.

   I also join you in encourage this Board to lead Oregon in re-designing business models for distributing timber revenues earned from our public lands. As a career public educator and concerned conservation voter, linking timber revenues to education and public safety budgets has never felt right. The current arrangement effectively buys “pro-timber sentiment” in rural communities, making it challenging for public employees to speak their values about important topics. Balancing a school district budget by pursuing aggressive harvest is plain wrong in the 21st century. It’s also a planning nightmare for those tasked to manage state operations around an eternally illusive “timber revenue” budget item. Today’s system incentivizes conflicts of interest and nepotism within county governance and derails efforts to secure more appropriate, sustainable revenue generation appropriate for our time.

   Decoupling Clatsop County’s timber harvest/county revenue relationship would be a win-win for the North Coast, removing budget uncertainty while fulfilling ODF’s obligation to manage public lands for multiple uses: economical, ecological, and recreational.

   As it stands, the timber industry of Clatsop County owns sizable private land and benefits from deep-rooted political alliances involving timber barons like outgoing State Senator Betsy Johnson and several of our County Commissioners. While state forests can support sustainable timber harvest, clearcutting public watersheds has no place in the 21st century. It’s the Board of Forestry’s job to transcend local politics to assure public forests also support fish, wildlife, healthy watersheds, and mature carbon sequestering stands for future generations. Instead of squawking about fictionalized economic impacts of enhanced protection, Clatsop County should be generating revenue through carbon trade mechanisms which incentivize keeping trees on the land—especially in riparian zones.

   I’m 53 years old now, and I’ve witnessed the startling impacts of our changing climate here in Oregon. and especially in Alaska where glaciers are disappearing, sea levels are rising, and permafrost is melting at startling rates. Climate science has clearly proven the important benefits of keeping trees on the landscape–to support fish, wildlife, clean water, and mitigate the harmful effects of a warming atmosphere which further compromises our state’s forests. Watching our local conifers turn brown in summer, needles quite literally singed by heat waves that turn forests into tinderboxes is scary to witness.

   The demographics of Oregon’s North Coast have changed rapidly in recent years, and so have taxpayers’ values. My neighbors today include climate refugees displaced due to wildfire. ODF should manage our remaining state forests to reflect those broader Oregonian values and concerns. Managing public lands to embrace enhanced conservation principles is 100% necessary for a 21st century Board of Forestry.

   Again, I thank you Bob for your support of this Habitat Conservation Plan and join you in urging the ODF bBoard to move forward with Alternative 3. I also empower this Board to lead Oregon towards decoupling approaches which alleviate county budgets from problematic reliance on timber revenues.

   Rural Oregonians should not be forced to choose schools and other public services over healthy forests, fish, and wildlife. The time is now to embrace balanced management principles for our remaining public forest resources. Oregon’s future, its forests, fish, and families, rely upon wise leadership which transcends special interests and manages forest resources for all stakeholders.

   Sincerely, Nancy C.
   Astoria taxpayer, mother, angler.

Comments are closed.