Protect Rogue, senator

Smith should support bill to protect tributaries

U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith is missing a prime election-year opportunity to boost his standing with environmental, recreational and fishing interests — and the many other Oregonians who treasure the remarkable Rogue River — by supporting legislation that would protect over 140 miles of tributaries under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

The timing could hardly be more advantageous for Smith. Not only is he facing a tough battle for re-election against Democrat Jeff Merkley, this year marks the 40th anniversary of the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Rogue was one of the original eight rivers listed as national treasures when Congress passed the federal law in 1968.

Surely it has not escaped Smith’s notice that former Oregon Sen. Mark Hatfield, the popular Republican moderate whose mantle Smith has long struggled to claim, championed the Rogue’s original listing. What better way for Smith to honor — and build on — that achievement than by making certain its many tributaries receive the protection needed to protect the watershed from aggressive logging that threatens to strip the forests and silt salmon streams?

Legislation has been introduced in both the House and Senate that would expand wild and scenic designation to include 143 miles of tributary streams, which are highly vulnerable to resource extraction activities. The bills were prompted in part by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s plans for logging hundreds of acres along key tributaries in the Zane Grey Roadless Area.

Smith has been largely silent on the Rogue legislation, but it’s a good bet that the BLM’s logging plans, including the controversial Kelsey-Whiskey Project, are keeping him on the sidelines.

The Bureau of Land Management has proposed a forest management policy that would dramatically increase logging in large swaths of the watershed. While the BLM insists its logging plans pose no threat to the Rogue, Smith should consider warnings by the Environmental Protection Agency that the original plan, which is currently being revised, would damage water quality throughout Western Oregon. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has warned the plan fails to adequately protect salmon and steelhead.

Smith should keep in mind that his support for expanded Rogue protections would affect only a fraction of the forests the BLM is targeting for logging. He should weigh that impact against the dismaying toll the construction of new roads and logging of old growth would take on the main Rogue, its free-flowing tributaries and the prime salmon and steelhead habitat they provide.

Smith should also consider the coalition of more than 50 local and regional businesses that strongly supports the Rogue bill. They rightly point out that any negative effects on the timber industry would be more than offset by the resulting growth in tourism, which already contributes more than $13 million annually to the region’s economy. Then there are the river’s legendary salmon and steelhead runs, which are critical to Oregon’s struggling recreational and commercial fishing industries.

Earlier this year Oregonians were surprised to learn that the Rogue River was listed as No. 2 on its annual list of the most threatened U.S. rivers — largely because of the BLM’s plans to log in the watershed.

Smith’s failure so far to support the Rogue bill is the main obstacle keeping it from moving forward in a year in which Oregon is poised to have the largest major wilderness expansion in years. At a time when both Smith and Oregonians have so much at stake, he should do everything possible to expand protections for this most beloved of Oregon rivers.