Why is the BLM's new logging plan bad for Oregonians?  Let us count the ways:

1. 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.
2. 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.
   
3. Insufficient habitat protections. 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.
   
4. Healthy watersheds. 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.
   
5. 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.
6. 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.
   
7. 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.
   
8. 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.
   
9. 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.
10. 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.
    

Click here to go back to the Action Page so you can make your voice be heard.