Roseburg BLM (attempted) Timber Sales of 1998
Class of '98 timber
sale near Myrtle Creek
Update 05/01: Upheld Rothstein ruling
frees Class of '98 sale from cutting.
Update 09/99: We won again. The Federal
District Court found Class of '98 illegal.
Update 03/99: BLM remanded (took back) this timber sale in the fall of
'98, and then re-released it, with no changes. We appealed it in January of 1999.
03/24/98: BLM decided to sell the Class of '98 timber sale,
scattered in the lower South Myrtle Creek watershed. One unit is just a mile out
of town, on the ridge separating the Days Creek Cutoff road and the huge, ugly clearcut
on South Myrtle Creek that private industry cut in 1995. Some of BLM's sale adjoins
that clearcut. All that is left of this beautiful ridge of ancient Madrone and Douglas
Fir trees is on public land. But on March 24, 1998, Roseburg BLM sold it to the highest
bidder: 1,400 logging trucks (7 mmbf) of old-growth from 205 acres - all clearcuts. |
 |
Emile Timber Sale near Little River
Update 05/01: Rothstein ruling upheld.
Update 10/99: We won a stay from the IBLA in the spring of 1999.
Then on 9/30/99 we won another victory. The Federal
District Court found Emile illegal.
The BLM is to log this timber sale in the Little River watershed. The Little
River watershed has been studied more than any other BLM watershed.
The reason for the bigger and better watershed analysis for Little River is that
this watershed is owned jointly with the Umpqua National Forest (UNF). A disagreement
ensued between the two agencies. The UNF concluded that large clearcuts in old-growth,
fertilization, and road building needed to be reigned in, and instead emphasize timber
production and restoration in previously managed stands. BLM refused to acknowledge
the scientific evidence and refused to agree to stop large old-growth clearcuts.
Emile timber sale is BLM's first proposed clearcut in Little River, in defiance of
the Watershed Analysis. BLM will clear-cut most of the old-growth left in the area,
3.5 mmbf, or about 700 logging truck loads. In response to public pressure to adhere
to the watershed analysis, they have added a "restoration" component to
the project - selling trees from the Riparian Reserves.
The sale location isn't hard to find - just look for the remaining patches of old-growth
up Emile road from Little River, you will find the "timber sale reserve"
signs, designating the reserve of timber for industry to cut. The picture above is
of unit 1C. Just before the final EA, BLM dropped unit 1C because it was very close
to an owl's nest.
Comment Now: The "official" deadline for public comments is over,
but, these are YOUR forests, and you can say anything you want anytime you want.
Tell BLM what you think of selling our public forests to the highest bidder. You
don't have to know what all the acronyms mean, just speak from your heart. You can
comment by clicking here.
Sugar Pine Timber Sale,
South Umpqua Key Watershed
Update 5/01: Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals allowed this sale to proceed. However, in the spring
of 2000, judges from the IBLA ruled that BLM must start over in this sale proposal.
Therefore, we have another chance to get the old growth trees excluded from cutting.
Update 10/99: We won a big victory for Sugar Pine. The Federal
District Court found it illegal, and even cited Sugar Pine specifically in the
court case, saying that logging in the Reserves would degrade the reserves, not restore
them.
BLM proposes to log some of the biggest trees in the Deadman Creek, part of the critically
important Key Watershed of the South Umpqua River. Restoration is supposed to be
top priority in a Key Watershed. Therefore, BLM has called the logging of these giant
trees "restoration".
These giant Douglas Firs, and their old Sugar Pine neighbors have lived next to each
other for hundreds of years. Their crowns complement each other. Their roots are
intertwined. BLM will now log, tractor yard, and sell old-growth Douglas Firs near
the Sugar Pines, claiming it will be beneficial to the pines. BLM has absolutely
no scientific data to back up their claims.
While thinning out some young understory trees could be beneficial for pine health,
logging these old-growth trees will degrade the watershed. Logging old-growth from
Riparian Reserves and yarding with tractors driving through the reserves, is not
"restoring" the watershed.
3/99 Status: We appealed this sale, and the IBLA (judges) has granted
us a Stay. BLM cannot log this sale until our arguments have been heard.