News

Posted on

CONSERVATION NEWS, Winter 2023

by Ann Vileisis

SWO Mineral withdrawal bill hits dead end

It is with great disappointment that I report that the Southwest Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA)—the legislation to make permanent the temporary 20-year mineral withdrawal for the headwaters of our wild rivers—did not make it across the finish line to become enacted as law in the last Congress. I know many of you have been wondering about it.

As I’ve reported in previous Storm Petrels, this bill was a high priority for Congressman DeFazio and also for our Senators, who had put it forth in the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act. On the House side, the bill had already passed the entire body of lawmakers, and on the Senate side, the bill had been reported favorably out of committee with a bipartisan vote –and so we’d been told it was all queued up and ready to become part of a public land omnibus (package of bills combined into an act) at the end of the session. We were very hopeful, and all eyes were on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources (SENR) Committee to develop an omnibus bill.

However, no public lands bill ever came together. Exceedingly close elections in Alaska and Georgia meant control of the Senate remained up in the air until early December. This left too little time for negotiations. Higher priority bills to fund the federal government and defense took precedence. And perhaps most significant was the threat of “poison pill” amendments. West Virginia Senator Manchin kept trying to attach riders to any moving bills to weaken environmental safeguards for the benefit of the fossil energy industry (dubbed Machin’s “dirty deal”) while Senator Daines of Montana tried to push a bill that would have undermined the Endangered Species Act. Given these larger factors, there was just no way to advance a public land bill through the closely divided Senate. 

And so where does this leave the headwaters of our cherished Wild and Scenic Illinois and North Fork Smith rivers and Hunter Creek and Pistol River? Fortunately, owing to our successful advocacy back in 2015-2016, we still have the 20-year temporary administrative mineral withdrawal in place –so there is more time for Congress to act to make it permanent. The purpose of the temporary administrative withdrawal depends on the bill being introduced again into the House and Senate again in the new session. 

We will no longer have our longstanding champion Rep. Peter DeFazio to help us, and the headwaters of the Wild and Scenic Illinois River are now in the district of Rep. Cliff Bentz, who has already voiced more interest in boosting mining in southwest Oregon than in conservation. I trust that Senator Wyden and Merkley will help, and I hope that we’ll soon have a chance to help educate our new Representative Val Hoyle about why protecting the headwaters of our South Coast’s wild rivers is so important. That said, given the current chaos in Congress, it looks like we may be in for a long wait until there is another opportunity to pass this bill. 

Securing the permanent mineral withdrawal to protect our region’s finest wild rivers and their clean water and salmon runs from the irreversible risks of mining must remain a high priority for conservation in our region. The surface strip mining needed to extract nickel from our local mountains would require removal of massive amounts of overburden for relatively small amounts of minerals—with untenable risks for our local watersheds. Clean drinking water and adequate flows in our rivers are going to be more and more precious as climate change ratchets up stresses on our aquatic ecosystems.

Our nation should prioritize research into alternate battery metals for the electric vehicles that we’ll need to transition to a clean energy economy. For example, researchers are already investigating sodium and saline—minerals that are far more common, less costly, and less irrevocably damaging to obtain than those that require strip mining. European nations are farther along in working toward a “circular economy” with metals recycling baked into manufacturing planning from the outset. We will never get to these much-needed innovations if our economic system allows wrecking whole landscapes—including some of America’s last best rivers and salmon streams—as a legitimate activity. Clean energy cannot be called “clean” if it depends on destructive mining. This nineteenth-century thinking needs to change as we aim to tackle twenty-first century challenges. 

Rocky Habitat conservation advances

In early December, I testified on behalf of KAS to the Oregon Policy Advisory Committee (OPAC), in support of proposed Rocky Shores designations. There were six areas proposed along the entire coast for Marine Conservation Areas (MCAs), including Cape Lookout, Cape Foulweather, and one in our area at Blacklock Point, which is contiguous with parts of Floras Lake Natural Area. The Blacklock MCA is intended to protect unique rocky habitat and nearshore kelp areas that are adjacent to the Floras Lake Natural Area. I am pleased to report that OPAC voted to recommend all six areas as MCAs.

Developing a strategy to conserve the important values of our state’s Rocky Habitats is a key part of Oregon’s Territorial Sea Plan. The public process to nominate and designate suitable areas has been going on for several years now. Rocky habitats are unique and important areas for marine life—think tidepools filled with snails, limpets, sea stars, mussels, barnacles, nudibranchs, and all manner of beautiful algae, plus shorebirds, including Black oystercatchers and turnstones and surfbirds! These rich ecosystems can also be extremely vulnerable to visitation and overuse, which has already resulted in unfortunate habitat degradation along the North Coast. 

The newly designated MCA sites will get added to the list of Rocky Habitat areas already designated last year, including the Cape Blanco Marine Research Area and the Coquille Point Marine Garden, and will be recommended for final approval by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) this spring. As the designations suggest, different areas are intended to have different emphases—some research, some public education with the aim of both reducing impacts and also helping the public to understand the unique values that rocky shore habitats provide. 

How these newly designated areas will be managed will depend on LCDC rulemaking that is yet to come. The Blacklock MCA will bring no explicit change of rules in terms of harvesting marine life but will hopefully help to marshal more resources to study and protect its important values into the future. 

Update on Floating Offshore Wind development

In January, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) completed its qualification review and finally announced the results of its “call” for nominations for floating wind energy development off Oregon’s Coast. Four multinational corporations put forth qualified nominations: Avangrid, Ocean Winds, Bluefloat Energy, and Mainstream Renewable Power. Their nominations cover the entirety of both the Brookings and Coos Bay call areas.

With nominations now reviewed, BOEM will continue with its own evaluation of potential impacts of energy projects on the nominated areas, which entails “suitability modeling” to determine which parts of the call areas are most suitable for future wind energy development. We hope they will also consider input from all other Oregon stakeholders before they identify Wind Energy Areas (WEAs) –the subset of the call areas—that will be considered for leasing to these private companies.

Down the coast in California, BOEM is much further along in its process of leasing offshore areas for wind energy development, which enables us to see what will be coming in Oregon. Having identified California WEAs last year, BOEM hosted its first West Coast wind lease sale in early December. Five companies won leases for five areas that will cover more than 370,000 acres—almost 600 square miles—off the coasts of central California near Morro Bay and of northern California, near Eureka, with the promise of generating 4.6 gigawatts (GW) of energy. The leases give developers the right to assess the WEAs in a proprietary way so they can propose more specifically how they will seek to further develop them in the future.

The auction drew bids much lower than recent lease sales on the East Coast, reflecting the greater uncertainties on the West Coast—with still unproven floating technologies in deeper waters, the lack of a clear plan to offtake the energy, and the need to build ports, a supply chain and a workforce. The average price offered to the government by the wind companies was $2,028 per acre in comparison with the $8,951 per acre price of lease areas off New York and New Jersey last February. Interestingly, none of the companies that won the California leases are the same as those now seeking leases in Oregon.  With its great demand for renewable energy and enormous population centers, California has already boosted its offshore wind energy goals to 25 GW by 2045, aiming to see more call areas identified for consideration soon.

With California racing ahead to adopt FOSW technology and other regions proceeding apace with OSW development, Oregon, coming a little later to the game, will hopefully have the benefit of learning from the mistakes of other places. Already BOEM’s suitability modeling is apparently becoming more robust and, in Oregon, will be used ahead of leasing instead of afterwards. Oregon’s outstanding marine natural resources certainly merit careful consideration. We should avoid and minimize impacts not only to fisheries but also to the seabirds and marine mammals that depend on the rich upwelling waters of the West Coast’s California Current large marine ecosystem. 

As longtime KAS members know, our group has been engaged in the public process for wind energy siting at both the state and federal level—advocating for earlier consideration of impacts to birds, fish, and wildlife and for a cumulative impacts assessment given the multiple wind energy areas and projects now under consideration for development from California through to Washington. The next opportunities for public input will be after BOEM identifies Oregon WEAs later this year. Please consider attending the upcoming presentations sponsored by KAS in Brookings and Gold Beach on February 9 to learn more about this important topic for our region. 

Elliott State Research Forest update

A bit north of our usual beat, KAS has long supported the goal of greater conservation of the important old-growth forest habitat remaining in the Elliott State Forest, located north east of Coos Bay. Longtime KAS members will recall that these valuable forests were being steadily logged-off to support the state school fund despite their irreplaceable habitat for marbled murrelets and other forest dependent wildlife. A big chunk of the state forest lands was even sold off with the express purpose of avoiding habitat protection laws that apply to public lands –until a deal was finally reached to de-couple the forest from the school fund and find a new path to provide for public benefit as a research forest. In early 2021, the Oregon Legislature established the Elliott State Research Forest (ESRF) to be managed by Oregon State University (OSU).


Over the past couple of years, there has been a concerted planning effort with OSU and an appointed advisory board to set up the ESRF. Now comes the test –will it will truly be managed as a living laboratory that helps to conserve critical natural habitat values? In December, the Oregon Land Board appointed a new group of nine stakeholders to the Elliott State Research Forest Authority Board, which will now work with OSU to oversee the research and management of the ESRF. Representatives from Southwestern Oregon include Teresa Bird, an ecological consultant who has conducted numerous murrelet surveys in the Elliott (and who is a KAS member!), and Jack Williams, a fish biologist who has served in the past as chief scientist for Trout Unlimited and as Supervisor for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Bob Sallinger, who has worked as Portland Audubon’s Conservation Director for several decades, has also been appointed to represent conservation interests.

In addition, the state has recently put forth a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the federally threatened and endangered species that inhabit the ESRF. The HCP must be approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service and will become the binding document that outlines specific protections for these species, including marbled murrelets, northern spotted owls, and Oregon Coast coho. KAS recently submitted comments and joined with other Oregon Audubon chapters in pressing the federal agencies to require better mapping, larger buffers, and greater protections for known occupied marbled murrelet nest sites and also provisions to improve aquatic habitat in the ESRF. 

Posted on

CONSERVATION NEWS, Summer 2022

  by Ann Vileisis

California Condors released into the wild!

In early May, the Yurok Tribe, released three captive-raised juvenile California Condors into the wild at Bald Hills, an ecosystem of high prairies in the eastern part of Redwood National Park. A fourth bird was released in mid-July as part of an inspiring recovery program spearheaded by the Yurok Tribe.

Condors once ranged throughout California and the Pacific Northwest, but through centuries of colonization, with new settlers often shooting and poisoning condors and reducing their food supply of large wild animal carcasses, it became increasingly difficult for these birds to survive except in a few enclaves. Condors very nearly went extinct in the 1980s, when the 27 remaining wild birds were brought into a captive breeding program. Over the past 50 years the condor recovery program has slowly boosted populations to nearly 500 birds that now soar free in the mountains of southern California and northern Arizona.  

The Yurok Tribe has led condor restoration efforts in our bioregion in conjunction with other partnering organizations including Redwood National Park, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Oregon Zoo, where the released birds were hatched and raised. 

In early May, I joined Oregon Wild’s Danielle Moser and the Oregon Zoo’s condor expert Kelli Walker in sponsoring a virtual program about condor restoration and what it will mean for Oregon. For now, condor experts hope the young birds will stay close to the release facility so they can acclimate. Condors are obligate soaring birds that rely on thermal uplifts to get around. Learning the lay of the landscape and wind-scape and gaining confidence in soaring are crucial skills that will enable the condors to travel in search of food. Mature and experienced adults routinely travel 40 miles in a single day from roosting to carrion foraging sites, but they have the capacity to travel more than 100 miles, and even up to 200 miles. In the coming years, we may well see these birds in Oregon! 

Research indicates that condors spending more time in coastal habitats have higher survival rates because of lower exposure to lead—the top threat to these birds’ recovery, which comes from pervasive lead shot and shrapnel in the carrion they eat. Along the coast, we still have large marine mammals—sea lions, seals, and whales—that become important food for condors when they wash ashore as carcasses. Over the years, I have seen quite a number of these carcasses and marveled at how long they can take to decompose. After learning more about condors, I came to realize that these long-lingering remains point to the fact that these carrion-eating birds have been a missing link in our coastal ecosystems. Condors have powerful beaks that can tear into the tough hides of marine carcasses, opening them up, bringing them back into the food chain, and making them available to other wildlife. Restoring condors will be an opportunity to restore and repair this broken link. We applaud and appreciate the efforts of the Yurok Tribe to restore condors, and we join them in welcoming these magnificent birds back to our bioregion.

South Coast Floating Offshore Wind Energy Update

In late April, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) officially proposed two “Call Areas” off the South Coast for potential future floating offshore wind (FOSW) energy leasing and development. The Brookings Call Area (450 square miles) extends from the California border north to the Rogue River, and the Coos Bay Call Area (1,364 square miles) extends from Charleston north to Florence. Both are roughly 14 to 25 or 46 miles offshore. BOEM’s earlier “draft” proposal had included a third Call Area that was dropped in response to concerns raised by fishing and conservation groups, including KAS, about the highly productive Coquille Bank, located west of Bandon.

Identifying Call Areas is the first step in BOEM’s press to lease areas on Oregon’s Outer Continental Shelf for energy development—part of the Biden Administration’s push to address our planet’s climate crisis by transitioning quickly to renewable instead of polluting fossil-fuel energy sources. The waters off our South Coast show bright red on wind maps, indicating high wind intensity, which has attracted the attention of both government energy researchers and wind-prospectors. 

However, unlike many other locations where FOSW projects are now being considered and proceeding, Oregon’s coast has limited transmission capacity and also a small population of energy consumers. Elsewhere, FOSW projects can plug right in to well-developed energy grids to directly and efficiently serve large, nearby cities (a big bang for the buck in terms of cost to decarbonize). Also, unlike many other places on the docket for FOSW development, Oregon’s marine ecosystems—part of the highly productive California Current Large Marine Ecosystem (CCLME)—have not yet been industrialized with oil and gas development nor massive ports and heavy shipping, and so we still have clean water and rich marine ecosystems that provide habitat for many species (several endangered), including seabirds that come from all over the Pacific, several types of whales, plus sea turtles, fishes, and unique corals. This rich ecosystem also provides for sustainable fisheries that are important for our coastal communities.

Over the past couple of months, we participated in “listening sessions” about FOSW hosted by local elected officials, including our State Representative David Brock Smith. At a session in Coos Bay attended by nearly 200 people, I spoke on behalf of KAS, emphasizing the values of our rich marine ecosystems to birds and wildlife. As always with wind energy, siting will be the single most important decision made. But because BOEM’s leasing process leaves the environmental analysis to the end—after areas are leased to private energy companies, I emphasized the need to consider cumulative impacts early in the siting process. At a session in Brookings, Sunny Capper spoke on behalf of KAS raising similar concerns. By far the largest group speaking out was the fishing community. Many fishers regard the rush to develop wind energy as a threat to their livelihoods and ability to provide sustainable seafood. They contend that the promised jobs in wind energy will displace their existing work and related jobs in coastal communities. They’ve also raised other important concerns about interference with navigation and long-term data collection that informs sustainable fisheries management. They’ve joined the conservation community in asking for a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) to help find areas of least conflict and to make sure that cumulative impacts to fishers and wildlife throughout the CCLME are carefully considered. They’ve also asked to slow the process and consider a small pilot project before proceeding with full-on leasing, which essentially privatizes areas of the ocean from here on out. 

In response to the outpouring of concern, Rep. Smith and other lawmakers in the “Coastal Caucus,” a bipartisan group of state representatives and senators from all coastal districts, sent BOEM a strong letter in early June asking to slow the leasing process to better understand risks, to address issues raised by fishers, to fully review bird and wildlife impacts, to consider leasing areas in deeper waters to reduce conflicts, and to prioritize locations to achieve the highest gain with the smallest footprint (a recommendation initially made by Governor Brown). Cities and ports up-and-down the coast, including the Cities of Gold Beach and Brookings, and the ports of Brookings, Port Orford, and Bandon, passed resolutions raising similar concerns. The Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siletz also weighed in, voicing additional concern about cultural values. Our Congressman Peter DeFazio and Senator Wyden also sent a letter to BOEM echoing many constituent concerns, asking for a more robust process to engage relevant stakeholders and not just the few local elected officials appointed to BOEM’s Oregon Task Force (eg. our sole “official” representative thus far has been Curry County Commissioner Court Boice). They also asked for a PEIS and for closer coordination with other agencies such as NOAA, the Pacific Marine Fisheries Council, and the Coast Guard to address fishery, navigation, and wildlife concerns. 

KAS catalyzed and helped lead a coalition of Oregon conservation groups to develop substantial written comments to BOEM about the proposed Call Areas. Joe Liebezeit of Portland Audubon (whom some of you know through the Black Oystercatcher survey) analyzed seabird abundance in the Call Areas based on the limited but best-available data. Other groups, including Oceana, Surfrider, and Oregon Shores, contributed important expertise on whales and dolphins, coastal law and resources—while KAS contributed crucial knowledge about our local ecosystems and communities and time. Twenty organizations, including all coastal Audubon chapters from the redwoods north to Astoria, signed on to our letter. 

We strongly urged BOEM to conduct a PEIS to ensure full consideration of cumulative impacts. At this point, there are six active proposals for wind energy development in the California Current ecosystem off California, Oregon, and Washington, with more slated for the future. Because the migratory paths of some birds and animals—gray whales, for example—span the entire length of the coast, they could encounter multiple FOSW projects in the future. Many seabirds are known to be either vulnerable to collisions or displacement by turbine arrays. Also, FOSW projects could displace both fishers and wildlife into areas in ways that could increase conflicts. These multiple impacts deserve analysis as part of the planning. 

More specifically, based on GIS data analysis, we recommended that BOEM remove known productive habitats from the north and east sides of the proposed Call Areas from future consideration. In our letter, we also encouraged careful consideration of the onshoring aspects of wind energy development early on—emphasizing Oregon’s Territorial Sea Plan and land use planning laws, which have very specific requirements and considerations to protect estuaries, rocky shore habitat. state parks, viewsheds, and more. Since it is not yet known where energy will be brought to shore, we highlighted important values of the coast proximate to Call Areas and highlighted the need for careful planning to avoid proliferation of too many substations, as has apparently occurred with FOSW projects in northern Europe. I’ll share a link to our comments in the next HOOT OUT so you can read them for yourself if you are interested to learn more.

At the same time, wind-energy developers nominated their favored locations for development within the Call Areas. From what’s been posted so far, it looks like a half dozen companies have made nominations to BOEM. One company Deep Blue, the US-based affiliate of the European company Simply Blue (featured in a recent article in the Curry Pilot) nominated 3 locations, including one within the Brookings Call Area. RWE, a German energy company that has been accused of using wind power to greenwash its coal mining and energy production operations, also nominated several locations within both call areas.

At this point, it’s important to underscore that there is very limited data about how seabirds and wildlife use Oregon’s rich offshore areas. Moreover, there is little understanding about how the new technology of floating offshore wind turbines—likely more than 800 feet tall and anchored with thousand-foot-plus long cables to the seafloor –will affect birds, marine mammals, and even fishes that depend on electromagnetic signals for navigation. Although there are many well-established fixed-bottom offshore wind farms, FOSW projects have only been implemented on a very small scale (eg. 5 turbines installed off Scotland) and only in shallower water. With the goal of transitioning to renewable energy as quickly as possible, BOEM is racing ahead with leasing off the Oregon Coast, in spite of the fact that wind energy development will likely be cheaper, easier, faster, less damaging to ecosystems, and closer to electric power demand in virtually every other part of the country where wind energy is now being considered.

There is much yet to research, learn, and consider about FOSW projects, and so a precautionary approach will be needed to ensure both the conservation of Oregon’s rich marine resources and also the most economic transition from fossil fuels.

BOEM’s next step will be to review all the input and devise smaller Wind Energy Areas to lease via auction to companies for future development. Meanwhile, in September, the Oregon Department of Energy will release the results of its study about the feasibility of integrating wind generated electricity into our existing grid. While preliminary studies indicated that the current infrastructure could accommodate 2 to 3 GW of power, energy companies have suggested that they’d want to develop at least five times that amount. 

Of course, climate change is already impacting our marine ecosystems and wildlife –with devastating marine heat waves and ocean acidification. And yet, we must ensure that the actions we’re taking will efficiently and effectively reduce carbon while not adding more stressors to our birds and wildlife. What will happen off Oregon’s Coast demands careful, informed, and nuanced consideration.

[Penny, I envisioned this next part as a special section, perhaps a boxed section with images/ photos]

Who lives on Oregon’s Outer Continental Shelf? 

Dozens of birds and animals inhabit or come to forage in rich offshore waters of Oregon’s Outer Continental Shelf. They all have fascinating stories that that most of us don’t even know. Here are just a few: 

Pacific Leatherback Sea Turtle: These critically-endangered, massive and long-lived sea turtles are the largest in the world reaching up to 2,000 pounds. They hatch on tropical beaches in Indonesia, but when full-grown, adult leatherbacks travel nearly 7,000 miles to forage for sea jellies in spots on our West Coast, including Oregon north of Cape Blanco. This is one of the longest migrations of any air-breathing marine animal, and it takes ten to twelve months to complete. Once incredibly abundant, Leatherback populations have collapsed over the past 40 years for multitude of reasons—development and disruption of nesting beaches, entanglement in fishing gear, illegal collection of eggs or killing of adults, plastic in the ocean, pollution, and climate change impacts.

Albatross: The Short-tailed Albatross and Black-footed Albatross routinely forage in Oregon’s rich offshore waters. These dynamic soaring seabirds are known for their massive wing spans and rely on air currents to migrate long distances to forage. In general, albatross are very long-lived birds that mate for life. The strong pair bond between mates is maintained through elaborate displays, including bowing, mutual preening, and head-bobbing. However, the birds breed infrequently and produce few chicks annually, which means their populations depend on adult survival over the long term. This makes their populations especially vulnerable to the risks of collision, which could kill adults. 

The Short-tailed Albatross is the largest, rarest, and most endangered of the northern hemisphere albatrosses. Distinguished by its golden head and showy pink bill, this bird alights on land only to nest –and, at this point, only on small islands off Japan, vulnerable to volcanic eruptions. Adolescents come to Oregon’s outer continental shelf to forage. Nearly annihilated by plume hunters a century ago, these birds have made a slow but strong recovery over the past 50 years. From a low of just ten pairs, the population has increased to the current estimate of more than 7,000 individuals. The smaller and more common Black footed Albatross—with its still impressive six-foot wingspan—nests on the Hawaiian Islands and glides two thousand miles to Oregon’s offshore waters to forage. Shearwaters, fulmars, and petrels are some of the other species of seabirds that forage in Oregon’s offshore waters. 

Bamboo Coral: Did you know we have a “Bamboo Coral Forest” in deep waters off our coast? It’s made up of pink, tree-shaped, filter-feeding animals in a genus Cnidaria. Bamboo corals have been called the “old growth forests” of the ocean because they grow very slowly (only millimeters per year) but can live hundreds of years if they are not disrupted by bottom trawling. In the deep sea, corals and sponges provide biogenic structures in areas that generally have few features and provide important shelter that supports a surprising diversity of marine fishes, including rockfish. 

Drones in Oregon State Parks, update

In the last Storm Petrel, I reported on the highly permissive drone policy proposed by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD). After an outpouring of heartfelt public concern at the April State Parks Commission meeting, the Commission directed OPRD to re-start the process with a new and more inclusive working group, finally including representation from wildlife and recreation groups. (Portland Audubon and Oregon Shores are the official conservation representatives to the state’s working group.) The initial, highly permissive proposal would have allowed drones to take off everywhere in Oregon’s State Parks, except in specific places where they would be disallowed as determined by park managers. The new working group is now tasked with developing specific criteria for where exactly drones will be allowed to take off and land within State Parks. After criteria is developed, OPRD staff will map the areas and develop further policy, with additional workgroup input before a new rulemaking process begins next year. 

We’ll have to see how this new process goes. From the outset, it still looks like OPRD’s goal is to accommodate more drone users in Oregon’s State Parks, even as so many other State Park systems –Colorado, California, Texas, Florida—have just said no to drones, as has the National Park Service. We’re following this issue closely because on the coast, our State Parks are especially important for birds and wildlife and also for recreational “wildlife watching.” Also, we have seen that the drone users nationwide have been particularly well-organized in aiming to make Oregon a model for permissive drone rules. Stay tuned. 

Rogue River Bear Canister Project

I am glad to report that the Rogue River bear canister rental pilot project is now up and running. If you plan to hike the Rogue River National Recreation Trail this summer or fall, you can now easily rent a bear canister for $3/ day when you arrange your car shuttle with Whitewater Cowboys (www.whitewatercowboys.com). The goal of the pilot project is to help reduce bear human conflicts, which have been increasing in recent years in the Rogue River canyon, in part because growing numbers of recreational users are not doing their part to properly store food. 

While seeing bears in their home habitat is one of the highlights of hiking or floating the Wild and Scenic Rogue River, it’s a problem when bears are attracted into camps and become habituated to human foods and garbage. Bears that become habituated to human foods cannot be relocated and unfortunately have to be killed if they become too persistent in seeking people’s foods. 

Though the Forest Service provides mini-electric fences and some bear-proof boxes for food storage at popular camp spots in areas known to be troublesome for bear conflicts, the bottom line is that visitors must take personal responsibility for properly storing food and trash. This is critical for safety and also to help protect bears in their wild habitats. 

To better educate visitors about how to be “bear aware” in the Rogue Canyon, the Oregon Department of Wildlife (ODFW), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently produced a video series to help educate the public. The bear canister rental project also helps provide this information to hikers before they set out. 

This year, there has already been a lot of black bear activity in the Rogue Canyon, likely owing in part to the late rains and late ripening of salmon berries that are the bears’ natural food sources. While the bear canister rental pilot project won’t solve all the problems, we hope it will help. The project has been a collaboration of Kalmiopsis Audubon, the Humane Society of the United States, Rogue Riverkeeper, Whitewater Cowboys (also known as Orange Torpedo), as well as ODFW, BLM, and the U.S. Forest Service, with funding from the Oregon Wildlife Foundation, River Network, and a donation from Bear Vault. We appreciate everyone’s efforts to help keep the Wild and Scenic Rogue River’s black bears wild and free!

Posted on

Spring 2022 Conservation News

by Ann Vileisis

Drones in Oregon State Parks

Thanks to everyone who sent letters to the Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation (OPRD) about proposed new rules for drones in state parks. On behalf of KAS, I submitted comments and testified in both the OPRD public process and also to the OPRD Commission in mid-April, raising concerns about the disturbing impacts of drones to birds and wildlife and also to park-user experiences. The Oregon Black Oystercatcher Survey has documented at least 3 nest disturbances per week as a result of drones on our coast, and there are many other examples of drone disturbance of colonial seabirds, including tufted puffins. And, of course, I’ve heard from many of you about unpleasant personal experiences with intrusive drones.

I was dismayed to learn that the public process for this rulemaking has been decidedly unfair. Only drone-users were invited to OPRD’s initial “Resource Advisory Committee” to develop drone rules, and they managed to change OPRD’s initially proposed rule—to allow drones nowhere except where expressly permitted—to a permissive approach allowing drones  everywhere except where prohibited. When two conservation groups were invited to the second RAC meeting and asked for a more-restrictive approach, they were told it was too late to change. Moreover, no bird or wildlife experts were consulted—even though Oregon’s coast hosts half of the West Coast’s seabird habitat, mostly in Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, which is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and lies directly adjacent to so many state parks.

Even more troubling, drone industry- and user-groups have organized nationally, asking their members to send comments to OPRD, and literally turning our Oregon OPRD rulemaking process into a venue for their national campaign to loosen-up the strong precedent of no drones in state parks across America. As OPRD has tabulated the comments, the agency has repeatedly said opinion is evenly split, and used that as rationale for the more permissive rules. Meanwhile, the park experience of the majority of Oregonians and visitors who cherish the opportunity to peaceably enjoy our state parks and to watch birds and wildlife that is vulnerable to drone disturbance is regarded as merely “one side” in an issue framed to be polarized when it shouldn’t be. To be clear, National Parks and other states parks, including those in Colorado, Washington and Florida and many, many more, have restrictive drone rules.  OPRD incredibly took an approach that would make our Oregon state parks into a mecca for drone users from elsewhere! This is not over, and KAS will continue to work on this issue with other Audubon chapters to protect our coastal parks, birds, and wildlife.

Floating offshore wind energy

In late February, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) announced its draft “call areas” for potential floating offshore wind (FOSW) energy development on Oregon’s outer continental shelf. They are big blocks—2,200 square miles—on the outer continental shelf (about 13-20 miles out), reaching from the California-Oregon border north to Florence, with a break in the middle for the sub-marine Rogue Canyon, which extends roughly from the Rogue River north to Cape Blanco. It’s a lot of area that will soon be officially offered up for leasing to big wind-energy-development companies. And we learned, still more areas will be offered up in the future. We learned, too, that bird and wildlife values have not yet been considered.

Because siting is the single most important decision that will be made about these industrial installations, I testified for KAS at BOEM’s February Oregon Task Force meeting about the unique values of our SW Oregon marine environment as part of the California current—one of only 4 eastern boundary upwelling ecosystems (EBUS) in the world. I emphasized the need for better analysis early on to consider cumulative impacts, especially for birds, fish, and wildlife that use the entire ecosystem, migrating north-south, or onshore-offshore. To get a sense of the super productivity of EBUS—they encompass less than one percent of the world’s ocean surface but providing for over 20 percent of the world’s ocean fish harvest.

Oregon’s fishing community also testified—in force, indignant that the promise of tens of thousands of new green jobs hid the fact that their “sustainable food” jobs could be lost. They reported that displacement of wildlife and fishers by wind turbine arrays would mean crowding fish and fishing boats into smaller areas creating more conflicts. Because both conservation and fishing groups asked for more and better analysis early on, we subsequently worked collaboratively to develop a joint conservation-fishery letter—again asking BOEM for better analysis in the form of a programmatic environmental impact statement, which is generally required for large federal projects that will have multiple sub-projects and parts. The current BOEM process lets energy companies pick their favored sites first, which puts the cart before the horse.

This is a challenging issue. One KAS member asked me if raising concerns with BOEM would cause delays that we don’t have time for given the urgency of addressing the climate crisis. I share the concern about the urgency of the climate crisis. Yet the headlong rush to lease our oceans makes it even more imperative that we raise concerns about birds and wildlife now. Floating offshore wind is an entirely new technology that’s been implemented only on a very small scale in just a few places in the world —not yet in deep waters nor upwelling zones. According to Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), the world’s largest FOSW farm in Scotland has just 5 turbines. There will be many important aspects to consider.

The cost of developing FOSW here off Oregon’s coast will be extremely high given the costs of “floating” wind farms, which are much more expensive than offshore windmills in shallower water and far more expensive than land-based wind energy. The need for port upgrades, massive infrastructure needs, and significant transmission upgrades force costs even higher. According to recent analysis, the Oregon grid could carry about 2-3 gigawatts (GW) of energy from FOSW arrays, which would mean about 200 very large (1,000 foot tall) turbines. However, at the recent BOEM and ODOE meetings, there were discussions about the possibility of a much larger build out in the future to 17 or even 20 GW—a massive industrialization of our ocean and coastline advocated by the wind energy industry. Also, unlike ours, all other FOSW projects currently proposed have far lower transmission costs because they are more proximate to significant population centers.

I keep returning to the fundamental fact that the ocean is not just an empty space. One old time salmon fisher I talked to told me that the waters out there near the continental-shelf drop-off move like rivers, with an abundance of fish, birds, and whales. Local offshore coastal ecosystems are literally wind-adapted, with birds and animals especially suited to high-winds and the upwelling waters stirred by those winds. It’s a place few people know with albatross and other soaring seabirds that glide across the Pacific to forage and microscopic plankton that depend on cold nutrient-rich waters and sustain complex food webs that feed salmon, tuna, and whales. The adaptation to wind extends onshore, as well, to the redwoods that depend on the fog drip caused by summer upwelling.

And so, there is much to learn and attend to in these challenging times. It’s expected that BOEM will “publish” its call areas in the Federal Register soon, which will kick off a short comment period. KAS will continue to work with a coalition of conservation groups to provide constructive comments to ensure consideration of birds and wildlife. (Since this article was published, BOEM published its call areas in the Federal Register. See here: https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/Oregon

Colebrook Quarry

Thanks to everyone who sent letters to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) raising concerns about Colebrook Quarry, up Hunter Creek. Hoot-out recipients know this is an enormous new quarry proposed for BLM land, adjacent to Hunter Creek Bog ACEC. But even though it’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land, the public process is being run by ODOT on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

The Colebrook Quarry would be located about 8 miles up Hunter Creek Road, a mile before the Hunter Creek Bog but directly adjacent to the Hunter Creek Bog Area of Critical Environmental Concern. Despite the large scale of this project, ODOT says the quarry will proceed with the minimum review possible—in National Environmental Protection Act parlance called a CE (categorical exclusion). According to ODOT, the proposed quarry is expected to supply a minimum of 300,000 tons of rock for ongoing repair of Highway 101. ODOT expects the quarry will be used for 3-5 months every few years—during summer paving season and/or during winter, when landslides affect the highway—generating truck traffic of 30-60 round trips per day. Operations at the quarry will include drilling, blasting, excavating, crushing, processing, batching, and hauling.

KAS raised concerns about the insufficient process, including lack of consideration of alternatives (local people have pointed to an existing private quarry already in operation lower in the watershed and closer to Hwy 101). We also raised key environmental issues that demand more careful project planning: that Hunter Creek hosts habitat for threatened coho salmon, with sedimentation from road runoff as a key limiting factor; that the site is part of proposed critical habitat for threatened coastal marten; that the quarry site is located in the Sudden Oak Death infected area and may well have the potential to spread the pathogen with so much traffic; and that the quarry site hosts old-growth trees. We also raised concerns about the impacts of traffic to local residents and growing recreational use on Hunter Creek Road for walking and mountain biking. ODOT says it’s pulling together analysis for BLM based on public input, but what happens next remains unclear. Stay tuned!

Wild Rogue conservation news

In mid-April, Congressman Peter DeFazio introduced the Wild Rogue Conservation and Recreation Enhancement Act, a bill that will help to protect the Wild and Scenic Rogue River in its remarkable canyons, upstream of Curry County. The bill would establish a Rogue Canyon National Recreation Area between Hog Creek and Mule Creek Canyon, and would also expand the current Wild Rogue Wilderness by 59,000 acres, extending it upstream along the river into BLM lands.

The bill is needed because conservation groups have for decades fended off old-growth logging proposals in the Rogue canyon where the wild and scenic corridor is too narrow to protect the river’s outstanding values. The proposed upstream protections will help to sustain water quality and salmon runs enjoyed by citizens of Curry County. The bill also directs land management agencies to develop a Wildfire Management Assessment and would match up with legislation already introduced by Senator Wyden called the Oregon Recreation and Enhancement Act. Of special importance to us, this includes our Southwest Oregon Mineral Withdrawal—a critical measure that has been a top priority of KAS for nearly a decade.

Passage of the Wild Rogue bill would certainly solidify Representative DeFazio’s legacy as a champion for Southwest Oregon’s rivers, wildlife, and public lands before he retires at the end of this year after 37 years of public service. Please thank Rep. DeFazio by going to his website’s contact page where you can send a short thank you note. https://defazio.house.gov/contact/email-me

Sample thank you note: Dear Rep. DeFazio, Thanks for your longstanding efforts to protect Southwest Oregon’s wild rivers! I appreciate your recent bill to conserve the Wild Rogue River, which will help protect clean water, salmon and steelhead runs, and wildlife habitat, while enhancing outdoor recreation opportunities—all valued by our communities. I also hope that you’ll steward the Southwest Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act to its final passage. Thank you for being such a champion for Oregon’s rivers, forests, and wildlife and for your exemplary public service!

Rogue River black bears

Seeing a black bear ambling along the river’s edge is a highlight of floating or hiking the Rogue. However, over the past few years, there have been increasing human-bear conflicts as a result of black bears getting habituated to human foods improperly stored by visitors.

A couple of years ago, ODFW proposed to address the problem by opening a new hunt for bears in the canyon, even though it’s not really a “bear problem” but rather a people-problem of getting visitors to store their foods properly.

Owing to strong public opposition, ODFW dropped its hunt idea. Since then, KAS has collaborated with Rogue Riverkeeper and the Humane Society of the United States, as well as with ODFW, BLM and the Forest Service to figure out how to inspire Rogue visitors to better store their foods to reduce conflicts and help keep both people and bears safe. This winter, with a grant from River Network, we convened a collaborative meeting to launch a bear canister rental pilot project, together with the Merlin-based-river rental and shuttle company, Orange Torpedo. The pilot project will give Rogue River Trail hikers the opportunity to rent bear canisters to safely store food when they hire their shuttle. Currently there is no easy way to rent a canister, and there are no food storage requirements in the Rogue canyon. We hope that providing a ready way to store food properly can help people take responsibility and do their part to keep Rogue bears wild and free.

The same principles of storing food on the Wild & Scenic Rogue apply in rural settings too. Curry Transfer and Recycling now offers special trash receptacles with lids that cinch down, to keep trash secure and wildlife out.

Good news for Oregon’s forests!

In early March, the Oregon conservation community had two great wins in the state legislature related to forest management. First, the legislature passed SB 1501 to reform the Oregon Forest Practices Act, which regulates more than 10 million acres of private forestland. The reform bill was the result of a long, hard negotiation convened by Governor Kate Brown’s office to engage representatives from the timber industry and the conservation community. The resulting agreement, called the Private Forest Accord, became this basis for legislation, which passed with rare bi-partisan support. The new law will provide stronger protection for both fish and non-fish bearing streams on private forest lands. It requires wider riparian buffers, more protection against steep-slope logging, and more requirements to prevent roads from bleeding sediments, all to the benefit of salmon and other aquatic species. Still more reforms are needed, but this is a significant step toward more science-based management of private forests. We can thank our friends at Portland Audubon, KS Wild, Oregon Wild, Trout Unlimited, and the Wild Salmon Center for their thoughtful work at the negotiating table.

Second, the legislature passed SB 1546 and allocated $121 million to create the Elliott State Research Forest, affording new protections for old growth forests, imperiled species, and water quality. Following decades of conflict owing to the state forest’s remaining old growth forests being logged to provide funding for Oregon’s Common School Fund while destroying habitat for threatened wildlife and other values, a new vision for a different future for the Elliott took hold. Over the past three years, stakeholders including conservation groups, tribes, timber interests, recreational interests, rural counties, the Oregon School Board, the State of Oregon, and Oregon State University (OSU) have worked to develop a new collaborative path forward for the Elliott.

The legislation establishing the Research Forest, based on the stakeholder proposal, also decoupled the Elliott from the Common School Fund, an essential step in prioritizing conservation as it removes the pressure for the forest to fulfill a financial obligation to the schools. The bill passed with strong support from more than 25 conservation groups (including KAS), and overwhelming bipartisan support in the legislature with a 22-4 vote in the Senate and 50-9 vote in the House.

Be aware of spring aerial sprays

Most timber companies spray herbicides in either the spring or fall, so this is the time of year to check and see if there are any herbicide applications planned near your community. Visit https://sprayfreecoast.org/sprays-across-oregon/ to use an interactive map that displays areas where chemical applications or clear cuts are planned. Click on the shapes in the map to learn more. In the case of planned aerial sprays, you can call operators to ask for more specific dates and details, or to express concern. Sprays are allowed by law, but respectfully voicing concern can be effective in reminding aerial spray operators to take special care when spraying near homes or water supplies.

Posted on

Conservation News, Winter 2022

by Ann Vileisis

Time to finish the job: Protecting our Wild Rivers Coast from strip mining

As longstanding KAS members know, we’ve been working to protect the headwaters of Hunter Creek, Pistol River, the North Fork Smith and the Illinois Rivers from the threat of nickel strip mining, ever since a foreign owned mining company proposed to explore Forest Service lands behind Gold Beach at Red Flat back in 2013. After working together with a coalition of organizations, communities, tribes—and our members of Congress, in 2016, we helped to secure a temporary 20-year administrative mineral withdrawal, which precludes the staking of new mining claims in these headwater areas to give our lawmakers time to pass a law to make the mineral withdrawal permanent. Since then, every year, our Senators and Congressman have introduced the Southwestern Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protect Act (SOWSPA). Last fall, the bill made it farther than ever before, with important hearings completed on both the House and Senate side!

However, with the pending retirement of our Congressman Peter DeFazio, we will lose an important champion who has long worked to protect Southwest Oregon’s rivers from the threat of mining. (By the way, Rep. DeFazio recently secured funding to clean up the horribly polluting Formosa Mine Superfund site over in the Cow Creek-South Fork Umpqua watershed!) Before Rep. DeFazio leaves office at the end of his session, we will need for him to work with our Senators to finally get SOWSPA across the finish line. With redistricting, a much bigger chunk of the upper Illinois River will move into the district of Rep. Bentz of eastern Oregon, who is already on record opposing protections for our rivers’ headwaters. Moreover, there is rising opposition to our bill based on the interests of one small but loud Grants Pass mining company that has gotten the ear of the Josephine County Board of Commissioners (BOC), as well as Rep. Bentz and other influential Republican lawmakers in D.C. – arguing that rising demand for battery metals means SW Oregon should be open to mining development and pushing a false narrative that local people don’t want any mining restrictions. In one Congressional hearing, a Josephine County Commissioner even claimed (falsely) that Curry County opposed SOWSPA!

Knowing we’d need to counter that misinformation, I approached Curry County Commissioner Court Boice—our commissioner most interested in public lands—and reminded him of the longstanding local effort to protect our rivers’ headwaters. Mr. Boice offered to put the issue onto the BOC agenda on Dec. 1. I am extremely grateful for the dedicated and articulate KAS members and local residents who showed up to testify in person at the Curry BOC meeting. One person after another got up to speak –giving voice to many concerns, from mine waste and pollution, to drinking water and wells, salmon and steelhead, and unique botany –all important reasons for the BOC to support SOWSPA.

As each person spoke of love for our rivers and place, the positive momentum grew. Ultimately, we built up a powerful wave of inspiration that literally washed over them. In the space of that BOC meeting, any larger political divisions evaporated, and we were all people who loved and cared deeply about our special “Curry Corner of Oregon,” as Mr. Boice often puts it.


When the public comment ended, Board Chair John Herzog led with enthusiasm. He exclaimed: I think we should just support this right now! He gave Boice “the honor of making the motion.” Then the Board voted unanimously to support, eliciting appreciative applause from the entire room. In the end, Mr. Boice said: “This is almost inspiring,” and Mr. Paasch added that he wanted to make sure the letter included specific direction to get the bill passed soon!

It couldn’t have gone any better. Two weeks later, on Dec. 15, the Curry BOC adopted a final letter in support of SOWSPA. Meanwhile, KAS member and Native Fish Society (NFS) Hunter Creek steward Dave Lacey went to the Gold Beach City Council, and they too voted to renew their support for SOWSPA. These letters–on top of the well-established and substantive record public support from the extensive public process for the 2016 administrative mineral withdrawal—should help to give Rep. DeFazio and our Senators the concrete and current evidence that they need to counter the mis-information. There are many reasons to feel despair about national politics, but our work locally gives me some hope that people can come together around common ground for conservation.

On another front, you may recall that, despite the mineral withdrawal, the Red Flat Nickel Company (RFNC) asserted that it had a “valid existing right” to continue exploratory drilling on its 1,776-acre block of claims at the Hunter Creek headwaters. (Mineral withdrawals do not apply to “valid existing claims) In response, the Forest Service has been preparing a “Surface Use Determination” to provide technical details that will inform whether such a continuation is even legally possible. The SUD is expected to be completed soon, and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Supervisor Merv George will make a final decision about whether to allow any further mineral exploration. Because hard rock mining on federal public lands is still governed by the outdated Mining Law 1872, our Mineral Withdrawal solution is not perfect, but it’s the best tool we have to protect our cherished watersheds.

There will be more to do on this issue in the coming year, and so I hope I can count on your continued backing and support. Please stay tuned, and sign up for KAS HOOT OUTs for timely opportunities to help.

BOEM to announce Wind Energy “call areas” soon

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is slated to officially announce “call areas” proposed for wind energy development off Oregon’s coast next month. In the last Storm Petrel, I reported that KAS had spearheaded efforts to pull together Oregon Audubon chapters and other important marine wildlife conservation groups into a coalition to proactively identify key issues for birds, fish, and wildlife early in the wind energy facility siting process. In late October, our coalition sent a letter to BOEM, expressing concern that official opportunities for public comment would come only after the areas for energy development were already picked. To us, it has seemed to be a cart-before-the-horse approach, especially since the floating offshore turbines are a totally new technology, and siting turbines in one of our planet’s largest upwelling current zones—the California Current—is also wholly new. If there is anything I’ve learned about minimizing the impacts of wind turbines on wildlife, it’s that getting the siting right is the single most important decision to be made.

In our letter, we provided specific information about the important values of Oregon’s rich offshore marine ecosystems—with productive upwelling of exceptionally clean, cold water that provides for fisheries/fish habitat areas, draws nearly 100 species of birds from all around the Pacific to forage, and provides foraging habitat for thru-migrating gray whales and other marine mammals. We provided preliminary maps and recommendations on important areas to be avoided.

We also recommended and requested more opportunities for public and scientific input early in the siting and planning process; a full consideration of the high value biological resources in the California Current ecosystem off Oregon and the cumulative impacts multiple West Coast wind energy projects will pose to wildlife; formation of a technical science advisory group to provide an independent review and expertise for both siting and management considerations; developing a comprehensive coastwide framework for adaptive management, including robust monitoring and a way to bring new scientific information on board; and developing a meaningful compensatory mitigation program to make up for environmental harm caused by the implementation of offshore wind facilities, including cable landing and port/terminal sites.

After sending the letter, in early December, we had a chance to discuss some of our concerns with BOEM officials. When we asked for a better understanding of what specific criteria BOEM was using to choose its call areas, they pretty much said: “Trust us! There will need to be some judgement calls.” Coming from a massive federal agency with a long background of siting offshore oil drilling platforms, this response was not entirely reassuring. In the big picture, we recognize the Biden Administration is racing to fast track its climate crisis response with offshore wind energy as a key component, but as local caretakers, we must voice concerns for the wildlife that depends on Oregon’s rich, clean, and pristine offshore marine ecosystems. After BOEM announces its call areas, we expect a notice in the Federal Register that will start a 30-day “call” for public comment and site nominations from wind energy companies.

Meanwhile, the Oregon Department of Energy (DOE), under direction from the State legislature’s HB 3375, put forth by our own State Representative David Brock Smith, is starting a study to identify benefits and challenges to offshore wind development –focused on the energy aspects (eg. hook up to the grid, port infrastructure, transmission lines). On Jan. 20, DOE gave an overview and kicked off a public comment period. Comments will be accepted via an online portal in response to “prompt questions” about different topics (not all have to be answered). To learn more and to participate, google: Floating Offshore Wind Study Oregon.

The need to transition to a carbon-free energy system has never been more urgent, but it is important to make sure we don’t inadvertently harm our wildlife as we proceed! Stay tuned.

Humboldt Marten: critical habitat proposed

In December, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) proposed critical habitat to help support the survival and recovery of the Humboldt marten (Martes caurina), which was listed as a threatened species in 2020. KAS submitted supportive comments.

Humboldt martens live only in the forests of Northern California and Oregon, including those dominated by old-growth firs but also coastal shore pine forests and serpentine forests. The coastal martens have been eliminated from 93-95% of their historic range and continue to be threatened by logging of mature forests, loss of habitat to wildfires, rodent poison used in growing marijuana, vehicle strikes, and loss of genetic diversity owing to such a small population size. The decline of these animals started with the historic fur trade that decimated not only martens but otters, minks, and beavers, too. Not until 2019 did the State of Oregon ban trapping for these very rare animals–and only then, after a petition and lawsuit from conservation groups.

The proposed Humboldt marten critical habitat in our KAS “beat” includes the Floras Lake Natural Area, Cape Blanco and Humbug State Parks, as well as large forested areas of Siskiyou National Forest—all areas where martens have been sighted and that still retain or have potential to retain the old growth, closed canopy character, and dense brush habitats that the animals favor. According to the USF&WS, 42% the area proposed for Humboldt marten critical habitat is already managed as such for marbled murrelets and spotted owls, other species that depend on old growth forest.

Humboldt martens have pointy ears and bushy tails. They grow up to 2 feet long but weigh less than 3 pounds. Martens are solitary animals except during mating and when females are raising young. They favor denning in cavities of large old trees and foraging in dense brushy areas. Martens eat small mammals, birds, berries, reptiles and insects, and are eaten by larger mammals and raptors so they once played an important role in coastal forest ecosystems.

Drones on the coast

Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) will soon consider new rules for drones in state parks. Through the years, some of you have reported observing drones flying too close to osprey nests. In addition, data from the ongoing coastal Black Oystercatcher study (orchestrated by Portland Audubon with help from volunteers, including some KAS members) has also documented a troubling trend of increased disturbance of these shorebird nests. This will be an important concern to bring up. A public comment period is expected in February. If any of you have observations or experiences with drone impacts to birds or wildlife, please let me know. I’ll be sharing more info about how to provide comments in an upcoming HOOT OUT.

Posted on

KAS published our first book! “Curry County Mammals I Have Known” is available for purchase now.



Curry County Mammals, a new book by Jim Rogers, now available

by Ann Vileisis

Through the years, many KAS members told me how much they enjoyed reading Jim Roger’s regular wildlife column in the Storm Petrel. Now, I am very pleased to announce that Kalmiopsis Audubon has published all Jim’s essays in a delightful little book: Curry County Mammals I have known: stories of wild animals, backwoods life, and forest conservation in Southwest Oregon. The book captures some of Jim’s wealth of knowledge and experiences in local forests and hopefully can help inspire us all to better know the natural world and to help protect it.

For those who don’t know about Jim, he’s best known as an industry forester-turned-environmentalist who led efforts to protect both the Grassy Knob and Copper Salmon wilderness areas up Elk River. He is a beloved founding member of KAS and has been engaged in conservation in Curry County for nearly five decades.

Curry County Mammals I have known was compiled by Teresa Bird, who did a terrific job of pulling together the essays with lovely colored illustrations. It also includes an introduction I wrote about Jim’s unique path and why he’s been so important to the history of conservation in our region. The final essay is one Jim wrote about his remarkable personal transformation and efforts to protect the Grassy Knob Wilderness even as the timber wars were brewing. 

Michael Kauffman, noted author of Conifer Country, offered this comment after reviewing the book: “With observations made across decades, Jim has nurtured deep connections with the natural world. His stories, weaving personal tales with scientific understandings, give us all a path to better know and connect with the wild mammals of this place.”

The book is now available for purchase at the following local outlets: Port Orford Community Co-op and Gold Beach Books. It would make a terrific holiday gift for your local, nature-loving friends! The book can also be ordered online from Barnes & Noble for $12.95 (here’s the link). Thanks to the generosity of Jim Rogers in sharing his words and stories, we can learn more about wildlife, and all proceeds go to support the work of Kalmiopsis Audubon!

Posted on

CONSERVATION NEWS

by Ann Vileisis

Southwest Oregon Mineral Withdrawal bill advances!

I am pleased to report that on Oct. 18, the Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee held a hearing, which included consideration of the Oregon Recreation Enhancement (ORE) Act. The ORE Act includes the Southwest Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA), which would secure a permanent “mineral withdrawal” to protect vulnerable areas at the headwaters of the Wild and Scenic Illinois and North Fork Smith Rivers, plus Hunter Creek and Pistol River, from the threat of nickel strip mining. The bill also includes designation of more wilderness and a National Recreation Area for the Rogue River canyon (upstream of Curry). In the Senate, such hearings are key stepping stones for a bill to advance.

You will remember that Congressman DeFazio advanced the SOWSPA portion of this bill earlier this year on the House side, pressing to have it included in a big public lands bill. The challenge of lawmaking, of course, is to get bills through both the gauntlet of both Senate and House hearings so they can match up in a larger public lands bill before the end of the two-year session. With so many pressing issues facing our country, and unprecedented political polarization, this chess game is not easy. That makes your continued engagement crucial.

Longtime KAS members know, we’ve been working for many years to secure this mineral withdrawal to permanently protect our rivers and unique wildlands from new mining claims. In the face of an active mining proposal up Hunter Creek, we built tremendous local and regional support and positive momentum. After massive turnout at public meetings—demonstrating 99% support, including from local surrounding communities, businesses and tribes—we secured a temporary administrative 20-year withdrawal in 2017. But only Congress can make it permanent, and the clock is ticking.

Meanwhile, this past summer, a mining proponent in Josephine County mounted an aggressive campaign to oppose any restrictions on mining in SW Oregon, promoting a vision of new mines as an economic boon for southern Oregon, though ignoring economic realities and severe problems that strip mining would impose on our pristine streams. Nonetheless, his claims prompted the Josephine County Board of Commissioners (BOC) to write two letters opposing SOWSPA and the River Democracy Act, which is another promising bill that would protect rivers statewide (see below). Of course, whatever happens on lands and rivers in Josephine County is upstream from us–in both the Illinois and Rogue watersheds. In addition, with the current push for renewable energy and growing global demand for battery metals, including lithium and nickel, the mining industry has been pushing hard for looser regulations to a more-receptive Congress.

And so, the threats remain. It’s important to remember that mining companies still operate under the Mining Law of 1872, which provides very few sideboards, gives local communities no way to protect drinking water, fish habitat or other special values, and leaves the taxpayers holding the bag for clean-up of toxic wastes and spills. As long as federal mining law makes it cheaper and easier to wreck pristine landscapes for raw minerals, sourcing needed metals from recycled sources remains a backburner option. Meanwhile, the metal mining industry, dominated by foreign companies, is the most polluting in America. In our region of renowned wild rivers, clear water, and salmon runs (not to mention unique rare plants) —plus high precipitation, locating strip mines on public lands at our headwaters would be a major mistake! As we’ve long said, this is no place for mining.

In addition to the ORE Act, earlier this year Senators Wyden and Merkley introduced the River Democracy Act (RDA), which would designate thousands of new miles of wild and scenic rivers all around Oregon, including many in our KAS beat thanks to local nominations and support. The bill would give the Forest Service clear directive to manage our rivers to protect their outstanding values into the future, and also would explicitly prevent new dams and new mining claims. This bill had its very first hearing earlier this summer. More than 250 businesses and breweries, including many in southwest Oregon, have supported it—providing an important counterweight to those few advocating for more mining.

To keep up momentum to get ORE/SOWSPA across the finish line and to show support for the RDA, I ask for your help once again. Please make a call or send an email to Senators Wyden and Merkley. We’ve had to do this again and again, and yet “endless pressure endlessly applied,” in the words of the great conservationist Brock Evans, is the only way we can succeed in proactively protecting the wild rivers that provide for so much life, beauty, recreation –not to mention drinking water –in our region.

ACTION ALERT: PLEASE HELP by taking 2 minutes to call Senator Wyden’s office and leave a message/or send a short email to THANK him for advancing the ORE Act.

Here is the phone number for Sen. Wyden’s Washington Office: (202) 224-5244 If you call after-hours, you’ll be asked to say and spell your name, indicate where you live –and leave a brief message. That’s easy!

Or here’s the URL for Senator Wyden’s website where you can send him a note:  https://www.wyden.senate.gov/contact/email-ron

SAMPLE Voice Message/note to cut, paste, and please personalize to make it more effective:

Dear Senator Wyden,

Thank you advancing the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act, which includes the Southwestern Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA). This bill will help to permanently protect the headwaters of our cherished local rivers from the threat of strip mining. I value our rivers and this is something that local people care about and that I’d really like to see get done. I also support your efforts on the River Democracy Act. I appreciate your leadership in protecting all our wild rivers. THANK YOU!

Senator Wyden is on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that will have chief jurisdiction on this bill, but if you have time, please also thank Senator Merkley. He has co-sponsored this bill, and he can help by lending his support, so it’s good for him to hear from us too. The message is the SAME as above.

Here is the phone number for Senator Merkley’s Washington office: (202)-224-3753

And here is the URL for Senator Merkley’s contact website where you can send an email: https://www.merkley.senate.gov/contact

Offshore Wind energy planning proceeds

As reported in recent Storm Petrels, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is proceeding, along with the Oregon’s Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), to identify potential areas for offshore wind energy development, called “call areas,” on the outer continental shelf along Oregon’s coast. The call area locations are expected to be announced this winter, with an official federal BOEM process starting early next year. Kalmiopsis Audubon has taken a lead role in helping to catalyze the Oregon Audubon Council and other wildlife-conservation groups to work proactively on this issue by identifying key issues for birds, fish, and wildlife early on in the process.

Of course, it’s important to remember our context: the perils of climate change already seem to be coming faster than expected, and a recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report has indicated that we’re missing the boat in reducing carbon emissions and thereby will face higher temperature increases. Already higher temperatures and carbon levels are causing marine heat waves and ocean acidification that is affecting marine life. President Biden has prioritized climate action, and so there is an urgent push for massive offshore wind projects that could theoretically come on line to provide significant energy in a relatively short time—with fewer larger turbines producing more energy. (Of course, there will be significant infrastructure needed to “onshore” and distribute the electrons.) Offshore wind energy facilities have already been developed in the North Sea, off Scotland and Denmark. And on the West Coast, there are already “call areas” identified and under consideration off California (near Morro Bay and Humboldt).

The floating offshore wind projects that BOEM will consider on West Coast’s outer shelf will be among the first in the world to be sited in one the Earth’s four eastern ocean boundary upwelling systems –in our case, the California Current. These nutrient-rich, upwelling zones are the globe’s most dynamic and ecologically rich ocean ecosystems for productivity of marine life and fisheries, supporting abundant seabirds and marine mammals—and our California Current marine ecosystem is no exception.

The waters off Oregon are particularly valuable for birds, fish, and wildlife. Audubon and Birdlife International have identified important hotspots along Oregon’s coast, including over 15 nearshore “Important Bird Areas” (IBAs) and two large, offshore IBAs (Cape Blanco, Heceta Bank) that extend into waters where wind turbines are expected to be sited. Nearly 100 species of birds, including the endangered Short-tailed albatross and other seabirds of conservation concern, come from all around the Pacific to forage in Oregon’s productive offshore waters.

This clean, nutrient-rich water also attracts many species of marine mammals. Foraging areas have been identified off Oregon for humpback and gray whales, as well as endangered Southern Resident killer whales. Our offshore waters also host critical habitat for other endangered marine species, including leatherback sea turtles and green sturgeon.

Given the dynamic nature of the California Current marine ecosystem off Oregon’s coast, sophisticated spatial planning will be needed to identify ecologically important areas to be avoided. Some offshore oceanographic features are already well-known to create important zones of high productivity, including the Astoria Submarine Canyon, Heceta and Stonewall Banks, and the advective upwelling zone south of Cape Blanco. These areas should be avoided for wind development. However, the dynamic nature of our upwelling ecosystem presents unique challenges for marine spatial planning. El Niños, Pacific Decadal Oscillations, and other atmospheric cycles can alter oceanographic processes and spatially shift zones of high productivity or of devastating hypoxia and thereby significantly shift foraging areas through time. In addition, climate change is already shifting marine life distribution and may also alter atmospheric cycles in yet unknown ways.

KAS and other conservation organizations have sent a letter to BOEM and DLCD identifying key habitat areas and issues for birds, fish, and wildlife to be addressed in siting wind energy facilities on Oregon’s outer continental shelf. Floating offshore wind energy has great potential to help us transition away from polluting fossil fuels, but as we do, it will also be crucial to proactively conserve our region’s remarkably clean and productive marine ecosystems. We’ll be pushing hard to make sure that BOEM accounts for these unparalleled values in their siting process.

Elk River chinook salmon, update

At September’s ODFW Commission meeting, I testified on behalf of KAS regarding the Elk River’s fall Chinook run, urging ODFW to do more to restore viability for this important but imperiled local run. This run is managed under ODFW’s Coastal Multispecies Management and Conservation Plan (CMP), which focuses on coastal fish species that migrate north, and it was time for a 5-year status review (yes, several years late!) of the plan’s efficacy.

Long-time KAS members know we’ve been advocating for Elk River fall Chinook since 2013 when ODFW first identified them as non-viable—in fact, the state’s ONLY non-viable fall Chinook run. In 2019, an updated ODFW Population Viability Analysis (PVA) indicated that this run has an alarming 89 percent risk of extinction, which is off-the-charts in terms of risk (usually 5 percent is considered the threshold for concern)!

ODFW has attributed the problem to two factors: poor habitat in the lower river (lack of shade, trees, large wood, and off channel habitat for rearing) and hatchery interactions. The Elk River hatchery puts out roughly 275,000 chinook smolts out each year, but too many returning hatchery fish—instead of getting caught or returning to the hatchery—spawn with wild chinook in the river. In the past, it was thought that hatcheries could easily “supplement” wild runs and provide for more fishing “opportunity,” but a significant body of research over the past three decades has demonstrated that “supplementation” programs actually replace wild fish runs with a far less sustainable substitute. While hatchery-raised fish are well suited to life in a hatchery, they are not optimally suited for life in the wild. As a result, when too many hatchery fish interbreed continually with wild fish, their offspring are less productive, which in the long run depresses the productivity of the wild run. At this point, alarmingly, Elk River’s wild run is no longer reproducing itself. All this becomes especially consequential in the face of projected climate changes because genetic and life history diversity will be the key ways that fish can adapt to changing river and ocean conditions. 

Over the past seven years, ODFW has taken some actions to address the hatchery problem. They’ve reduced smolt output from 325,000 fish to ~275,000. They’ve left the intake ladder open through the entire season and fixed water pumps. This has helped to draw more fish into the hatchery and significantly reduced the number of hatchery fish spawning on wild fish redds –measured as pHOS (percent hatchery fish on spawning grounds). In the past, pHOS readily exceeded 50%, and now it’s down to just below 30% —a trend in the right direction. Also, starting last year, in light of the alarming PVA, ODFW curtailed take of wild fish for the first time ever, a closure continuing this year. This should result in anglers catching more hatchery fish and will hopefully allow more wild fish to reach and “seed” upper river spawning grounds. Finally, researchers continue to study whether adding a scent to egg incubation water might provide a better cue for hatchery fish to return into the hatchery –another possible way to reduce spawning of hatchery fish on wild spawning grounds. This research still has another six years to go! Meanwhile, we remain concerned that ODFW seems unwilling to consider the one idea that may be most important–to simply lower the enormous hatchery releases to a more sustainable level that could reduce high risks to wild run.

For comparison, according to 2019 ODFW data, the number of fall Chinook smolts and fingerlings released by Indian Creek hatchery in the estuary of the mighty Rogue River was ~63,000, and hatchery fall Chinook made up 1-3 percent of the returning lower river run. In the much smaller Elk River, the average number of fall Chinook smolts released annually between 2014-2018 was 279,209, and hatchery fish made up a whopping 52 percent of the returning run!

Moreover, a key problem in tracking Elk River chinook populations is that when ODFW counts returning fish, they count those that return without an adipose clip as “naturally produced.” However, these non-clipped fish could be not only the offspring of two wild fish, but possibly of one hatchery and one wild parent, or of two hatchery parents that spawned in the river. There’s been a nagging concern that the high numbers of hatchery fish continually added into the river, and continually contributing to less productive, non-clipped offspring, could be masking a decline of the wild run. That is a key reason that ODFW’s recent PVA is so alarming. If this is making your head swim, don’t worry. This is a truly challenging issue on many levels.

In short, when Elk River hatchery was built back in 1968, Elk River had a strong run of fall chinook—a majestic, locally adapted, deep-bellied fish that was a keystone species for this exceptional watershed. But now after 50 years of hatchery supplementation, despite efforts to protect and restore habitat, we’ve ended up with a faltering, non-viable run! It turns out that ODFW biologists have been deeply concerned about hatchery interaction problems for decades, but only recently, with the CMP, has the Department finally started to address these vexing issues. We appreciate all that ODFW is now doing but think that more is needed. The longer a run remains non-viable, the greater the risk. Now is time to pull out all the stops to ensure our fall chinook’s survival into the future. And so, we must continue to be a voice for these local fish.

Native Plant Notes, by Teresa Bird

Triantha occidentalis (Western false asphodel) – a fairly common plant that’s been hiding a specialized skill

If you enjoy hiking in higher elevation, serpentine areas, you’ve likely seen this lovely member of the lily family already. It’s common in darlingtonia bogs and wet meadows or seeps, and can be recognized by its fairly large, flat leaves, and cluster of either small six-tepaled* white flowers or bright red fruits, depending on the time of year. If you think you’ve found it but are unsure, reach out and press the stem beneath your fingers. If it’s sticky, you’ve probably got the right plant! The “false asphodel” is often seen coated with small insects ensnared on the stem’s tiny sticky hairs.

It is this characteristic that researchers from the University of British Columbia and the University of Wisconsin-Madison recently decided to investigate further. In a carefully designed study involving fruit flies, they found that Triantha occidentalis gets more than half of its nitrogen from prey! The sticky hairs on the stem not only trap small insects, they produce a digestive enzyme that allows the plant to absorb nutrients from its prey, similar to many other carnivorous plants. This is an amazing adaptation that likely allows the Triantha to thrive in areas with nutrient-poor soils, like serpentine.

At first, it could seem like a poor choice for pollination (and therefore reproductive) success for a plant to trap insects so close to its flower. But the researchers believe the small hairs are only sticky enough to trap very small insects, allowing larger and stronger insects like bumblebees to escape carnivory and pollinate the plant.

The recent discovery of the carnivory habit of this species, which was first described by botanists almost 150 years ago, reminds us how many amazing things are yet to be discovered about the plants in our Northwest wildlands! I recently saw Triantha growing in a Darlingtonia seep right along Hunter Creek Road – keep your eyes out for it next time you’re up that way (and don’t forget to check out what kinds of insects it’s eating). Happy botanizing!

*“Tepals” refers to the outer part of a flower, including petals and sepals together, when there is no clear distinction between the two

Posted on

Summer 2021 Conservation News

by Ann Vileisis

Marbled Murrelet uplisted to endangered

On July 9, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (OFWC) voted 4 to 3 to uplist the marbled murrelet (MAMU) from “threatened” to “endangered” on the state endangered species list. It’s odd to cheer the listing a bird as “endangered,” but in this case, we are hopeful that the decision can provide a new framework that may truly help this little seabird to rebound.

Marbled murrelets are small dark seabirds that come ashore to nest on mossy limbs of big old growth trees in forests along Oregon’s coast. They were devastated by the clearcut logging of the vast majority of their nesting habitat, and are now impacted by continued habitat fragmentation and warming ocean conditions that affect the fish they eat. Survival of MAMU in Oregon requires protection of existing old-growth nesting habitat until surrounding forests grow large enough once again to provide sufficient habitat to support nesting of more birds. 


You may remember a similar vote by the OFWC three years ago that was subsequently reversed in response to timber industry pressure. Environmental groups cried foul, and sued. A judge ultimately agreed with their assessment of the illegal public process and directed the OFWC to take up the issue with a de novo hearing.

This time, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) staff recommended against uplisting, citing a small (2%) uptick in murrelets counted in recent at-sea surveys, an increase in habitat (mostly marginal) since 1995, and the fact that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (during the Trump Administration) had not uplisted MAMU. But seabird scientists provided new research indicating that birds at sea forego nesting for many years in a row if ocean conditions are poor, and that there was really no way to know if birds counted at sea were actually Oregon nesters. Predictably, a lineup of timber industry groups opposed the uplisting while all the seabird scientists and bird advocacy groups supported. As the Commissioners took in all the testimony and then discussed the issue through a marathon 8.5-hour meeting, it became clear that a majority thought it was time to take stronger action to protect this vulnerable bird.

With the uplisting, the Commission also voted to approve survival guidelines developed by ODFW staff that will clarify and help strengthen protections for remaining murrelet habitat in state-owned forests in the Coast Range, which contain a significant amount of the murrelets’ remaining nesting habitat. The guidelines will influence how other state agencies, such as State Parks, Oregon Department of Forestry, and Department of State Lands, address land management actions that may detrimentally impact MAMU habitat. The agencies are now required to develop endangered species management plans and submit to the Commission for approval within 18 months.

Teresa Bird, who has been leading KAS murrelet advocacy efforts, testified eloquently and persuasively on behalf of KAS at the ODFW hearing in favor of the uplisting. Teresa, who has done both at sea and in forest monitoring for marbled murrelets, has come to know the science of these mysterious little seabirds and was able to point out flaws in opposition arguments and also to convey some of her personal experiences. I am proud to say that KAS members have worked to protect marbled murrelet habitat in our forests since the founding of our organization. Thanks to all who sent letters to the OFWC in support of our MAMU! And if anyone wants a chance to perhaps see a marbled murrelet, please contact Teresa about this year’s community murrelet survey up Elk River, coming up on July 31.  

Port Orford outdoor lighting ordinance passed!

I am pleased to report that the Port Orford City Council unanimously passed an upgraded version outdoor lighting ordinance at its July 15 meeting, after an extensive process of research and public meetings by the Port Orford Planning Commission. The upgrade was needed to address many changes in lighting technology that have occurred since the dark sky ordinance was first passed in 2005. Some highlights include the requirement for warm colored lighting (< 2700 kelvins), dark-sky compliant street lights on Highway 101, and stronger enforcement provisions. We’ll post the upgraded ordinance on our website when it becomes available. 

KAS has been engaged in projects to protect the beautiful starry sky over the city of Port Orford from light pollution for more than 20 years, beginning with getting the goal into our city comprehensive plan. Then for many years, KAS board member Al Geiser worked together with Coos Curry Electric Coop to install “night caps” to focus the bright light of street and yard lights down to the ground. KAS worked to pass the original ordinance in 2005. And with this recent upgrade effort, KAS has attended every single meeting pressing to get the ordinance right and across the finish line.

I want to thank everyone who has helped by attending meetings through the long process and  several individuals who played particularly helpful roles: former Planning Commission Chair Kevin McHugh (and retired electrical engineer) spearheaded the effort to upgrade of the ordinance, conducting a tremendous amount of research and bringing considerable expertise to bear; Steve Lawton helped us to collaborate with ODOT and CCEC regarding light fixtures on Highway 101; star- (and bird-) photographer Rowly Willis attended countless meetings and shared his knowledge of illumination. In the end, Planning Commissioner Greg Thelan took a special interest in making the ordinance work well, and we are grateful to all current planning Commission members and to City Council members for passing the new outdoor lighting ordinance. Please thank Port Orford’s City Council members for passing the lighting ordinance by sending them a thank you note. (email contacts: pcox@portorford.org, claroche@portorford.org, gburns@portorford.org, jgarratt@portorford.org, tpogwizd@portorford.org, lkessler@portorford.org, gtidey@portorford.org)

Finally, I am delighted to share that long time Dark Sky supporter and local, Port Orford musician Steve Montana was so inspired by our town’s beautiful starry skies that he wrote fun and moving lyrics to an old song to help inspire our effort. You can see his truly stellar performance on our brand new KAS Youtube channel. Google “Kalmiopsis Audubon, Dark Skies, Youtube,” and you’ll find it. The stunning starry background photo is by KAS member Rowly Willis. We encourage our social media-savvy members to help share this fun little music video widely to help inspire compliance. We plan to do some more community education in the fall.

River Democracy Act

Last year, Senator Wyden asked Oregonians to nominate their favorite rivers for Wild and Scenic designation. More than 2,000 people responded to the call with 15,000 nominations, and earlier this year, he and Senator Merkley introduced the River Democracy Act, which would designate more than 4,500 miles of rivers, including many in our Kalmiopsis-Wild Rivers coast region. In early July, Senator Wyden advanced the bill with a hearing in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources subcommittee, a key step in legislative process.

Some important local streams in the bill include tributaries to the Wild and Scenic Illinois, Rogue, Chetco, and North Fork Smith Rivers, plus the streams in the Sixes, Pistol River, Hunter Creek, and Winchuck basins. The bill would direct federal agencies to “protect and enhance” each river’s outstanding values and would explicitly protect designated river corridors from damming and mining. The bill allows for fire-risk reduction and management that is in alignment with protecting outstanding values (called “outstandingly remarkable values” by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act). With rising concern about drought, the importance of protecting our rivers has come into particularly sharp relief!

The Pacific Rivers Council produced a short video that highlights some of the rivers to be protected by the new bill that you can see here: http://vimeo.com/534234263

If you’ve not yet done so, please contact Senators Wyden and Merkley to thank them for advancing the River Democracy Act in the Senate and while you’re at it, please also encourage them to advance the Southwestern Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA). You can send a comment on their websites, or make a call: Sen. Wyden: (202) 224-5244/ (541) 858-5122/ Sen. Merkley: (202) 224-3753/541-608-9102

Here’s a sample of what you might say or write:

Thank you for introducing the River Democracy Act. I appreciate your listening to Oregonians and working to better protecting the rivers that flow through our federal public lands. In Southwest Oregon, we have some rivers that need special protection from the threat of strip mining at their headwaters, and so I hope you’ll also continue to advance the Southwestern Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA), which was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this year.

Remember, it’s always good to add something personal —by tucking in a sentence about how you appreciate the natural values of rivers, getting outdoors, birds, fish or fishing. Conserving our rivers is essential because rivers are literally the lifelines of our landscapes!

Also, Senator Wyden may be coming to Curry County for an in-person town hall meeting in late summer, and if he does, it will be important for people to show up—in person— to thank him for his leadership in protecting our rivers. Sign up for the KAS HOOT OUT for news about opportunities to make a difference for conservation.

Floating offshore wind

With the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) public process for leasing offshore areas for development of wind energy on the horizon for the end of the year, I’ve continued to research how these industrial, floating turbine installations might impact our region’s birds, fish, and wildlife so we’ll be ready to provide informed and constructive input.


Here are some things I’ve learned thus far. Proponents think that locating turbines ~20 miles out will minimize conflicts with fishermen and wildlife, but it’s important to note that this offshore zone is not empty. The continental shelf gradually slopes down from the coast, and then— between 25 to 30 miles out—drops from 3,000 to 10,000 feet deep. At the shelf break, cold, nutrient rich waters rise from the deep, creating a particularly rich zone of life that attracts larger fishes and birds. Off Oregon’s coast, upwelling coupled with distinctive bathymetry and oceanographic conditions in the vicinity of the Columbia River mouth, Heceta Bank, and Cape Blanco are thought to make for particularly rich zones.

Birds known to use the upwelling zone include albatrosses, shearwaters, and fulmars—known as the dynamic soaring seabirds—which come from all around the Pacific to forage. Most of these pelagic birds never come to land except to breed, and each has a fascinating life history. For example, the endangered Short-tailed Albatross now breeds on only two islands in northern Japan. Parents raise one chick each year, and it is thought that 2- to 3-year-old birds come to feed off Oregon’s coast. Decimated by market hunters to the point of near extinction in the early 20th century, the birds have had a difficult time rebounding owing to their very small population size and limited breeding grounds. Plastics pollution, marine contamination, and long-line fishing are also considered to be threats to their recovery. 

To help minimize impacts to birds like albatrosses, wind energy researchers have been studying the idea of installing enormous-sized turbines—800-1,000 feet tall—so that dangerous rotor-swept areas will be 400-500 feet above the ocean’s surface and so that arrays might contain fewer, larger turbines. (For perspective, wind turbines you may have seen in the Columbia Gorge or in southern California are 300 to 400 ft tall!) To reduce impacts to birds and marine mammals, the turbines will need to be arranged in arrays small enough or widely-spaced enough, that north-migrating species can either avoid or go around. The noise, electromagnetism, cables, structures may displace some species entirely, while the structures may also attract forage fish and draw some species into the arrays. 

Finally, for offshore wind energy development to be economic, locations for turbine arrays will likely need to be close enough to link up to major electric grid infrastructure—such as near Coos Bay, which has a major tie-in to BPA power lines. However, stronger winds to the south may prompt wind prospectors to consider farther-afield turbine locations that could be linked by undersea cables. There is still quite a lot of uncertainty on many fronts —and a lot more to learn. Stay tuned!

Wild horses, again!

In early June, Commissioner Boice reprised his proposal to relocate wild horses from over-populated eastern Oregon’s BLM range lands to the rugged terrain of the Kalmiopsis Wilderness. He’d invited his friend, a zealous proponent of using horses to reduce fire risks in wilderness areas, to come and give a presentation to the Curry Board of Commissioners (BOC). Long-time KAS members will remember that Mr. Boice brought this misguided proposal to the BOC back in 2017, and after a series of meetings, at which KAS members and others testified persuasively against it, the Curry BOC voted 3 to 2 to not pursue it any further.

It was a bad idea then, and it remains a bad idea now, so I sent in a letter from KAS and asked KAS members who had provided persuasive testimony in the past to send in letters again. I am proud to say our membership includes people with a lot of diverse expertise to address this issue—from wildlife and rangeland management, to direct experience with horses’ behavior and of the animals’ impacts, to knowledge of the Kalmiopsis Wilderness and its botany, of the wild horse laws and of public lands laws, and more.

Commissioner Boice moved the presentation to a later date, but KAS Board member Tim Palmer went down to the BOC meeting anyway and urged Boice and his fellow commissioners to just drop the misguided proposal. Marisu Terry also spoke against. At that point, Commissioner Paasch let it be known that Boice’s horse-expert friend had sent an email to the BOC deriding and insulting Curry County citizens who had already submitted letters, and so he recommended against allowing the presentation. (We later obtained a copy of the email, which indicated that the expert did not want to come to talk to a bunch of “ignorant” Curry County citizens.) Paasch, a long-time horse owner, explained that uncontrolled wild horses would likely end up becoming a problem on private lands, echoing one of the many concerns we had raised.

To be clear, this proposal would not even be legal owing to laws protecting wild horses and wilderness, which is managed by the U.S. Forest Service, but in this age of ill-informed ideas taking root, we’ve felt that it was critically important to provide substantial information to counter the proposal. Mr. Boice’s intention was positive—to reduce wildfire risks, but we think there are far better ways for our county to do that—foremost by helping to better educate citizens about fire risks, and to encourage managing vegetation close to houses to create defensible spaces and hardening of homes to withstand fire. In the end, Commissioner Boice decided to drop the horse proposal. Thanks to all who helped with this one!

Honey Bear campground expansion

In April, new Las Vegas-based owner of the Honey Bear Campground in Nesika Beach—Dacia RV Adventures LLC—proposed a significant expansion of the RV park to 162 campsites. Apparently, the previous, locally-based owner had made unauthorized expansions of both RV and tent sites beyond the approved 65 RV and 5 tent campsites. The new owner, which also owns RV parks in Florida, Texas, and Oklahoma, sought both to bring past expansions into compliance (with proper sewer and water capacity) and to expand even further. KAS submitted comments about the need to keep campsites and parking areas out of wetlands, to properly manage stormwater to avoid impacts to Greggs Creek, and also to support dark-sky compliant illumination proposed by the new owner. Neighbors raised questions about traffic and proximity of such a dense, commercial development in their rural neighborhood, but because campgrounds are “conditional uses” for the property’s “commercial rural zone,” there was little that could be done. Ultimately, the Planning Commission approved the campground expansion with a set of 15 conditions, including ones related to protection of wetlands, riparian zones, and dark skies.

34-acres in Langlois

Curry County Roadmaster Richard Christensen has proposed to use the 34-acre County-owned land at the intersection of Airport Rd and Highway 101 in Langlois for a much-needed, clean-fill disposal area –a place to store materials in the event of landslides. This is the 34-acres that Oregon Parks traded to the county as part of the Floras Lake land swap, and the need for a clean fill storage area in north county was identified in the Road Department’s 2021 strategic plan.

Recognizing that the County seeks to now put this land to some useful purpose, at a BOC workshop on this matter held on July 7, KAS Board member Tim Palmer suggested that, with good planning, the densely forested land—with one parcel north and one south of Airport Rd—might accommodate the needs of the road department while also allowing for some other uses, such as trails and possibly educational uses in association with Pacific High School (right across the street). He recommended that the road department use the northern parcel, leaving the southern parcel, which has larger trees and more wetlands, for other purposes. He underscored the need for a wide scenic forest buffer all along Highway 101 and that clearing the land unnecessarily would allow gorse to take hold. As part of the discussion, Economic Development Director Summer Matteson also proposed the idea of a “canopy project” that might capitalize on the land’s sizable trees (all are third growth). The Commissioners directed Planner Becky Crockett to work with the road master to develop a more specific site plan proposal.

New Strain of Sudden Oak Death found near Port Orford

In May, sudden oak death (SOD) was found at a new site north of Port Orford along Highway 101 and also in the general vicinity of Arizona St. on the west side of the Highway 101. SOD is a non-native pathogen (Phytophthora ramorum), spread in part by spores carried by air currents. It has been decimating tanoaks and infests other shrubs, including rhododendrons, at a number of locations in the South County. This detection is over 20 miles north of the last known detection, which was just north of the Rogue River near Lobster Creek.

At this point, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) has sampled about 151 trees and has found 107 positives. The results indicate a new strain—called the NA2, which up to this point has only been found in nurseries. ODF is still sampling in the area and are actively contacting landowners for permission to inspect properties where they suspect dying tanoaks. A helicopter flight has been done by an ODF aerial survey specialist with a number of trees marked for follow up ground visits. The SOD program is also starting to obtain permissions for “treatments,” which means cutting, piling, and carefully burning trees. Meanwhile, the Oregon Department of Agriculture has instituted an emergency quarantine in the area within 3 miles of the infected trees. (See: https://blogs.oregonstate.edu/suddenoakdeathworkshops/) If anyone in the Port Orford area has tanoaks, myrtles, azaleas, or rhododendrons that appear to be dying, please contact Randy or Casara at the Oregon Department of Forestry’s Sudden Oak Death program so your trees can be evaluated: Casara Nichols, (541) 435-5031, Casara.C.Nichols@oregon.gov, Randy Wiese, (541) 294-8425, Randall.S.WIESE@oregon.gov

Posted on

Conservation News, Spring 2021

by Ann Vileisis

Representative DeFazio Leads on SOWSPA!

I am pleased to report that, since the last Storm Petrel, the bill to protect the headwaters of Hunter Creek, Pistol River, the Illinois (Rough and Ready Creek), and North Fork Smith from the threats of strip mining — the Southwestern Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act (SOWSPA) — has passed the whole U.S. House of Representatives as part of a larger public lands bill (the Protecting America’s Wilderness and Public Lands Act), thanks to a big
push by our Representative Peter DeFazio! If you’ve not yet thanked Congressman DeFazio, please send a quick note via the contact page on his website to express appreciation (and help to keep him engaged!): https://defazio.house.gov/contact/contact-peter.

Now it’s time to ask our senators to do their part! They have already introduced a different bill, the River Democracy Act, which — based on nominations from hundreds of Oregonians — would designate thousands of miles of new wild and scenic rivers throughout our state, giving clear guidance to federal land managing agencies to accord our wild rivers with a higher level of protection. But most important, we need our senators’ help to finish the business of passing SOWSPA, which remains crucial to protecting threatened headwaters from mining. As longtime KAS members know, SOWSPA builds on years of communities coming together — on both sides of the Oregon and California border — to advocate for protecting outstanding wild rivers, drinking water, salmon and steelhead runs, recreation opportunities, and other natural values. The initial impetus was a proposal for mineral exploration in the headwaters of Hunter Creek/Pistol River by a company that also held a large block of mining claims in the headwaters of the North Fork Smith River. The laterite soils (what we often call “serpentine”) are rich in minerals but are of low grade — so mining would require removal of massive amounts of overburden. Such strip mining, plus piling and leach-processing of rock, in our high-precipitation area would be like opening a Pandora’s box at the headwaters of our special wild rivers. Working for increased protections for our public lands is a long process that demands perseverance, but I know that all our local voices together — YOUR VOICES — have been absolutely critical in getting us this far. Please let’s press ahead together. I thank you for your help in keeping this ball rolling along!

ACTION NEEDED: Please send an email to Senators Wyden and Merkley thanking them for introducing the River Democracy Act and encouraging them to introduce and advance SOWSPA in the Senate. Here is the contact page for Senator Wyden:
https://www.wyden.senate.gov/contact/email-ron

Here is the contact page for Senator Merkley:
https://www.merkley.senate.gov/contact

Here is a sample message to help you with writing
your own note:

Dear Senator Wyden/ Senator Merkley,
Thank you for introducing the River Democracy Act.
I appreciate your listening to Oregonians and giving
federal agencies clear guidance to better protect the
rivers that flow through our federal public lands.
However, in southwest Oregon, we have some rivers
that need additional protection from the threat of
strip mining at their headwaters. To address this
issue, I urge you to please re-introduce the Southwest
Oregon Watershed and Salmon Protection Act
(SOWSPA). The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed this bill, and so your leadership is now needed on the Senate side to get this important act
passed into law. Please re-introduce SOWSPA soon!

Floating Offshore Wind Power: Coming SOON to a Coast Near Us

In late March, KAS along with the Oregon Audubon Coalition (OAC) hosted a webinar with planners from the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Manage-ment (BOEM) and the State of Oregon about current planning for future installation of floating wind tur-bines in federal waters off our coast. In short, BOEM is now preparing to identify potential leasing areas, called “call areas,” for wind energy development companies, and the agency wanted to “engage” with us to tell us what they are doing to address concern about impacts to birds.

Of course, we’re very interested to know. Our “beat”— Oregon’s South Coast — is seabird central! Oregon hosts one-half of the West Coast’s breeding bird colonies, and our part of the coast hosts more than one-half of Oregon’s colonies. We have millions of seabirds that come to breed here precisely owing to the wind, which churns the surface and causes upwelling of deep, cold water and nutrients that nourish the invertebrates and fish they forage on; it’s one of the richest and cleanest marine ecosystems on the West Coast. Moreover, these rich waters also attract nearly 100 species of pelagic birds from all across the Pacific, including albatrosses, shearwaters, fulmars, and more. I’ve never yet been out on a pelagic birding trip, but friends who have say that 25 miles out is where one starts to see many of these unique species. Of course, fish and wildlife, including whales and other marine mammals, depend on rich offshore waters, too. So what is BOEM doing? It is currently assembling and starting to analyze known data with the aim of identifying areas where presumably impacts to birds, fish, and wildlife can be minimized. I am grateful that BOEM is making this effort, but I have no delusions. This is the same agency that oversees offshore oil and gas leasing, and its process aims to expedite installation of industrial-scale energy production facilities by big energy companies. Though it sounds at first like BOEM’s planning will inform the site selection, actually the companies decide where they want to site facilities first, and then a public process follows from there. It is expected that BOEM will invite companies to propose sites for projects later this year (likely in November). Then there will be two opportunities for public input — the first in response to general siting of “call areas” and another with the NEPA-required public process — after areas have been leased and companies have put forth their specific plans, which is, of course, quite late in the game for making meaningful adjustments.

Meanwhile, with the Biden Administration’s big push to address climate change with green energy projects, there is now a rush to bring these facilities to Oregon to take advantage of substantial, time-limited federal subsidies. On the state level, in early April, the Oregon House Committee on Energy heard a bill put forth by our Representative David Brock Smith to expedite installation of three gigawatts of power — roughly 250 to 300 massive turbines — off our coast by 2025 or 2030. The initial bill called for a task force to expedite development and included no mention of birds, fish, wildlife, or ecosystems, but it was substantially amended to instead direct the Oregon Department of Energy to collect information about the benefits and challenges of connecting the offshore energy facilities with Oregon’s electric grid. The amended version includes a statement about minimizing impacts to ocean ecosystems and also, very fortunately, includes clear language about the need to plan for decommissioning of such facilities. This improved bill has bipartisan support, is expected to pass, and aims to give different economic stakeholders and the State of Oregon greater leverage in deciding where and how wind energy facilities might be sited — though to be clear, the primary permitting process will be federal.

In the past, land-based wind power on our coast had been deemed economically infeasible because the big BPA (Bonneville Power Administration) transmission lines stop at the California border and so could not carry electrons south to lucrative, larger markets seeking renewable energy. Now, however, a new model is being put forth — to tap Oregon’s offshore wind to supply power to coastal communities and then use our state’s existing grid infrastructure to also convey electricity into the Willamette Valley, freeing up other energy for energy-demanding metropolitan areas to the north and south. It is widely thought from a national perspective that wind power will help to reduce our dependence on polluting fossil-fuel energy sources, namely oil and gas, with an overall benefit of ultimately reducing impacts of climate change.

National Audubon has a policy of supporting wind energy development that minimizes impacts on birds — recognizing that the environmental stressors associated with climate change are already affecting birds, fish, and wildlife. The harsh reality is that we now live in a time of increasingly heartbreaking tradeoffs based on the tragic failure of past energy policy decisions.

One thing I have learned about reducing impacts of wind turbine arrays is that siting is supremely im-portant; wind generators are a good idea but are not suitable everywhere. With concern about potential impacts of industrial wind installations on birds, fish, and wildlife in the rich waters off Oregon’s coast, KAS and the OAC intend to engage to ensure that the expedited federal permitting process will not sidestep these concerns.

Honestly, when I listened to the state hearing online, heard our coast described as the “Saudi Arabia of Wind,” and saw that the initial bill to expedite energy development included not a single word about birds, it was hard not to worry about the gold-rush mentality of wind developers. It made me realize we’ll surely need to stand up for the albatrosses, petrels, and puffins, and hopefully be a force to make sure these potentially massive industrial facilities get sited in the least damaging locations and operated in the least damaging manner possible. Please stay tuned on this important emerging issue.

Administration Revokes Bad MBTA Opinion

In early March, the Biden Administration revoked the controversial opinion made by the former administration’s Department of the Interior Solicitor, the so-called “M-Opinion,” which in 2017 had weakened the Migratory Bird Treaty Act — one of America’s bedrocks for bird conservation. Reversing decades of legal interpretation, the “M-Opinion” declared that the Act did not prohibit incidental — albeit the predictable and preventable — killing of migratory birds by commercial activities. In addition, the Biden Administration started a public process that hopefully will also revoke the pending regulation intended to further codify the unfavorable-to-birds “M-Opinion.”

With ever increasing development along their migra-tory flight paths, our birds face increasing threats — from potential for collisions with tall buildings, wind turbines, and communications towers, to finding former wetland resting and feeding habitats reduced to crowded, disease-ridden, or polluted-by-industry sinks. Several industries, including wind energy, have made great effort to develop best practices and miti-gation measures to reduce incidental bird mortality, owing precisely to the “stick” of the MTBA. This bedrock law remains critically important as a tool for bird conservation into the future.

Protect Forests to Address Climate Crisis

President Biden’s first big action on the environment was to re-enter the Paris climate agreement, and his administration has hit the ground running with efforts to accelerate a transition to renewable energy. How-ever, there is another important approach that many in the conservation community would like to see advanced, too: protecting our forests.

Safeguarding current carbon stored in forests and in-creasing those stores is recognized by the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as an essential strategy for addressing the climate crisis. U.S. forests already sequester nearly 12 percent of our nation’s annual carbon emissions, but they could do more if public lands forests were strategically managed to retain carbon.

Mature trees in old-growth forests play an outsized role in storing and sequestering carbon because they serve as a centuries-old bank. Intact, primary, or un-logged forests store 30 percent to 70 percent more carbon than logged forests. It will take quite a long time for newly planted trees to catch up — 100 or 200 years, of course. In addition, protecting mature forests would have the multiple benefits of also pro-tecting clean water and biodiversity.

For all these reasons, Kalmiopsis Audubon joined with more than 100 conservation and environmental groups in sending a letter to Biden Administration climate policy leaders, urging them to include protection of mature and old-growth forests as a key strategy to assure compliance with the Paris climate treaty. At a global climate summit on Earth Day, Biden announced an ambitious new goal of reducing carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030 — signaling greater urgency and commitment to addressing the climate crisis. There is a lot of focus on new technologies, but let’s not forget the value of our trees and forests as tried-and-true carbon sequesterers.

KAS Supports ODFW Efforts to Protect Habitat

Earlier this year, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) submitted applications for “in-stream water rights” to ensure future flows for fish in more than 100 streams around the state, including in our area the Sixes, Chetco, and Winchuck. The flows of all our local rivers are pretty much already “fully-appropriated” for the low-flow summer months, which means that water users already have the rights to take all the water that is available down to a fairly minimal flow level, not always leaving enough as would be optimal for fish and aquatic life. Like most states in the West, Oregon’s water allocation system is based on the antiquated doctrine of first in time, first in right — established long before anyone could envision a scenario of scar-city and certainly before anyone remembered to leave some water in the river for fish.

Fortunately, many of our rivers already have some minimal in-stream water rights for fish, and in some cases, farmers or ranchers have worked with ODFW to allow their water rights to flow in-stream for the purpose of conservation — so the new ODFW applications were submitted as a kind of insurance policy, giving fish priority should any flows become available in the future. Nevertheless, Curry County’s commissioners decided to oppose the in-stream flow proposals, suggesting that they would preclude “future development” that would be more important. I honestly can’t imagine many local residents prefer-ring more development to rivers with insufficient water in the summer or fish in the fall. On behalf of KAS, I submitted a letter to the commissioners and also to the State Water Resources Department to back up ODFW’s applications for local in-stream flows, and I appreciate other KAS members from the specific watersheds who helped by sending addition-al letters. We also sent a letter to support ODFW in updating the state’s Essential Fish Habitat maps. These official maps determine where the many laws intended to protect salmon habitat actually apply — and affect activities such as mining and logging.

Port Orford Dark Sky Ordinance

Keeping Port Orford’s skies dark — for natural beauty, birds and wildlife, human health, and energy conservation — has been an issue championed by KAS for more than two decades with notable success, but evolving LED lighting technology has made an up-grade of the Port Orford outdoor lighting ordinance necessary. The public process has taken longer than expected, but we’re now getting close. At its March meeting, the City Council sent the latest version back to the Planning Commission (PC) with a request for some specific fixes related to enforcement provisions, street lights, and security lights. At its April meeting, the PC stated its intent to make the fixes in May and then to hold another public hearing in June. The ordinance will then head back to the City Council, hopefully for final approval. Please sign up for the KAS HOOT OUT to learn more about how you can help at the critical junctures. It will be important to show public support!

Interactive Map of Clearcuts and Sprays Across Oregon

If you haven’t done so yet, I’d recommend checking out the map created by Coast Range Forest Watch that compiles all the clearcuts and sprays planned so far in 2021. A zoomed-out view shows just how much forestry activity is planned in the Coast Range, and zooming in will allow you to see if activities may be planned in a specific area you care about. It also al-lows you to see which clearcuts and sprays are taking place within municipal drinking watersheds. You can view the map online at www.sprayfreecoast.org/sprays-across-oregon/ which also provides information about more of the map’s functions and how to use it.

If you’re interested in helping to monitor forestry activity in a watershed near you, please contact teresa @kalmiopsisaudubon.org. – Teresa Bird

Posted on

Conservation News

By Ann Vileisis, from January 2021 Storm Petrel

Floras Lake Land Swap Complete

I am pleased to report that the Floras Lake land exchange was finalized just before the 2020 year-end deadline, so it’s now official! We succeeded in adding 90 acres to the magnificent Floras Lake State Natural Area, including some important lake frontage. The effort to fend off ill-conceived development plans for County-owned lands at Floras Lake has been going on since at least 2005. That year, longstanding KAS members will remember we fended off the first secret deal, and then we did it again in 2015, when two county commissioners proposed a pie- in-the-sky plan to take over part of the state natural area to develop a golf course. I am reminded of the BOC’s images of golf “greens” photoshopped onto scruffy headlands, of the ensuing scandal of county involvement with digging illegal test pits INSIDE the state park, but most of all, of the more than 200 people who showed up at critical OPRD Commission hearings to speak in support of State Parks. OPRD staff and Commission members said it was the largest show of public support for Oregon State Parks ever! 

In 2016, we aimed to turn a new page by pushing for a more proactive effort for the county land at Floras Lake. We urged Curry County to consider a land swap with Oregon State Parks. With the support of then Commissioner David Smith, and then Tom Huxley and Sue Gold, County Planning staff researched options, and then organized a special outreach event in Langlois for community input in 2017. For the past three years, KAS members from throughout Curry County, together with citizens from Langlois, have shown up at key meetings to show overwhelming public support for the land swap. Commissioner Court Boice became an enthusiastic supporter of the swap, reaching out to OPRD to build goodwill; both he and Commissioner Gold made the votes needed to proceed. Though Commissioner Paasch was not in support at the outset, he earned my respect because he put aside his disagreement, supported the direction of the Board, and subsequently voted to get the job done.

But the devil is always in the details, so we waited and waited for the roads to be vacated and the parcels to be partitioned. With Covid-19, county staff attentions were understandably directed elsewhere, while State Parks saw its budget deeply slashed, with many staff members laid off. Nevertheless, we persisted with friendly reminders, attending BOC meetings, and saw the deal to its completion. Of course, the county still owns ~400 acres at Floras Lake –so we’ll need to keep vigilant (and, at some point, begin work on “Phase 2”); but with this swap, we’ve hopefully turned a critical corner. Also, the final exchange agreement does have a reversion clause dependent on trail planning work –so that is another detail we’ll need to watch.

I am proud that KAS has defended Floras Lake and the special lands between the lake and Blacklock Point, and post-covid, I am still hoping we can celebrate this success!

Please consider sending a note of thanks to our Curry County Commissioners for their leadership in conserving beautiful Floras Lake. Here is a sample note—you can add a personalized touch at the end. 

Dear Commissioners, 

I was glad to learn that Curry County recently finalized the Floras Lake land swap with Oregon State Parks. Thank you for your forward-looking leadership in conserving beautiful Floras Lake through your support for this exchange. 

Send a thank you note via snail mail to: Curry County Commissioners, 94235 Moore Street, Gold Beach, OR 97444. Or email them (Chris Paasch, Court Boice, and former commissioner Sue Gold): PaaschC@co.curry.or.us, boicec@co.curry.or.us, golds@co.curry.or.us, and PLEASE cc John Jezuit jezuitj@co.curry.or.us, who can forward any emails of thanks to former Commissioner Sue Gold. 

A path to protect Port Orford’s drinking water

Last fall, through her work monitoring the Oregon Department of Forestry FERNS website, Teresa Bird noticed a clearcut slated for the North Fork Hubbard Creek, the watershed that supplies the city of Port Orford’s drinking water. She shared that info with Port Orford Watershed Council (POWC) Chair Linda Tarr, who reached out to express concerns to the timber company, which granted 20-ft buffers, not required by law for the small stream. Oregon Forest Practices laws are notoriously inadequate to protect municipal water supplies, and so this agreement from the land owner was some measure of protection that otherwise would not have happened. 

Through this interaction, POWC learned that an even larger, steeper parcel of timberland in the city’s watershed was up for sale and would likely be logged the next year, given the high price of timber. The City’s reservoir has already been heavily silted in by past logging, and the City’s Water Plan recommended finding ways to prevent logging and road building, ideally through city ownership. With that, the POWC set out to find some way to proactively protect the city’s watershed from logging. 

With lots of research and networking, the POWC found the possibility of the Conservation Fund (CF) acting as a bridge buyer; the CF has a special revolving fund to help cities buy their water supply lands. In our December HOOT OUT, we asked Port Orford based KAS members to write letters to City Council, urging them to partner with the CF to purchase this crucial 160 acres of timberland very close to the city’s reservoir, with several tributaries and steep slopes. 

The Council received dozens of supportive letters and voted unanimously to proceed with this proactive effort that will hopefully protect our municipal water supply as well as the forest habitat into the future. The owner agreed to take the land off the market while CF carries out due diligence and an appraisal that are necessary for a successful transaction. There is still much work to be done and funding to find, but there is real reason for optimism that this key piece of forested land might be preserved to protect our drinking water. A huge thanks to Linda Tarr and the POWC for working to find this proactive, protective option, and to all KAS members who pitched in with letters of support. It was so good to see the Port Orford City Council vote for a proactive and protective step instead of repeating the error of past inaction. 

Please thank Port Orford City Council members for taking this proactive, protective step by giving them a call or sending an email. Here is a sample message you can use:

Dear Port Orford City Council members, 

Thank you for your recent vote to partner with the Conservation Fund to purchase forest lands in our city’s watershed, which will help protect our city’s water supply into the future. Many other small coastal cities have seen their watersheds ruined by logging so I am glad to know that our City Council has taken a proactive, protective, and cost-effective approach.  

Email them at: pcox@portorford.org, claroche@portorford.org, gburns@portorford.org, jgarratt@portorford.org, tpogwizd@portorford.org, Lkessler@portorford.org

Please remember, if you are interested to help track clear cuts and aerial spraying on the timber lands in your watershed, please contact Teresa Bird at Teresa@kalmiopsisaudubon.org

Federal Environmental Policy update

Over the past four years, dozens of federal policies protecting public lands, clean water, birds and wildlife were targeted by the Trump Administration. Under the rhetoric of “deregulation,” numerous longstanding environmental rules, as well as opportunities for public input, were cut. Several egregious changes were finalized in just the past few weeks. 

For birds of the Pacific Northwest, some of the most troubling rule changes include evisceration of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and then a surprising, last-minute effort to remove protection for over 3 million acres of critical habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl. 

Draft rule changes to weaken the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) have been in the pipeline since 2017. In response to an earlier lawsuit filed by National Audubon and other conservation groups, a District Court ruling last summer found that the proposed changes did not align with the intent of the 100+ year-old law. Despite this ruling, the Trump Administration proceeded to finalize regulations that shield industry from fines and prosecution if migratory birds are incidentally rather than intentionally killed. It’s important to note that the MBTA has long served as disincentive for companies to kill large numbers of birds through their operations, such as with oil spills; and damages paid have provided for important mitigation and habitat restoration efforts (such as, locally, with the 1999 New Carissa spill, which killed ~3,000 birds on Oregon’s coast including threatened marbled murrelets). 

Rule changes that remove protection for 3.4 million acres (42%) of critical habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl were finalized by the Trump Administration in mid-January. Just weeks earlier, US Fish & Wildlife Service biologists had released a report indicating that the rapidly declining population of owls warranted uplisting from “threatened” to “endangered”; but despite the urgent need for increased protection, the Trump Administration had decided not to uplist owing to “higher priority actions.” Rather than simply not uplist, the Trump Administration then proceeded to remove 42% percent of owl habitat from protection, citing only “discretion” of the Secretary of the Interior. For nearly 30 years, National Forests (and BLM lands) of the Pacific Northwest have been managed under the Northwest Forest Plan, with specific protections for remaining old growth forests that provide habitat not only for spotted owls but also for other birds, fish, and wildlife –including our region’s iconic salmon. Many biologists regard this new rule as accelerating the owl’s path to extinction. 

So with the recent inauguration of President Biden, where do we now stand with rollbacks to these and many other federal laws that affect our local public lands and wildlife? The Biden Administration issued a “hold memo” that requires all federal agencies to hold and review any recently published final or draft rules. That will apply to both the MTBA rule and the last-minute Spotted Owl rule. There is also the Congressional Review Act, a procedural tool that allows lawmakers to consider and possibly nullify recently finalized regulations with a simple majority vote. It’s also very likely that the worst administrative rule changes will be litigated. National Audubon and a coalition of conservation groups have already filed suit against this final MBTA rule change. Until challenges are resolved, the new Spotted Owl critical habitat rule will likely create a fair measure of chaos for land management agencies. Stay tuned. 

BRIEF updates

Southwestern Oregon Mining Withdrawal

With the new Congress, we need our Senators and Rep. DeFazio to reintroduce and advance the Southwestern Oregon Salmon and Watershed Protection Act in order to finally make permanent the 20-year mineral withdrawal we all worked so hard to secure back in 2016. In the last Congress, SOWSPA was paired up with the Rogue Wilderness bill as the Oregon Recreation Enhancement Act but did not advance beyond hearings. Meanwhile, Red Flat Nickel Company (RFNC) continues to assert that its mining claims at Red Flat, up atop the headwaters of Hunter Creek and Pistol River, are valid while Forest Service continues to evaluate RFNC’s assertion through a technical process known as a “Surface Use Determination.” Also important to note, St. Peter Paul Capital, the offshore, U.K.-based company that owns RFNC, recently indicated it intends to auction off its RFNC holdings. Given rising interest in EV batteries, there is also increasing interest in nickel mining. The auctioning-off could be a sign of the company’s weakness, but a new buyer could also re-invigorate interest in further exploration. Southwest Oregon’s nickel deposits are relatively small, low grade, and thus far, have not proven economical for mining development in a global context, but as long as the Mining Law of 1872 remains in place, they remain vulnerable to exploitation. EV batteries typically require high grade nickel sourced from nickel sulfide deposits. The low-grade nickel in Southwest Oregon’s laterite deposits can only be extracted by strip mining the unique ecosystems at the headwaters of our cherished rivers. We’ll keep you posted on how to help. 

Jordan Cove dealt major setback

On Jan. 18, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) handed down an important decision that we hope will put the kibosh on the Jordan Cove LNG export terminal and gas pipeline across southern Oregon. The Canadian Company Pembina had asked FERC for a waiver from Oregon water quality regulations, but FERC upheld the requirement that projects must meet water quality standards. In Oregon, the state has the regulatory authority and responsibility to implement the federal Clean Water Act.  KAS has long opposed the Jordan Cove project along with a broad coalition of Tribes, conservation groups, fishermen, impacted landowners, and citizens concerned about clean water, climate change, and public safety. Pembina may petition for re-consideration or apply for a water quality permit again, but given the changing economics of natural gas, this permit denial is a significant setback. 

Rocky Shore Proposals, now under review

In December, KAS sent a letter to support three Rocky Shore Habitat proposals put forth by the South Coast Rocky Shores group, which includes Oregon Shores and PISCO (the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans), for Blacklock State Park, Crook Point, and Cape Blanco. As part of its Territorial Sea planning process, the State is currently updating its Rocky Shore Habitat plan and had requested citizen proposals for new designations. The aim is to protect the diversity of marine life in these rich habitat areas. All proposals are currently under review by the Rocky Habitat Working Group, and a public comment period is expected later this spring.

Port Orford Dark Sky, update

Port Orford’s Dark Sky lighting ordinance has simmered on the backburner for the past few months. Last fall, City Council sent it back to the Planning Commission (PC) for refinements. However, they also sent the PC a request to work on building heights, which took higher priority. The lighting ordinance update has been a work in progress for over a year now, so hopefully 2021 will be the year to get it done. Meanwhile, ODOT still plans to install 6 pairs of new lighting fixtures on Hwy 101 next summer as part of its reconfiguration and paving project. ODOT has selected shielded LED fixtures with 2,700 kelvin (warm) color temperature that we hope will comply with “dark sky” goals of the ordinance, and now CCEC wants to field test them to assure they can withstand coastal weather. We’ve been told that demonstration fixtures will be installed some time in February. This will give us all a chance to see what the new LED fixtures actually look like. CCEC aims to shift toward LED lights throughout its service area, but has been leaning toward 3,000 kelvin fixtures –so pay attention to changes in street lights in your neighborhood. 

Posted on

Support KAS’s conservation work in 2021: Annual Raffle!

Check out our great raffle prizes this year! This is KAS’s one and only fundraiser, and it supports the bulk of our conservation work. We can’t do any of it without you. Please consider participating (and potentially winning some great prizes!).

To participate, click here to download the printable raffle mail-in form!

Dear KAS supporters,

Through this strange and unsettling year of 2020, with the coronavirus compelling us all to stay closer to home, I think many of us have a renewed appreciation for the beauty and vitality of the extraordinary place where we live—from backyard gardens and forests replete with bird songs, to wondrous wild backcountry, big trees, dramatic vistas, unique plants, rushing rivers, and rugged shorelines. This special corner of Oregon that we call home inspires—and needs—our vigilance and stewardship, and so I hope that you will consider a generous donation to the Kalmiopsis Audubon Society (KAS).

Each year we strive to bring you birding and conservation news and to act on your behalf to protect Curry County’s natural environment through strategic local grassroots advocacy on important issues that affect our land, water, wildlife, and communities. For four decades now, I am proud to say, KAS has been the most active and effective local citizens’ organization concerned with habitat conservation issues on the South Coast, and we need your support to keep up our good work.

Over this past year, we’ve advocated for public lands conservation including more protection for our National Wild and Scenic Rivers and the unique botanical and wildlife values of our National Forests. We’ve participated in the Wild Rivers Forest Collaborative and continued survey work for marbled murrelets. We’ve tracked and pressed for the final steps of the Floras Lake land exchange (hopefully to be finalized by year’s end) and for Dark Sky lighting in the city of Port Orford. We’ve monitored local land-use decisions and wildlife policies, and have responded to a wide range of issues affecting our forests, rivers, fish, and wildlife at the local, state, and federal levels. Although we had to cancel our usual field trips, service projects, and kids’ camp this year owing to the coronavirus, we did some educational workshops to train volunteers to help track aerial herbicide spraying. Our award-winning Storm Petrel newsletter was published four times; we’ve sent monthly Hoot-Outs to hundreds of members and friends; and we upgraded our website—a great resource for visitors and residents alike—to be mobile-friendly. Finally, with an eye to the future in this 40th anniversary year, we launched our Nest Egg Club, a planned giving program that aims to lay the foundation for continued conservation of our special place for many years to come.

Kalmiopsis Audubon relies on this one November fundraising appeal and membership dues for our operating expenses, which allow for a whole range of volunteer activism and activities. This is the one time each year that we reach out to you for financial support. And following in our annual tradition, we are offering another funRAFFLE to make giving more fun! Please see a description of this year’s exciting and enticing prizes on the back of this page.

I hope that you will choose to give generously to KAS by buying raffle tickets and/or by sending a donation above the cost of the tickets. Thank you for being a part of our group and for supporting Kalmiopsis Audubon as a voice for conservation and the environment in southwest Oregon.

Stay safe and healthy, and best wishes for a joyful and wondrous holiday season!

Ann Vileisis, President, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society