Tag: drones

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.