Port Orford’s Dark Sky, update
KAS has continued to participate in the City of Port Orford’s effort to upgrade its “Dark Sky” outdoor lighting code to account for changes in technology. The basic principle of “dark sky” lighting is to point lights down or properly shield them to reduce sky glow and light trespass into other people’s yards. However, new LED fixtures pose new challenges, requiring us all to learn a new language of illumination. Watts remain the energy required per second; lumens are the measure of light output (brightness); and kelvins describe a light’s “color temperature” on a scale, with 2700 kelvins (k) describing the warmest LED fixtures (the color of incandescent bulbs), to 3000k (cool white), to 3200k (florescent bulb-like) and beyond, with lights rated at 4000k and above having blue elements experienced as extremely cool and bright.
While LED fixtures are excellent for conserving electricity, lights that are too blue and bright can have unintended impacts to human health and wildlife. Reports from the American Medical Association (AMA) have raised concerns about possible adverse effects of shorter wavelength blue light that can adversely suppress melatonin during night. According to the AMA, recent large surveys found brighter residential nighttime lighting associated with reduced sleep times, dissatisfaction with sleep quality, excessive sleepiness, impaired daytime functioning and obesity. The AMA concluded that communities should be careful “to minimize and control blue-rich environmental lighting by using the lowest emission of blue light possible” and recommended using fixtures no higher than 3,000k. Beyond human health, studies have found impacts of excessively bright lights on birds, wildlife, pollinating insects, and more. The capacity for new LED fixtures to emit such bright, blue glaring light prompted KAS to urge a cap on kelvins.
This has particular relevance for the streetlights on Highway 101. ODOT has plans to repave and re-line Highway 101 through Port Orford and says it must now must apply national crosswalk safety standards. This will require 6 new pairs of lights mounted on 30-foot poles, taller than what we currently have (a motley collection from 20-28ft). The small town of Port Orford has low pedestrian use and low traffic at night. We’ve long had crosswalks without lights, and so many have questioned whether new lights are truly needed, worried that our main street will end up looking like a Walmart parking lot. ODOT’s answer is simply that all cross walks now need to meet national safety standards.
Other coastal cities have met the safety requirements by footing the sizable bill for greater numbers of low, decorative lights, but Port Orford doesn’t have the budget or inclination for that. Initially, the ODOT lighting design called for 3,000k lights. Fortunately, in response to strong public concern, ODOT’s engineer has now approved use of warm lights (2700k) with full cut-off fixtures to meet Port Orford’s “dark sky” goals as long as lights can be mounted high on the 30-foot poles, but it remains unclear whether Coos-Curry Electric Coop will be able and willing to source these Dark-Sky compliant fixtures. They say not all fixtures can stand up to coastal conditions. KAS has pressed for use of warm colored lights and has also asked city council to urge ODOT to consider other options for pedestrian safety, such as lights that come on only when someone needs to use a crosswalk.
In August, the Port Orford Planning Commission (PC) passed its upgraded outdoor lighting ordinance and recommended it to the City Council (CC), which voted unanimously to pass it in September. But then, during a “second reading,” CC members decided to make some changes to address concerns about placement of security lights and how fines would be levied. Owing to outstanding questions related to the ODOT required lights on Highway 101, the CC has sent the code back to the PC and is now waiting for answers before considering a final version. A huge thanks to all KAS members who are helping to work on this issue. It’s not over yet, so if you want to help, please send me an email.
Salmon on the South Coast
ODFW is currently developing a plan to manage several fisheries on the South Coast. The public process has been limited this time primarily to angler stakeholders with the exception of the Lower Rogue Watershed Council, but KAS has participated to advocate for the local species that are not fished (threatened coho), for birds unfairly vilified (cormorants) because they are fish predators, and for stronger consideration of climate change impacts to our local fish runs. SONCC coho are a threatened species that has already been reduced to perilously low levels, and ODFW scientists have identified that our cherished rivers will come under far greater stresses with climate change, including lower flows and higher water temperatures.
This new plan will deal with steelhead, coho, and cutthroat trout from Elk River south (2 other plans deal with chinook and rivers from Elk north) and aims to specify “harvest” levels and hatchery output, as well as some goals for habitat improvement. Some fish conservation groups are pressing ODFW to allow anglers to harvest steelhead only if there is sufficient monitoring and data to demonstrate that populations can handle fishing pressure. There has also been discussion about the need to evaluate both harvest goals and hatchery programs in light of climate challenges, recognizing that natural origin fish will have greater genetic capacity to adapt to new conditions. Planning ahead for how we will have resilient salmon and steelhead populations and fisheries into the future will likely require a more precautionary approach from ODFW.
If ODFW doesn’t take climate change seriously in all aspects of its work, it will be harder to ask individuals who own riverfront properties to actively engage in the river stewardship and restoration activities that will also be critical, such as conserving water if you tap into groundwater or river flows for irrigation or lawn watering, planting trees and native plants that can help provide shade to cool the water temperature, or allowing beavers to recolonize in tributary streams. If you are a riverfront property owner and want to help to do more to help our rivers prepare for climate change, contact Curry Watersheds Partnership ((541) 247-2755, ext. 0), to learn more. Also, if you are new to our area, you may not be aware that Curry County has a “Riparian Buffer Corridor Overlay Zone” (50-75 feet from rivers and streams, depending on flow) that prohibits permanent clearing of riparian vegetation, a policy that helps to protect water quality and fish habitat. It’s going to take us all supporting conservation policies and restoration of riparian habitats if we want to keep our birds and fish into the future.
Oregon’s Rocky Habitat Plan update
The state of Oregon is currently updating and revising its policies to protect rocky coastal habitat areas for the first time in 25 years. Rocky coastal habitats include offshore rocks and islands, tidepools, and headlands—features that provide natural beauty but also outsized ecological values to so many creatures that depend on them for food and shelter, from unique invertebrates to our beloved black oystercatchers and turnstones.
The Rocky Habitat Management Strategy will provide for three new types of protective designations—Marine Conservation, Marine Gardens (focusing on education), and Marine Research— to safeguard these unique habitats into the future.
To develop the new Rocky Habitat Management Strategy, the state of Oregon has asked citizens and communities to nominate rocky sites that deserve protection. At this point community groups have formed up and down the coast and are in the process of developing substantial, site-specific proposals based on input received earlier this summer. Full proposals, which will go to state agencies and decision-making bodies for review, are due at the end of the year.
On the South Coast, Shoreline Education for Awareness, South Coast Rocky Shores Group, Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans, based at Oregon State University (PISCO), the Oregon Kelp Alliance, and Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition have taken the lead to develop site specific proposals for Coquille Point, Blacklock Point, Cape Blanco, part of Port Orford Heads, Rocky Point, and Crook Point.
You can help support these designations by writing letters of support, sharing observations about proposed sites you regularly visit, and participating in community meetings to support the site designation process (currently being held online). To learn more about sites being considered for designations in our area, and how you can get involved, please contact CoastWatch Volunteer Coordinator Jesse Jones (503-989-7244, jesse@oregonshores.org).
More information on the Rocky Habitat Management Strategy, which nests within the state’s Territorial Sea Plan, can be found at: https://www.oregonocean.info/index.php/tsp-rocky-shores-amendment.
Shasta-Agness Project
In late July, the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest released the Record of Decision for its “Shasta-Agness Landscape Restoration Project,” a plan that will guide management of nearly 7,000 acres of public lands in the vicinity of Agness. The idea for this project started many years ago, with Forest Service planners and the Forest Collaborative aiming to find common ground on logging that could provide timber but also accomplish conservation goals, such as restoring oak savannas, while supporting recreation opportunities.
Owing to fire suppression, the landscape around Agness in particular has been shifting from oak savanna vegetation to Douglas firs. But the warming climate may now be making it harder for Douglas firs to thrive in thin soils. Already some have died owing to persistent drought. According to Forest Service, thinning in areas with encroaching firs, plus prescribed fires, could help shift the ecosystem back to white oaks; then revenues generated from timber could fund positive conservation actions such as replacing old culverts and decommissioning old logging roads that still spill sediment into tributaries. However, one controversial aspect of this plan is to log some firs in LSR (Late-seral reserve) areas that are now more than 80 years old –and so already well on the way to providing the kind of big tree habitat that is more resistant to fire and that is needed by some forest birds and wildlife. The plan includes 3,770 acres of commercial logging in oak woodlands, pine forests, and riparian zones.
This project, like all public-lands projects, has gone through a NEPA public process designed to identify environmental impacts and consider different options. (NEPA is the National Environmental Planning Act.) KAS has submitted comments through the entire public process. We supported thinning of plantations (already logged areas that are now thick and fire-prone) and all actions related to stream restoration. We supported restoration of oak savannas but urged a cautious approach, especially with regards to hazards of invasive plants taking over in the wake of logging, questioning the feasibility of how prescribed burns could actually be implemented, and asking for more explicit plans for how restoration will actually be accomplished after logging is done and underscoring the need for adaptive management, since this type of restoration is new to this area. We questioned the need for commercial logging in riparian areas and serpentine pine areas, where mineralized soils already create a mosaic of habitat. In addition, we asked for more careful consideration of how recent wildfires affected the larger landscape of southwest Oregon, pointing out that the forest habitat still standing in the vicinity of Agness may now be all the more important for birds and wildlife, including the coastal marten, that have dispersed from the large areas burned in the Chetco Bar and Klondike Fires.
With the Final Record of Decision, we were disappointed that our main concerns were not adequately addressed. We submitted objections raising concern about several aspects of the project: commercial logging in Riparian Reserves and serpentine pine areas, the likely increase of invasive species in oak savanna restoration areas; and the short timeline of the project over a large area, which precludes the ability to actually apply the promised “adaptive management” approach. In short, it’s hard to shift gears and adapt management to new information after all the trees have been cut. Objections were considered at a meeting in late October. In early September, the coastal marten was designated as a federally threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We hope this will require the Forest Service to make some adjustments to its plan. The last major timber management plan in our area, “Coastal Healthy Forest Treatments,” focused on plantation thinning and has guided the direction of local timber sales for over ten years. This plan has scheduled timber sales over the next 4 years.
Protecting forest waters
Over the past several years, Teresa Bird has headed up KAS efforts to help local citizens and communities better understand and find out about aerial spraying on nearby private timberlands. As we’ve come to learn, Oregon’s Forest Practices law is weak, with only narrow buffers from logging and spraying to protect fish-bearing streams and no buffers to protect smaller non-fish bearing streams, even those that flow into drinking water sources. Earlier this year, we hosted an online training to help volunteers learn how to monitor for spraying through the state’s aerial spraying notification program (FERNS).
I am pleased to report a positive outcome from these efforts. Through monitoring of the Hubbard Creek watershed, which supplies drinking water for the city of Port Orford, Teresa identified an upcoming timber sale and spray in the North Fork. She alerted the local Port Orford Watershed Council. The Council was then able to reach out to the landowner to request that the logging company leave a buffer around the stream and avoid aerial herbicide spraying. Because this stream is both non-perennial and non-fish bearing, there are absolutely no requirements to leave buffer trees or to avoid spraying, even though it flows into a public drinking water supply. In the end, the company agreed with a handshake to leave a 20-foot buffer and to use only manual application of herbicides. The Chair of the Port Orford Watershed Council went out with the company to flag the buffer zone. Kudos to the Port Orford Watershed Council for negotiating this positive deal for Port Orford’s water drinkers!
In the absence of meaningful reform of the Oregon Forest Practices Act, continued vigilance by citizens will be needed to protect the streams that flow through Oregon’s private timberlands, many of which are now owned by real estate investment companies. If you’d like to help us monitor for local aerial sprays, please contact Teresa at teresa@kalmiopsisaudubon.org
Marbled Murrelet Surveys Continue by Teresa Bird
This summer I continued to look for murrelets in our nearby coastal forests with the help of Max Beeken. The most exciting surveys this year were along the South Fork Sixes River, where Max and I both saw an amazing amount of murrelet activity on both sides of the river! I also heard many of the murrelet’s distinctive keer! calls from all around me during a survey about a third of the way up the Humbug Mountain trail. While we usually focus our survey efforts in the forest surrounding Elk River, this year we also helped Coast Range Forest Watch survey a proposed timber sale on the Board of Forestry lands in the Elliott State Forest. The many combined murrelet sightings from our surveys in the area effectively confirmed that the area was being used by murrelets, and the timber sale was halted by the Oregon Department of Forestry. Thanks to the National Audubon Society for a grant that helped to fund this survey effort!