Tag: policy

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

Conservation News, Summer 2020

Port Orford Dark Sky lighting

On Tuesday August 11 at 3:30pm, the Port Orford Planning Commission (PC) will have its final hearing on the city’s new outdoor lighting ordinance. Last year, the City Council directed the Commission to update the old ordinance to reflect new advances in lighting technology (eg. LEDs) and to tighten language to make it more enforceable. KAS has attended monthly meetings over the past year as the PC has worked to upgrade the ordinance, drawing upon municipal ordinances from other small towns. Once the ordinance is passed at the official hearing in August, it will be referred to the City Council. 

It will be helpful for KAS members and other citizens in Port Orford to participate in the PC meeting, probably via zoom, and even more important, in the subsequent City Council meetings to voice support for the new ordinance. I will let everyone know more via our HOOT OUT about meeting call-in information when it becomes available. 

As long-time members know, Kalmiopsis Audubon, under the leadership of board member Al Geiser, has been involved for more than two decades in efforts to conserve the dark night sky in Port Orford—from installing “night caps” to getting the first “dark sky” ordinance passed. The gist is that light fixtures need to be pointed down to reduce light trespass (onto neighbor’s property) and also to avoid pink sky glare. Bright light at night can be harmful to human health, can be disruptive to birds and wildlife, and diminish the beauty of the night sky and our ability to enjoy sights like the recent Neowise Comet. Please talk to your neighbors and friends about the value of conserving the night sky and the benefits of a sensible lighting ordinance. For more background, see: www.kalmiopsisaudubon.org/dark-sky

Jordan Cove project update

In the last Petrel, we reported that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), had approved the Jordan Cove LNG facility and pipeline, despite the fact that the Canadian company Pembina, had not yet qualified for state permits needed to move forward. Shortly thereafter, landowners whose property would be condemned by eminent domain for pipeline construction—plus community groups, conservation groups, and tribes—filed lawsuits against the decision. In mid-June, the state of Oregon submitted its own petition to challenge the project since the FERC seemed intent to totally preempt the state’s critical roles in permitting under the Clean Water Act and the Coastal Zone Management Act.

In early July, around the same time that several other large energy pipelines were struck down by court decisions (Dakota Access and Keystone XL) or cancelled owing to the declining market for natural gas (Atlantic Coast), the Trump administration went ahead and approved gas exports from the Jordan Cove facility, further signaling disdain for state environmental laws and its intent to keep pushing oil and gas production, despite mounting scientific concerns about fossil fuels damaging our climate and a marked downturn in the natural gas market. 

Our organization has long opposed this proposal because of its promotion of fossil fuels at a time of climate crisis, condemnations of private property owned by rural landowners, hundreds of pipeline crossings of our fine southern Oregon rivers and tributaries, infringement on irreplaceable forest and estuary habitat for birds, fish, and wildlife, and threats to public safety, water quality, and commercial and sport fisheries. We’ve helped at the local level, with our members showing up at hearings in Coos Bay. [Breaking news is that Oregon’s Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) has just denied Pembina a key local land use permit, too.] At this point, the fate of the pipeline will lie mostly in the hands of the federal courts, but Governor Kate Brown will continue to play an important role to make sure state laws are followed.

ACTION ITEM: Please thank Oregon Governor Kate Brown for her leadership thus far. Make a quick phone call (503) 378-4582); make a comment via her email portal; or send a note with a message like this: Dear Governor Brown, Thank you for challenging FERC’s approval of the Jordan Cove LNG facility and pipeline and for voicing your commitment to make sure all state laws are followed. I appreciate your standing up for citizens of Oregon. (personalize or add reasons!) Snail mail address: Governor Kate Brown, 900 Court Street NE, Suite 254, Salem, OR 97301-4047.

Floras Lake exchange update

In early June, I attended a Curry Board of Commissioners (BOC) meeting (with a mask!), aiming to keep the Floras Lake Land exchange on track. As stipulated by the land swap agreement finalized by the BOC last fall, the county must vacate the roads and right of ways in its parcel. Yet again, there was a delay, this time owing to a disagreement between the county assessor and attorney over the format of the order. Ultimately, two weeks later, the BOC passed the final order unanimously. However, around the same time, Oregon State Parks announced massive staffing cuts owing to a huge budget shortfall related to the pandemic reducing revenues from camping and lottery. Despite pandemic and budgetary chaos, we’ll need to make sure the final steps of the exchange are completed to close the deal before the agreement expires at year’s end. 

A Tragedy in Progress: Elk River Chinook update

Over the past several years, we’ve tracked the troubling situation with the wild (also called natural origin) Elk River fall Chinook. In 2013, we were shocked when ODFW determined that wild Elk River fall chinook run was the only non-viable chinook run on the entire coast and that our fish had an alarmingly high risk of extinction (16.9 %). Owing to questions about older data used in the 2013 population viability analysis, ODFW recently completed a new one, with far more alarming results. According to the new population viability analysis, Elk River fall Chinook have a 97 percent risk of extinction over the next one hundred years, under the most likely scenario, with current climate and fishing conditions.

This situation is utterly tragic because the Elk River has been renowned for its salmon habitat, with a highly intact forested watershed that Jim Rogers and so many of us have worked hard to protect, plus an undeveloped mouth (though there is a lack of adequate summer rearing habitat in the lower river), and positive restoration efforts underway for coho that will also benefit chinook. Most all other fall chinook runs up and down the coast have extinction risks less than 5%, typically considered the threshold for concern.

What’s gone so wrong at Elk River? A key problem is hatchery interactions. Because the local hatchery has pumped so many smolts into our small river over the past 50 years (>325k annually until a few years ago, and upwards of 500k in decades past), there has been too much interbreeding between wild and domesticated hatchery fish. Because too many hatchery fish are not caught and do not return into the hatchery, the unfortunate outcome is that natural- origin fish now have depressed productivity.

Wild fish that have returned to Elk River for hundreds of thousands of years are adapted to river conditions. Hatchery fish are adapted best for life in a hatchery through epigenetic changes (also called domestication), but when they interbreed with wild fish, the result is offspring that are less fit and less productive. Imagine breeding chihuahuas with wolves—the outcome would be offspring less capable of surviving in the wild. 

Since 2013, ODFW has taken some actions to try to reduce the crisis of interbreeding of wild and hatchery salmon. Aiming to reduce the number of hatchery fish spawning in the wild, ODFW reduced smolt output by 50k, and fixed the hatchery pump and fish ladders. These actions have slightly improved the situation. In addition, the Oregon Hatchery Research Center has been studying the strategy of adding a special scent to hatchery water during incubation with hopes of better drawing returning fish back into the hatchery. After many years of study, 2020 was the first year the new scent was added to chinook incubation water; we’ll not really know how well it works for another 3 to 7 years.

But ODFW’s new population viability analysis indicating up to a 97 percent risk of extinction for fall Chinook in Elk River raises serious alarm bells. How much longer do we wait to see what happens—especially since questions have been raised about this problem since at least 2005? The 2013 Coastal Multi-Species Management Plan stipulated that ODFW must revisit the situation with Elk River chinook in 2021. 

The Elk River hatchery was built not to mitigate for lost habitat but as a way to “enhance” sport fishing. That was back in 1969 when people were unaware of the insidious risks that hatcheries posed to wild fish runs. Instead of enhancing our sport fish run, it appears this very oversized hatchery program is now putting our local wild chinook run into a dangerously unsustainable position. This is not theoretical. Over the past few years, with poor ocean conditions, there have been years with extremely poor returns of hatchery fish, years with no bubble fishery for Chinook off the river’s mouth, and this year there will no longer be retention of wild fish for sport anglers. 

To build ecosystem resilience in the face of climate change—or even earthquakes—we need for our fall Chinook to be able to evolve with changing conditions, and the locally adapted native Elk River fish will be far better suited to that task than their domesticated hatchery cousins. Ultimately, to conserve our locally adapted fish into the future, we will need to reduce the smolt output and right-size the hatchery program for our small river. Stay tuned. 

Calling for more Wild and Scenic Rivers

Last fall, Senator Ron Wyden put out a call to citizens throughout the state to nominate more Oregon rivers to be designated in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers system. In response, Kalmiopsis Audubon nominated a number of important tributaries to our local rivers. Wild and Scenic designation most notably prohibits dams, but it also affords greater protection through the requirement that public land agencies plan and manage to conserve the rivers’ “outstandingly remarkable values.” To follow up on our advocacy for the Southwest Oregon Mineral Withdrawal, we nominated public land tributaries of Hunter Creek and Pistol River and the North Fork Smith. We also nominated some outstanding tributaries of the lower Rogue, the Sixes, and the Chetco. 

As long time KAS members know, our region currently has one of the highest concentrations of wild and scenic rivers in America—and the designations have helped to conserve water quality, fish habitat, ecological values, and recreational opportunities in our public lands. Senator Wyden’s wild rivers initiative has understandably been delayed owing to the pandemic and its economic fallout, but we expect the Senator will press forward with this project as soon as he can. We are also hope he’ll continue his efforts to make the Southwest Oregon Mineral Withdrawal permanent. 

ACTION ITEM: To help, please call (202) 224-5244/ (541) 858-5122 —or send Senator Wyden a short note (via his website portal) with this message: Thanks for your efforts to advance the Southwest Oregon Mineral withdrawal legislation and to protect more Wild and Scenic Rivers in Southwest Oregon (you can add in your favorites and otherwise personalize!). 

ODFW proposes and drops new Rogue River Bear hunt

In mid-July, ODFW announced a proposal for a new black bear hunt in the Wild and Scenic Rogue River canyon—the one place in Oregon where it’s been off limits since 1965. A week later the proposal was dropped owing to strong public opposition. 

The agency’s primary aim was to address an issue with so-called “problem bears” that have become habituated to human foods, improperly stored by campers who hike and raft in the Wild & Scenic Rogue River canyon. Black bears generally mind their own business and have ample wild foods to eat (except for in some drought years), but periodically, managing bears in the Rogue canyon has been a challenge. In years past, some lodges and campers backpacking and rafting the river neglected to take sufficient care with food and trash storage, with the unfortunate effect of drawing in bears. There is an old truism: a fed bear is a dead bear. 

About 20 years ago, citizen groups and public land and wildlife agencies pulled together and came up with a partial solution: for river campers to use mini-electric fences to store food at campsites known for bear problems. This approach worked relatively well for many years, but owing to a delay in putting out the food storage fences last year, there was a season of especially troubling interactions between campers and bears. ODFW and public land agencies have also tried to educate campers about proper food storage, but there is no requirement, or even a recommendation, for hikers or boaters to use bear proof storage containers, as required in so many other wilderness areas with high bear activity.

The good news is that this year, fences went in early and problems have lessened, but it remains critically important that Rogue River campers and hikers take personal responsibility to store their food and trash properly—and for ODFW and public lands agencies to redouble their efforts to educate the public about proper food and trash storage. In many other places where there have been conflicts between people and bears, proper storage of food and trash has been the key to reducing problematic interactions. 

This is critical to recognize in storing food and trash at home, too. Curry Transfer and Recycling (CTR) recently offered new bear-proof trash cans to its customers. They were so popular that CTR is already out of stock! The containers have a special lock that is automatically opened when trash is retrieved. If you are interested in getting one of these bear-proof trash cans (also good for wind), call CTR (541-469-2425) and ask to be placed on the waiting list. They expect to get them in again next year. Also, please pay attention to bird feeders and pull them down for a while if you suspect bear activity.

National environmental rollbacks, finally coming to fruition

Those who follow national environmental news know that the current Administration has been on a determined path to rollback many laws intended to safeguard public health, wildlife, and nature. Unfortunately, in mid-July, the Trump Administration finalized rules to weaken the most fundamental law, the National Environmental Policy Act, known by its acronym NEPA. For fifty years, NEPA has required that federal agencies consider environmental consequences, and alternatives, before they take actions. The law also provides for transparency in federal decision making and public input from citizens. From local experience, we know public input is critically important because sometimes agency staffers (which come and go) lack crucial knowledge or perspective or are subject to political pressures. 

The new rule gives federal agencies broad discretion to exempt certain projects from NEPA and to avoid consideration of cumulative and indirect impacts, though the law’s statutory language requires such consideration. What this means locally is yet to be seen. The Forest Service may start to fast track projects through the new streamlined regulatory process. Though the rule change will purportedly fast-track approvals for pipelines, mines, logging, and oil drilling, it will no doubt be litigated, which may well lead to more delays. 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act rollback proceeding apace

The Trump Administration has also targeted an even more longstanding bedrock conservation law. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) has been in effect since 1918, when leaders in the U.S. and Canada recognized the important value of migratory birds to the economies and enjoyment of all citizens. Treaty protection was soon expanded to include Mexico, Japan, and Russia. For a century, the threat of MBTA prosecution had served to deter those who would harm birds. 

That changed in 2018 when the Trump Administration decided to “celebrate” the 100th anniversary of this critical law by issuing a new legal opinion that effectively gutted it. Under this new interpretation, the MBTA forbids only intentional killing, such as hunting without a permit, and no longer applies to industries that inadvertently kill a whole lot of birds, such as the oil and gas industry (with their toxic wastewater pits and oil spills), communications and wind power (with their towers), and fishing (with long lines). To be clear, many of these industries, to comply with the MBTA, had already adopted bird friendly practices that have no doubt saved the lives of millions of birds. In addition, financial penalties imposed under the MBTA have helped recover species harmed by reckless negligence, such as the Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon oil spills.

In response to the Trump Administration’s rollback of the MBTA, a bi-partisan group of former wildlife officials from previous presidential administrations (going back to Nixon) sent a letter strongly urging reinstatement of traditional rules. Shortly thereafter, a bipartisan group of Congress members, led by California Rep. Alan Lowenthal introduced a bill to close the loophole and restore the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Our Congressman, Peter DeFazio, was one of the original co-sponsors of this bill, H.R. 5552. In March, a group of 23 Senators, including Senators Wyden and Merkley, sent a letter, strongly urging the Secretary of the Interior to reconsider the Administration’s decision, calling it “the most significant rollback of migratory bird protections in our nation’s history.” 

Nevertheless, the Trump Administration has pressed ahead. KAS recently joined with other Audubon chapters in Oregon (and across America), to comment on a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to oppose the damaging rule change. 

So far, HR 5552 has moved ahead with a markup in the House Natural Resources Committee, but it has not yet been referred for a full House vote. Honestly, the bill has little chance of passage with the current political configuration, but it’s heartening to know that our elected officials are fighting to keep the MBTA intact. It’s important that they know we care and appreciate their efforts to stand up against rollbacks to environmental protection laws. 

ACTION ITEM: Please give our federal elected officials a call (or send an email via their website portals) to thank them for standing up against rollbacks to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other bedrock environmental protection laws. 

Rep. DeFazio (202)-225-6416/541-269-2609

Sen. Merkley: (202) 224-3753/541-608-9102

Sen. Wyden: (202) 224-5244/ 541-858-5122

Cormorants under siege again

In tandem with rolling back the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Trump Administration has also pursued a new rule that specifically targets Double Crested Cormorants, one of the most persecuted birds in the United States. The new rule would allow killing of more than 120,000 birds each year. Based on current estimates, this could potentially result in the annual killing of up to 14% of the national population and represents nearly a 140% increase over the average annual take between 2007 and 2018. The rule would also turn over jurisdiction for management of these birds over to state wildlife agencies.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) already has a poor record of protecting this species. You may recall that the agency permitted killing nearly 11,000 cormorants and destroying more than 28,000 nests at in the Columbia River Estuary, resulting in the complete collapse of this colony, which represented 40% of the entire Double-crested Cormorant population west of the Rocky Mountains.

However, we are concerned that turning over cormorant management to states with such high ceilings for lethal take could be far worse. State agencies are already strapped for funds to manage non-game species, and we know that ODFW managers are frequently pressured by fishermen to kill or haze cormorants in order to reduce competition for fish. KAS joined other Audubon chapters in Oregon and around the U.S. to submit comments opposing this overreaching proposal that flies in the face of 100 years of federal bird protection policy. 

Help Monitor for Aerial Spraying on the Curry County Coast!

For the last few years, KAS has been helping our community to better understand and find out about aerial herbicide spraying on timberlands. You may have already heard that the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) has an online notification system called FERNS, which will send emails to notify subscribers about pending chemical applications in particular areas. Our goal is to recruit KAS members who can use FERNS to help us monitor sprays in all the watersheds on the Curry County coastline. Basically, all you need to do is sign up and start paying attention. We are looking for volunteers who can cover watersheds north of Elk River (eg Floras Creek, Sixes River), South of Hubbard’s Creek to Gold Beach (eg Euchre Creek, Lobster Creek), and in the Brookings area (we just got some great volunteers to monitor Hunter Creek and Pistol River – thank you!!). Having better information about aerial spraying in our communities can help us advocate for better practices, and it can enable you to better protect your and your neighbors’ health and wellbeing. If you are interested to help, please contact Teresa Bird: teresa@kalmiopsisaudubon@org.