Dear fellow citizen,

This is your chance to help strengthen the right of Oregonians to protect themselves and loved ones against criminal intruders in their homes.

You can sign a citizen initiative petition to put the Oregon Castle Doctrine on the ballot this November 2014.

Did you know that a criminal intruder (or his family) can come back and sue you when you defend yourself during a break-in?   

Simply click on this link for a complete explanation and for a single signature petition that you can sign and send in the mail back to us.

Also, if you would like to receive more petition sheets so you can gather voter signatures from family and friends – please reply to this email with your name and postal mailing address and we will mail petition sheets to you.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Kevin L. Mannix

President, Common Sense For Oregon

March 28, 2012
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/news/2014/march/032814.asp

SALEM, Ore.--ODFW will host a series of public meetings around the state in early May to hear public comment on proposals for big game, game bird, and furbearer hunting and trapping seasons.

At the meetings, ODFW staff will provide information about big game herd health and populations and propose the number of controlled big game hunting tags to issue for this year. Staff will also review concepts for possible changes to the 2015 big game regulations, including any changes to archery seasons recommended by the Archery Review Public Advisory Committee (ARPAC).

Staff proposals for tag numbers, ARPAC recommendations and other proposed 2015 regulations changes will be available at the meetings and posted on the hunting section of ODFW’s website by May 1.

Upland bird seasons and furbearer regulations are additional topics open for discussion and comment during these meetings. Upland game bird seasons are reviewed every five years and seasons structures are due for review this year.

Oregon offers general seasons and controlled hunts for big game (deer, elk, pronghorn, bighorn sheep, Rocky Mtn goat, cougar, and black bear). The number of tags for controlled hunts is limited and hunters must apply for them by May 15 each year (or Feb. 10 for spring bear hunts).

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission is expected to adopt 2014 fall big game tag numbers at its June 5-6 meeting in Salem. Concepts for 2015 big game regulations will be presented to the Commission at this June meeting, with final adoption occurring in October. Bird hunting regulations are adopted in August.

The public may provide input on ODFW proposals during public testimony at the June or August Commission meetings in Salem or by sending written comments to odfw.comments@state.or.us, mail to: ODFW Wildlife Division, 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, Salem, OR 97302.

Hey Everyone,

On April 1, 2014 at 9:30 am in The Owen Building, the Board of Commissioners is going to be voting on the formation of the South Coast Community Foundation.  In order to stop this very bad idea, everyone has to SHOW UP, SIGN IN, and SPEAK OUT, against another government development plan that will weigh on this community for several generations.  This taxing scheme can be STOPPED at the county level, but only if people contact the county commissioners and/or attend the meeting.  The Port of Coos Bay and their cronies will use the SCCF the same way the Corleone Crime Family used the Genco Olive Oil Company in the movie, “The Godfather.”

Link to the BOC Agenda:
http://www.co.coos.or.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=R5hYQFlHARE%3d&tabid=141&portalid=0&mid=1169

Here is an article with the four options to the SCCF plan:
Four possibilities for Jordan Cove's future
http://theworldlink.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/four-possibilities-for-jordan-cove-s-future/article_6bba9d4e-9e65-11e3-9da1-0019bb2963f4.html

We will file a referendum IF the BOC approves the SCCF and we will need YOUR help.  Please send me your contact information if you would like to collect signatures.  Help us stop the waste of more public tax dollars on government development, where wealthy developers and elite financiers get richer and the taxpayer slowly goes broke.  Email contact info to cooscountywatchdog@hotmail.com

Once the BOC votes the Foundation into existence, there will be:
NO Oversight
NO Public Input
NO Transparency
NO Recourse
NO way to stop the drain of tax dollars until this monster runs its course….

IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE MEETING IN PERSON:
It is very important to contact the commissioners and ask them to Vote NO on the SCCF.

Call & Email Commissioners                                                                                                                                                   John Sweet
(541) 396-7541
Email: jsweet@co.coos.or.us

Melissa Cribbins
(541) 396-7539
Email: mcribbins@co.coos.or.us

Robert "Bob" Main
(541) 396-7540
Email: bmain@co.coos.or.us
 
The Board of Commissioners
Public Board Meeting
Tuesday April 1, 2014 at 9:30 AM  
The Owen Building,  
Google Map
 
 
Click the following links to read some news articles on the SCCF:
Four possibilities for Jordan Cove's future

Final elected bodies to vote on South Coast Community Foundation
 
North Bend City Council opts in to South Coast Community Foundation
 
Jordan Cove on deck for Canadian LNG export license approval
 
Jordan Cove parent company looks at financing, ownership options, expansion
 
Jordan Cove on deck for Canadian LNG export license approval
 
 
Click the following links for examples of how the SCCF will waste your
money:                                                        
City of Bandon---Local Developer Michael Drobot Admits to Bribery & Conspiracy   
                       
Urban Renewal---Read How Schools suffer to Support Wealthy Foreign Companies
 
Urban Renewal---King Hales of Portland Master of Government Development 
 
  Click link for some history of Eco/Devo in Coos County:
Coos County 20 Years of Economic Development: Article 3 to Jordon Cove
 
Mary Geddry has offered a lot of good information on the Jordon Cove Plan:
MGX---Geddry Slams Koch over Forced Cooperation & Jordon Cove Funding 
 
http://mgx.com/blogs/2014/03/28/now-know-local-leaders/
 

Related Posts:
Letter to Editor---South Coast Community Foundation Scam will Top All Past 
MGX---Geddry Slams Koch over Forced Cooperation & Jordon Cove Funding 
League of Oregon Cities Class of Slanted View on History of Urban Renewal in OR 
City of Bandon---Expanding Government Cheese
Urban Renewal---King Hales of Portland Master of Government Development
FBI Press Release on Charges Against Local Bandon Developer Michael Drobot
Urban Renewal---Read How Schools suffer to Support Wealthy Foreign Companies
City of Bandon---Local Developer Michael Drobot Admits to Bribery & Conspiracy 
Preserving the American Dream:  Lessons in Beating Boondoggles
Agenda 21---Sustainable Development & Regionalism
City of Bandon---Votes on the renewal of City Manager's Contract
What is Craft3 & how does it relate to Agenda 21
INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL
Community Vs. Collectivism
Regionalism - The Blueprint for Your Serfdom
Success against Agenda 21
The Smoking Gun The direct link between Agenda 21 and local planners!
The International Code Council and You...
Port of Bandon in North Bend, Why?
Urban Renewal---Tualatin council to consider plan for Cabela's 
Urban Renewal---A tale of bad planning in two Cities
Urban Renewal---Oregon schools could recoup money
Bandon---Combine Private Public Partnership w/ Urban Renewal and you get cheese...
Urban Renewal---Tax fight aims at PSU renewal district
Urban Renewal Money in the hands of the Politicians
B-Corporations: The Redefining of what it means to be a Corporation
Support  SB478
Cities are using Monopoly Utilities to Game the System 
Action Alert:---State Legislation SB 478
The Federalization of Local Urban Renewal Agencies
The Antiplanner---The Feds Want to Take Your Car #22‏

Hey Folks,,

On April 1st, 2014, at 9:30 AM in The Owen Building, the Coos County Board of Commissioners will be deciding on enacting a new foundation that will siphon tax dollars normally used to support the basic services in other taxing districts.   The money being redirected to the South Coast Community Foundation is all discretionary funding, meaning it can be spent on anything.  There is little to no oversight, no public recourse, no transparency, no accountability, and no way to stop the process until the established expiration date.  Please, read the file on the left, which will explain some history of government Economic Development in Coos County.  The File on the right is the White Paper the Jordon Cove Energy Project Twenty years of economic development and the county is almost bankrupt and unemployment is hovering around 10%...............Rob T.

Subpoena Issued to Department of the Interior Deputy Inspector General for Unredacted Report on Stream Buffer Zone Rule

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 25, 2014 - House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04) today issued a subpoena to Department of the Interior Deputy Inspector General Mary Kendall for an unredacted copy of the Office of Inspector General (IG) report on the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation, and Enforcement’s (OSM) efforts to rewrite the 2008 Stream Buffer Zone Rule and a small number of related OIG documents. The House Committee on Natural Resources has made multiple requests for the unredacted copy of the report and related documents. According to Deputy Inspector General Kendall, the unredacted report is being withheld from the Committee at the request of the Department of the Interior. One of the redacted sections is entitled “Issues with the New Contract.” This means that the OIG has identified significant on-going problems with the rulemaking that they are refusing to disclose to Congress.

“The IG is charged with being an independent watchdog for Congress. It’s completely unacceptable and inappropriate for the IG to be taking orders from the Department, especially about what information to withhold from Congress. That’s why today I have issued a subpoena to the Deputy Inspector General Kendall for this information,” said Chairman Hastings today on the House floor. “If the IG discovered on-going issues with the way the Department is currently conducting this rulemaking process, they have a responsibility and duty to share that information with Congress now. The Committee is not asking the IG for materials produced by the Department, but we are asking for materials and interviews produced by the IG’s staff.”

Today, the House is considering H.R. 2824, the Preventing Government Waste and Protecting Coal Mining Jobs in America Act. This legislation will protect jobs, affordable energy, and taxpayer dollars by putting an end to the Obama Administration’s wasteful and mismanaged rulemaking process, and put a responsible process in place to ensure there is no rush to recklessly regulate.

Click here to watch Chairman Hastings’ full floor statement.
###

Printable PDF of this document

Contact: Committee Press Office 202-226-9019

Supreme Court Hears Oregon Protest Case March 26, 2014 -

http://aclu-or.org/content/moss-v-secret-service?etname=OR_update_032614&etjid=1341362

Washington D.C. - The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Wood v. Moss, a case brought by us on behalf of a multi-generational group of peaceful protesters, who were forcibly moved on orders of the Secret Service to a place where their protests could no longer be seen or heard by President Bush. The protest took place during a visit to Jacksonville, Oregon in 2004. Demonstrators supporting the President were allowed to remain much closer to him.

The lawsuit claims that the protesters were targeted because of their political views in violation of their free speech rights.

“The Secret Service does not have immunity from the First Amendment,” said Steven M. Wilker, a lawyer with Tonkon Torp LLP in Portland, who argued the case as a cooperating attorney for the ACLU.

Plaintiffs supported their claim of viewpoint discrimination by alleging that they were treated less favorably that Bush supporters, that the decision to move them was not made until after the President sat down to dinner and could hear their chants, and was consistent with at least 12 similar incidents during the first Bush administration. In addition, the decision was also consistent with the Bush White House Advance Manual which instructed the President’s staff to “work with the Secret Service” to ensure that protesters were kept far away from the President’s view and hearing.

Nevertheless, the Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the case on the ground that plaintiffs’ claim of viewpoint discrimination is “implausible.” Defendants also argue that Secret Service agents could not have been expected to know in 2004 that their actions in this case violated the First Amendment even if plaintiffs’ allegations are accepted as true.

Both arguments were rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a 2012 ruling.

“The job of the Secret Service is to shield the president from danger, not from criticism,” said Steven R. Shapiro, the national legal director of the ACLU.

The initial complaint in this case was filed in 2006 and there have been two appeals of lower court decisions to deny the federal government’s motions to dismiss the case. If plaintiffs prevail in the Supreme Court, the case will finally proceed to discovery and trial.

“The right to engage in peaceful political protest lies at the very heart of the First Amendment,” said David Fidanque, executive director of the ACLU of Oregon. “The government essentially is arguing that the courts should trust the Secret Service agents based on faith, rather than evidence. Our clients are entitled to have the case go forward so that they can finally have their day in court.”

Hello Council and Friends,

 For our upcoming meeting on Monday the 24th, we have Ryan Bronson from Lone Rock Timber who will discuss their ODF Operator of the Year Award for their work over the past 20 years on the restoration of King Creek.  This will be our first presentation from Ryan, so please come out and see what he has to say!

Afterwards, we will discuss the 20th Anniversary Party, to be held on June 7th at the Oak Pavilion in the Coos County Fairgrounds.  We have an exciting Keynote Speaker - former Secretary of State Bill Bradbury! - and lots of interesting things planned for the evening.  We are looking for donations of all sizes for a Silent Auction (to benefit the Association and offset the costs of the event) and Door Prizes, and any type or size  of donation is welcome and appreciated. I have attached a donation letter for you, and will bring copies to the meeting, so I am depending on everyone to help us find support & donations from the community.  The letter describes what we need and has a return form for tax purposes (we are a 501(c)(3)), and so far we have small items for the door prizes like Starbucks cards and auction items like a cord of firewood J.  I would love to have a big variety of items for the auction so that everyone can find something they’d like to bid on - so no donation will be turned away! The CWA can pick up large items if needed, and cash is always welcome.  More on the party at the meeting. 

For our April & May Executive Council meetings, we have Watermaster Mitch Lewis coming to speak on the upcoming regulator requirements and Cameron La Follette from the Oregon Coast Alliance to discuss coastal trends in land use - so two very important, not-to-miss meetings! Mark your calendars for April 28th and May 19th.

 Let me know if you have questions about any of the above, and let’s hit the pavement and drum up some good stuff for the party!

Hope to see you Monday and thanks for all you do….

Kelly

Kelly N. Miles
Director, Coquille Watershed Association
223 N Alder, Suite D
Coquille, OR 97423
O: 541.396.2541
F: 541.396.2545

OWEB seeks public comment on proposed rules for Outcome-Based Watershed Council Capacity Grants until March 31, 2014.

OWEB’s administrative rules for watershed council support grants were adopted in 2004.  Since that time OWEB has held multiple listening sessions with stakeholders and worked with several stakeholder based work groups to identify policy issues and process inefficiencies with OWEB’s council support grant program. The proposed rules establish process improvements and address long standing policy issues.

In October 2013, in preparation for the proposed changes, OWEB mailed to all council coordinators and council chairs an eligibility checklist for councils to use in reviewing the council's bylaws, policies and procedures and other relevant documents.  Council are encouraged to read the Council Capacity grant guidance and use the eligibility checklist to assess the council’s readiness for the new eligibility criteria.

Changes under the proposed rules include:

• Changing the name from Watershed Council Support Grants to Outcome-Based Watershed Council Operating Capacity Grants;
  
  
• Changing eligibility requirements for who is eligible to apply for the grants;
  
  
• Outlining the Board process for merit evaluation and the process for distribution of funds; and
  
  
• Other minor changes.
  
  

COMMENT PERIOD:  The public comment period for the proposed rules begins on February 24, 2014, and will close at 5:00 p.m. on March 31, 2014.  To comment on the proposed rules, please email Renee Davis-Born, with the phrase “Comments on Council Capacity Rulemaking” in the subject line, or send written comments to Renee Davis-Born at OWEB, 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 360, Salem, Oregon 97301-1290.  If you have questions concerning the rules or this process contact Courtney Shaff at 503-986-0046 or Courtney.Shaff@state.or.us.  PUBLIC HEARING:  OWEB will hold six public hearings to receive comments regarding the proposed rules. Both oral and written comments will be accepted at the hearings.  RULES, GUIDANCE, AND OTHER INFORMATION

• Guide to Outcome-Based Watershed Council Capacity Grants.pdf
• Draft Watershed Council Capacity Grant Rules.pdf
• Draft Council Capacity Grant Guidance.pdf
• Council Capacity Grant FAQs.pdf
• Council Capacity Grant Public Hearing Agenda.pdf

NEXT STEPS March 31, 2014 Public Comment Period Ends April 1 - May 16, 2014 Respond to Public Comment: Rules and Guidance edits as needed April 29-30, 2014 OWEB Board Meeting – Update (information item only) May 2014 Rules Advisory Committee Meeting: Review any Rules and Guidance edits July 29-30, 2014 OWEB Board Meeting: Adoption of Council Capacity grant rules

Related Posts:
OWEB---Updating the Watershed Council Map
OWEB---Streamlined Budget Categories for Grant Applications 
OWEB---Whole Watershed Restoration Initiative RFP Released & Scheduling‏
OWEB Grant Request by The Nature Conservancy 2013
OWEB---Public Meeting Focused on Winter Lake Restoration  August 29, 2013
OWEB---Seeking public comment on now expired Salmon Season State of Emergency
OWEB---Long-Term Investment Strategy for Conservation‏
OWEB---Watershed Council Support Update‏
OWEB---Restoration, Water Acquisition and Technical Assistance applications
OWEB---Proposed Direction for OWEB's Long-Term Investment Strategy for Conservation‏
OWEB---Post Listening-Session Survey Available‏
Subject: CWA meeting recap and information
Oregon Water Resource Commission approved the Integrated Water Resource Strategy
2010 Coastal Wetlands Grants
OWEB Listening Session Information & Agenda

Tired of having your taxes raised without a public vote or even a public hearing?

The Taxpayer Association of Oregon has created a statewide petition requiring a public vote on new local taxes. Sign the petition.

If you don’t sign, then politicians & lobbyists behind closed doors will decide for you on how much to raise your taxes.

We need to raise 87,000 signatures in the next 100 days.

You can download a petition sheet right to your computer immediately.

It’s free, it’s easy, it gives you the right to vote!

Also free & easy is donating your political tax credit -- you can get 100% of your $50 (or $100 per couple) donation back on your Oregon taxes. Donate online here.

Please help today.

Sincerely,
Jason Williams
Taxpayer Association of Oregon - since 1999
P.O. Box 23573
Tigard, OR, 97281

P.S. When other people decide your taxes, there's no limit on how much of your tax money they collect.

Related Posts:
Federal Legislative Action Alert:  Vote YES on S.890 to Protect Private Property
OFF---Public Comment needed on the First Gun Bills Scheduled for 2014 Legislature
US Congressional Legislation on Public Access in Natural Resource Committee
Congressman Peter DeFazio Votes in favor of more Land Acquisitions
Ashland, OR debates the Right to Bear Arms,  Two must see videos on the subject 
Oregon Legislative Action Alert: Vote NO on SB1538 Support School Choice
Oregon Legislative Action Alert:  VOTE NO on SB 1538, it limits school choice

AFP Monthly Meeting
Thursday,  April 10, 5 to 8 pm
1350 Teakwood Ave
Coos Bay, OR 97420
No Host Pot Luck Dinner---Bring your favorite dish....
http://goo.gl/maps/lstse

Hey Folks,

Check out the title of the meeting happening in the Natural Resources Committee on March 26, 2014 about the "Collision Course" taken by the Obama Administration's approach to enforcing environmental laws.  I hope there is live streaming, because the committee is right on  target when it comes to Obama's take-no-prisoners land acquisition policy and the agencies policies of over-regulation.  Please contact Peter Defazio, who is on that committee, and let him know about the land grabs and restrictions happening in our county....Rob T. 

Committee Meeting
House Committee on Natural Resources Meeting

Oversight hearing titled “Collision Course: Oversight of the Obama Administration’s Enforcement Approach for America’s Wildlife Laws and Its Impact on Domestic Energy.” [LHOB 1324] Mar 26, 2014 10 a.m.

Our nonpartisan recall effort is driven by Mayor Auborn's lack of transparency, and disregard for the Democratic process.  Had the Mayor respected the position taken  by our fishing community,and the unanimous decision by our City Council, there would be no recall effort by my hand, at this time.

Firstly, Mayor Auborn's "Imagine a Corporation" (press release Summer 2013) referring to a  a National Marine Sanctuary was insulting, loaded with inaccuracies, and it was intended to trick our community into support. I, for one, am no Lemming. Are you?

I am a Commercial Fisherman of 20 years, the Senior Port Commissioner, serving my  second term at Port Orford, a member of the State of Oregon's Commercial Nearshore Fishery Advisory Committee, and a board member with the Southern Oregon Ocean Resource Council.  I enjoy excellent relationships with multiple Oregon seafood commodity chairmen among many  others, including 1) an Advisor to the National Marine Sanctuary at Monterey Bay 2) a Harbor Master with over 20 years serving within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. I humbly proclaim an understanding of National Marine Sanctuaries.
Mr. Bailey, from Salem, is a National Marine Sanctuary salesman.  Mayor Aubornmet with Mr. Bailey on January 30th according to the Mayor's report. This meeting was prior to the February City Council meeting.  The Mayor did not inform the Council of the pendingnomination, why not?  I don't believe for an instant the two were doing anything other than going over their final plans, as the venue for the meeting was the office of a special interest group who strongly advocates a National Marine Sanctuary.

Mr. Bailey claims a National Marine Sanctuary would not affect fishing.  Not a single Oregon Seafood Commodity Commission, Commercial, Recreational, or Charter Fishing Association supports a National Marine Sanctuary.  He also claims a National Marine Sanctuary would have no authority beyond it's boundaries. This is simply not true. He suggests local control  is not lost.That statement is laughable.  Remember, P.O.O.R.T. is not funded locally.  They are the voice of National Special Interest.  Mr. Bailey continues unabashedly with his sales pitch.  Don't buy it folks.Those who have, regret it.  For more information, search the internet  for the Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries, or go to ALLIANCEFISHERIES.COM then click on reports and get educated.I also recommend a web search for  Kathy Fosmark's OPAC speech. (Oregon Policy Advisory Committee) These are real people who have lived the Sanctuary process at Monterey Bay.

On March 12, 2014 at the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) Bob Bailey   and the faceless group "Friends of Cape Blanco" presented their nomination, centered at Cape Blanco.  The proposed Sanctuary ranges from New River, just south of Bandon to Rogue River Reef near Gold Beach, and westward 33 miles, a total area of 1340 sq. miles.  This area  should be expected to grow rapidly.

In closing, I would ask ALL citizens one question. Do you teach your children to cheat and deceive to achieve their goals? Of course not! It is not okay for our children, and it is not okay  for our Mayor.

Relentlessly Yours,Brett Webb

OREGON & CALIFORNIA LAND GRANT ACT OF 2013:
Critique No. 2
Senator Wyden’s O&C plan will bankrupt counties_

Regarding Clear Cuts
It might be fairly said that the entire thrust of Senator Wyden’s effort to repeal the1937 O&C Act is purely and simply to eliminate clear-cuts. As he has said: “Will there be clear-cuts? No. End of story.” This restriction is clear in the structure of his bill whether it is addressing conservation lands or forestry lands. But Senator Wyden offers no rationale for the elimination. He describes no advantage to be gained by the elimination. The approach is simply that clear-cuts must go. One is left to ask, “What’s wrong with clear-cuts?”

As much as the Sierra Club idolizes John Muir as the original environmentalist, no one has done more to popularize the environmental movement that the poet Robert Frost. Whether he describes stopping by woods on a snowy evening or choosing a path less traveled, his reader is always impressed that Frost has been there, that he personally experienced the sensations he was so talented at describing - and that he grasped the truth. And, if the reader also has been there, the reader knows the truth of the sensations and emotions experienced. This is important in the matter of clear-cutting because of a lovely book of poetry written by Frost in the 1950s -“In the Clearing.”

As only poetry can do, Frost’s book eulogizes the joy experienced by the woodsman when he comes to a clearing in the woods. The wonderful expansions of the sensations of life, joy and freedom that overwhelm one when suddenly released for a moment from the shadows and confines of canopies and crowded age old trees and moss.In the clearing there is life. Where the sun can penetrate, young green growth can sprout and the cycle of life can go on. In the clearing, one is released from the dark tomb of hoary old trees tenaciously clinging to the last moments of quiet destiny.

In the clearing, wildlife in all forms can thrive. All creatures come there to dine on the sustenance provided by the sunlight and the miracle of photosynthesis. The birds - be they quail, grouse or chickadees - forage on the seeds to be found. The mice, the wood rats and the voles can find food. The deer and the elk feast upon the tender shoots of new green growth. And the creatures that prey upon all the rest come there to feed also - the bobcats, cougars, wolves and coyotes. Even owls need the life found in the clearings if they are to eat. In the clearing, in the sunlight, the cycle of life renews itself and creatures young and old go there to survive.

A clearing is nature’s nursery.   It is in the clearing that youth can thrive. There is nothing other than shelter and cover for the young in the dark woods. The message is simple. Eliminate the clearings and you eliminate the life you associate with the wild and the wilderness. Likewise, where there are clearings, nature provides wildlife.

Clearings are important to the forest itself. Fire is an integral part of the natural forest regime. There are several species of trees in which their seeds will only open when exposed to the heat of a forest fire. But, unchecked, fire can be a stand replacement event. Against such catastrophic loss, clearings stand as natural fire-breaks.

It should be clear that clearings are good. They are natural. They provide for the maximum development of all that is natural. By contrast, hoary old growth stands are tombs. They provide nothing and are only unproductive monuments to the past, soundlessly awaiting their doom.

Even the center of the old growth controversy - the spotted owl - needs clearings. While old growth stands may provide nesting habitat for the owl, they provide no forage because they foster no life other than their own. The owl lives on voles and voles live in clearings. The owl needs nesting habitat but it also needs forage habitat.

Besides their natural value, clear-cuts play an important part in the process of sustained yield timber cultivation. Clear-cutting, where the terrain will allow it, is the essence of rapid regeneration. It has been clear-cutting that made possible the remarkable increase of the merchantable timber inventory from 44 billion board feet to 60 billion after harvesting some 45 billion. Clear-cutting makes for rapid and cost- effective regeneration. While not without cost - young regeneration stands lack the fire resilience of older stands, these costs have been proven to be manageable if they are in fact managed with fire protection in mind. With out clear-cutting, forest management as envision by Wyden, Frankin and Johnson produces less merchantable timber and what is produced is far more expensive. If one would have a small percentage of our forests devoted to timber production for the benefit of the economy and the support of local government, rapid regeneration and tree plantation are the proven means.

Senator Wyden’s O&C plan will bankrupt counties
Tuesday, December 10. 2013

by Jack Swift

OREGON & CALIFORNIA LAND GRANT ACT OF 2013: Critique No. 1

It follows that, with the judicial decision upholding the primary utilization mandate of the 1937 O&C Act, the environmental movement’s response would be to repeal the act. This should surprise no one. The repeal and its replacement scheme have been in the works for years. Those who oppose timber production had to have a fall back plan once the inevitable litigation took place.

That the attack would be predicated upon what the environmentalists call “science” should be no surprise either. Their favorite and most effective ploy is to advance their agenda behind the charade of what they call “science.” Their “science” is a farce built upon a sand hill of false facts and irrelevant projections.

Senator Wyden’s “Oregon & California Land Grant Act of 2013″ would amend and effectively destroy the mandates of the 1937 Act by doing away with half of the roughly 2.1 million acres dedicated to sustained yield timber production and would establish new mandates for the remainder. The Senator tells us this is necessary to resolve the legal impasses that prevent a “return to the unsustainable logging levels of a bygone era.” This is, of course, false fact number one.

According to data published by the Association of O&C Counties, these lands had an inventory of 44 million board feet of merchantable timber in the late 1930s when the law was enacted. During the roughly sixty years intervening between the Act and the adoption of the Northwest Forest Management Plan, more than 45 billion board feet were harvested. At that point, thanks to managed regeneration, the lands supported a standing inventory of some 60 billion board feet. That experience established that the 2.1 million acres could and would sustain harvests at a level of 1.2 billion board feet per year in perpetuity.

This data tracks exactly the BLM’s own reports. Their WOPR “Plan Revision News” Newsletter #9 indicated a standing inventory in 1950 of 50 billion board feet, a harvest over the ensuing 50 years of 45 billion board feet, and a resultant standing inventory in 2000 of 70 billion board feet.

To avoid the “sustainable” production mandate of the law, our Governor, when he addressed Congress on the issue in April told them that we are now dealing with a “broadened sustainability criteria.” He feels that FLPMA and the ESA have amended the 1937 Act as to the meaning of “shall be managed, except as provided in section 1181c of this title, for permanent forest production, and the timber thereon shall be sold, cut, and removed in conformity with the principal (sic) of sustained yield . . . .”  This might be an acceptable position unless one also considers the rest of the sentence, “for the purpose of providing a permanent source of timber supply, protecting watersheds, regulating stream flow, and contributing to the economic stability of local communities and industries and providing recreational facilities” which are the very concerns addressed in FLPMA and the ESA. The historic fact is that the 1937 Act was a conservation effort that introduced the concepts later expanded by FLPMA and ESA to all federal lands.

Wyden boasts that his scheme aims at “doubling timber harvests over the next 10 years compared to the last 10 years.” He explains that harvests during the recent decade “have averaged 149.5 million board feet per year.” So he apparently believes that 300 million board feet per year will suit our needs nicely. Note that his represents 1/3 of the 900 million per year that was historically produced and 1/4 of the 1.2 billion board feet per year proven to be sustainable. Even considering the fact that he would reduce the producing acreage by half, his management scheme for the remainder falls far short of what is sustainable.

This would be irrelevant projection number one. When it comes to revenue generation, doubling nothing is still nothing.

Without directly attacking all that is wrong with Wyden’s House Built on a Slime Foundation, it would seem adequate to point to two additional fundamental defects.

Initially, there is the goal Wyden espouses to “permanently protect old growth trees, ensure habitat for sensitive species, and put in place strong safeguards for drinking water and fish.” In the abstract, this is a lofty goal and highly desirable.

Wyden, however, forgets that this objective is well addressed in the management of Oregon forests. We have lands set aside for wilderness. We have national monuments. We have Wild and Scenic Rivers. We have Wild and Scenic Corridors and we have the vast array of National Forests. Why is it so hard to conceptualize that 10% of our forest capacity should be set aside for production?

Finally, one has to question why it is necessary for Senator Wyden to re-invent the wheel? For fifty years the 1937 Act worked perfectly until the environmentalists took exception. Either they are opposed to production altogether or they are opposed to the methods of production. Since Wyden speaks in terms of restoring production to some level, one would have to take him at his word and conclude he is not against production as such. The answer can only be that environmentalists do not like regeneration forestry. And, in response to the question “Will this bill allow clear cuts?”, Wyden is emphatic, “No. End of story.”

The value of clear cuts in terms of the health of the forest is the material for another critique. Suffice it to say that it is clear that the only reason for turning the whole system of forestry management upside down is to do away with clear cuts. Does it make any sense to bankrupt counties, to destroy economies, and to put an entire forest at risk for the sole purpose of satisfying the aesthetic preferences of a minority?

Jack Swift is the Vice Chairman of the Southern Oregon Resource Alliance

Letter to the editor
March 15, 2014 8:56:50 PM

I am sure this scam, will top all past, present and future endeavors of a small elite group to dictate and control through non governmental organizing the purse strings of a very large sums of, I quote, exchange of tax dollars for benefits.

We have from the belly of the Beast, a new, big sister and brother of SCDC. South Coast Development Council. A “new”, non governmental organization, same structure, non public disclosures, no public transparency, privately controlled and operated. 

I present, the SCCF, South Coast Community Foundation, dedicated to managing, half, of the community service fees offered by Jordan Cove Energy Project.

We’re told we can keep our tax dollars, other wise going to the state coffers, first, by eliminating the tax dollars and exchanging them for fees. To insure their cut, a plan of coercion , extortion and bribery, offered by the controllers of Enterprise Zones, they are the governing municipalities in Coos County. the City Council's, County commissioners, and the port of Coos Bay. those “Fees” or a part of them stay in the County and go to, WHOM? The SCCF.

The fees, after the administrative and management cost of the new scam group, will be apportioned out with in the County to government organizations, and other grant funded organizations. I am sure they will be drawing of the straws to see who gets what.

The players is a list of who’s who, of persons who dedicated their very existence in the betterment of their brothers and sisters, through public service.

Certainly the community would benefit with lower Water and Sewer Cost. Lower electric cost, and low property tax. However few benefit under this plan. First, fees filtered through the SCCF, then municipalities, and Non profit organizations who will first use their funds for administration cost, creating new departments and administrators, and then what is left, may filter to services to a remaining few.

Does the citizens have a say in the outcome of this egg that will be hatched to benefit us all? By proxy, and holding out your hand, maybe some of the residue will fall your way. Proxy is a corporate form of governance, not a representative form of government. Would you like to have a vote on how this bonanza of new revenue will be spent?

The last time the controlling group of the Enterprise Zones grantors, granted benefits it was to the mining company of all times, and for those benefits, and no tax dollars this mining company was to hold up their end, I believe they shut down, not sure of their status right now.

You only have a vote by proxy, and once its done you will be forbidden from any of the information of the inter working of the egg from the belly of the beast.

History will tell you, even though you cannot look at the records, the management style of SCDC, benefited only the players, and the paid administrators of the organization as they wisely spend your tax dollars on themselves, no jobs, Oh, there is that mining company.  Looks as though SCDC’s  recent bid for a new  image and more dollars, has turned into egg hatching and straw drawing.

den

House Approves Bipartisan Measure to Protect Water Rights
http://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=372804
WASHINGTON, D.C., March 13, 2014 - Today, the House of Representatives approved H.R. 3189, the Water Rights Protection Act by a bipartisan vote of 238-174. This bipartisan bill, authored by Natural Resources Committee Member Scott Tipton (CO-03), protects private property rights from recent federal overreach that threatens to take water supplies from recreation businesses, ranchers, cities and towns, and local conservation efforts. This important legislation would stop the federal government from demanding citizens and businesses turn over their privately owned water in order to qualify for a federal permit or lease.

“Water is the lifeblood of communities and essential for a strong economy.  Cities, ranchers, farmers, businesses – along with the jobs they support – all depend on a stable supply of water to survive,” said Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04). “For over a century there have been established laws upholding a state’s right to manage its water and water laws.  But now the Obama Administration is threatening to undermine those laws and seeking to take away private water rights governed under state laws. It’s time for the Legislative Branch to exert itself on behalf of the American people and rein in the imperial overreach of the Executive Branch.  No law gives federal agencies the authority to take private water rights as they’re seeking to do – in fact, the Constitution prohibits such takings.  It’s time to put an end to such tactics.”

“The Water Rights Protection Act is the result of bipartisan efforts that began in October 2011 and encompass testimony from Congressional hearings, conversations with stakeholders from across Colorado and the West, and close collaboration with my colleagues on the Natural Resources Committee in order to protect state-recognized water rights,” said Congressman Scott Tipton (CO-03).“Water is the lifeblood of the Western United States and all water users including grazers, ski areas, businesses and municipalities need certainty that all federal land management agencies, not just the Forest Service, are prohibited from future attempts to take privately held water rights. The Water Rights Protection Act offers a sensible approach that preserves water rights and the ability to develop water requisite to living in the arid West. I thank my House colleagues for joining me today in passing this important bill, and urge our colleagues over in the Senate to take swift action to do the same.”
###
Printable PDF of this Document
Contact: Committee Press Office 202-226-9019

Happy 25th Birthday, World Wide Web!
http://govbooktalk.gpo.gov/2014/03/12/happy-25th-birthday-world-wide-web/
Twenty-five years ago on March 12, 1989, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, a British scientist at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, wrote a paper proposing the system now known as the World Wide Web. (Left: 25 Years logo courtesy Marketing Magazine UK.) It was originally conceived and developed as an improved means for instantaneous information-sharing between scientists around the world.

From DOD’s ARPANet to an Internet

The Internet itself had actually started as a creation of the U.S. Government’s Department of Defense’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) together with U.S. universities. It was in response to the Cold War need for a backup communications method in case the traditional phone networks were knocked out. The resulting mainframe-to-mainframe computer network in 1969 was called ARPANet, the foundation for today’s Internet. (Read the History Channel’s history of the invention of the Internet here.) Soon, other organizations, mostly universities and military, created their own private networks. When the University College in London and the Royal Radar Establishment in Norway) connected to ARPANET in 1973, the term Internet was born.

In 1974, the first Internet Service Provider (ISP) was launched with the introduction of a commercial version of ARPANET, known as Telenet, thus expanding the availability of the Internet. After the introduction of a new protocol called TCP/IP by computer scientists Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn (called “The Fathers of the Internet”) in 1974, diverse computer networks could easily interconnect with each other, transforming the “Internet” into a truly global network by the end of the 1970s.

However, by 1990, frustrated CERN scientists were using the text-only Internet with its bulletin boards and limited mainframe messaging, but it was not user-friendly for either the end users or the publishers of content.

From a text-only Internet to a graphical World Wide Web

After Berners-Lee’s proposal received the go-ahead from his boss at CERN, he went on to write software in his spare time, creating the first World Wide Web server (“httpd”) and the first web client “WorldWideWeb.”

This “World Wide Web browser” was a WYSIWYG (what-you-see-is-what-you-get) hypertext browser/editor that would install on their client (end user) computers, providing them with the first graphical interface for accessing Internet content (think of clicking on hyperlinks, viewing  photos and other graphical images, seeing text in different fonts, colors and sizes).

The World Wide Web was launched publicly on August 6, 1991, forever after providing the world a way to “browse the World Wide Web.”

Image: This NeXT workstation (a NeXTcube) was used by Sir Tim Berners-Lee in 1990-1 as the first Web server on the World Wide Web. Source: Wikipedia

In a guest blog post today on Google’s official blog, Sir Tim Berners-Lee explains the results of his World Wide Web idea:

In 1993, after much urging, CERN declared that WWW technology would be available to all, without paying royalties, forever.

This decision enabled tens of thousands to start working together to build the web. Now, about 40 percent of us are connected and creating online. The web has generated trillions of dollars of economic value, transformed education and healthcare and activated many new movements for democracy around the world. And we’re just getting started.

So, thank you, Sir Tim! The rest, as they say, is history.

Below is a timeline of Internet history from 1990 to 2007:

GPO’s History on the World Wide Web

GPO is joining in the celebration by commemorating our own moments in World Wide Web history:

1993:    The Government Printing Office Electronic Information Access Enhancement Act of 1993 was enacted (Public Law 103-40).

1994:    GPO Access launched (available by subscription; free to Federal depository libraries)

1995:    GPO Access became free to all users.

1995:    GPO began selling Government publications online with its “Sales Product Catalog” (now the site known as the U.S. Government Bookstore)

1996:    GPO’s Federal Depository Library Program Web site, “FDLP Administration,” launched (later named the FDLP Desktop and now FDLP.gov)

2000:    GPO’s kids’ site, Ben’s Guide to U.S. Government, launched.

Image: Home page of Ben’s Guide to U.S. Government for Kids as of March 12, 2014.

2006:    The Catalog of U.S. Government Publications, launched.

2009:    GPO’s Federal Digital System (FDsys) launched.

2010:    GPO entered the world of social media, first with the launch of its YouTube Channel.

2013:      GPO relaunches its newly redesigned U.S. Government Bookstore ecommerce site at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/.

March 10, 2014

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the “rails-to-trails” property rights case, Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States—a case in which PLF attorneys participated as an amicus curiae. By an 8-1 margin, the Court ruled in favor of the property owner, upholding one of the most important and fundamental policies of our property law system: certainty and predictability in land titles. That is a win for all property owners. We congratulate our friends at Mountain States Legal Foundation, who represented the Brandt family in this case.

March 10, 2014

On December 20th the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released their drafted disapproval of Oregon's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program (CNPCP). This disapproval was issued in response to a 2010 settlement agreement via Northwest Environmental Advocates (NWEA).  Oregon needs your help to ensure that funding issued under the CNPCP for water quality related programs and restoration important to farms and ranches are protected.  Please help us spread the word and let the NOAA know that Oregon's Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program works!

How to protect funding for nonpoint source related water quality improvement projects on farms and ranches:

Thank you for taking steps to comment on the Notice of Intent to Find that Oregon has Failed to Submit an Approvable Coastal Nonpoint Program (78 FR 77104). This disapproval will mean the loss of $1.2 million that is used for restoration and improvement projects in Oregon in 2014/2015. Over time, it would mean the loss of up to $2 million each year that is being used by Oregon, and in particular, soil and water conservation districts (SWCD), for restoration and improvement projects.

In the sample comments linked here, please add information in the yellow highlighted portions.  Please personalize the comments in other ways that make sense to you as well. At a minimum, be sure to add:

• The date at the top; 
• Your name and contact information at the bottom (found just above the "References" section);
• And information about your own operation within the introductory paragraphs. For example, add details such as the nature of your livestock operation; what you've done to improve or protect water quality; and how long your family has farmed/ranched in the area. 

It is important to make these comments as unique as possible. 

Comments are due no later than March 20, 2014.

They should be emailed to joelle.gore@noaa.gov.

Thank you for your time, and please feel free to contact me via the information below if you have any questions or concerns. 

Sincerely,
Lauren Montgomery
Communications Officer
Oregon Cattlemen's Association
V: (503) 361-8941x12
C: (541) 619-2705
E: lauren@orcattle.com

Hey Folks,

The following message is from The Service and in it is the file for the Final Plan for mosquito control in the Bandon Marsh.  Please download and read the files and then make a comment to remind The USFWS that the only known solution is to "Dike the Marsh and Drain The Swamp."  This is what our wise forefathers did as a permanent solution.  It would eliminate the need for chemical spaying or the eventual creation of a vector control taxing district.  Also, please bring as many family and friends to the meeting on March 18, because they need to know where the people stand.....Rob T. 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is asking the public to review and comment on its proposed Integrated Marsh Management approach to control mosquitoes on the Ni-les’tun Unit of Bandon Marsh National Wildlife Refuge.  The public review and comment period will begin on March 11, 2014 and end on April 9, 2014.

Specifically, we are asking for your review and comments on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Tidal Marsh Restoration and the Draft Environmental Assessment for Mosquito Control at Bandon Marsh National Wildlife Refuge, which together constitute our Integrated Marsh Management approach to mosquito control.  Both Draft Environmental Assessments are attached to this email as PDF files. 

The draft Environmental Assessments are also available for download at http://www.fws.gov/oregoncoast/index.htm.  Hard copies are available in the reference section of the public libraries in Bandon, Coquille, Coos Bay and North Bend. Printed copies can be obtained by sending an email request to oregoncoast@fws.gov or calling (541) 867-4550. 

Your comments on the plans can be mailed, faxed or emailed by April 9, 2014 to:
Oregon Coast National Wildlife Refuge Complex
2127 S.E. Marine Science Drive
Newport, OR 97365-5258
Fax number (541) 867-4551
E-mail oregoncoast@fws.gov

The Service will evaluate and respond to the comments received and inform the public of our decision. 

The Service is inviting the public to attend an open house where you can ask questions and learn more about the Integrated Marsh Management approach.

The USFWS Open House
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
4:00 and 7:00 PM
The Barn: Bandon’s Conference and Community Center,
1200 West 11th Street SW,
Bandon, Oregon, 97411.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff and Coos County representatives will be available to answer questions anytime between 4:00 and 7:00 PM.
--
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Oregon Coast National Wildlife Refuge Complex2127 SE Marine Science DriveNewport OR 97365 541-867-4550oregoncoast@fws.gov

Koch: “Found money… forces cooperation”
http://mgx.com/blogs/2014/03/08/koch-found-money-forces-cooperation/

If you can stomach watching your civic leaders salivate over other people’s money, watch the Coos Bay City Council work session regarding the community enhancement plan. It is has been clear from the very first mention of the community enhancement scheme that Coos Bay and North Bend want access to tax dollars outside of their district and are willing to use their role as enterprise zone sponsors to usurp the rights of other taxing districts in order to get at it. But hey, according to Coos County Commissioner John Sweet, “the North Bay Rural Fire District doesn’t need $16 million…” Apparently, Sweet doesn’t think the county needs much money either because he is in full support of a plan to reallocate county revenue to the betterment of the waterfronts of Coos Bay and North Bend by “redirecting” taxes into the Bay Front Investment Corp.

While it should be noted that Sweet received the majority of his campaign contributions from the Coos Bay/North Bend area all of this comes at extraordinarily little inconvenience to either city. “This is all found money,” says Port CEO David Koch talking about the influx of cash within the city boundaries. “Found money.” What a descriptive phrase for this situation, as in unearned, or undeserved.

“What I like about this is it forces a partnership,” continues Koch. “We are forcing a partnership and seeding it with money that forces a closer cooperation between all four agencies in accomplishing the goals of this community. Frankly, I think the Bay Front Investment is the most exciting part…”

On a side note, one of the councilors bragged about downtown Coos Bay’s industrial waterfront. “We are very proud of it,” said Mike Vaughn. “It has always been a draw for us.”

Be Sociable, Share!

Hey Folks,

The following is a Press Release from The Conservation Fund, which is another conservation front group for the federal government.  These groups, The Conservation Fund, The Nature Conservancy, will tell private owners that giving their land to the conservation groups is a good way to protect the property for generations to come.  Then, after a few years, the purchasing groups will sell or grant the property to the US Federal Government, usually for some type of trade of monetary compensation.  The Feds then take the property and use it for whatever they choose, depending on current administrations.  It is a federal land grab no matter how you slice it and people need to see these NGO's for what they really are.....Rob T.  

March 7, 2014

Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument.

Private-Public Partnership Protects High-Priority Forestland Within Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument Thanks to the Land and Water Conservation Fund JACKSON COUNTY, Ore. — The Conservation Fund has transferred 930 acres of former Hancock Timber Resource Group lands, including a stretch of the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail, to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for protection as part of Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument (CSNM).  Located at the intersection of the Cascade Range, Siskiyou Mountains and Klamath Mountains, the area has been called the “Galapagos of North America” because of its wide range of plant and wildlife species, many of which are found nowhere else on earth. The U.S. Congress provided funding through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), America’s premier conservation program, enacted in 1965. The Monument offers public recreation opportunities for hiking, camping, fishing, horseback riding, hunting and winter sports.

Protection of these critical lands, along with key parcels the BLM purchased in 2012, completes over half of a multi-phase effort by the BLM and The Conservation Fund to protect one of the largest remaining private landholdings within the Monument boundary—approximately 6,570 acres—owned by Hancock Timber Resource Group. Approximately 2,890 acres of priority Hancock Timber lands remain available for sale, and future support from the LWCF could help BLM acquire these properties for conservation, which enhances habitat connectivity for wildlife and expands public recreational access.

Thanks to the dedicated support of U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, the U.S. Congress approved funding in Fiscal Year 2012 for the purchase through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a federal land protection program that receives funds from the development of federally-owned offshore oil and gas resources. No taxpayer dollars are used to support the LWCF, which has been protecting forests, natural resources, state and local parks and recreation areas since 1965.

“Today’s land transfer means that the project to increase public lands at the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument—which is truly one of Oregon’s special places—is more than halfway complete,” said Senator Wyden. “Conserving this land within the Monument means more opportunities for hikers, hunters, and the rest of Southern Oregon’s robust recreation economy. I’m going to continue to fight for full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which makes this kind of valuable project possible.”

“The Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument is one of America’s most treasured ecological places, and this land transfer will help conserve this area for future generations,” said Senator Merkley. “This will help provide protected habitat for many native plants and animals, and also provide new recreation opportunities for Southern Oregon.  Preserving this important area reminds us of how critically important it is to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund which was essential for this to happen.”

Clouds Over Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument. Photo by Todd Kaplan

“This collective effort will allow the BLM to eliminate much of the fragmentation within the monument, enabling better stewardship and landscape-level protection of at-risk lands,” said Evan Smith, Senior Vice President of Conservation Ventures at The Conservation Fund. “We are grateful for the support of Senators Wyden and Merkley to take a huge step forward in completing the Monument and securing this one-of-a-kind place.”

“We are very pleased with the progress being made to place these important conservation lands at Cascade-Siskiyou into public ownership,” said David Kimbrough, Manager, Hancock Timber Resource Group.  ”With our Sensitive Lands program and through our strong partnership with The Conservation Fund and the Bureau of Land Management, we are more than halfway there, and look forward to continuing to work together to ensure that the rest of the sensitive lands in this biologically-rich landscape are conserved forever.”

“Partnerships with organizations such as The Conservation Fund are vital to the Pacific Crest Trail Association’s work to fully protect the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail,” said Ian Nelson, Regional Representative with the Pacific Crest Trail Association (PCTA). “In addition, PCTA’s strong working relationship with the BLM in Southern Oregon has helped to make acquisition of lands that include sections of the Pacific Crest Trail a high priority.”

The Friends of Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument strongly endorsed the purchase of 930 acres from the Hancock Timber Resource Group lands.  Terry Dickey, Chair of the Friends added: “The purchase of these private parcels within the Monument has had the highest priority of support by the Friends. This was a ‘must’ action item.  Once the purchase of these private lands is final, the outdoor experiences of exploring and discovering diverse wildlife habitat and scenic vistas will be protected for future generations.”

Established in 2000 with the sole purpose of preserving the area’s extraordinary biodiversity, CSNM now spans more than 61,700 acres in southern Oregon.  Encompassing a diverse array of landscapes, from the high, dry deserts of the Great Basin to the wet, lower-elevation forests of the Pacific Coast, the CSNM region supports critical habitat for 3,500 plant and animal species.

About The Conservation Fund
At The Conservation Fund, we combine a passion for conservation with an entrepreneurial spirit to protect your favorite places before they become just a memory. A hallmark of our work is our deep, unwavering understanding that for conservation solutions to last, they need to make economic sense. Top-ranked, we have protected more than 7 million acres across America.