FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2016
THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS — 7
Outdoor Recreation
Lead ammunition the subject Public input
sought on
of ODFW / OSU survey
events out-
side the State
(the possible
restoration
of California
Condors
in northern
California),
or litigation,
legislation or
a ballot ini-
tiative, could
affect the
use of lead
ammunition
THE OUTDOOR COLUMN
and hunt-
ing wildlife
By Todd Arriola
management
Early last month, I
in Oregon.
wrote an article about the
For these reasons, the
planned release of Califor-
Department believed it was
nia Condors, within a few
important to understand the
years, by the Yurok Tribe
views of hunters and the
of northern California, and public on this issue, and
the expected migration to
ensure that those views are
Oregon.
clearly understood, and can
The Oregon Depart-
be fairly represented in any
ment of Fish and Wild-
future discussions regard-
life (ODFW), and the
ing lead ammunition.”
Oregon State University
The survey included
(OSU) Research Center
more questions for the
collaborated on a State
hunters than the public
lead survey, to assess the
(both groups picked at
opinions, and knowledge
random, from all regions
regarding lead ammuni-
within the State).
tion use of both hunters,
This ratio makes sense,
and non-hunters, which I
because, as the introduc-
also mentioned. I didn’t
tion states, “The hunter
expect to see the results of
survey included 33 ques-
that survey until the end of tions in order to get more
winter, however, I received specifi c information on
an email on January 26th,
current fi rearm and ammu-
with a summary. The dis-
nition usage for big game
appointing, but unsurpris-
and unprotected mam-
ing results tell me this: the
mal and furbearer hunts.
lead debate will continue
Therefore, the general
to be a long, divisive battle public survey consisted
for anyone involved.
of fewer questions. Both
ODFW Wildlife Com-
groups responded to a
munications Coordinator
subset of questions that
Michelle Dennehy said,
allowed comparisons of
“There has been specula-
opinions, knowledge, and
tion that this survey was
preferences between the
a precursor to ODFW
two groups.”
implementing a ban or
The fi rst response I
restriction on the use of
noted—mostly, because,
lead ammunition. This is
it reassured me that news,
not the case. There are no
and print isn’t dead, and
proposals by ODFW or the people still read papers—is
Oregon Fish and Wild-
the answer to a question
life Commission to ban
that was posed to both
or restrict the use of lead
groups, regarding their
ammunition for hunting in
sources of information as-
Oregon.”
sociated with the effects of
Stating a seemingly
lead ammunition.
prophetic view, prompted
Topping the list of sourc-
most likely by the knowl-
es of information used
edge that State issues
by hunters, sportsmen’s
frequently metamorphose
magazines, ranked at about
into heated, extended
63%, followed by mass
battles, she said, “Howev-
media, and other hunters,
er, ODFW anticipates that
both at about 60%.
The public responded
with the top three sources
as mass media, at about
65%, followed by hunters
they know, at about 46%,
and conservation/environ-
mental organizations, at
about 43%.
Both groups were then
asked to rate the reliability
of their sources of lead
ammunition information.
This is where predict-
ably, among other specifi c
responses, the two groups
largely disagreed.
Sportsmen’s magazines
received the top score for
reliability for hunters,
at about 40%, however,
mass media, the second-
ranked source for the
group, received only about
18% reliability, and other
hunters, the third-ranked
source, received a score of
about 26% reliability.
On the other hand, the
public, whose top three
sources were mass media,
hunters they know, and
conservation/environ-
mental organizations, also
ranked those sources in
the same order, as the top
three in reliability scoring,
at about 35%, 28%, and
28%, respectively. Interest-
ingly, both hunters, and
the public ranked the OSU
Extension Service, and
ODFW employees near
the bottom, in both a cited
source of information, and
reliability.
Several key points
were noted, as the survey
provided some insight,
regarding lead ammuni-
tion use, and hunter versus
public opinion. The fol-
lowing was asked of both
groups: “If Oregon were
forced, such as by legis-
lation or regulations, to
phase out use of ammuni-
tion that contains lead, by
which year do you believe
it would be realistic for
the State and its hunters
to adopt the change?” Ac-
cording to the survey, the
public supports an almost
immediate phase out, while
hunters support a gradual
change, by around 2024.
“If a program to reduce
use of or eliminate am-
munition that contains lead
were created in Oregon,
how would your participa-
tion in hunting change, if
Why advertise with us?
David Conn
david@thebakercountypress.com
or call 541.523.5524
Baker City, Haines
• Low rates per
column inch &
promotional deals
• Color at no
additional charge
as space permits
• Friendly,
professional sales
staff
Wendee Morrissey
wendee@thebakercountypress.
com or call 541.805.1688.
Sumpter, Bates,
Richland, Halfway,
Medical Springs,
Keating
Family owned and operated.
Packed with local news!
• All display ads
are also posted
to our Facebook
page, which means
thousands of
individuals see
your ad from that
source alone.
We’re the only
local paper that
offers this service!
at all?” the survey asked
hunters. The response
was, overwhelmingly, that
hunting activities wouldn’t
change.
When asked how knowl-
edge of the effects of lead
has infl uenced whether
hunters consume, or use
game meat harvested with
lead ammunition, the sur-
vey noted, “Most hunters
have not stopped consum-
ing game meat because
of what they have learned
about lead. Others are
minimizing their exposure
by trimming meat, or using
non-lead ammunition.”
The hunters cited the
need to know about non-
lead ammunition’s perfor-
mance, as the top infl u-
ence, whether to switch to
non-lead ammunition, for
hunting big game.
The lowest-ranked infl u-
ence cited was if the cost
was 25%-50% higher than
lead-based ammunition.
When asked what would
infl uence the switch to
non-lead ammunition,
for hunting unprotected
mammals, or furbearers,
the highest percentage
responded that the switch
would not be made, under
any circumstances.
The lowest-ranked infl u-
ence was, again, if the cost
was higher than lead-based
ammunition.
The survey shows that,
if a program in the State
were initiated to reduce
lead exposure to both hu-
mans and wildlife, it could
be said that both hunters
and the public basically
would agree on regulations
to prohibit lead-based am-
munition solely in regions
with demonstrated wildlife
lead ingestion concerns.
When asked about
Statewide regulations
to prohibit the use of
lead-based ammunition,
the public shows strong
support, while hunters
show strong opposition, as
predicted.
More notable proof that
the two groups can agree
periodically is offered in
the following suggestions,
receiving strong opposition
from both hunters, and the
public, according to the
survey:
“Region-specifi c regula-
tions to allow use of lead-
based ammunition, but
require removal of gut pile
from hunting fi eld; State-
wide regulations to allow
use of lead-based ammuni-
tion, but require removal
of gut pile from hunting
fi eld; Voluntary coupon
incentive program only in
regions with demonstrated
wildlife lead ingestion
concerns.”
A voluntary coupon
incentive program—which
includes a voucher for
non-lead ammunition,
for example. Statewide?
Hunters strongly oppose it,
while the public strongly
supports it, according to
the survey.
Well, there it is, sports
fans.
It’s not a 100% com-
plete picture of the state
of the lead debate, but, an
overview.
Sometimes, hunters and
the public can agree, and
sometimes, they come dan-
gerously close to fi nding
the nearest UFC cage, in
order to battle it out.
I am 100% certain about
one thing, though: we
haven’t heard the last of
it…
restoration
project
PENDLETON, Ore. – In an effort to increase forest
health across the Blue Mountains, the Ochoco, Umatilla,
and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests are proposing
a landscape scale forest restoration and fuels reduction
project on portions of approximately 1,270,000 acres of
National Forest System (NFS) lands.
“The current pace of active forest restoration on our
forests is not keeping pace with forest growth, making
them vulnerable to severe wildfi res and insect and disease
outbreaks,” said Stacey Forson, Ochoco National Forest
Supervisor. “In order to promote a healthy and productive
forest, we must look at ways to do planning differently, at
a larger scale and faster pace.”
The Forest Resiliency Project aims to return the Blue
Mountains to healthier conditions, reduce the risks of
unusually large and severe wildfi res, and reintroduce the
natural role of fi re to the landscape. The project will also
contribute to local communities through reduced risk of
fi re spread to adjacent lands, increased jobs and supple-
mental benefi ts. The analysis area is located within the
Blue Mountains in northeast Oregon and southeast Wash-
ington and encompasses portions of 13 counties.
The project proposes approximately 610,000 acres of
thinning and prescribed fi re treatments across the three
National Forests in areas with the greatest restoration
need. All forest treatments will be designed to create for-
est patterns that are more resilient to natural disturbance.
Additionally, treatments will support safe and effective
fi re management. Proposed treatments by forest include:
• 118,000 acres of treatment on the Ochoco National
Forest
• 212,000 acres of treatment on the Umatilla National
Forest
• 280,000 acres of treatment on the Wallowa-Whitman
National Forest
The proposal refl ects Forest Service commitment to
focus on the urgent need to restore dry forest landscapes
in eastern Oregon and Washington. Decades of fi re
suppression, past timber management practices, and
climate change have left more than 2.3 million acres of
dry forests across the Blue Mountains overcrowded and
vulnerable to unusual outbreaks of insects, diseases, and
wildfi res. The 2015 fi re season set the record as the worst
in U.S. history, with more than 282,000 acres reported
as burned in the Blue Mountains. Because current forest
project planning takes several years to complete, forest
managers are unable to keep up with the pace of forest
growth to restore these conditions.
“To really make a difference on the landscape, we must
try new approaches to project design and analysis, test
new ways to reach decisions differently, while working
closely with tribes, communities, and forest collaborative
groups,” said Genevieve Masters, Umatilla National For-
est Supervisor.
The Blue Mountains Restoration Strategy Team, a
dedicated interdisciplinary team, was hired by the Forest
Service Pacifi c Northwest Region to tackle this critical
issue and complete large landscape restoration plans, in-
cluding the Forest Resiliency Project. The planning team
intentionally designed this project at a large scale, explore
new planning and analysis methods, and create fl exibility
for local units during implementation. The draft envi-
ronmental impact statement (EIS) will be released this
summer with the fi nal EIS expected in December 2016.
A separate Record of Decision will be prepared for each
Forest and signed by the associated Forest Supervisor, but
the analysis of effects will be completed in one EIS.
The success of this project depends on frequent
engagement among a variety of interested stakeholders,
tribes and communities. Three local collaborative groups
within the project area (the Ochoco Forest Restoration
Collaborative, the Umatilla Forest Collaborative, and
the Wallowa-Whitman Forest Collaborative) are actively
engaged with the local forests on similar projects to inte-
grate social values and address any local concerns about
Forest Service project plans.
“We want to do what is right for the landscape, while
balancing social and economic issues. We encourage all
citizens to contribute to this important project,” said Tom
Montoya, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Supervisor.
“Your feedback will help guide and improve this proposal
through the planning process.”
The comment period is an opportunity for the public to
be involved in the process and offer thoughts on alterna-
tive ways the Forest Service can accomplish the project
purpose and need. Comments may be submitted during
the 60-day scoping period, which begins with the Notice
of Intent published in the Federal Register (anticipated to
begin on February 5). Public engagement sessions will be
scheduled during the month of March. Additional infor-
mation on these meetings will be released in the future.
The Proposed Action and maps can be downloaded
from the web site: www.fs.usda.gov/goto/forestresiliency-
project. Comments can be submitted online or by email:
r6restorationprojects@fs.fed.us. Written comments may
also be submitted to: Blue Mountains Restoration Strat-
egy Team, 72510 Coyote Rd., Pendleton, OR 97801.
The Forest Resiliency project is part of the Forest
Service’s broader strategy to accelerate the pace and scale
of forest restoration in eastern Oregon and Washington
to provide both healthy forests and healthy communities.
More information can be found on the Eastside Restora-
tion website: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/EastsideRes-
toration or by contacting Ayn Shlisky (541-278-3762,
ajshlisky@fs.fed.us) or Darcy Weseman (541-278-3755,
deweseman@fs.fed.us).