BY COLIN HOUCK
BLM PLANS TO LOG THURSTON HILLS
Disciples of Dirt and other recreation groups oppose the timber sale
T
he Bureau of Land Management, in a decision
proving increasingly controversial among area
stakeholders, has announced plans to extensively
log 155 acres of mature forest in Thurston Hills.
The logging is immediately adjacent to the new
Thurston Hills Natural area and part of the questionably
named “Pedal Power” timber sale.
Prior to the May 30 decision, BLM and Willamalane
Park and Recreation District officials, as well as local
mountain bike club Disciples of Dirt (DoD) and others, had
all been working toward developing the area for recreation
opportunities meant to supplement the new trail system in
the Thurston Hills Natural Area.
While those involved in the project say it was always
understood that a dedicated recreation area was only one
among several options being considered, many see the BLM
decision to essentially clearcut as a unilateral one, especial-
ly considering the wide support for an unlogged recreation
area.
DoD’s Peter O’Toole was one of several who provided
input during the required comment period after publication
of BLM’s environmental analysis. His statement read in part:
“I am concerned that the [analysis] has not fully ad-
dressed the impacts to recreational trail users from the tim-
ber harvest proposal … trail design, construction techniques
and green tree aggregates do not make up for the loss of the
intrinsic value of recreating in a mature forest setting.”
The BLM’s response, in a nutshell, is that because there
currently aren’t any recreation opportunities — specifically,
biking and hiking trails — at the proposed sites, their analy-
sis doesn’t need to prioritize recreation over other alterna-
tives.
When asked about how he interpreted that response,
O’Toole says, “We don’t exist. That’s what they said: We
don’t exist.”
6
June 21, 2018 • eugeneweekly.com
O’Toole also notes, however, that although the DoD is
less than thrilled about the proposed logging, the organi-
zation does not want an adversarial relationship with the
BLM, and that DoD is happy to have trails at all.
The DoD isn’t alone in expressing disappointment, even
if in a cautious tone. Willamalane Park and Recreation Dis-
trict Superintendent Michael Wargo declined to be inter-
viewed, instead issuing the following statement:
“Willamalane and the BLM have a longstanding rela-
tionship of collaboration in support of each other’s mis-
sions. This partnership has never been more apparent than
in the ongoing development of the Thurston Hills Natural
Area trail system. Recognizing that the BLM has obliga-
tions regarding sustainable timber harvest, we are coordi-
nating with their leadership on alternatives that optimally
balance those obligations with delivering recreational op-
portunities desired by the Springfield and surrounding com-
munity. We recently had encouraging face to face meetings
with key BLM decision makers and will continue to com-
municate the best interest of our community regarding rec-
reational pursuits.”
If Willamalane and DoD are choosing to exercise an
abundance of caution in their responses to the BLM’s pro-
posed action, others are taking a decidedly more aggressive
approach.
Conservation group Oregon Wild has been the most
vocal opponent of the proposed timber sale. Of the three
organizations that filed official comments on the BLM’s en-
vironmental analysis, Oregon Wild’s was by far the most
substantively critical of the BLM’s decision-making pro-
cess and it’s outcome.
Additionally, Oregon Wild filed on June 12 an official
protest document with the BLM, which BLM is required
by law to respond to before any logging contracts can be
finalized.
In their protest, Oregon Wild contends that BLM, in its
haste to produce a timber harvest, failed to adequately con-
sider the detrimental effects a logging operation as exten-
sive as the proposed action would have on the scenic value
for the recreation area.
In their own words, Oregon Wild charges that, “BLM
needs to correct for the internal agency bias towards logging
and manage for the recreational and scenic expectations of
the general public,” adding, “It is arbitrary and capricious
for BLM to ignore the significant scenic and recreational
impacts of regeneration/clearcutting.”
Rep. Peter DeFazio and Oregon state Sen. Lee Beyer
have also weighed in critically on the proposed action, with
both politicians dealing directly with the BLM in hopes of
getting the agency to reconsider.
DeFazio, whose district encompasses all of Lane Coun-
ty, expressed dismay at what he sees as a rushed attempt to
meet logging quotas without fully considering community
impact or other options.
Likewise, Beyer, whose district includes the Thurston
Hills area, says he had hoped the BLM would have been
more willing to consider the impacts that clearcutting would
have, not only on recreation opportunities but also on the
environment. Beyer specifically cites concerns about the
Clear Creek drainage basin.
As it stands, it’s unclear what effect, if any, these efforts
will have regarding whether BLM modifies its decision.
BLM acting field director Michael Kinsey says his office
is aware there is now a great deal of interest in the proposed
timber sale, but when asked if that interest is likely to have
any effect, his answer was a simple “no.”
“We are continuing to talk with our partners, and we are
continuing to talk with our public, but at this point the deci-
sion that I signed a couple of weeks ago is the decision,”
he says.