Home > Legislative Tracker > Tillamook Logging Bill

Forests:
Tillamook Logging Bill

Our Position: oppose
Bill Number: HB 2975
Sponsor: House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee
Legislative Session: 2007

HB 2975 would have changed the Greatest Permanent Value (GPV) rule that governs state forests, requiring that the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests between Portland and the Oregon Coast be managed 'primarily for timber production.' State forest management plans would have been amended to meet this new mandate, increasing logging dramatically while harming values such as fish and wildlife, recreation, and clean water

Status

HB 2975 died on April 30 when a scheduled vote was cancelled as a result of a threat of a veto from Governor Kulongoski.

Action Needed

More information

For more information contact ivan.maluski@sierraclub.org

Background

A recent state-wide poll conduced by the Oregon Department of Forestry found that 87% of Oregonians value our state forests for providing clean drinking water, 82% for wildlife habitat protection, 78% for fish habitat protection and 71% for hiking and wildlife viewing .These important values are at risk every legislative session. Oregon’s Greatest Permanent Value (GPV) rule requires state forests to be managed for “healthy, productive, and sustainable forest ecosystems that over time and across the landscape provide a full range of social, economic, and environmental benefits to the people of Oregon.” (emphasis added) HB 2975 would have changed the GPV Rule to require that the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests between Portland and the Oregon Coast be managed 'primarily for timber production.' State forest management plans would have been amended to meet this new mandate, increasing logging dramatically while harming values such as fish and wildlife, recreation, and clean water.

HB 2975 would have thrown out the current management plan for the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests and require the Oregon Department of Forestry to prioritize logging over fish, wildlife, clean water, and recreation.

If anything, logging levels should be reduced on these forests to better protect salmon, preserve recreation opportunities, avoid logging on steep slopes, and curtail road building that muddies streams and rivers. A system of permanent 'no-logging' reserves for old growth development and fish and wildlife protection should be established on states lands. Ultimately, Oregon needs a Board of Forestry that will work for the protection of sensitive habitats, clean water and recreational opportunities on state forest lands and balance these values with logging. The legislature should refrain from trying to increase logging every session and Governor's Kulongoski's threat of a veto of HB 2975 should send a strong signal in that regard.