In early 2011, Oregon's US Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley reintroduced S.220 (112th Congress), the Oregon Eastside Forests Restoration, Old Growth Protection and Jobs Act. You can find out the bill's current status and other information, and also download a copy of the bill itself, by going to Thomas.
S.220 (112th Congress) is a revised version of S.2895 (111th Congress), a bill by the same name that was introduced in late 2009. Hearings were held on the S.2895 in Washington, DC and Bend, OR, but the bill did not become law. Here is my testimony that I gave at the Washington, DC hearing.
A conservation coalition led by Defenders of Wildlife, Oregon Wild, Pacific Rivers Council and The Nature Conservancy is advocating for the legislation.
I have prepared the following materials on the current legislation:
• "The Gets, the Gives, the No Changes and the No Gets." A one-pager that details what conservationists would get, would have to give, what would not change and what we would not get (but would not lose).
• "How The Revised Legislation Would Work." 3 pages that outlines how the 39-page bill would work.
• "Questions and Answers." 5.5 pages of Q&A including how the revised bill differs from the original
• "Administrative and Judicial Review." A 1-pager on how both administrative and judicial review are preserved in the bill.
• "Acreage Treatment Mandate." 2 pages on perhaps the most controversial provision of the bill that pertains to legislatively mandated restoration treatments. Hint: it's a good thing for the forest.
• "Collaboration Required and Collaborative Groups Empowered by Legislation." 2 pages on how the proposed legislation addresses and promotes multiparty collaboration.
The seminal work done on eastside forest and watershed conservation and restoration "Eastside Scientific Societies Panel Report:
• Henjum, M. G., J. R. Karr, D. L. Bottom, D. A. Perry, J. C. Bednarz, S. G. Wright, S. A. Beckwitt, and E. Beckwitt. 1994. Interim Protection for Late-Successional Forests, Fisheries and Watersheds: National Forests East of the Cascade Crest, Oregon and Washington. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD.
Click for summary (searchable, 13 pages and 1.2 MB) and the entire report (not searchable, 245 pages and 25 MB for the version I have) is, to my knowledge, not available on line. If you really need the entire report (see if the summary meets your needs first), please contact me and plead your case.
Johnson, K. Norman, Jerry F. Franklin and Debora L. Johnson. 2007. A Plan for the Klamath Tribes’ Management of the Klamath Reservation Forest.
Here is the abstract of my critique:
A "Plan for the Klamath Tribes' Management of the Klamath Reservation Forest" is perceived by many to be an ecological restoration plan for 689,827 acres of National Forest System lands in south central Oregon. While it is a management plan that includes state-of-the-art ecological restoration information and recommendations for ponderosa pine-dominated forests, the document also includes recommendations for lodgepole pine-bitterbrush, red fir and mountain hemlock forests that emphasize timber production and revenue generation rather than ecological restoration. The document should not be construed as a template for the conservation and restoration of lodgepole pine-bitterbrush, red fir and mountain hemlock forests.
"Ponderosa Pine in Peril: Assessing Public Lands Livestock Grazing in Ponderosa Pine Forests" is a report by Mark Salvo of Wild Earath Guardians that speaks to the impacts of fire suppression and livestock grazing to the ecological disruption of these magnificent forests. My modest contribution, "Forest Health and Livestock Grazing" is a paper I did for the National Public Lands Grazing Campaign.