Salem, Ore., – Hundreds of wildlife and habitat advocates from across the state gathered in Salem today in support of HB 4134, the “1.25% for Wildlife” legislation. HB 4134 has garnered broad, bipartisan support from a diverse coalition of hunters, anglers, farmers, ranchers, conservationists, rural and urban communities, and over 100 businesses from across the state.
“This bill must pass this year,” said Oregon Wild Wildlife Program Manager Danielle Moser before the crowd gathered on the Capitol steps. “The longer we wait to address species and the habitats that sustain them, the more costly it becomes, and the more difficult it becomes.”
Oregon House Representative Ken Helm also addressed the crowd, calling the bill a “unicorn” because it had bipartisan, bicameral support.
After the rally, participants dispersed to attend pre-scheduled meetings with their elected representatives to discuss the importance of investing in Oregon’s natural heritage and how wildlife conservation and other aspects of the bill relate to their own experiences and values.
Healthy ecosystems support clean drinking water, reduce wildfire risk, sustain Oregon’s outdoor economy, and protect public health. Early investments in conservation can prevent species from declining to crisis levels, avoiding higher costs and greater conflict in the future.
HB 4134 would dedicate a small portion of Oregon’s lodging tax to support wildlife conservation, habitat restoration, wildfire risk reduction, and conservation workforce development. Supporters say the proposal represents a forward-looking and fiscally responsible approach to protecting Oregon’s natural legacy while investing in Oregon’s outdoor recreation economy.
In Minnesota, federal immigration agents have been terrorizing the community with impunity. ICE is increasingly operating as an unaccountable paramilitary force, kidnapping people off the street and distributing retribution against community members who stand up for their neighbors, use their freedom of speech to protest, and take a stand against this administration’s miscarriages of justice.
Today, January 23, Minnesotans are coming together for a statewide day of nonviolent action to call for ICE Out of Minnesota, an independent investigation into the killing of Renee Good, and no additional federal funding for ICE.
With this statement, Oregon communities express our solidarity with Minnesota. Over the last year, Oregon has also been deeply affected by abuses perpetrated by ICE. We know that what federal agents can get away with in Minnesota will quickly become precedent for the horrors they can inflict on all our communities.
We stand with Minnesotans in mourning the lives ended and irrevocably changed by ICE violence and abuse of power. While the threats ICE poses to the lives and well-being of immigrant communities are not new, the current immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota represents a frightening new moment in which communities find themselves under siege, unable to participate in education, open businesses, or walk down the street without facing potential questioning, violence, and abduction.
We also stand with Minnesotans in their resolve to protect our neighbors. There is no force large enough, and there are no reprisals brutal enough, to stop communities from standing up for each other. Wherever ICE shows up next, people are learning from Minnesotans’ courageous nonviolent resistance and planning ahead with an eye towards protecting our neighbors. Many Oregonians are already organizing their communities to mitigate and document the devastating impact ICE has on our communities.
We will do our part to end ICE impunity. Today, we speak out in solidarity with Minnesota. Tomorrow, and every day, we will show up for the safety and freedoms of all. ICE Out of Minnesota. ICE Out of all of our communities.
Signers
Elected Officials
Oregon State Senator Sara Gelser Blouin
Oregon State Senator Wlnsvey Campos
Oregon State Senator Khanh Pham
Oregon State Senator Mark Meek
Oregon State Senator Courtney Neron Misslin
Oregon State Senator Deb Patterson
Oregon State Senator Floyd Prozanski
Oregon State Senator James I Manning Jr
Oregon State Senator Lew Frederick
Oregon State Representative Willy Chotzen
Oregon State Representative Lamar Wise
Oregon State Representative Lisa Fragala
Oregon State Representative Dacia Grayber
Oregon State Representative Travis Nelson
Oregon State Representative Farrah Chaichi
Oregon State Representative Thuy Tran
Oregon State Representative Hai Pham
Oregon State Representative Tom Andersen
Mayor Melanie Kebler, City of Bend
Commissioner Laurie Trieger, Lane County
City Councilor Kori Rodley, City of Springfield
City Councilor Elise Yarnell Hollamon, City of Newberg
Commissioner Bubba King, Yamhill County
City Councilor Ashley Hartmeier-Prigg, City of Beaverton
City Councilor Taylor Giles, City of Sherwood
Council President Sal Peralta, City of McMinnville
City Councilor Scott Cunningham, City of McMinnville
Organizations
APANO Communities United Fund
APANO Action Fund
Basic Rights Oregon
Coalition of Communities of Color
Common Cause Oregon
Consolidated Oregon Indivisible Network
Democratic Party of Oregon
Jewish Federation of Greater Portland
Latino Network
Oregon Futures Lab
Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education
Logging sales in mature and old-growth forests continue to be developed in western Oregon BLM forests, and Oregon Wild continues to push back. The 42 Divide Project, south of Roseburg, would log beautiful, diverse forests - harming wildlife habitat and releasing stored carbon.
Today, a coalition of conservation organizations filed suit challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) “42 Divide Forest Management Plan” (42 Divide) near Camas Valley, Oregon. The agency proposes to aggressively log thousands of acres of diverse forest stands, even though more than half the land is in reserves set aside for habitat conservation. The area targeted for logging covers nearly 7,000 acres of public lands within the checkerboard of public and private lands in Douglas County, already heavily impacted by private industrial clearcuts.
The forests and waterways within the project area are home to federally protected northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, Oregon Coast coho salmon, and BLM designated sensitive species western pond turtles. The targeted area contains healthy, diverse stands of mature forest, including Douglas fir, cedar and madrone, and is home to a great diversity of plant, animal, and fungal life. Not only will the project negatively impact these species, the BLM itself recognizes that it will increase fire risk in the area by creating hundreds of tons of post-logging slash.
Heavy thinning and clearcutting will make these forests more vulnerable to wildfire. Logging removes large trees with thick bark and protective forest canopies. This tends to make the forest hotter, drier, and windier, drying out fuels and driving more extreme fire behavior. Logging also stimulates the growth of hazardous surface and ladder fuels. Despite community concerns, BLM wants to conduct logging that makes wildfire risk and hazard worse for surrounding communities for decades.
“Our organizations are challenging 42 Divide out of great concern that it does not advance BLM’s purported purposes of restoration and resilience, instead threatening imperiled wildlife, increasing fire hazard, and decreasing these forests’ resilience to disturbance,” said Peter Jensen, staff attorney with Eugene-based Cascadia Wildlands. “The fish and wildlife within the area, as well as the communities in and around these public lands, are put at greater risk by BLM’s timber-centric agenda and disregard for ecosystem needs, public outcry, and federal environmental law.”
The lawsuit alleges the project violates federal law and the agency’s own regulations by failing to protect older forest stands in late successional reserves (LSRs). Late successional reserves are designed to protect remaining older, structurally complex forest–the highest value spotted owl nesting and roosting habitat, and to promote forests maturing into the types of habitat essential to spotted owls where the forest does not currently function as such. BLM’s analysis and ultimate conclusion that this project would not significantly affect the environment failed to address key issues, omitted necessary analysis of critical resource issues and wildlife management concerns, and ultimately left more questions than answers and more controversy than collaboration with the public.
”BLM continues to wrap large logging projects targeting mature and old-growth forests in a veneer of ‘restoration’ and “resilience”, despite the research showing the logging would negatively impact protected wildlife and increase wildfire risk, and despite the clear legal mandate to protect these forests,” said Brenna Bell, senior staff attorney, Crag Law Center. “It should not require legal action to get this federal agency to follow its own management plan and manage public lands to benefit more than just the timber industry.”
BLM first proposed the 42 Divide in November 2021, subsequently issuing draft planning documents and pausing the project a few times, most recently for further study and endangered species analysis before ultimately issuing the December 2025 decision. The conservation organizations, along with local community members, engaged at every public comment opportunity, voicing their concerns. To the agency’s credit, BLM deferred over 400 acres of logging in occupied northern spotted owl habitat, but myriad other concerns raised by the plaintiffs and community members remained unresolved.
“In such a diverse and important ecosystem, home to sensitive and imperiled wildlife species, BLM must do better,” said Janice Reid of Umpqua Watersheds. “The agency must conserve and protect imperiled wildlife species and their habitats, and demonstrate compliance with federal environmental laws before authorizing such large-scale industrial forestry practices on public lands.”
“The BLM continues to shirk its obligations to the public and the law in its pursuit of large commercial logging projects,” said John Persell with Oregon Wild. “Aggressive logging in these protected areas not only endangers fish and wildlife, but it also adds to the cumulative destruction of the landscape already ravaged by the surrounding private-land clearcuts. Public lands are supposed to be a refuge from this kind of destruction, not an extension of it.”
The organizations are represented by attorneys from Crag Law Center and Cascadia Wildlands.
Today, a coalition of wildlife advocates filed a complaint in the Federal District Court for the District of Montana against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for failing to designate critical habitat for wolverine, listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in November of 2023. The law requires the Service to designate critical habitat within a year of listing, but the agency has not done so nor issued a proposed rule, even though only about 300 wolverines remain in the Lower 48 states.
Scientific studies show that critical habitat designation is a primary driver in the recovery of imperiled species. As such, in the Endangered Species Act, Congress directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to provide a “means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved,” with explicit deadline requirements to do so.
The wildlife advocates seek to promote wolverine recovery by ensuring the most important areas for supporting these populations are protected via a court-ordered, agreed-upon deadline for the agency to designate critical habitat.
The court found that the Forest Service failed to make the required findings under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that commercial logging would not cause significant environmental harm. As a result, the agency may no longer rely on CE-6 to bypass environmental analysis for planned or future projects.
The ruling states “Because the record before the Court does not show the Forest Service considered the impact of thinning at any scale, commercial or otherwise, the Court cannot conclude the Forest Service engaged in a ‘reasoned decision’ regarding environmental impacts of the actions authorized by CE-6.”
“This ruling delivers a tremendous victory for forests and communities across the country,” said Erin Hogan-Freemole, attorney for WildEarth Guardians. “The Forest Service can no longer disregard environmental impacts simply because Trump ordered the agency to ramp up logging on the public’s forests. The court’s decision protects wildlife, water supplies, and our communities by closing this loophole that has allowed the Forest Service to authorize industrial-scale logging under the guise of restoration at great cost to our forests and all who depend on them.”
“The Forest Service’s defense of CE-6 was a house of cards,” said Oliver Stiefel, attorney with Crag Law Center. “There is—and never has been—any legal basis for the agency to use a regulation intended for small, innocuous projects for massive commercial logging projects instead. We’re pleased to see the Court put an end to the agency’s overreach.”
“Categorical exclusions,” or “CEs,” like CE-6 sidestep the environmental analysis and public participation required by federal environmental laws. Historically, they were used on small, non-controversial projects. In recent years, however, CEs have been deployed on larger projects, invoking increasingly controversial rationales for disregarding science and locking the public out of public lands management decisions. Community advocates and conservation organizations have warned that CEs are taking resources and focus away from wildfire projects that actually protect homes and communities in order to log mature and old-growth trees in the backcountry, away from public scrutiny.
“Invalidating CE-6 drags Trump’s Forest Service out of the shadows,” said John Persell, Staff Attorney for Oregon Wild. “They will no longer be able to use this bureaucratic loophole to hide the impacts of massive commercial logging projects or exclude the public from having a voice on how our public lands are managed.”
Environmental groups brought this suit in 2022, but the Forest Service had successfully stalled its resolution on the legal merits until recently. Once the court was able to consider the record and the scientific evidence, it swiftly ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor following oral arguments heard in December 2025.
In ruling for the plaintiffs, the court stated, “The Forest Service’s error here was as much a failure to put forth a reason as it was an error of reasoning.”
“The court’s decision does not block wildfire risk reduction,” Hogan-Freemole noted. “It simply requires the Forest Service to do what the law demands: analyze impacts honestly. We’re still working to understand the scope of this ruling, but it’s undeniably a huge win for forests and the public interest.”
“The most destructive fires of our time weren’t stopped by thinning, fuel breaks, or previously treated forests. They were wind-driven ember storms that ignited homes and turned neighborhoods into fuel,” said Ralph Bloemers, Director of Fire Safe Communities. “The court’s ruling forces agencies to prove what they claim, analyze what they authorize, and stop treating communities as collateral damage in a logging strategy that will not save them.”
The court’s order does not affect existing timber contracts and allows the Forest Service to proceed with projects using proper environmental review or other lawful authorities–as the court explained, “setting aside CE-6 does not leave the Forest Service without alternatives to address wildfire risk.” Instead, it requires the agency to explain its decisions to the public before authorizing industrial-scale logging.
The lawsuit was brought by Oregon Wild, WildEarth Guardians, and Go Alliance, who challenged the Forest Service’s use of CE-6 to approve tens of thousands of acres of commercial thinning in the Fremont-Winema National Forest, and asked the court to block the rule’s application to commercial logging. The plaintiffs were represented by Hogan-Freemole, and Oliver Stiefel and Meriel Derzen of Crag Law Center.
The Oregon Court of Appeals has overturned a December 2022 rule by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) that weakened protections for migratory fish like salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, and lamprey. The Nez Perce Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, along with seven nonprofit organizations, had sued to overturn ODFW’s rule.
The court’s decision reinstates Oregon’s long-standing requirement that artificial barriers to fish migration, like dams, be upgraded to allow fish to swim freely past. The court struck down ODFW’s new rule allowing dam operators to trap salmon and load them into trucks for transport around dams—a process with much lower survival rates.
ODFW’s new rule was overturned because ODFW failed to notify Tribes or the public before making this important rule change. According to the Court, “The lack of notice [deprived] people whose interests are historically, culturally, and integrally intertwined with the policies at issue of a role in the process . . . .”
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Board of Trustees Chair Kat Brigham said, “The CTUIR appreciates the Oregon Court of Appeals for upholding the importance of transparency and public participation in decisions that affect our rivers and fish. This ruling affirms that agencies must follow the law and respect the voices of all stakeholders, including sovereign tribal nations. It is the right decision for the health of our waterways and the cultural and natural resources that sustain our people and others in Oregon.”
Nez Perce Tribal Chairman Shannon Wheeler commented, “This is a highly significant, consequential, and protective decision for native migratory fish in Oregon, for Oregonians, and for Nez Perce people throughout the Tribe’s treaty-reserved territory in Oregon. For us, the decision confirms, for future fish passage requirements on rivers throughout Nez Perce territory in Oregon, and right now at the Wallowa Lake Dam reconstruction in the heart of the Nez Perce homeland, that Oregon’s fish passage regulation requires volitional passage unless an exemption can be proved publicly, and that state regulations cannot be revised by an agency at the last minute in a back room with no public notice and comment. The Court of Appeals’ decision is grounded in common sense and clear reasoning, and is a reminder of the indispensable oversight and protective role the courts play for all of us.”
“Healthy fisheries are vital to Tribes, river communities, and Oregon’s culture and economy; they deserve the highest level of protection,” said Miles Johnson, Legal Director for Columbia Riverkeeper. “It’s gratifying to see that protection restored.”
“ODFW’s attempt to weaken Oregon’s rules protecting salmon without telling Tribes or the public was both misguided and illegal,” said Steve Pedery, Conservation Director with Oregon Wild. “Clearly, the Oregon Court of Appeals agreed.”
“By ODFW’s own count, there are 42,780 artificial barriers to fish migration along rivers, streams, and creeks in Oregon,” said Mark Sherwood, Executive Director for Native Fish Society. “The Department should be doing everything possible to aid these struggling fish populations, not creating more barriers by cutting corners in laws meant to protect these fish.”
The conservation and fishing groups involved in the legal challenge include Columbia Riverkeeper, The Conservation Angler, Institute for Fisheries Resources, Native Fish Society, Northwest Environmental Defense Center, Oregon Wild, and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. They are represented by the non-profit Crag Law Center.
Portland, Ore., – The Trump administration this week announced a sweeping series of rollbacks to wildlife and habitat protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). These actions revive efforts previously attempted during Trump’s first term, which were later blocked by the Biden administration. The newly proposed rules would weaken core safeguards for threatened species, limit habitat protections, and elevate the priorities of logging, mining, and oil industries over wildlife recovery.
Oregon is home to several endangered species, including Humboldt marten, coho salmon, western painted turtle, monarch butterfly, Oregon silverspot butterfly, Gentner’s fritillary, rough popcorn flower, and Howell’s spectacular thelypody.
One of the most significant proposals would eliminate the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s long-standing “blanket rule.” This rule automatically extends protections to species that are newly listed as threatened. Under the Trump proposal, threatened species would no longer receive automatic safeguards. Instead, agencies would be required to create individual rules for each species, creating a lengthy and cumbersome process that leaves wildlife vulnerable at critical stages of decline.
A second proposal would force officials to weigh economic impacts when deciding whether to protect critical habitat. This change would increase the influence of industry interests and reduce the role of science in agency decisions.
These rollbacks are in addition to earlier proposals that weaken wildlife protections, including narrowing the definition of “harm” under the ESA and President Trump’s March 1 executive order, which threatened to sidestep species protections to accelerate logging projects in national forests and on public lands.
“Oregon Wild opposed these reckless rollbacks during Trump’s first term, and we will do so again,” said John Persell, Senior Staff Attorney at Oregon Wild. “The Endangered Species Act has saved 99 percent of the species under its protection. Weakening its core provisions at the request of industry lobbyists puts decades of conservation progress at risk.”
With the federal government once again turning wildlife protections into a political battleground, Oregon Wild is championing strong state-level action to safeguard species that are already declining.
“Under the Trump administration, the logging, mining, and oil and gas industries are calling the shots in Washington, DC. As a result, states will increasingly have to fill the gap,” said Danielle Moser, Wildlife Program Manager for Oregon Wild. “The extinction crisis is not something that’s just happening in other countries. Oregon has more than three hundred species of greatest conservation need, and that list continues to grow. This is why proposals like ‘1% for Wildlife’ are so important.”
The ‘1% for Wildlife‘ proposal, which is expected to be considered during the Oregon Legislature’s 2026 short session, would dedicate a modest increase in the statewide lodging tax to wildlife conservation, habitat restoration, and community resilience projects. Even with this increase, Oregon’s lodging tax would remain among the lowest in the country. Economic analysis has shown that the proposal would not harm tourism competitiveness. The funding would help preserve the landscapes and wildlife that draw visitors to Oregon.
“Oregon cannot afford to let wildlife conservation rise or fall based on the political landscape in Washington, DC,” added Moser. “By passing ‘1% for Wildlife,’ state leaders can ensure Oregon’s species and habitats have the stable funding they need regardless of federal politics.”
Oregon Wild will oppose the administration’s efforts to weaken the ESA and will continue its long-standing work to defend imperiled species and the habitats they depend on.
“This bill is a direct assault on what makes public lands public: it stymies science-based forest management, muzzles community input, and endangers the fish, wildlife, and communities that rely on our forests.”
S. 1462, the “Fix Our Forests Act,” passed out of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Conservation organizations from across the nation have voiced strong concerns with the content of the bill and have opposed its passage. The bill now heads to a full Senate vote.
Oregon Wild Wilderness Program Manager Erik Fernandez released the following statement:
“Today, the US Senate advanced its latest attack on public lands, the so-called “Fix Our Forests Act” (FOFA). This bill is a direct assault on what makes public lands public: it stymies science-based forest management, muzzles community input, and endangers the fish, wildlife, and communities that rely on our forests. It also fails to provide dedicated funding for the types of wildfire strategies that save lives and livelihoods — home hardening, defensible space, and emergency planning.
The legislation authorizes 15 square-mile-sized logging projects with little to no public input and environmental analysis, making this one of the scariest plans to face public lands in a generation.
Trump and his logging industry backers have made no secret of the fact that they see public land forests as tree farms, and view any science, transparency, and accountability from the public as an obstacle to profit. FOFA is nothing less than a corporate handout and a further step towards that dystopian vision. It is a betrayal of the very idea of public lands.
Over the past several months, we have seen an incredible movement develop, first to oppose public lands sales proposed by Senator Mike Lee of Utah, then as an unprecedented outpouring of support for the Roadless Rule that protects some of our nation’s last wild places from reckless logging and development. Over 99% of those public comments opposed the Trump administration’s efforts to rescind these public lands protections.
Unfortunately, too many politicians in Washington DC, including Senate Democrats like Amy Klobuchar, still don’t get it.
Public lands may be managed by agencies like the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the National Park Service, but they belong to all of us. They’re held in trust for the American people, not for industry lobbyists or corporate logging interests. As caretakers of these lands and as believers in the democratic vision they represent, we will continue to remind our elected officials that these places are ours, and that efforts to privatize, profit, and remove public oversight will not be forgotten.”
The U.S. Department of Agriculture and Forest Service has concluded a three week public comment period on the Trump administration’s plan to rescind the landmark Roadless Rule. The rule protects approximately 44.7 million acres of National Forest System lands, including nearly 2 million acres in Oregon, but the Trump administration wants to open these wild areas up for logging and mining.
Hundreds of thousands of comments were submitted from across the country, including thousands of unique and personalized comments from Oregonians. A coalition of conservation organizations, including Oregon Wild, Central Oregon LandWatch, Central and Eastern Oregon Bitterbrush Broadband, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, Cascadia Wildlands, Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project, Greater Hells Canyon Council, and Oregon Sierra Club helped facilitate this outpouring of public input.
An initial analysis by the Center for Western Priorities found that opposition to dropping safeguards for Roadless Areas was nearly unanimous, with 99.2 percent of comments supporting keeping Roadless protections in place.
“The American people have clearly and forcefully rejected this attack on our wild public lands,” said Sami Godlove, Central Oregon Field Coordinator for Oregon Wild. “Proceeding with the rescission of the Roadless Rule after such an overwhelming outpouring of opposition would be another example of how the Trump administration allows campaign donors, like those in the logging industry, to buy the policies they want, even when the public has spoken nearly unanimously against them.”
Adopted in 2001 after the most extensive public involvement process in federal rulemaking history, the Roadless Rule safeguards some of America’s last intact national forest landscapes. These areas provide clean water, critical wildlife habitat, and world-class recreation opportunities while sustaining rural economies.
“Roadless areas contain much of our last remaining mature and old-growth public forests, which absorb climate pollution and provide refuge for vulnerable fish and wildlife,” said Grace Brahler, Wildlands Director with Cascadia Wildlands. “Targeting these areas for destructive extractive practices would further erode the ecological resilience we need in the face of a warming climate.”
Jim Davis. A hiker marvels at a large, old-growth ponderosa pine tree in the Lookout Mountain Roadless Area.Sami Godlove. Bridge Creek in the Tumalo Mountain Roadless Area supplies clean drinking water to the city of Bend.David Mildrexler. The dramatic canyonlands of the Joseph Canyon Roadless Area. Chandra LeGue. Hikers in the Iron Mountain Roadless Are, Willamette National Forest.
Roadless Areas are also some of the most fire-resilient landscapes. Because they are remote and intact, they experience fewer human-caused ignitions. Building new roads would dramatically increase the number of man-made fire starts and redirect scarce firefighting resources away from protecting homes and communities. Instead of focusing on strategic fuel reduction projects near communities where it matters most, the logging industry is pressuring agencies to pursue logging in unroaded backcountry areas where timber is more lucrative. Logging in these areas would make them more vulnerable to fire, fragment wildlife habitat, and degrade water quality. Road construction and the sediment runoff that follows are already among the greatest threats to clean drinking water across the West.
“Even the Forest Service’s own research shows that building more roads neither improves forest health outcomes nor mitigates wildfire risks. More roads lead to more fires, pulling vital wildfire response resources away from where they’re needed most,” said Fiona Noonan of Central Oregon LandWatch. “Rolling back of the Roadless Rule is not only scientifically baseless — it’s reckless, putting people and ecosystems at greater risk.”
The Trump administration’s attempt to roll back the Roadless Rule is part of a broader campaign to weaken bedrock environmental safeguards. Other targets include the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, individual Forest Management Plans, and the Bureau of Land Management’s Public Lands Conservation Rule. The administration has also slashed staff at the Forest Service and is attempting to relocate experienced staff and leadership away from the Pacific Northwest. These efforts undermine public accountability while falsely claiming to be about “local control.”
“Rescinding the Roadless Rule would put clean drinking water at risk for people in downstream communities,” said Paula Hood of the Blue Mountain Biodiversity Project. “National Forests provide clean drinking water to millions of people nationwide, and Roadless areas are strongholds for the cleanest, coldest water.”
Meanwhile, most of Oregon’s congressional delegation has signed on in support of the Roadless Area Conservation Act, legislation that would make the rule permanent. The only two members who have not cosponsored the bill are Representative Val Hoyle and Representative Cliff Bentz.
“Eliminating the Roadless Rule would be a disaster for Oregon’s forests and communities,” said Jamie Dawson of Greater Hells Canyon Council. “Building new roads in these wild places opens the door to invasive species and habitat fragmentation. Once these areas are cut apart, we lose the clean water, wildlife, and solitude they provide forever.”
The next step in the Forest Service process will be to analyze the public comments and issue a draft plan, likely in the spring.
Oregon’s Roadless Wildlands
Oregon’s roadless forests are among our state’s most spectacular and irreplaceable landscapes. From the flower-studded meadows of Iron Mountain in the Willamette National Forest, to the dramatic canyons and cultural homelands of the Nez Perce Tribe in Joseph Canyon, to the clean drinking water flowing from Tumalo Mountain into the taps of more than 100,000 people in Bend, these places embody the best of Oregon’s natural and cultural heritage. They also sustain recreation economies and wildlife habitats.
Other iconic areas include Lookout Mountain in the Ochocos, where diverse forests and meadows form the headwaters of critical streams; Rough & Ready Creek, a unique botanical wonderland threatened by mining in southwest Oregon; and Larch Mountain, a lush old-growth haven just minutes from Portland. These and dozens of other roadless areas across Oregon safeguard clean water, biodiversity, cultural values, and recreation opportunities that are impossible to replace once lost.
PORTLAND, OR — Conservation groups sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today for denying protections to the imperiled North Oregon Coast population of red tree voles. The voles spend most of their lives in the upper branches of the Oregon Coast’s mature and old-growth forests.
The Service’s 2024 decision to deny life-saving Endangered Species Act protections to the North Oregon Coast population echoes a similar 2019 Trump administration denial, which also sparked a lawsuit. Those decisions were made despite studies showing that these red tree voles are threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, largely due to logging and climate change-fueled wildfires.
Red tree vole by Stephen DeStefano, USGS.
“Red tree voles have graced Oregon’s coastal old-growth forests for thousands of years, but we could lose them forever if they don’t get Endangered Species Act protections soon,” said Ryan Shannon, a senior attorney in the Center for Biological Diversity’s endangered species program. “It’s time for the Fish and Wildlife Service to follow the science and do the right thing by stepping up for red tree voles.”
Red tree voles build their nests on complex branch and bole structures found in mature and old-growth forests. The North Coast is dominated by a combination of private industrial timberlands and the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests. Decades of rapacious clearcut logging, as well as a series of historic fires known as the Tillamook Burn, have eliminated most of the area’s old forests along with the red tree voles that once called them home. Red tree voles are an essential species in the last remaining old-growth and mature coastal forests in Oregon and protecting them is necessary for ecosystem recovery.
“Red tree voles are a key prey of the threatened northern spotted owl whose population is plummeting,” says Joe Liebezeit, statewide conservation director for Bird Alliance of Oregon. “We need to step up protection of voles to ensure the integrity of forest ecosystem as a whole — including the food web which so much wildlife depends on.”
Remaining North Coast voles are concentrated on federal public lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Although the Northwest Forest Plan helps protect these remaining small and isolated populations, the long-term survival of the voles depends on improving state and private land forest management and connecting fragmented and isolated red tree vole populations.
Oregon is in the process of adopting a state forest habitat conservation plan that will provide some protection to the vole, but the plan will also allow for continued logging of thousands of acres of potential vole habitat without any surveys to determine if voles are present. There are currently no meaningful protections in private forests.
“The red tree vole is a unique species with adaptations that allow them to live almost their entire lives high in the canopy of mature and old-growth forests,” said Doug Heiken of Oregon Wild. “Its range and habitat are already limited, and without protection for the North Coast population, we could lose red tree voles to irresponsible logging.”
In response to a 2007 Center for Biological Diversity petition, the Service determined in 2011 that protection of the North Oregon Coast population of red tree voles was “warranted but precluded” by other listing priorities. It then moved the voles to a list of candidate species for a decade, repeating its determination that the North Oregon Coast population warranted protection several times before reversing course and denying protections in 2019. A Center lawsuit over the denial resulted in a 2022 settlement directing the Service to reconsider the decision.
“The Fish and Wildlife Service is yet again shirking its duty to this and future generations to prevent the extinction of our most imperiled wildlife species including the red tree vole,” said Bethany Cotton, conservation director for Cascadia Wildlands. “Red tree voles are an important indicator species of forest health; their decline should be a wake-up call to us all to better care for our remaining mature and old-growth forests.”
Bird Alliance of Oregon, Cascadia Wildlands and Oregon Wild are represented by the Center for Biological Diversity in today’s suit.
The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.8 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
Bird Alliance of Oregon was founded in 1902 and works statewide to advocate for Oregon’s wildlife and wild places, and to inspire all people to love and protect birds, wildlife, and the natural environment upon which life depends.
Cascadia Wildlands defends and restores Cascadia’s wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets.
Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.
PORTLAND, OR — A budget reconciliation proposal introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, to sell off millions of acres of public lands across the West, including in Oregon, was removed. Oregon Wild released the following statement:
The news that Senator Mike Lee’s proposal to sell off America’s public lands has been removed from the Senate reconciliation bill is a major victory for the American people and the millions across the country who stood up in defense of our shared natural heritage.
This win belongs to the public. Hunters, anglers, hikers, tribal communities, rural residents, conservation advocates, and many more joined together to send a clear message: our public lands are not for sale.
But let’s be clear: Senator Lee’s statement makes it evident that he’s not done trying to sell our public lands. However, he has unintentionally helped build a stronger, more unified movement to defend public lands. We’ll be ready when he tries again.
While this development is worth celebrating, the broader reconciliation bill still poses serious threats to our environment, to vulnerable communities, and to the future of public lands. It remains a massive transfer of wealth from everyday Americans to billionaires and should be rejected.
We urge everyone who spoke out to stop this land sell-off to keep going. Call your Representative and tell them to vote down this harmful bill.
SALEM, OR – In the final hours of the 2025 legislative session, a landmark bill to fund wildlife conservation fell short—not for lack of public support, bipartisan backing, or legislative merit, but because of cynical obstruction from a small group of Republican senators. Democratic leadership in the Senate had the power to stop them, but chose to give in.
HB 2977, which passed the Oregon House with a three-fifths bipartisan majority and cleared the Senate Rules Committee, would have modestly increased Oregon’s statewide transient lodging tax—currently among the lowest in the country—to fund urgently needed wildlife conservation. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has identified nearly 300 species in decline, yet lacks the general fund resources to act.
“This bill was built on compromise, unity, and a shared love for Oregon’s wild places,” said Danielle Moser, Wildlife Program Manager at Oregon Wild. “It brought together hunters, anglers, conservationists, and rural community leaders, people who often don’t agree. And it showed what’s possible when we put politics aside. Unfortunately, a few obstructionist senators decided to stand in the way of that hope.”
Senators Daniel Bonham and Cedric Hayden used procedural gimmicks to block a floor vote on the bill, despite growing momentum and a written minority report ready to be set aside. While a few Republican legislators defied their caucus to vote for HB 2977, the obstructionists prevailed—for now.
Still, advocates say the coalition and public engagement behind this bill have created a wave of political will that won’t disappear.
“Every legislator and staffer I talked to had heard from Oregonians about this bill,” said Casey Kulla with Oregon Wild. “Phone lines rang off the hook. Inboxes were flooded. People showed up. This was grassroots democracy at its best, and it worked, even if the final vote didn’t happen. We are just getting started.”
While Republican obstruction was central to the bill’s defeat, conservation advocates are also pointing to internal resistance among some Democrats, and Democratic leadership’s decision not to advance the bill to the floor, as a missed opportunity that can and must be corrected.
“We’re disappointed,” Moser said. “But we’re not deterred. We’ve built something powerful. Next session, we’re coming back stronger.”
Oregon Wild and the statewide coalition behind HB 2977 are already preparing for the 2026 short session.
“The need to fund wildlife and their habitats remains, and the broad public support has never been clearer. This was the closest Oregon has come in decades,” Kulla added. “And next time, we’re going to finish the job.”
SUPPORT FOR HB 2977
American Bird Conservancy
American Sportfishing Association
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
Bird Alliance of Oregon
Blue Mountains Forest Partners
Cascadia Wildlands
Center for Biological Diversity
Central Oregon LandWatch
Chintimini Wildlife Center
Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation
Defenders of Wildlife
Elakha Alliance
Environment Oregon
Great Old Broads for Wilderness
HOWL for Wildlife
Humane Voters Oregon
Humane World for Animals
Kalmiopsis Audubon Society
Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center
Lane County Audubon Society
Mid-Willamette Bird Alliance
Native Fish Society
Northwest Guides and Anglers
Association
Oceana
Oregon Association of Shooting Ranges
Oregon Coast Alliance
Oregon Hunters Association
Oregon League of Conservation Voters
Oregon Natural Desert Association
Oregon Trappers Association
Oregon Wild
Oregon Wild Sheep Foundation
Oregon Wildlife Coalition
Oregon Wildlife Foundation
Oregon Wildlife Rehabilitation Association
Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
Rogue Riverkeeper
Salem Audubon Society
SEIU Local 503
Surfrider Foundation
The Conservation Angler
The Habitat Institute
The Wildlife Society, Oregon Chapter
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
Think Wild
Trout Unlimited, Oregon Council
WaterWatch of Oregon
Western Environmental Law Center
Western Invasives Network
Western Watersheds Project
Wildlands Network
Willamette Riverkeeper
Xerces Society
350PDX
Join Our
Newsletter.
Staying informed is the first step to becoming a public lands and native wildlife advocate.
