Cons

Protect the Wildlife 

The Elliott State Forest has prime habitat conditions for many federally protected species including the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and coastal coho salmon. The public forest is one of the last places in the coastal range that can provide these conditions. By selling the Elliott State Forest it would most likely be sold to one of the 48 parties interested in inquiring the Elliot State Forest. Most of these are large timber companies that have bid on the land. Selling the land to a timber company would result in the last remaining habitat for the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and coastal coho salmon being destroyed by old-growth forest clear-cutting and reduced protections for wild salmon. According to the website, Building A Region Where People and Wildlife Flourish Together, states privatizing the ElliottState Forest would be detrimental for wildlife in the area, “The Elliott is home to numerous imperiled species of birds, salmonids, and other wildlife. It contains some o
f the last remaining old growth in the Oregon coast range and is a massive carbon sink. Clean water, rare habitat, and aquatic ecosystems are reliant on a protected, intact forest. The sale of the forest to a private timber company could seriously threaten these values”. By refraining from selling the Elliott State Forest     state officials and environmentalists can create a new plan to protect species                                                  in the forest and make a profit for Oregon’s public schools.

Benefits Community

The Elliott State Forest is the oldest forest in Oregon and is one of the last that is owned by the public. It is a beloved place for Oregonians for hiking, hunting and fishing. Selling the Elliott State Forest to a private timber company would restrict public access. Proposing the privation of the forest has been especially unpopular with hunters, anglers, and environmental groups. The public benefits from access to the Elliott State Forest for recreational purposes and has the potential to benefit economically as well.Since the 1930’s the Elliot has provided timber, fish, game, and non-timber forest products. Recreational activities alone are responsible for 390,000 in wages. Also, over 1.3 million in economic output. State officials and environmentalists strongly believe there is a plan that can benefit everyone in the long run by creating logging jobs in parts of the forest where it is not endangering species. There are valuable parts of the forest that should stay in public ownership.

References:

Anna V. Smith March 23, 2017 Print Share Subscribe Donate Now. “High Country News.” Oregon May Sell a State Forest That’s No Longer Profitable. N.p., 23 Mar. 2017. Web. 19 May 2017.

“Elliott State Forest.” Elliott State Forest — Audubon Society of Portland. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 June 2017.Hubbard, Saul, and The Register-Guard. “Oregon Senators Consider Bill to Ax Sale of Elliott State Forest.” The Register-Guard. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 May 2017.

“New Threats to the Spotted Owl Prompt Lawsuit on the Elliott State Forest.” New Threats to the Spotted Owl Prompt Lawsuit on the Elliott State Forest — KS Wild. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 June 2017.”Save The Elliott.” Save The Elliott. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 May 2017.

“Selling the Elliott State Forest.” The Oregonian – OregonLive.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 May 2017.

One thought on “Cons

  1. The quote used in the first paragraph provided multiple arguments that really could have used more discussion. It would be nice to see some more figures/graphs to support your argument.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *