DOCSLIB.ORG

National Park Service Facility-Specific Comment Summary Documents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Park Service Facility-Specific Comment Summary Documents Aug. 27, 2021 Public Notice Draft Oregon Regional Haze State Implementation Plan For the period 2018 - 2028 Submitted to: Public Notice Air Quality Planning 700 NE Multnomah St. Suite 600 Portland, OR 97232 Phone: 503-229-5696 800-452-4011 Fax: 503-229-6124 Contact: Michael Orman or Karen F. Williams www.oregon.gov/DEQ DEQ is a leader in restoring, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality i maintaining and enhancing the quality of Oregon’s air, This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 700 NE Multnomah Street Portland, OR 97232 1-800-452-4011 www.oregon.gov/deq Contact: Karen F. Williams 503-863-1664 Alternative formats: DEQ can provide documents in an alternate format or in a language other than English upon request. Call DEQ at 800-452-4011 or email [email protected]. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ii Table of contents Table of contents ................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ........................................................................................................................ vi List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ viii 1. .. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. History of Regional Haze Planning in Oregon ............................................................................. 1 1.2. Sections of this report .................................................................................................................. 2 1.3. Oregon Class 1 Areas ................................................................................................................. 5 1.3.1. Mt. Hood Wilderness Area ................................................................................................. 6 1.3.2. Mt. Jefferson Wilderness Area ........................................................................................... 6 1.3.3. Mt. Washington Wilderness Area ....................................................................................... 6 1.3.4. Three Sisters Wilderness Area .......................................................................................... 6 1.3.5. Diamond Peak Wilderness Area ........................................................................................ 6 1.3.6. Crater Lake National Park .................................................................................................. 7 1.3.7. Mountain Lakes Wilderness Area ...................................................................................... 7 1.3.8. Gearhart Mountain Wilderness Area.................................................................................. 7 1.3.9. Kalmiopsis Wilderness Area .............................................................................................. 7 1.3.10. Strawberry Mountain Wilderness Area .............................................................................. 7 1.3.11. Eagle Cap Wilderness Area ............................................................................................... 8 1.3.12. Hells Canyon Wilderness Area .......................................................................................... 8 1.4. Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area .............................................................................. 8 1.5. Monitoring .................................................................................................................................... 9 1.5.1 Oregon IMPROVE Monitoring Network ............................................................................. 9 1.5.2 Monitoring strategy............................................................................................................. 9 2 ... Visibility Impairment in Oregon Class 1 areas and 5-year Progress Report ............... 10 2.1 Five-year Progress Report .........................................................................................................11 2.1.1 Status of implementation of control measures included in the original regional haze SIP 1 2.1.2 Emission Reductions Achieved by SIP Measures ............................................................. 2 2.1. Most Impaired Days ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.2. Clearest Days .............................................................................................................................. 8 2.3. Emissions Inventory Analysis ....................................................................................................10 2.4 Pollutant Components of Visibility Impairment ..........................................................................16 2.5 Source Apportionment of Visibility Impairment and Weighted Emission Potential ....................19 2.5.1 Estimated future projected emissions .............................................................................. 19 2.5.2 Weighted Emission Potential and Source Apportionment ............................................... 24 3. .. Stationary source emissions and controls analysis ..................................................... 26 3.1. Q/d screening process ...............................................................................................................27 3.2. Impact of Oregon facilities on other states’ Class 1 areas ........................................................31 3.3. Impact of facilities in other states on Oregon Class 1 areas .....................................................32 3.4. Four factor analysis....................................................................................................................35 3.5. Division 223 Rulemaking ...........................................................................................................37 3.6. Weight of evidence approach ....................................................................................................37 3.6.1 Environmental Justice Analysis ....................................................................................... 39 3.6.1.1 Vulnerable Populations Score .................................................................................39 3.6.1.2 Towards an Environmental Justice “Score” Methodology for Oregon .....................41 3.6.2 Weight of Evidence Results ................................................................................................. 45 3.7 Facility-specific findings and results ..........................................................................................45 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality iii 3.7.1 PGE Boardman (25-0016) ............................................................................................... 47 3.7.2 Ash Grove Cement Co, Durkee (01-0029) ...................................................................... 47 3.7.3 Facilities that lowered PSELs .......................................................................................... 48 3.7.3.1 Kingsford Manufacturing Company (LRAPA #204402) ...........................................48 3.7.3.2 Cascade Tissue Group: A Division of Cascades Holding US, Inc. (05-1849) .........48 3.7.3.3 Timber Products Co. (15-0025) ...............................................................................49 3.7.3.4 PGE Beaver / Port Westward I (05-2520)................................................................49 3.7.3.5 Roseburg Forest Products – Riddle Plywood (10-0078) .........................................49 3.7.3.7 Klamath Energy LLC – Klamath Cogeneration Project (18-0003) ...........................50 3.7.4 Facilities for which no controls were cost-effective .......................................................... 50 3.7.5 Facilities where DEQ found controls cost effective .......................................................... 51 3.7.5.1 Owens-Brockway (28-1865) ....................................................................................51 3.7.5.2 Gilchrist Forest Products..........................................................................................51 3.7.5.3 Boise Cascade Wood Products, LLC - Elgin Complex (31-0006) ...........................52 3.7.5.4 Georgia Pacific - Wauna Mill (04-0004) ...................................................................52 3.7.5.5 Cascade Pacific Pulp, LLC - Halsey Pulp Mill (22-3501) .........................................54 3.7.5.6 Boise Cascade Wood Products, LLC - Medford (15-0004) .....................................54 3.7.5.7 Gas Transmission Northwest LLC - Compressor Station 12 (09-0084) ..................55 3.7.5.8 Gas Transmission Northwest LLC - Compressor Station 13 (18-0096) ..................55 3.7.5.9 International Paper - Springfield (208850) ...............................................................55 3.7.5.10 Georgia-Pacific – Toledo LLC (21-0005) .................................................................56 3.7.5.11 Northwest Pipeline LLC - Baker Compressor Station (01-0038) .............................57 3.7.5.12 Northwest Pipeline LLC - Oregon City Compressor Station (03-2729) ...................58 3.7.5.13 EVRAZ Inc. NA (26-1865) .......................................................................................58 3.7.5.14 Biomass One, L.P. (15-0159) ..................................................................................58
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Forests of Eastern Oregon: an Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann
    Forests of Eastern Oregon: An Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann United States Forest Pacific Northwest General Tecnical Report Department of Service Research Station PNW-GTR-578 Agriculture April 2003 Revised 2004 Joseph area, eastern Oregon. Photo by Tom Iraci Authors Sally Campbell is a biological scientist, Dave Azuma is a research forester, and Dale Weyermann is geographic information system manager, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 620 SW Main, Portland, OR 97205. Cover: Aspen, Umatilla National Forest. Photo by Tom Iraci Forests of Eastern Oregon: An Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, OR April 2003 State Forester’s Welcome Dear Reader: The Oregon Department of Forestry and the USDA Forest Service invite you to read this overview of eastern Oregon forests, which provides highlights from recent forest inventories.This publication has been made possible by the USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program, with support from the Oregon Department of Forestry. This report was developed from data gathered by the FIA in eastern Oregon’s forests in 1998 and 1999, and has been supplemented by inventories from Oregon’s national forests between 1993 and 1996.This report and other analyses of FIA inventory data will be extremely useful as we evaluate fire management strategies, opportunities for improving rural economies, and other elements of forest management in eastern Oregon.We greatly appreciate FIA’s willingness to work with the researchers, analysts, policymakers, and the general public to collect, analyze, and distrib- ute information about Oregon’s forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Deschutes National Forest
    Deschutes National Forest Summer Trail Access and Conditions Update KNOW BEFORE YOU GO! Updated July 13, 2013 Summer Trail Highlights Summer weather, high summer/holiday use at many recreation sites and trails. Remaining snow limited to South Sister, Broken Top, Road 370 and a few patches on trails and the volcanoes above 6,000’ along the Crest. Reports of heavy blowdown (50+ trees/mile) on some trails. Wilderness Permits required. Broken Top TH and 370 Road from Todd Lake to Road 4601 are blocked by snow and closed until determined safe. June 29 photo from Broken Top. Nearly all Wilderness Tumalo Falls road open to vehicle trails are snow free with a few patches likely remaining traffic. North Fork Trail is cleared of along the PCT and on climber trails and routes up the blow down; open to bikers uphill only. volcano peaks. 16 Road and Three Creek Lakes are open and snow free. Tumalo Mt. Trail may yet have a patch or two of snow but very passible. Green Lks/Moraine Lks Trails are snow free with light blowdown. PCT has patchy snow above 6,000’ with some trail clearing in progress. Mosquito populations are highly variable with some backcountry lakes and riparian areas at high levels. Go prepared with your Ten Essential Systems: Navigation (map and compass) Sun protection (sunglasses/sunscreen) Ongoing Suttle Lake trail project with Deschutes NF Trail Insulation (extra clothing) Crew constructing one of many rock retaining walls. For Illumination (headlamp/flashlight) Your safety, please use caution and leash dogs when First-aid supplies approaching trail crews working the various trails on the Fire(waterproofmatches/lighter/candles) Deschutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Cascades Wilderness Strategies Project Deschutes and Willamette National Forests Existing Conditions and Trends by Wilderness Area
    May 31, 2017 Central Cascades Wilderness Strategies Project Deschutes and Willamette National Forests Existing Conditions and Trends by Wilderness Area Summary of Central Cascades Wilderness Areas ......................................................................................... 1 Mount Jefferson Wilderness ....................................................................................................................... 10 Mount Washington Wilderness .................................................................................................................. 22 Three Sisters Wilderness ............................................................................................................................. 28 Waldo Lake Wilderness ............................................................................................................................... 41 Diamond Peak Wilderness .......................................................................................................................... 43 Appendix A – Wilderness Solitude Monitoring ........................................................................................... 52 Appendix B – Standard Wilderness Regulations Concerning Visitor Use ................................................... 57 Summary of Central Cascades Wilderness Areas Introduction This document presents the current conditions for visitor management-related parameters in three themes: social, biophysical, and managerial settings. Conditions are described separately for each of
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011
    Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Submitted by The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. Title: Monitoring Wolverine in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Authors: Audrey J. Magoun, Patrick Valkenburg, Clinton D. Long, and Judy K. Long Funding and Logistical Support: Dale Pedersen James Short Marsha O’Dell National Park Service Norcross Wildlife Foundation Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Seattle Foundation The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. U.S. Forest Service Wildlife Conservation Society Special thanks to all those individuals who provided observations of wolverines in the Wallowa- Whitman National Forest and other areas in Oregon. We also thank Tim Hiller, Mark Penninger, and Glenn McDonald for their assistance in the field work. This document should be cited as: Magoun, A. J., P. Valkenburg, C. D. Long, and J. K. Long. 2011. Monitoring wolverines in northeast Oregon – 2011. Final Report. The Wolverine Foundation, Inc., Kuna, Idaho, USA. 2 INTRODUCTION The Oregon Conservation Strategy lists “species data gaps” and “research and monitoring needs” for some species where basic information on occurrence and habitat associations are not known (ODFW 2006; pages 367-368). For the Blue Mountains, East Cascades, and West Cascades Ecoregions of Oregon, the Strategy lists wolverine as a species for which status is unknown but habitat may be suitable to support wolverines. ODFW lists the wolverine as Threatened in Oregon and the USFWS has recently placed the species on the candidate list under the federal Endangered Species Act. Wolverine range in the contiguous United States had contracted substantially by the mid-1900s, probably because of high levels of human-caused mortality and very low immigration rates (Aubry et al.
    [Show full text]
  • KALMIOPSIS Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon
    KALMIOPSIS Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon Kalmiopsis leachiana ISSN 1055-419X Volume 20, 2013 &ôùĄÿĂùñü KALMIOPSIS (irteen years, fourteen issues; that is the measure of how long Journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon, ©2013 I’ve been editing Kalmiopsis. (is is longer than I’ve lived in any given house or worked for any employer. I attribute this longevity to the lack of deadlines and time clocks and the almost total freedom to create a journal that is a showcase for our state and society. (ose fourteen issues contained 60 articles, 50 book reviews, and 25 tributes to Fellows, for a total of 536 pages. I estimate about 350,000 words, an accumulation that records the stories of Oregon’s botanists, native )ora, and plant communities. No one knows how many hours, but who counts the hours for time spent doing what one enjoys? All in all, this editing gig has been quite an education for me. I can’t think of a more e*ective and enjoyable way to make new friends and learn about Oregon plants and related natural history than to edit the journal of the Native Plant Society of Oregon. Now it is time for me to move on, but +rst I o*er thanks to those before me who started the journal and those who worked with me: the FEJUPSJBMCPBSENFNCFST UIFBVUIPSTXIPTIBSFEUIFJSFYQFSUJTF UIFSFWJFXFST BOEUIF4UBUF#PBSETXIPTVQQPSUFENZXPSL* especially thank those who will follow me to keep this journal &ôùĄÿĂ$JOEZ3PDIÏ 1I% in print, to whom I also o*er my +les of pending manuscripts, UIFTFSWJDFTPGBOFYQFSJFODFEQBHFTFUUFS BSFMJBCMFQSJOUFSBOE &ôùĄÿĂùñü#ÿñĂô mailing service, and the opportunity of a lifetime: editing our +ne journal, Kalmiopsis.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon
    Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon January 2011 – December 2012 Final Report Authors: Audrey J. Magoun Patrick Valkenburg Clinton D. Long Judy K. Long Submitted to: The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. February 2013 Cite as: A. J. Magoun, P. Valkenburg, C. D. Long, and J. K. Long. 2013. Monitoring wolverines in northeast Oregon. January 2011 – December 2012. Final Report. The Wolverine Foundation, Inc., Kuna, Idaho. [http://wolverinefoundation.org/] Copies of this report are available from: The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. [http://wolverinefoundation.org/] Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/publications.asp] Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation [http://www.owhf.org/] U. S. Forest Service [http://www.fs.usda.gov/land/wallowa-whitman/landmanagement] Major Funding and Logistical Support The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation U. S. Forest Service U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wolverine Discovery Center Norcross Wildlife Foundation Seattle Foundation Wildlife Conservation Society National Park Service 2 Special thanks to everyone who provided contributions, assistance, and observations of wolverines in the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest and other areas in Oregon. We appreciate all the help and interest of the staffs of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation, U. S. Forest Service, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Conservation Society, and the National Park Service. We also thank the following individuals for their assistance with the field work: Jim Akenson, Holly Akenson, Malin Aronsson, Norma Biggar, Ken Bronec, Steve Bronson, Roblyn Brown, Vic Coggins, Alex Coutant, Cliff Crego, Leonard Erickson, Bjorn Hansen, Mike Hansen, Hans Hayden, Tim Hiller, Janet Hohmann, Pat Matthews, David McCullough, Glenn McDonald, Jamie McFadden, Kendrick Moholt, Mark Penninger, Jens Persson, Lynne Price, Brian Ratliff, Jamie Ratliff, John Stephenson, John Wyanens, Rebecca Watters, Russ Westlake, and Jeff Yanke.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bill to Designate Certain National Forest System Lands in the State of Oregon for Inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for Other Purposes
    97 H.R.7340 Title: A bill to designate certain National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Weaver, James H. [OR-4] (introduced 12/1/1982) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 12/15/1982 Failed of passage/not agreed to in House. Status: Failed to Receive 2/3's Vote to Suspend and Pass by Yea-Nay Vote: 247 - 141 (Record Vote No: 454). SUMMARY AS OF: 12/9/1982--Reported to House amended, Part I. (There is 1 other summary) (Reported to House from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with amendment, H.Rept. 97-951 (Part I)) Oregon Wilderness Act of 1982 - Designates as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System the following lands in the State of Oregon: (1) the Columbia Gorge Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (2) the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (3) the Badger Creek Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (4) the Hidden Wilderness in the Mount Hood and Willamette National Forests; (5) the Middle Santiam Wilderness in the Willamette National Forest; (6) the Rock Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (7) the Cummins Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (8) the Boulder Creek Wilderness in the Umpqua National Forest; (9) the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness in the Umpqua and Rogue River National Forests; (10) the Grassy Knob Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou National Forest; (11) the Red Buttes Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou
    [Show full text]
  • Hike & Stand up Paddleboard Oregon's Alps
    Hike & Stand Up Paddleboard Oregon’s Alps Due to the many variables of outdoor trips, it's impossible to describe exactly what the trip will be like but this will give you a sense of what to expect. Questions? Get in touch at: [email protected] About the Location: Nestled in the remote northeastern corner of Oregon, next to Washington state and Idaho, lie the spectacular mountains nicknamed “Oregon’s Swiss Alps.” Very different from the Cascade Mountains, the Wallowa Mountains tower to nearly 10,000 feet and feel similar to the Rockies. Pronounced “Wal-OW-ah,” meaning “fish trap” in the Nez Perce language, this rugged and remote range shoots up around Oregon’s largest natural lake, Wallowa Lake. If you ever watched the 1975 movie, “I Will Fight No More Forever,” this valley was the home of Chief Joseph and his Nez Perce tribe. Now it’s the home of bronze sculptors, loggers, artists, craft beer brewers, and ranchers. Vegetation and weather are similar to that found in the Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado mountains; August weather is typically dry and sunny early in the day, with potential thunderstorms in the afternoon. Wallowa Lake has an amazing natural setting, tucked in a basin between jagged peaks. This wild corner of the state features some of the most spectacular scenery Oregon has to offer, and you will get to gaze up at glacier-capped mountains from a stand-up paddleboard in the middle of the lake! What to Expect: You will stay in rustic cabins at a camp College Outdoors has rented, eat great food in the dining hall, and have access to showers and flush toilets.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Service Region 6 Wilderness Interpretation and Education Plan
    U.S. Department of Agriculture February Forest Service 2012 Pacific Northwest Region Regional Wilderness Interpretation and Education Plan 2 Pacific Northwest Region Regional Wilderness Interpretation and Education Plan February 2012 3 Acknowledgements This Regional Wilderness Interpretation and Education Plan (Plan) was drafted by a core team including: • Bonnie Lippitt, Regional Interpretation and Tourism Program Manager, Region 6 • Hans Castren, Wilderness Program Manager, Hungry Horse/Spotted Bear Wilderness, Region 1 • Todd Cullings, Interpretive Specialist, Mount St. Helens NVM, Region 6 • Jennifer Lutman, Wilderness Education Intern, Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center, Region 1 The team received tremendous support, technical assistance, and reviews from District, Forest, Regional, and Washington Office Wilderness Program Managers, the Region 6 Wilderness Advisory Group, staff at the Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center and Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, and others. 4 Regional Wilderness Interpretation and Education Plan Review and Approval Developed By: _______________________________________________ Bonnie Lippitt, Regional Interpretation Specialist Reviewed By: ________________________________________________ Michael Heilman, Regional Wilderness Coordinator ________________________________________________ Rodney Mace, Regional Assistant Director of Recreation Recommended By: _________________________________________________ Claire Lavendel, Director of Recreation, Lands, and Minerals
    [Show full text]
  • OR Wild -Backmatter V2
    208 OREGON WILD Afterword JIM CALLAHAN One final paragraph of advice: do not burn yourselves out. Be as I am — a reluctant enthusiast.... a part-time crusader, a half-hearted fanatic. Save the other half of your- selves and your lives for pleasure and adventure. It is not enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it. While you can. While it is still here. So get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for awhile and contemplate the precious still- ness, the lovely mysterious and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to the body, the body active and alive and I promise you this much: I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those desk-bound men with their hearts in a safe-deposit box and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this: you will outlive the bastards. —Edward Abbey1 Edward Abbey. Ed, take it from another Ed, not only can wilderness lovers outlive wilderness opponents, we can also defeat them. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men (sic) UNIVERSITY, SHREVEPORT UNIVERSITY, to do nothing. MES SMITH NOEL COLLECTION, NOEL SMITH MES NOEL COLLECTION, MEMORIAL LIBRARY, LOUISIANA STATE LOUISIANA LIBRARY, MEMORIAL —Edmund Burke2 JA Edmund Burke. 1 Van matre, Steve and Bill Weiler.
    [Show full text]
  • Or Wilderness-Like Areas, but Instead Declassified Previously Protected Wildlands with High Timber Value
    48 OREGON WILD A Brief Political History of Oregon’s Wilderness Protections Government protection should be thrown around every wild grove and forest on the Although the Forest Service pioneered the concept of wilderness protection in the mountains, as it is around every private orchard, and trees in public parks. To say 1920s and 1930s, by the late 1940s and 1950s, it was methodically undoing whatever nothing of their values as fountains of timber, they are worth infinitely more than all good it had done earlier by declassifying administrative wilderness areas that contained the gardens and parks of town. any commercial timber. —John Muir1 Just prior to the end of its second term, and after receiving over a million public comments in support of protecting national forest roadless areas, the Clinton Administration promulgated a regulation (a.k.a. “the Roadless Rule”) to protect the Inadequacies of Administrative remaining unprotected wildlands (greater than 5,000 acres in size) in the National Forest System from road building and logging. At the time, Clinton’s Forest Service Protections chief Mike Dombeck asked rhetorically: here is “government protection,” and then there is government protection. Mere public ownership — especially if managed by the Bureau of Is it worth one-quarter of 1 percent of our nation’s timber supply or a fraction of a Land Management — affords land little real or permanent protection. fraction of our oil and gas to protect 58.5 million acres of wild and unfragmented land T National forests enjoy somewhat more protection than BLM lands, but in perpetuity?2 to fully protect, conserve and restore federal forests often requires a combination of Wilderness designation and additional appropriate congressional Dombeck’s remarks echoed those of a Forest Service scientist from an earlier era.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Law 98-328-June 26, 1984
    98 STAT. 272 PUBLIC LAW 98-328-JUNE 26, 1984 Public Law 98-328 98th Congress An Act June 26, 1984 To designate certain national forest system and other lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes. [H.R. 1149] Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Oregon United States ofAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act may Wilderness Act be referred to as the "Oregon Wilderness Act of 1984". of 1984. National SEc. 2. (a) The Congress finds that- Wilderness (1) many areas of undeveloped National Forest System land in Preservation the State of Oregon possess outstanding natural characteristics System. which give them high value as wilderness and will, if properly National Forest preserved, contribute as an enduring resource of wilderness for System. the ben~fit of the American people; (2) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation (RARE II) of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have identified areas which, on the basis of their landform, ecosystem, associated wildlife, and location, will help to fulfill the National Forest System's share of a quality National Wilderness Preservation System; and (3) the Department of Agriculture's second roadless area review and evaluation of National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon and the related congressional review of such lands have also identified areas which do not possess outstand­ ing wilderness attributes or which possess outstanding energy, mineral, timber, grazing, dispersed recreation and other values and which should not now be designated as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System but should be avail­ able for nonwilderness multiple uses under the land manage­ ment planning process and other applicable laws.
    [Show full text]