Judge stops timber operation after protected trees cut in old-growth forest 

A federal judge has ordered that the Bureau of Land Management stop a logging operation 45 minutes southwest of Eugene after whistleblowers accused the agency of cutting trees in an old-growth forest.

Oregon U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai filed an opinion late Thursday, May 14, finding that the BLM did not meet its obligations under at least two environmental laws.

The long-controversial Blue and Gold project, in Douglas County within 5 miles of Sutherlin, covers over 3,000 acres in the southern Oregon Coast Range.

Since 2024, when BLM finalized plans, conservation groups have been engaged in a lawsuit challenging the legality of the harvest.

Cascadia Wildlands, Oregon Wild and Umpqua Watersheds alleged that BLM failed to adequately consider and protect old-growth forests within the project area. The case continued for nearly two years due to complex legal arguments and factual disputes, resulting in multiple motions and extensive review of administrative records.

The groups filed another motion Tuesday, after volunteers reported discovering freshly cut tree stumps they believed were larger than legally allowed to be cut — trees protected because of their size and age.

They asked the court to pause logging. In response, attorneys for the defense acknowledged that a contractor cut large Douglas fir and red cedar trees the BLM had marked for preservation.

Kasubhai not only ordered the project to come to an immediate halt, but he also is requiring the BLM to restart its review process — an effort that had been underway for years.

The laws behind Blue and Gold 

In 2016, BLM created a long-term plan for managing over 1.2 million acres through its  Northwestern and Coastal Oregon Resource Management Plan. The plan is intended to balance timber harvesting with protections for water quality, wildlife habitat and other natural resources.

The plan operates in accordance with multiple environmental laws, including the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

The management plan set aside areas for logging, including a swath of land that would become the Blue and Gold project.

Nearly 95% of the 3,594 acres in the project area is also subject to the O&C Act — named for lands once owned by the Oregon and California Railroad. For almost a century, these lands have been prioritized for timber production, with revenue from timber sales going back to the counties where they were harvested.

In early 2024, BLM started the process to host several timber sales, in which the agency contracts with businesses and gives them rights to cut and remove trees from parcels of public land. 

By law, BLM had to do an environmental assessment — a public review to gauge ecological influence of the timber sale and decide if deeper study was needed. BLM found no significant harm, skipping the full environmental impact statement, and approved 2,405 acres for the project.

Cascadia Wildlands and the other conservation groups filed suit, arguing that BLM did not properly analyze the forests — a violation of the law. 

They claimed BLM relied on inaccurate and misleading data, failed to account for old-growth trees, and violated federal environmental laws. Their case was supported by a recently retired BLM scientist and other staff, who raised concerns about the agency’s data. 

Evidence also included internal emails and spreadsheets obtained by Cascadia Wildlands attorneys through a Freedom of Information Act request, that showed BLM’s own records documented much older trees and more complex forests — including habitat for endangered species like the marbled murrelet — than the agency reported in its public assessment.

What whistleblowers saw

Logging started in mid-April. 

A group of volunteers went camping near the Blue and Gold project May 3 and 10, observing and documenting logging operations. 

They saw trees marked by BLM to protect, as required by the agency’s resource management plan that includes a binding rule to preserve trees that are both at least 40 inches in diameter and were established before 1850.

They also saw stumps they believed fit that protection category with one measuring up to 67 inches in diameter. They counted 221 rings on one felled tree and estimated others to be around 250 years old.

It prompted attorneys to request a restraining order and preliminary injunction that pauses work until the court ruled on the broader case, which Kasuhbai reviewed promptly. He ordered the Blue and Gold project, its environmental assessment, and other administrative decisions “vacated.” This means the judge canceled BLM’s approval of the project and the agency must start over and follow the law before trying again.

“Concerned community members worked tirelessly to document in detail the old-growth present in these forests and, in doing so, saved this unique area from the chopping block,” Nick Cady, legal director at Cascadia Wildlands, said in a statement Friday. 

“The Court’s recognition of their contributions and condemnation of the BLM’s dismissal of these efforts is an enormous relief and is also a reminder of the critically important role the public plays in the oversight of these outstanding public forestlands.”

Timber industry defends project

Leading up to the judge’s opinion, attorneys for the defendants — also including lobbying groups American Forest Resource Council and the O&C Association — filed a response that opposed the plaintiff’s restraining order and preliminary injunction.

They admitted that the logger, Diamond J Timber Services, appeared to have cut three trees marked for preservation under the resource management plan. BLM “immediately addressed the unauthorized actions,” according to the attorneys.

According to a BLM report filed as an exhibit, the contractor cut several large trees, including a 36-inch diameter Douglas fir and two 40-inch-plus diameter Douglas firs. The report also notes a reserved red cedar that had been cut.

Regardless, the attorneys argued, such evidence was “inadmissible and irrelevant.”

BLM officials could not be reached Friday for comment. 

In a statement to Lookout Eugene-Springfield, American Forest Resource Council spokesperson Nick Smith called the court’s decision “disappointing.”

“AFRC continues to believe that the project represents responsible, science-based forest management on O&C lands. It was carefully designed by professional public lands managers to support rural Oregon jobs, timber supplies, and county revenues while incorporating strong safeguards for water quality, wildlife habitat, and forest health,” he said. “AFRC will continue defending this project and other efforts by our local public lands managers to care for our forests and support our communities.”

Smith said they are assessing their next steps.

Meanwhile, the BLM is revising its resource management plan under the Trump administration, which wants to increase timber harvest levels for projects like Blue and Gold.