I support allowing pedal-assist e-bikes on the forest. I frequently ride an electric bike, and I enjoy frequenting the forest, but have been sad that I cannot combine the two pastimes.

Last Friday (June 14, 2024) I saw a closure sign for the Woodpecker Phase 1 logging project. The sign was posted at the 500 Road gate. I hike there weekly and this was the first inkling that logging would commence in a little over a week. More advance notice sure would have been nice. I am writing to ask you to relocate the approximately 600-foot-long strip of Woodpecker 1 boundary that is immediately adjacent to the Section 36 trail starting at Cronemiller Lake and proceeding uphill. Please shift that section of the Woodpecker 1 boundary far enough away from the trail that the resulting logging operations do not become apparent from the trail. The entire Section 36 trail section along Calloway Creek uphill from Cronemiller Lake is an exceedingly important stretch of trail for me. For two reasons. Reason 1. To regain cardiac fitness, I have climbed Peavy Peak at least 400 times over the last four years. Each time, I return via this section of the Section 36 trail to wind down and appreciate the beauty of this older forest. Logging boundaries that are immediately adjacent to the trail will likely result in degrading the beauty and calming experience of a mature forest. The forest trail uphill along Calloway Creek is one of the very few good options that enthusiasts have for hiking in an old forest stand near Corvallis. <> You have already adjusted the logging boundary (away from the trail) a little further uphill after the first 600 feet. Presumably this is because the trail enters a portion of a mature forest reserve here. I would prefer you cut more trees elsewhere in the Woodpecker 1 project, rather than diminish the beauty of any portion of this trail. Reason 2. In the early 1990s I was a founding member and 1-year president of the Native Yew Conservation Council (NYCC). We advocated among all interest groups to seek new sources of the cancer drug Taxol, as the original source of the compound entailed stripping the bark from ancient yew trees. Our efforts hastened the efforts of Bristol Myers Squibb and Weyerhaeuser to source Taxol from the foliage of cultivated seedlings. During my advocacy with NYCC, I witnessed large-scale harvesting of yew trees, especially old ones. This pertains to my input because Calloway Creek should really be named “Yew Creek.” In my decades as a forester and outdoors enthusiast, I have seen very few populations of yew trees as dense and varied as that along this stretch of creek and trail. I have counted over 100 yew trees and some specimens are likely hundreds of years old. <> Indeed, even elsewhere in your Woodpecker logging operations, I implore you to avoid cutting any yew trees in your logging operations. Oh yes, and possibly one more pertinent request, if needed. Although the Woodpecker 1 map technically shows a particular tree to be outside of your proposed logging boundaries, please don’t fell the huge Douglas-fir wolf tree located just uphill from Cronemiller Lake.

Hello, I live in Corvallis and urge you not to allow ebikes in OSU forests. They are dangerous for pedestrians, frightening to dogs and probably horses, and the whole point of being in the forest is getting some exercise. So please don't allow this unnecessary and dangerous thing. Make an exception for motorized wheelchairs for those who need them. Many bikers don't stop for pedestrians anyway when they speed downhill, so there are enough hazards now. Thank you.

To the McDonald Dunn Research Forest -- I was able to briefly review the presentation and video. To think that this is the same OSU that played a leading role in developing the Northwest Forest Plan. You would never have guessed after reviewing this management plan. It is in most evey way upside down. This is not ecological forestry. This is not research into practices we don't already know about. This plan reads as a justification for harvest using a matirix bias towards a forestry of the past. It is the old growth and late successional trees that should make up 40% with rotations designed to support important ecological services -- climate change, clean water, biodiversity. The public deserves ecological integrity. The public deserves ecological forestry, a forestry that has multiple benefits to society -- not a forestry primarily in service to the market. The public deserves forests not plantations.

Matt McPharlin and the forest trail crew have done a great job making new trails in the Mac! I would love to see 1) more trails; 2) more singletrack connectivity; and 3) better access closer to town. Please consider a new conditional use permit for more trail building. Whether the College likes it or not, the Mac forest is a big reason people love Corvallis. I am excited about the new Greenbelt purchase that might open up a new access point for the forest from Bald Hill and/or MLK park. This is a much more sustainable alternative than people driving to Oak Creek Station. I also would love to see more events in the forest (could these be a potential (modest) revenue stream?). I was disappointed the USATF 50k national championship got turned down...it could have been a great opportunity for the forest, Corvallis, etc. There are not so many events in the forest. I also would very much like to see more trails in the Dunn, as well as legal connectivity between Mac and Dunn. It is a whole new frontier and would space users out more. Finally, there are some obvious connections that would greatly improve the experience for trail users. For instance, Old Growth to Daves, so a complete singletrack loop from the Saddle could be done. Another would be some trail from of Dimple/Beautiful down to Extendo or Oak Creek would be great. Also, continue Playtime further down (there has been talk of revamping Endo/Innuendo.

I love all the trails in the Mac/Dunn! I think more trail races should be permitted - big races are good for the community as they bring in more revenue. I also think permanent trail signs would be very helpful. I also would approve of ebikes, as for some people, it is the only way they can experience the forest.

I am opposed to e-bikes in Mac Forest. Thank you.

I attended and zoomed in on the public forum Wed. June 5. Here's what I said and would like a reply on my questions:

I want to know who chooses the "experts for your study criteria and management plan? I also want to know how you avoid conflicts of interest between the College of Forestry and the time industry (including the logging and Timber Management Organizations)? I represent both the taxpayers of Oregon and those who donate funds to support OSU "Research Forests". We want to protect the natural habitats, the biodiversity of our forests, and old growth habitats. We are horribly alarmed at the indiscriminate "harvesting" of your "Research Forests" and have witnessed the destruction of canopy forests and habitats. Do you have any true naturalists and biologists, ornithologists and independent surveys that address the protection of the many non-human inhabitants (like nesting birds, raccoons, bears, cougars, and the many rodents that inhabit wooded areas). There is clearly a bias towards allowing the exploitation of nature and putting "capitalism" before the environmental impact of logging operations. The animals, the birds, the ecological health of your forests do not have a voice, nor a choice and many organizations that we also support like Oregon Wild, The Sierra Club, and the Environmental Defense Fund have all witnessed how the OSU College of Forestry sets priorities and accommodates the Timber Industry over the health of our states forests and natural habitats. When will you set forth a plan to truly protect and preserve the habitats that are left? When will you honor biodiversity over making money? We look forward to your answers and will hold you responsible for "...the management plan for the McDonald and Dunn Research Forests", as well as the other forest projects that you support or are involved in."

I would like to see even more trails especially for hiking/trail running in the forest. We really need more parking at the Oak Creek entrance. That is a true bottleneck to accessing such a great existing trail network.