Bulk sampling with heavy equipment proposed for Rogue River-Siskiyou Forest
Minerals Research Partners Bulk Sampling
U.S. Forest Service· Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, High Cascades Ranger DistrictU.S. Forest Service project page ↗
Forest ServiceWe track this on the agency’s own system of record, where most on-the-ground decisions live.
The groups on this fight
4 groups work California
By footprint, from the same match the STAND matchmaker runs; none is linked to this decision in our record yet. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.
- California Wilderness Coalition
Works California: spent years building the designation campaign with Tribal nations and now defends the monument as an intervenor in federal court.
- Friends of the Desert Mountains
Works California: coachella Valley land conservancy that helped establish Sand to Snow and worked with The Wildlands Conservancy on acquisitions inside the monument footprint..
- Friends of the Inyo
Works California: runs the Eastern Sierra opposition to the gold exploration projects around the Bodie Wilderness Study Area and hosts the Bodie Hills Conservation Partnership's donation and newsletter operations..
- Los Padres ForestWatch
Works California: has led opposition to oil drilling in the Los Padres region for two decades and is fighting the plan to reopen 400,000 acres to leasing.
Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.
A mining company wants to excavate up to 1,000 cubic yards of material from national forest land near Prospect, Oregon.
What’s at risk
National forest land in the High Cascades Ranger District faces ground disturbance from heavy equipment and helicopter operations for private mineral extraction. The agency plans to skip a full environmental review by using a categorical exclusion, limiting public scrutiny of the impacts.
If this goes through
The Forest Service would authorize bulk mineral sampling that disturbs up to 1,000 cubic yards of subsurface material, with minimal environmental review and no requirement to reconsider the project.
Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.
The agency’s case, tested
What the agency argues, and whether its own record backs it
- 2
- No support given yet
The Forest Service says it's processing a proposal to bulk sample up to 1,000 cubic yards of mineral material in Douglas County, Oregon, using heavy equipment and helicopters. It calls the project non-discretionary and expects to handle it under a categorical exclusion.
“This non-discretionary project proposes to bulk sample up to 1,000 cubic yards of material. The project will utilize heavy equipment and include use of helicopters to transport materials to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon.”
Minerals Research Partners Bulk Sampling
Each Ask below goes into your letter when you write it with PLAN on this page, matched to what you tell it about how this land reaches you.
Authority
No support given yet
The Forest Service treats the bulk sampling project as non-discretionary, meaning it believes it has limited choice over whether the project goes forward.
The notice labels the project non-discretionary and lists its purpose as minerals and geology. It doesn't name the law, claim, permit or rights that would limit the agency's choice, and it doesn't say which parts of the project, such as equipment, helicopter routes or timing, the agency can still shape.
AskExplain what legal basis makes this project non-discretionary, and identify which conditions, such as equipment limits, helicopter routes, timing and reclamation, the Forest Service can still require.
The agency’s words +Hide the words
The agency says
“This non-discretionary project proposes to bulk sample up to 1,000 cubic yards of material.”
Minerals Research Partners Bulk Sampling
Effects
No support given yet
Sampling up to 1,000 cubic yards with heavy equipment and helicopter transport fits a categorical exclusion and doesn't need an environmental assessment.
The Project Overview lists the expected analysis type as a categorical exclusion under category Department of Agriculture-32d-Forest Service. It also lists the current status as Developing Proposal, with the expected decision date as 3/2027 (Estimated), so the analysis may not be finished yet. Still, the notice gives no acreage, access route, number of helicopter flights, water or wildlife information, or reasoning showing that heavy equipment work and helicopter hauling of up to 1,000 cubic yards fit that category without unusual circumstances.
AskExplain how the project fits category Department of Agriculture-32d-Forest Service, and disclose disturbed acreage, access routes, helicopter flight numbers and any nearby streams, listed species or cultural sites reviewed for unusual circumstances.
The agency’s words +Hide the words
The agency says
“The project will utilize heavy equipment and include use of helicopters to transport materials to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon.”
Minerals Research Partners Bulk Sampling
Read from the agency’s own notice ↗, the notice that opens this window; the full analysis comes later, so what it leaves unsupported is what to ask it to show. Every quote is checked word for word against it, a claim marked contradicted stands on a quote from the same document, and a second reading argued the agency’s side of every verdict before it was published. The verdicts are our reading; the quotes are the agency’s. A court can set aside agency action it finds “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law” (5 U.S.C. 706(2)(A) ↗), which is why these gaps are worth putting in the record.
What to say
Make these points, in your own words
- I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
- The notice designates this project a Categorical Exclusion under USDA-32d-USFS, but it provides zero analysis of whether extraordinary circumstances apply. Bulk sampling of up to 1,000 cubic yards using heavy equipment and helicopters in a National Forest setting raises obvious questions about soil disturbance, water quality, and wildlife disruption that could trigger extraordinary circumstances under 36 CFR 220.6. The agency should publicly disclose its extraordinary-circumstances screening checklist before any CE is signed, or prepare an EA or EIS.
- The notice discloses that materials will be transported by helicopter to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon, but says nothing about flight paths, number of flights, noise levels, or effects on wildlife and recreation users in the corridor. Helicopter operations over National Forest land are themselves a significant noise and disturbance source that deserves at least brief analysis. The agency should identify the flight corridor, frequency of operations, and analyze noise and wildlife disturbance before issuing a CE.
- The project location is described only as Douglas County, Oregon, T. 29 S., R. 03 E., Section 13, with no mention of proximity to streams, wetlands, Wild and Scenic Rivers, roadless areas, or sensitive species habitat. The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest contains multiple designated and eligible Wild and Scenic River segments and roadless areas. Without disclosing proximity to these resources, the public cannot evaluate whether the CE is appropriate or whether extraordinary circumstances apply. The agency should provide a map and disclose the project's relationship to all special-management designations in or near the project area.
- The notice identifies the lead unit as the High Cascades Ranger District but the project location is in Douglas County in a township and range that may fall administratively within a different district boundary. No explanation is given for why the High Cascades Ranger District is the lead unit. Mis-assignment of lead unit can affect which specialists review the project and which forest plan standards apply. The agency should confirm in the record which administrative unit has jurisdiction and which forest plan governs this project.
Show all 6 points from the document
- Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
In the agency’s own words
This non-discretionary project proposes to bulk sample up to 1,000 cubic yards of material. The project will utilize heavy equipment and include use of helicopters to transport materials to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon.
Did the agency answer?
4 issues are on this record. The agency has not published its decision document yet, so each one stays pending until the agency answers.
Issues on the record, awaiting the decision
- PendingThe notice designates this project a Categorical Exclusion under USDA-32d-USFS, but it provides zero analysis of whether extraordinary circumstances apply.
The notice designates this project a Categorical Exclusion under USDA-32d-USFS, but it provides zero analysis of whether extraordinary circumstances apply. Bulk sampling of up to 1,000 cubic yards using heavy equipment and helicopters in a National Forest setting raises obvious questions about soil disturbance, water quality, and wildlife disruption that could trigger extraordinary circumstances under 36 CFR 220.6. The agency should publicly disclose its extraordinary-circumstances screening checklist before any CE is signed, or prepare an EA or EIS.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice discloses that materials will be transported by helicopter to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon, but says nothing about flight paths, number of flights, noise levels, or effects on wildlife
The notice discloses that materials will be transported by helicopter to the airfield at Prospect, Oregon, but says nothing about flight paths, number of flights, noise levels, or effects on wildlife and recreation users in the corridor. Helicopter operations over National Forest land are themselves a significant noise and disturbance source that deserves at least brief analysis. The agency should identify the flight corridor, frequency of operations, and analyze noise and wildlife disturbance before issuing a CE.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe project location is described only as Douglas County, Oregon, T.
The project location is described only as Douglas County, Oregon, T. 29 S., R. 03 E., Section 13, with no mention of proximity to streams, wetlands, Wild and Scenic Rivers, roadless areas, or sensitive species habitat. The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest contains multiple designated and eligible Wild and Scenic River segments and roadless areas. Without disclosing proximity to these resources, the public cannot evaluate whether the CE is appropriate or whether extraordinary circumstances apply. The agency should provide a map and disclose the project's relationship to all special-management designations in or near the project area.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice identifies the lead unit as the High Cascades Ranger District but the project location is in Douglas County in a township and range that may fall administratively within a different distric
The notice identifies the lead unit as the High Cascades Ranger District but the project location is in Douglas County in a township and range that may fall administratively within a different district boundary. No explanation is given for why the High Cascades Ranger District is the lead unit. Mis-assignment of lead unit can affect which specialists review the project and which forest plan standards apply. The agency should confirm in the record which administrative unit has jurisdiction and which forest plan governs this project.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
The reporting behind this
From More Than Just ParksIt’s referred to as Unit 346 in the Twin Mountain II Timber Sale. On the ground, it’s some of the most spectacular old growth we’ve ever witnessed, and it’s marked for clearcutting.
To document and do our part to save America’s greatest old growth forest
More actions that need you
Go deeper, free
See how your members of Congress vote on public lands
Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.
Open ↗The mapSee the places under active threat
A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.
Open ↗A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.
Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .