By GARRET JAROS/YachatsNews
YACHATS – Whether an eleventh-hour effort to stop a 40-acre clearcut on a swath of timber just across the Yachats River bridge in south Yachats will be successful is anybody’s guess.
But one thing is certain – the clock is ticking.
Logging could have started as early as Tuesday if not for a 30-day reprieve granted by landowner Clemente Rocha of San Jose, who agreed to give the city of Yachats time to come up with an alternative.
It was a compromise worked out between Rocha and Mayor Craig Berdie, who happened to see a logging and slash burn notice on an Oregon Department of Forestry website.
The property lies just outside city limits and is zoned for forestry practices. It is sandwiched above homes inside the city on the east side of U.S. Highway 101 and below the 1,100-acre Yachats Ridge that land conservation group View the Future is trying to preserve. It wraps around the base of the ridge above the Yachats River and Cape Ranch Road accesses its northwest corner.
“We are very, very concerned about it and wish it wouldn’t happen,” said View the Future co-chair John Theilacker. “But unfortunately, there’s not a lot you can do about it in Oregon if a landowner has made up their mind that they want to log a property.”
If the clearcut moves forward, the group hopes that instead of burning the remaining slash piles, loggers would instead leave the piles to reduce fire danger and circumvent the resulting smoke.
But Berdie says the clearcut’s location will negatively affect property values as well as the city’s appeal to tourists.
“Instead of looking out at beautiful scenery we will be looking out at a clearcut,” Berdie said. “The city is concerned with infrastructure, slash and the economic impact.”
Yachats has very few legal options in the matter. Berdie spoke with the landowner about finding a “mutually agreeable solution,” but said the zoning is a Lincoln County matter dictated by “pretty strict forestry laws.”
Landowner and logger
Rocha told the YachatsNews that his ideal solution would be to retain one acre to build a home and have the city pay to install water, sewer and electric lines. Also, he would like a couple of stocked Conex containers on the property to help residents on the south side of town in case of emergencies.
In return, he would give the remainder of the property to the city “to preserve in perpetuity,” he said. “I believe it would benefit the community tremendously.”
Barring that or some as yet unknown solution, Rocha said, the property will be logged.
Rocha has signed a contract selling the trees to RF Logging of Dallas, Ore. which in turn provided a first payment of $25,000, with more to follow once revenue from the trees is determined.
Both Rocha and RF Logging owner Joshua Howard said a deal with the city could still be reached.
“I own the timber now and I can be talked to and reasoned with if it’s beneficial for everyone involved,” Howard told YachatsNews. “It’s zoned for timber conservation and I am a job creator with employees that are kind of counting on this and so I have to think about them first, as my priority, but I am willing to listen to options.
“But again, if it’s something that is beneficial to the city and (Rocha) and me and my crew then that’s not a problem,” he added. “But it just has to work out.”
In getting the 30-day extension, Berdie said perhaps some “complex intergovernmental issues” could be resolved to help make a deal. But state, county and city staff made clear to YachatsNews that there are no options allowing Rocha to build a home on the property.
The city has posted its concerns about the proposed clearcut on its website and sent a letter of concern to the Oregon Department of Forestry, which oversees privately-owned forestlands in the state.
Planning officials
Lincoln County planning director Onno Husing told YachatsNews that “at a glance” the property does not meet the requirement for housing.
“Just eyeballing the property, I don’t think it would qualify for what they call a template dwelling, which means you’ve got a certain amount of other development near you,” Husing said. “Then you could get one house. But you can’t count other (nearby) development if it’s in the city. So, this is not a final word on my part but I don’t believe the property would qualify for a template dwelling.”
Template dwellings are “very fact based” with “no discretion involved,” he added. “You’re either in or your out.”
In what Husing characterized as his “back-of-the-envelope assessment,” the only way it might be possible is if Yachats were to extend its urban growth boundary and rezone the property. Whether that is possible is outside the county’s purview.
Yachats city planner Katherine Guenther said any decision would fall on the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and that Hui Rodomsky, who is its regional representative, told her it is a waste of time.
“It’s really the state that’s setting the rules,” Guenther said. “There was a one-time opportunity to extend the urban growth boundary but typically state laws prevent us from making these little land grabs. We would have to get to a point where we are below the 20-year buildable inventory before we can even start thinking about growing in any direction.”
Rodomsky did not mince words.
“Everyone is being very polite in how realistic this idea is,” she told YachatsNews. “And I try to do the opposite because the more time we all spend on it, the more time we are wasting. When I tell … interested parties this idea is a no-go, I try to be very clear because I’m saving everybody’s time and resources by being absolutely clear and not polite about it.”
The state’s urban growth boundary expansion process does not accommodate a targeted one-acre expansion, she said. It has more to do with what inventory is available within the urban growth boundary and what is needed. And there are different tiers of priority in expanding that boundary. Farm and timber lands are on the bottom of that priority list.
“On the top of that list would be places already served by say water,” Rodomsky said. “There are places north of city limits that are more densely developed that have residential development. Those would be higher on the list to be included.”
Buying the land
Yachats could buy the property from Rocha but that brings both “political and citizen concerns,” Berdie said. And with Howard owning the trees, any purchase deal would require some finessing.
Rocha said he, like Howard, is open to discussing some sort of arrangement and will wait to hear back from the city about any proposals.
“The timber is spoken for and the contract is pending,” Rocha said. “The permits are pending. (Howard) has to get paid obviously, he has to be reimbursed. At this point the city asked for an extension and I am willing to give them one because they have to do some fiduciary process. I understand all that.”
Berdie has talked with both Rocha and Howard. While he would not comment on the conversation with Howard, he asked Rocha what price he wanted for the property and that Rocha told him $2 million.
Berdie told YachatsNews that $2 million is a “non-starter.”
Rocha inherited the 40-acre parcel as well as another 40-acre parcel directly to the south, from his godmother in 1998. She purchased the properties from High Heaven Logging who bought them from International Paper.
The 2024 “in process real market value” for each property is $110,600, according to county records. Rocha also purchased two small undeveloped lots on Cape Ranch Road in 2016. Their market values are $83,000 and $71,550.
Rocha said there is no “rhyme or reason” for why he wants to log the land now and that he approached the city four years ago to see if a deal could be arranged.
“So I think it was already something that was (in) my head to see if there was any interest about a greenbelt like I proposed,” he said. “But I never received a call, never got an email back until I decided to make a little bit of money like I should. Why not make a profit out of it?”
Rocha added he is willing to make the same kind of deal on the southern parcel but if an agreement cannot be reached, he will likely log those trees in the future as well.
- Garret Jaros is YachatsNews’ full-time reporter and can be reached at GJaros@YachatsNews.com
My heart hurts for the trees. Organize to stop this madness.
What madness? If the guy owns the property he can do whatever he wants. You want it stopped, buy the property. Why do people feel like they can “stop” other adults from doing what they want with what they own.
Native Oregonian here 65 years. While I wouldn’t like to see it logged, I would defend the owner’s rights to do so. Way too many NIMBYs in Oregon. And I would bet the most vocal objections are coming from California transplants anyway.
The destruction of this planet is because of this kind of mentality. Do you know the story behind Yachats? The U.S. Government signed a treaty with the Yachats Natives to secure their ancestral land. See any Yachats Natives? As the planet dies the money that comes from the trees people kill. Good luck.
I attended a talk at the Heceta head lighthouse that said the native Americans burned forests for a number of reasons, but one being to attract food like deer and growing things they wanted. I had no idea. As I looked online it said it was the Europeans that outlawed the native burns. Did anyone ever hear of this?
Yes. When Euro settlers came to Oregon, in addition to killing snd forcing indigenous people from lands they had lived in and tended for thousands of years through use of fire.
Well, no. There are all kinds of things a person can’t do with their own property because they threaten the safety and well-being of other people.
I can understand the owners rights.
Excellent, thorough, and timely reporting on this story by Garret Jaros. Clear cutting the Rocha parcel will leave a massive scar on the emerald backdrop that is a crucial element of Yachats’ extraordinary beauty. More essentially, the homes and the river beneath this 40 acre parcel will be endangered by potential landslides, as has happened with other clear cuts on Yachats Ridge in the not distant past. Tourism, which is the city’s lifeblood, will likely be negatively impacted, as well. Yachats city government is funded largely by the lodging and dining tax. Reduced spending by tourists will require increasing city fees and rates for services and/or lowering our sites on future city improvements. Imagine looking out from the proposed Estuary Boardwalk along Oceanview Drive in a couple of years and seeing a huge bald region in the viewshed as your gaze shifts to the south east. Clearcuts are a part of life in Western Oregon, for sure, but the uncut version of that movie is the one most residents and visitors would prefer to see. Here’s hoping a deal can be reached. If he wants a long term legacy of affection more than he does one of infamy, Clemente Rocha will accept a price that is reasonably possible for the city to pay, provided too that citizens are willing to invest in much needed local forest conservation.
Great reporting, Garret. And many, many thanks to Mayor Berdie and city planner Guenther for trying to forestall this disaster-in-the-making.
What disaster are you talking about? Cutting tress is not a disaster, it is healthy for the forest and several years after the cut new trees will be growing.
You might feel differently if your home was located under the area to be clear-cut. It is very important that the rules for deforestation be followed so streams are not destroyed, animal habitats are maintained and homes are not at increased risk of landslides. Considering that the 101 is in relatively close proximity, it is reasonable to consider the consequences of having 101 impacted by a landslide.
Well there is your answer right there. If logging is going to endanger the watershed or create landslides then how was a permit allowed to do this in the first place, no matter what the zoning currently is right now. This should be illegal. The owner must have already known about the inability to build and should have requested and applied for a change to that rule way before this when he first considered anything. The public has a right to dispute this since it will change the beauty and liability of the city. This could be an environmental disaster in the making due to climate change.
A reasonable, intelligent response to a highly controversial problem. Harold and Alice Bowerman built a house across from the Adobe. They would like your answer and add to it that selective cutting would be the best for that hillside. You are right about land slides. The age of the trees is an important factor in considering cutting. They do have a certain life span.
Until the state and federal governments protect people and nature over profits the timber industry will continue to destroy public and private forestland in the name of “jobs” even though the outdoor recreation industry employs far more people (~120,000) than logging (~30,000). State government needs to enforce Article One, Section I of the state constitution as landslides and the spraying of pesticides (aerial or ground spray) affects our health and safety. We could duplicate what a passionate group of people in Lane County are doing by placing a citizen initiative on the county-wide ballot to protect our watersheds (https://www.protectlanecountywatersheds.org/). They need to collect 14,000 voters’ signatures to get it on the ballot. We in Lincoln County would only need about 1600. Something to think about.
The trees will grow back before you know it. My grandma, from Tillamook county said she saw the property behind her logged 3 times in her 98 years. If you have lived here long enough you will have to admit the trees do grow pretty fast.
This reminds me of sitting in Al Dewey’s real estate office 20 years ago while first looking at property to purchase, and Al had a map of that hill hanging on the wall behind him. He said to take a good hard look at the color of the trees on the map and made sure that we realized that the dark ones would be the next to be logged, and we’ve never forgotten that advice. We’ve had three different properties in the city but not one of them on that side below that area.
Is there a parcel of developable residential land the city might offer in trade, or citizens might come together to offer? Cutting a deal as Rocha proposed is a very long shot from all standpoints.
What a perfect place for an campground/RV park that would keep the trees and bring in more revenue within walking distance to Yachats city limits.
It’s zoned for timber harvest, that’s the problem, and there is no solution. If he wants to make a profit, he can sell the land, donate it (tax incentives) or sell the timber. He’s already in contract with a timber company as well, so there’s no winning here.
Rocha’s question at the end of this article is key: “Why not make a profit out of it?” I say let’s get together and write down dozens of answers to this simple, telling question. Perhaps with enough citizen input put down on paper, he might see the clear answer to this question.
A fundamental problem with answering Rocha’s why-not question with answers written by citizens interested in maintaining the forest land is this: Rocha has zero skin in the game other than the profit he earns from selling the land he was given by his godmother. He has no reason to consider anything other than cold, hard cash for the land and trees. He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area. He has no emotional attachment (that I can discern from this article) for Yachats, Lincoln County, or the state of Oregon. Thirty days goes by far too quickly. I hope there are people who can think quickly enough to keep our green state green. Green as in trees, not green as in cash.
Mr. Rocha was a firefighter, and therefore someone who cared about the safety of his community. It’s very sad to hear that he may be willing to increase the risk of property damage and potentially loss of life by starting fires in the woods and increasing the risk of landslide for the sake of money.
Bistable Dynamics between Forest Removal and Landslide Occurrence
Christiane W. Runyan, Paolo D’Odorico
“It is well documented that deforestation results in an increase in landslide frequency due to the control that forest roots have on slope stability. The loss of forest vegetation leads to a reduction in soil cohesion and a decrease in the shear strength of the soil profile.
On steeper hillslopes, reduced soil shear strength as caused by vegetation removal can lead to mass failure of the soil via landsliding. Landslides have followed deforestation in many parts of the world [DeGraff, 1979; Swanston, 1988; Prandini et al., 1977; DeGraff et al., 1989; Glade, 2003], occasionally scouring the hillslope to bedrock [O’Loughlin and Pearce, 1976; Crozier et al., 1980; Sidle and Swanston, 1982; Trustrum et al., 1983; Trustrum and De Rose, 1988]. For instance, Swanson and Dyrness [1975] found that the quantity of material transported in landslides was 2.8 times greater in clear-cut areas than in forested areas of the Western Cascades in Oregon.”
Thank you for this article and showing the multiple sides of this issue.
CLEARCUT
Clearcutting, anywhere, is not sustainable and is mostly destructive.
If they don’t replant within the legal time limit, there will be aerial spraying of herbicides that will affect the air, water, earth, as well as neighbors and visitors.
Replanting a monoculture of conifer forest is also not sustainable and only invites future clearcuts.
The problem isn’t with landowner Clemente Rocha, it is with these outdated and unsustainable forest practices that relate to the environment as a slave to commercial needs, instead of our family and home.
LAND USE
Onno Husing and Hui Rodomsky are correct in their analysis of the proposed land use. I’ve studied the legal aspects of this “homesteading” proposal, and it would be in violation of State of Oregon laws. There are no exceptions. This issue is tangential to the “exception” that Linda Hetzler has requested for extending her housing beyond the land use laws.
TOURISM IN YACHATS
The City of Yachats does rely upon tourism for about half of their income (I crunched the numbers last year based on their posted budget for the past three years and the number of rooms available for rent within the city limits). But what is not made clear is the reduction in quality of life for the residents due to the overemphasis on the tourist industry. Example, little to no parking at the post office. Residents carry more than their share of the burden of supporting tourism in Yachats…just look at the huge new fire station and the cost of that construction. Most of the calls they receive are from tourists, not residents (again, I’ve studied the 911 calls and the fire station’s annual budget). To ask the residents of Yachats to, once again, bale out the tourist industry by purchasing the forest acres, would need to be seriously examined with very honest accounting to show real benefit to the local citizens.
REAL ESTATE VALUES
First, any time one purchases real estate, it is advisable to also consider your environment and the impact it may have on that potential home, as well as the impact that home may have on its surroundings. To name a few concerns…forest fires, clearcuts, landslides, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, weather patterns, water source, air quality, noise pollution, other pollution, geology, accessibility (what if an earthquake takes out all the bridges?), proximity to health facilities, private transportation, public transportation, etc.
And on the question of reducing real estate value, keep in mind, maximum assessed value (MAV) does not rise or fall more than 3% per year, so the property value issue would only affect the real estate market, not the dedicated residents.
CONCLUSION
Time to think SYSTEMICALLY folks… Until the City of Yachats is as concerned about their residents, neighbors, and the county, as well as county and state rules that determine the quality of life we all live with by supporting more community and environmentally sound practices for us all…they are not the exception to the treatment we all suffer from here. The City of Yachats already has issues with managing landslides due to overdevelopment they’ve approved…best to take care of those issues first before creating more problems!
Who dropped the ball four years ago. A simple call back could have saved this from happening. I know pointing fingers is no help, but it shows how these mistakes by the city government have put it in this position. The trees behind my house were all cut down, and I told them that it would or could create a slide and that the water run off would increase as there are no trees to soak it up.
As was quoted in the article, it’s “a complete waste of time”. There is nothing the city, mayor or governor can do. The land is zoned to harvest, period. That is the law.
Perhaps a compromise can be reached in terms of logging design. Some ideas: cut half now, half in a few years, thin instead of clearcut, do a cutting unit landscape design for a more natural look (mimic a natural opening rather than straight lines. Restating an earlier comment, the city or the community finds a developable parcel within the city limits or UGB, buys it for trade, offer to extend utilities or expedite the permitting process. Actual property values can be determined by a third party land appraiser, mutually selected. How about a conservation easement with break on county taxes? Just some ideas. If he is really interested in a solution for the community as a whole, plus some profit, he should be willing to come to the table and compromise.
Wise advice, Steve. I wish all forest harvesting were done intelligently, instead of clearcutting. Let’s change the laws, so this doesn’t happen anywhere. Yes to Conservation Easements, but which takes time and cost money to arrange yet are a wonderful way to invest in the future of the well-being of the land. This is the best strategy, for if there was a group willing to do this work on the landowner’s behalf and pay for the cost of creating the easement, plus, create a trust that would cover the landowner’s back and future property taxes as well as cover the cost of managing these acres, this would certainly create an incentive and win-win situation.
From what I’ve been told by someone in the know, due to the watershed and streams on that property, only 20 of the 40 acres are scheduled to be clearcut. Truth be known, there isn’t much profit in a 20 acre cut, due to forest deferral taxes that must be paid back based on board feet harvested, the cost of hauling the trees to a mill, and the profit for the logging company.
If the Yachats community thought systemically and sincerely cared about the environment, this would have been put into action years ago, but now it may be too late.
The property east of Highway 101 and north of Idaho Street was logged, slash piled up, tried to burn the piles but ordered to extinguish the piles by the Forest Service and now the slash piles just sit. The California owner sold the timber.
The property owner you are referring to is not from California, he is from Oregon. They had one successful burn, then another company came in later after the first burn and did a horrible job, that’s when people cried about smoke. My property borders this property. The owner had proper permits. The smoke was not that bad.
Do not clearcut but select cut without mechanical equipment. Use horses or mules to log selectively with an Oregon state forester present. Or buy the lot and keep natural.
How about having the city purchase the timber contract from the logger and then have them selectively log it maybe getting a reasonable return in their investment. Rocha will have his money, loggers will have work and we will have a hillside that it is tailored for our viewshed.
Fire up the chain saws, peoples lively hoods are at stake, not just this man making money but also people employed in this industry, the tree will be replanted and grow again and the hillside will look even better in a few years
If this land is clear cut, it will be a scar on the souls of Yachats for decades. Being that close to the river means that the glyphosate and 2,4D herbicides sprayed over it will wash down into the watershed and poison the waterfowl and fish that depend upon it. The people are tired of being gut punched by the herbicide and timber industries. The legislature lacks the courage to fight these corporate opportunists. Yachats should ask for an extended delay so that the money to save this parcel can be found. You’re on the front line Yachats. People will help you. You can count on it.
It’s somewhat odd that the mayor is concerned about property values and the impact on tourism this would have after the city green lighted the unsightly town house project at Ninth street and Highway 101. One of the developers of the project himself described the building as “ugly” any said he “felt bad” about the neighbors who suffered serious negative impacts from this project. This construction is a serious blemish on “the gem of the Oregon coast”, which tells me city officials aren’t really very concerned about present homeowners or tourism.
If you hike the ridge you can spot separations/cracks in the topsoil that show downslope movement is already occurring. There is also a certain development with a stupid water tower up a crazy steep road (it should never have been permitted) that is literally cracking at the edge as the slope gives way. This has all the earmarks of the Oso, Wa. disaster, a horror show landslide that effectively killed an entire town.
Please, I know that you can do better than spread fear. You do know that soils with higher clay or sodium content will crack as they dry out. That doesn’t mean a possible landslide.
Does anyone have background on the Evans-Betts property block in yellow on the landowner map? I don’t see any mention of it and I’m not sure its connected to the VtF land efforts. Its right along the river. This could be another piece to keep an eye on.
Cut to the chase. Every owner is entitled to the value of a property, including its resources. The question comes down to what is the value of the property and its timber under current laws? Then, how might the owner realize that value in a way that satisfies him and the community. It seems limited time exists for that discussion.
Another question is whether the Oregon Department of Forestry has already approved a logging plan. ODF is generally very lax in approving clearcut plans and supervising their consequences. I’ve seen ODF carry out a post logging burn where it actually burned trees designated under its plan to be left. It also burned some piles of lumber the logger had limbed and stacked for trucking out. The first storm after the clearing tore across the site and felled hundreds of trees on adjacent land owned by The Wetlands Conservancy, which didn’t muster the energy to contest the plan or protest the results.
I am visiting Yachats soon and was dismayed to see this article. Yachats is truly one of the most beautiful places on the Oregon coast.
Why not force an emergency rezone for his cabin, or allow the owner to make money on this property in another way (such as a low impact tiny home cluster or something creative such as a mountain bike trail that people need to pay for)? Or, find a donor willing to buy it as a park named after their family, perhaps with a letter of commitment from some government agency that they will work towards this rezone for the good of all residents? Here in Bend, Oregon, there are lots of potential donors.