Oregon Timber Restriction Measure 34 (2004)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on the Environment
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Oregon Ballot Measure 34 (2004) was on the November 2, 2004 ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute. It was defeated.

This measure would have set restrictions on timber production. The statute would have reserved half of the Tillamook and Clatsop state forests in northwest Oregon for restoration; the rest would have remained open for timber production.[1]

Election results

Measure 34
Defeatedd No1,606,49670.9%
Yes 659,467 29.1%
Election results from Oregon Blue Book website, accessed December 16, 2013

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title of Measure 34 was:

Requires Balancing Timber Production, Resource Conservation/Preservation In Managing State Forests; Specifically Addresses Two Forests[2]

RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote requires managing state forests balancing, as equally beneficial, conservation/preservation and timber production; manages Tillamook, Clatsop forests half for restoration, half for production.

RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote retains current law allowing mixed use state forest management; rejects: requiring management that values conservation and production equally, separately managing Tillamook, Clatsop Forests.[3][4]


The official ballot summary for Measure 34 was: {{Quote| Current law directs that Board of Forestry manage all state forests to maximize "permanent value" (defined by board) through mixed use, including timber sales, mining, protecting, conserving, utilizing forests. Measure requires management defining "permanent value" as balancing sustainable timber production with water, wildlife, watershed protection, recreation, forest restoration, considering resource conservation equally beneficial to timber production. Manages Tillamook, Clatsop Forests half for forest restoration, prioritizing drinking water, habitat, fish protection; half for sustainable timber production, with restoration management steps recommended by restoration science team. Addresses using timber revenues for common School Fund, forest restoration management (board providing additional funding as needed); continues current local school funding levels. Measure declares it replaces any other management plan for Clatsop, Tillamook Forests adopted in 2004 election. Other provisions.[3]

Financial impact

The official statement of estimated financial impact was:

With respect to the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests:

The measure is estimated to increase state expenditures by $1.5 million to $6.3 million per year;

The measure is estimated to decrease state revenue by $4.2 million to $10.3 million per year;

The measure is estimated to require approximately $2 million of one-time state expenditures;

The measure is estimated to decrease revenues for local governments by $17.2 million to $19.4 million per year; and

There is no financial effect on local government expenditures.

The impact of the measure on other state forests cannot be determined.[3][4]

Full text

The full text of the legislation proposed by Measure 34 is available here.

BallotMeasureFinal badge.png
This historical ballot measure article requires that the text of the measure be added to the page.


Supporters of the measure were concerned with the preservation and protection of Oregon's state forests.

Former Governor Barbara Roberts publicly supported the measure, saying that it would keep the forests open for Oregonians to enjoy, while still keeping a percentage of the timber industry's jobs.

While much of the opposition argued that preserving the forests would take funding away from education, The Oregon School Employees Association stepped forward in support, saying that Measure 34 provides $6.5 million more for local schools in the 4 affected counties of the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests than they received last year. Measure 34 would have required additional revenue for all public schools and annual deposits of timber revenue from Oregon State Forests to the Common School Fund.[5]


Oregon Citizens for a Sound Economy was an organization that strongly encouraged people to vote no on the measure. Also concerned with the impact it could have on public education funding, the group argued that the passage of the new law would have taken thousands of jobs from the timber industry and said it would have actually have a negative effect on the environment due to increased forest fires.[6]

See also

External links

Suggest a link