Last updated September 9, 2005.

There is a place along the Oregon coast that is blessed with incomparable beauty and biological importance. Much of it is state park land: Sunset Bay State Park (a sheltered beach near rocky tidepools, with a picnic area and a campground), Shore Acres State Park (views of spectacular wave action on wave sculpted sea cliffs, and formal gardens), and Cape Arago State Park (a rugged headland, extensive tidepools, and overlooks near seal and sea lion resting spots on Simpson Reef). This area has among the most scenic coastal views anywhere, the largest and perhaps most productive intertidal zone in the state, more seal and sea lion haul-outs than any other place on the Oregon coast, several large seabird colonies, late successional (approaching old growth) forest, and more. This wondrous stretch of coastline—only a few miles long—is one of the Oregon coast’s most biologically productive, ecologically important areas. From the nearby fishing village of Charleston, the road to this area climbs over Coos Head, drops and passes by a county park at Bastendorf Beach and then passes Yoakam Point, climbs again and runs by a number of small homes, crosses through forest behind the Gregory Point headland, and descends to Sunset Bay. The road then parallels the Oregon Coast Trail, running past Shore Acres and ending at Cape Arago (the three state parks border each other). Just before Sunset Bay, a small road—Lighthouse Way—branches off the main road and runs along the northern edge of Gregory Point to a small Coast Guard facility on the edge of the headland, which is just a high footbridge away from Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island). Everything southward of Lighthouse Way should be protected; unfortunately, misguided people want to “develop” Gregory Point.

The Bureau of Land Management controls part of Gregory Point and had planned to permit construction of an Indian interpretive center there, the Bal’diyaka center. The BLM also expected the Bal’diyaka Center to use state park land and land controlled by the Coast Guard, but had not bothered to secure permission to use that land. Most of Gregory Point is part of Sunset Bay State Park, and that part of the park is designated for management as an undeveloped buffer zone; Bal’diyaka would have developed that area. In early 1996 the BLM published an Environmental Impact Statement for this project. The EIS selected Gregory Point over alternative sites at Yoakam Point (midway back toward Charleston), and Coos Head (next to Charleston). However, since the Gregory Point site was chosen in a master plan developed by the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians well before the EIS was written, it is clear that the BLM merely went through the motions of considering alternatives. Contrary to what the law requires, the BLM had always narrowly focused on developing Gregory Point. Implementing this plan would have been disastrous for Gregory Point and the surrounding areas. It would have flooded the area with a quarter of a million visitors a year, severely impacting the state parks and trails and the marine mammals that come ashore to rest along the coast. It would have opened Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) to tours, disrupting the seabird colony there and further jeopardizing the threatened brown pelican, which roosts there. It would have guaranteed that visitors would flow down into the now largely unvisited intertidal and subtidal research reserves around Gregory Point and Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island), and to the nearby rocks and islands that are part of the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge. And it would have done all of this unnecessarily. The center could be built closer to Charleston or Coos Bay/North Bend, where there is already infrastructure and where it would provide a greater boost to the local economy. Yet the BLM was fixated on laying waste to Gregory Point, just so the center would have a nice view of a lighthouse.

The BLM’s plan was not merely flawed from an ecological perspective, but from a legal perspective as well. The BLM failed to fully consider alternative sites, as the National Environmental Policy Act required it to do. NEPA also requires consideration of cumulative and secondary impacts, as on the nearby state parks and coastal wildlife habitats; the BLM failed to do this also. The BLM failed to do consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding endangered species, as it was legally required to do (this area is threatened and endangered species habitat). The BLM failed to coordinate its plans with the State of Oregon, as the Coastal Zone Management Act required it to do. This list of violations goes on and on; the BLM apparently figured it could hurry this plan through without serious opposition, and so didn’t bother to conform to relevant environmental laws. A number of the public comments about the EIS pointed this out, and the BLM was slow to produce a final Record of Decision.

During this process, something happened that should have made it significantly easier to get the BLM to spare Gregory Point and the nearby coastal area, and still construct Bal’diyaka elsewhere. In late 1996, the Air National Guard decided to abandon a small military facility on Coos Head. That land—which would be a much better location for Bal’diyaka than any of the alternatives described in the EIS, including the Coos Head alternative mentioned in the EIS, which is on a different part of Coos Head—went up for grabs. A group of local government and tribal officials and members of the public formed a working group to discuss the disposition of the Coos Head base, with serious consideration going to getting the land turned over to the BLM for use as a Bal’diyaka site and for the Coastal Environments Learning Network. The BLM official in charge of the Bal’diyaka EIS said that if the BLM could get that land turned over to them, it would make the best site for Bal’diyaka.

In 2000, the BLM and the Confederated Tribes issued a Record of Decision choosing to take “no action” on Bal’diyaka (the BLM did not address use of the new Coos Head site). At first, this looked like a victory for those who called and wrote the BLM and urged a better approach. Save Gregory Point! believed that the tribe’s traditional cultural ties to this area could be respected without letting them trash the area by turning it into a commercial tourist destination. There are many other possible places for such a development, but few other areas with Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island)’s ecological richness. Save Gregory Point! also believed that the BLM’s and the Confederated Tribe’s decision to take no action on Bal’diyaka removed the excuse for not making Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) part of the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, and that the refuge should be completed. This would protect the island and would complete the refuge, and in so doing would protect large seabird colonies, marine mammal haul-outs, and exceptional subtidal areas. Save Gregory Point! urged the federal government to to add Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) to the refuge, and to properly fund the refuge so it could maintain the lighthouse. Then we waited and hoped the government would do the right thing.

Instead, word came that in conjunction with a Coast Guard plan to decommission its small housing unit on Gregory Point and to build a new automated light on the headland, the BLM planned to take full control of the area and then “withdraw” the land for the Confederated Tribes to use as it pleased. On September 1, 2004 the Bureau of Indian Affairs produced a Finding of No Significant Impact/Supplemental Environmental Assessment showcasing a plan to allow the Confederated Tribes to move into the now-abandoned Coast Guard housing facility on Gregory Point and use it as a tribal office, and also to take control of Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) with the expectation that tribal members would visit the island frequently. The FONSI meant that the BIA thought it could go ahead with the scheme without doing a full Environmental Impact Statement, although it did have to take public comment on the plan. The SEA focused largely on sympathetic sociological and psychological issues, such as the tribe’s assertion that there are cultural sites on Gregory Point and on Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) important to this small and dwindling tribe, whose ancestors were indeed treated unjustly. There is a shell midden, but then the entire coast is lined with old garbage piles of shells left from long ago; this one probably dates to when Coos Indians lived on the headland before being driven off by the Rogue Indians. However, those issues are not what an Environmental Assessment is supposed to be about; an EA is supposed to deal with the physical environment. What little ecological analysis this SEA had, focused narrowly on endangered species and seemed to assume that if the plan managed for endangered species it will manage appropriately for everything. The only endangered species the SEA really looked at was the brown pelican, of which there are a number on Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island). This analysis was conducted largely by having a biologist cross onto the island to see if the pelicans would fall over dead in fright, and by writing to various federal agencies to see if anyone opposed the plan. Confusing the issue, some supporters of the plan led others to believe such things as that the tribe’s cemetery is on Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) rather than on the Gregory Point headland, which led some people who would otherwise want more protection for the island to suggest that there should be considerable tribal access. The SEA overlooked other endangered species issues by claiming, in contradiction to the original Bal’diyaka EIS, that there is no other endangered species habitat on Gregory Point; the SEA also contained a host of other shortcomings. The SEA did not consider the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge completion issue at all; it narrowly segmented its concern into only the specific footprint it claimed humans would occupy, and did not look at the cumulative impact. The fact is that endangered species are managed by designation of “critical habitat,” which is different than refuge creation. Refuges deal with the broader picture, and protect all animals, and Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) needs to be in the refuge because there is more in play than just a few threatened or endangered species. Even adjacent Squaw Island—reportedly soon to be renamed—is in the refuge, and is a designated wilderness area, even though it has considerably less ecological significance than Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island). Not including Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) in the refuge is utterly nonsensical. This is especially true when one considers that the BIA’s plan and the refuge issue were not necessarily incompatible: there is a privately owned island off the coast that is part of the refuge, through a conservation easement; this makes it clear that compromises are possible. It is also clear that refuge staff can easily manage lands adjacent to lighthouses, as shown by the fact that they already do so elsewhere. But the SEA didn’t look at a compromise allowing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the island through the refuge. Some mitigation measures were proposed regarding the island, such as keeping dogs off the island, but that rule is already in place and is being ignored, as are some of the other mitigation measures. In short, the idea that this plan would have had no significant environmental impact was ludicrous, the idea that the SEA could be tiered to the old Bal’diyaka EIS—which is outdated and did not consider the impact of frequent visits to the island, or the importance of the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge—was a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, and the fact that this FONSI/SEA was done without notice to any of the known opponents of development of the area is a pretty large red flag for people who love the coast .

In July of 2005, Save Gregory Point! learned that the BLM determined the BIA does not have authority to receive the planned withdrawal of Gregory Point and Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) (the BLM, predictably, did not tell Save Gregory Point! that the SEA’s plan had been scrapped; Save Gregory Point! had to find that out on its own). The BLM said it did not know what it would do next. That left an amazing opportunity for concerned citizens to act. For the first time since the creation of the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, there was no pending plan to misuse Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island). There was no plan for it at all (although the BLM still wanted to find a way to let the tribes use the area). Since the island should have been added to the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge when the refuge was created, and since there was no reason left not to do so, and since the BLM was looking for a plan to do something with the island, there had never been—and likely would never be—a better time to advocate adding Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) to the refuge. This was no longer a matter of swimming against the tide as we have been doing. With public support, the tide could have turned immediately, before the next development scheme came along. Save Gregory Point! pushed for adding Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) to the refuge, but had difficulty getting publicity for the issue. Strangely, refuge management was resistant to the idea of completing the refuge. Despite the fact they gave even tiny, barren little rocks elsewhere the full protection of the refuge, refuge management did not want this wondrous area to have the same level of protection. The refuge manager was concerned about the cost of maintaining the lighthouse, and did not want to keep the tribes from access to a historically important cultural site. Of course, congressional action completing the refuge could have provided for adequate lighthouse funding without benefit of funds from lighthouse tourists, and there was no reason refuge designation would preclude giving the tribe permission to access the island. Moreover, the Confederated Tribes could help the refuge by using casino revenue to maintain the lighthouse, as part of an access agreement. But without public pressure, the bureaucrats did not want to budge from their established positions, and they continued to look for a way to legally turn the island over to the tribes. Save Gregory Point! could have litigated various issues, stalled the process to try to coerce the bureaucrats into climbing out of their ruts, and tried to better publicize the issue through news of a legal fight. We might well have been able to prevail on the merits of our legal arguments, and force the government to adequately consider completing the refuge. However, the existing Coast Guard buildings on the headland are rapidly deteriorating, and need to be fixed and occupied if they are to be used for tribal offices. The refuge manager and the BLM have argued that the buildings should be occupied soon, and they will keep an eye on the wildlife issues. Save Gregory Point! is currently reevaluating whether to put up a fight on this issue, or to give the federal government a chance to see if it will manage these public lands appropriately. You should still keep your public servants aware that this area is important to you, and that adding Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) to the Oregon islands National Wildlife Refuge is still a great idea.

There are two other issues of concern to Save Gregory Point!. First, with the demise of Bal’diyaka also removing the impediment to the state park system’s management of all of its land on Gregory Point as a primary protection area (a designation that should also apply to all of the land in the undeveloped areas between Sunset Bay and the Shore Acres gardens, and between the Shore Acres gardens and the Cape Arago picnic sites), this is also a good time for revision of the park’s master plan in a conservation-oriented direction. Primary protection areas are areas where development is minimized and conservation of natural beauty and resources is maximized, and the parks need more such areas. Existing developed areas of the parks would still provide parking, picnic facilities, camping, etc., but the natural areas that make the parks attractive in the first place would be conserved.

Second, recent debate on the marine reserves issue makes this a good time to designate the entire stretch of shoreline between Gregory Point and Cape Arago as a marine reserve. Marine reserve status would allow people to look at and enjoy these areas, but would require everyone to leave them the way they are instead of using them consumptively and destructively. Few other parts of the coast come close to deserving such recognition and protection. This is the time marine reserves can become a reality, if we act now.

Implementing these refuge, primary protection area, and marine reserve measures would go far toward better protecting this coastal treasure. Here are some people you could contact:

Save Gregory Point! is both a rallying cry and a network of people working to protect both Gregory Point and the coastal area near it. Join the effort! The webmaster will update this page periodically with the latest developments. If you have comments or suggestions about this site, please send e-mail to sgp@xmission.com (if you cannot use e-mail software from your location, use this form). But it’s more important that you write today to speak on behalf of Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island) and the nearby coastline.

Thank you, everyone who helped either with the original Bal’diyaka fight or with the current effort to complete the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge! It’s that grassroots action that will get the refuge finished. In addition to the individuals who have helped, Coast Range Association and the Conservation Leaders Network recently weighed in for Chief’s Island (Lighthouse Island), and The Oregonian gave the issue a bit of publicity. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and the Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition publicized the Bal’diyaka issue in the past.