Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (April 1, 2016)
6 CapitalPress.com April 1, 2016 Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Opinion Editorial Board Publisher Editor Managing Editor Mike O’Brien Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com Online: www.capitalpress.com/opinion O UR V IEW Judge rejects environmentalist bid to hurt irrigators A federal judge has denied a request by environmentalists for an injunction that would have drastically altered water fl ow from two Central Oregon reservoirs and cost 4,600 farm families their livelihoods. Common sense has prevailed, at least for now. The Center for Biological Diversity is suing the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates the Crane Prairie and Wickiup reservoirs. The reservoirs are an important water source for the 3,650 farmers and ranchers of the Central Oregon Irrigation District and nearly 1,000 more belonging to the North Unit Irrigation District. It appears that The plaintiffs At a glance the frogs have fared sought an injunction, well since the dams arguing management were built 70 years of the reservoirs must Binomial name: Rana pretiosa ago. Defendants be drastically altered to Appearance: Medium-size frog ranging from 1.75 to 4 inches long. Body color varies with age. Adults appear brown to reddish brown with black say the frogs have protect the threatened spots with ragged edges. adapted to water Oregon spotted frogs Courtesy of U.S. Fish Range: British Columbia, Washington, and Wildlife Service conditions that now from further population Oregon and California Habitat: Found in or near exist and a sudden declines. perennial bodies of water that disruption of the cycle U.S. District Judge include zones of shallow water and vegetation. they’ve adapted to Ann Aiken said the would devastate the environmental groups Status: Threatened Reasons for decline: populations around failed to show that Habitat loss, competition from non-native species, the reservoirs. such a preliminary predation Environmentalists injunction was justifi ed Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alan Kenaga/Capital Press risk harming the to protect the frogs. The lawsuit alleges the spotted frogs they “It was a very reservoirs have altered natural want to protect by demanding diffi cult burden for you and I don’t water fl ows in the Deschutes River major operational changes at believe you’ve met it,” she said to the point of interfering with the the reservoirs, according to the at the end of an oral argument frog’s life cycle. federal government. hearing in Eugene March 22. Oregon spotted frog O UR V IEW Labor Department program no friend of ag And holding water back and reducing stream fl ows in the summer, as the environmentalists demand, could harm salmon and other endangered species in the river. That makes us wonder whether the point of the lawsuit is to help the frogs and other endangered species or to get rid of the dams and the farmers. It seems to us the farmers and ranchers are in greater danger than the frogs. If their water is cut off, they will not fare as well. Having failed to convince Aiken that the frogs face an imminent threat, we are hopeful plaintiffs will also fail on the merits as the case continues. Proposed Calif. ballot measure funds water storage projects By BRUCE COLBERT For the Capital Press W hen it comes time to compile a list of Friends of Agriculture, you can leave the U.S. Department of Labor out. We realize government agencies aren’t supposed to promote industries. They are supposed to carry out their jobs in an even-handed manner. But some, including the Department of Labor, have for decades gone out of their way to damage America’s farmers and ranchers. It’s not that farmers expect special treatment from the Department of Labor. They just want the DOL to be fair. If a farmer, rancher or processor is violating the law, they should expect to be called on it. But the DOL, especially under the current administration, has consistently gone out of its way to unfairly target agriculture. The agency is famous for its slow-motion handling of H-2A visa applications so farmers can obtain enough pickers and pruners for their fruit and other crops. DOL says it lacks the people power to get the job done. Ironically, that threatens to leave farmers without the people power to harvest their crops to help feed the world. DOL is also famous for its over-the- top “hot goods” orders in which fresh market crops such as blueberries have been held hostage until farmers admit A Rik Dalvit/For the Capital Press guilt for underpaying workers and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in fi nes — even though the allegations weren’t true. Farmers are also worried about another DOL anti-farming program — training for farmworkers. This isn’t to help them advance to higher-paying jobs on the farm. Rather, it’s aimed at getting them off the farm altogether by training them for other jobs, specifi cally driving trucks. The DOL’s National Farmworker Jobs Program is 50 years old and was developed as a part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. The DOL website touts the fact that farmworkers are able to go to trucking driving school to get their commercial driver license. Apparently unbeknownst to the DOL, truck driving school is readily available to anyone, and it’s inexpensive. The federal government has no business spending $75 million a year to subsidize truck driving schools — or any other schools, for that matter — especially when it damages agriculture. The department would be better off taking that money and fully funding the programs that farmers need, such as staffi ng for handling H-2A visas. Concerns on Owyhee Canyonlands proposal By KEITH BALTZOR For the Capital Press O regon Natural Des- ert Association, Keen Footwear and other supporters are proposing a National Conservation Area consisting of 2,579,032 acres within Malheur County, Ore. Some 2,012,350 acres will be designated as wilderness, and 50 miles as wild and sce- nic river. The area constitutes 47 per- cent of all federal land in Mal- heur County and is 1,279,032 acres larger than all privately owned land in the county. The area proposed is, in a word, massive. ONDA’s stance ONDA plows forward with its selfi sh agenda with no regard for the thousands of people, lo- cal economies or ecosystems that will be impacted. ONDA has failed to acknowledge col- laborative efforts between agen- cies and local stakeholders. BLM and ranchers have ef- fectively managed this area for over 70 years. ONDA has nev- er hidden its agenda of wishing to see large tracts of roadless, fenceless lands closed to all motorized vehicles. I contacted Corie Harlan, ONDA’s Owyhee coordinator, in an effort to secure a road inventory of the area. Harlan informed me that no such map exists. She stated one was being worked on, but did not know when it would be fi nished. She also foresees that roads would be “closed to the pub- lic” but retain “administrative access.” When pressed further, she was unable, or unwilling, to name specifi c roads. I can only presume those de- cisions will be made by BLM in a new Resource Management Plan and Wilderness Manage- ment Plan. By then, it will be too late to have much say on access. By closing even a few roads, public access, other than by foot or possibly horseback, will be denied to hundreds of thousands of acres. These areas are used to graze cattle, hunt, fi sh, sightsee, camp and ride ATVs. ONDA’s webpage (wildowyhee.org) states, “The proposal will ensure areas people care about such as Leslie Gulch, Birch Creek, Three Forks, Owyhee Overlook and Anderson Crossing remain accessible to the public.” Five destinations in an area of over 2.5 million acres, is not, in my opinion, even close to accept- able access. It is nothing more than a bone thrown to the public. I am offended an organization like ONDA and its partners pre- sume to know what areas people care about. Their unwillingness to address motor vehicle access leaves most stakeholders some- where between concerned and outright terrifi ed. Historical uses ONDA touts historical uses such as grazing will be protect- ed. I think not. Road closures will greatly diminish ranchers’ ability to visit places they need to tend cattle, monitor grazing or check water. Ranches’ economic viability will cease to exist. Ranchers will be forced to reduce cattle num- bers or sell out altogether. Peo- ple who are now able to make a living — in many instances, a modest living — will be in fi nancial ruin. The people they employ and support businesses will all suffer. A chain reaction economic downturn will plague the county, all by denied access. Economic impact According to Oregon State University’s Economic Infor- mation Offi ce, Malheur County ranks fi rst in beef production value in Oregon. Negatively affecting that segment of the county’s economy will be di- sastrous for the county tax base, all of its businesses, schools and protective services. The communities, the coun- ty or the state can ill afford the losses in revenue that will occur due to ONDA’s overreaching proposal. Road closures will harm non-agricultural activities and the businesses they patronize. Deer, elk, antelope, big horn sheep, upland bird and varmint hunters, along with anglers, will be denied access, leaving them, in some instances, 40 or more miles from the places they and their families have hunted and fi shed for generations. Again, the consequence of access denied. Campers denied. Sightseers denied. Very young, old and disabled individuals will be denied the opportunity to enjoy special places. No eco- nomic growth will occur. ONDA’s claims of economic growth because of the designa- tion are simply false. A compre- hensive study, “Boom or Bust: Wilderness Designation and Local Economies,” designed to analyze the impact of wilderness designations on local economies in nearly every case found that “wilderness designation is as- sociated with lower per capita income, lower total payroll and lower total tax receipts.” Costly decision The bad news doesn’t stop here. I recently asked Michael Campbell of the Oregon-Wash- ington BLM for an estimated cost of producing new manage- ment plans. He said it would be diffi cult to put an exact cost on it now, but it would easily be “several million dollars.” These monies come di- rectly from BLM’s operating budget, taking funds from sage grouse habitat enhancement, water development, weed control, fuel reduction and im- proving range health. Any designation without col- laboration of local stakeholders and BLM on access or econom- ic, ecological and social ramifi - cations is not only wrong, it bor- ders on immoral. Using Harlan’s own words, “All we want to do is keep the Owyhee as it is.” I agree the Owyhee, as cur- rently managed, is a spectacular place. Let’s keep it that way by opposing ONDA’s proposal for designation. We can assist our neighbors in Malheur Coun- ty by contacting the Oregon congressional delegation, Gov. Kate Brown and President Obama to voice our opposition. Please also sign the online pe- tition by going to “Oppose the Misguided Owyhee Canyon- lands Proposal.” Keith Baltzor has ranched in Harney County, Ore., for 30 years. He hunts, fi shes and rec- reates in the Owyhee Canyon- land in Malheur County, where he was raised. proposed California ballot measure funds water storage proj- ects to address the state’s immediate water supply needs. The proposed Reallo- cation of Bond Authority to Water Storage Initia- tive also prioritizes water uses in California by put- ting people and growing food first in the California Constitution. For 25 years, politicians, bureaucrats, special inter- ests and the courts have made other uses of water more important than domes- tic and irrigation uses. In addition, government agen- cy and court interpretations of beneficial use, public use and the public trust have thwarted the development of new surface water and groundwater storage proj- ects. This ballot measure es- tablishes in the California Constitution — above the reach of politicians, bureau- crats, special interests or judges — that the priorities of water use are: domestic use first, and irrigation use second. Only the people can change these priorities. California is suffering from infrastructure invest- ment priorities that benefit only special interests. Prop- osition 1 (2014) appropri- ates $2.7 billion in bonds to the California Water Com- mission to fund water stor- age projects, half of which goes toward environmental purposes. The Commission spends the bond funding in accor- dance with the environmen- tal priorities provided by the Department of Fish and Wildlife and by the State Water Resources Control Board. For example, much of the capacity of the pro- posed Temperance Flat Res- ervoir would be reserved to provide water to restore salmon runs, and would yield little in terms of water supply. California’s proposed high-speed rail system now costs more than twice the original $33 billion esti- mate given in Proposition 1A (2008), and is no longer a true high-speed rail proj- ect. The project has been modified to use a “blended” design, which would use slower, existing commuter tracks in some urban areas. Fifty-three percent of Californians would vote for a ballot measure end- ing high-speed rail and us- ing the unspent money on water-storage projects, ac- cording to a January 2016 Hoover Institution Golden State Poll. This ballot measure reprioritizes California’s infrastructure investments to benefit people rather than special interests. The measure reallocates $10.7 Guest comment Bruce Colbert billion in unused bond au- thority — $8.0 billion from existing Proposition 1A high-speed rail bonds and $2.7 billion from Proposi- tion 1 water storage bonds — to fund surface water and groundwater storage facili- ties. No new tax burdens on taxpayers or additional debt obligations on the state are created by this measure. This measure establish- es a new State Water and Groundwater Storage Fa- cilities Authority to choose the projects to be funded by the reallocated bonds in accordance with the prior- ities of the measure, put- ting project selection and operating decisions in the hands of elected regional water experts represent- ing the entire state, instead of in the hands of political appointees with agendas contrary to what the people want. This measure funds the 50 percent state por- tion of water storage proj- ects, including: Sites Res- ervoir, Temperance Flat Reservoir, expansion of San Luis Reservoir and of Shasta Lake, and construc- tion and modernization of groundwater storage facil- ities. By adding 5 million acre-feet of storage capac- ity, all water users benefit — families, farms and the environment. Even though El Niño is bringing more precipita- tion, the water cannot be captured and is being re- leased from reservoirs be- cause of government reg- ulations for fish, causing the water to flow into the ocean. Presently, 65 to 75 per- cent of the water flowing through the Sacramen- to-San Joaquin River Del- ta runs into the ocean, and only 27 percent is diverted to water users to the south. More water storage capacity is needed. Information, includ- ing signature petitions and the text of the initiative, is available from California Water Alliance, the sponsor of the initiative, online at: www.cawater4all.com or by calling (866) 875-2533. This is an opportunity for We the People to set the priorities for water use and for infrastructure projects in California so that people come first, thereby restoring certainty and reliability to our water supply. Bruce Colbert, AICP, is executive director of the Property Owners Associ- ation of Riverside County, Calif. The association is a nonprofit, public policy research, lobbying and educational organization formed in 1983.