CapitalPress.com 6 Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. October 28, 2016 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 Puget plan discussions must include farmers T he Army Corps of Engineers and environmental groups have a $451.6 million plan to improve fi sh habitat around Puget Sound. While we won’t pass judgment on the plan’s goals, we don’t like the language used to describe some of the plan’s consequences. The corps and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife propose to inundate 2,100 acres in Whatcom, Skagit and Jefferson counties, including by removing dikes protecting farms. The fl ooded land would include about 800 acres of Whatcom County farmland and about 250 acres of Skagit County farmland. In a study supporting the project, the corps called the loss of prime farmland in won’t use eminent Whatcom County domain to acquire land. “insignifi cant.” “We haven’t had The project is detailed conversations,” environmentally Theresa Mitchell, justifi ed and WDFW’s project “socially manager, said. “We’ll acceptable,” it said. work with willing That’s not how landowners, and if Scott Bedlington landowners aren’t sees it. Bedlington, willing to sell, the who grows seed project will need potatoes, estimates the plan would Don Jenkins/Capital Press to be redesigned or Excavators breach a dike earlier this year in Skagit County, Wash., abandoned.” inundate 700 to to expose 131 acres of former farmland to Puget Sound salt water That’s good news, 800 acres he owns for fi sh habitat. A much larger effort is contemplated in a plan to and we’ll take WDFW or rents. Some of fl ood thousands of acres of farmland bordering Puget Sound. at its word for now. his best ground is Beyond the loss behind a dike. Capital Press. “That’s what we of farmland, Washington ag Far from insignifi cant, it’s his live off.” organizations are upset that family’s livelihood. Bedlington’s farm isn’t for none of the plan’s advocates “I have to farm,” the third- sale. To their credit, WDFW have had any discussions with generation producer told the offi cials told us that the state O UR V IEW Idaho sets example for rest of nation — again I daho voters next month will decide on a straightforward amendment to the state constitution. The amendment guarantees the right of the legislature to review rules and regulations written by the executive branch to make sure they adhere to the spirit and letter of the law. The full text is: “The legislature may review any administrative rule to ensure it is consistent with the legislative intent of the statute that the rule was written to interpret, prescribe, implement or enforce. After that review, the legislature may approve or reject, in whole or in part, any rule as provided by law. Legislative approval or rejection of a rule is not subject to gubernatorial veto under section 10, article IV, of the constitution of the state of Idaho.” This is not some wild-eyed infringement on the executive branch’s “rights,” as some argue. Rather, it is an assurance that Idaho’s laws are carried out through regulations that accurately refl ect a law’s intent and substance. It is a concept that has long been at work in the Gem State. The amendment would simply include that common sense practice in the constitution and prevent those who oppose it from challenging it in court. The legislature forwarded HJR 5 to the voters by a near-unanimous vote. Some lawyers, including the Idaho Attorney General Lawrence G. Wasden, insist that they ought to be the sole arbiters of whether regulations follow the law. That argument ignores the fact that the legislature is not merely an interested party. It wrote the law; as such, it ought to have the unfettered ability to make sure its intentions are fully and accurately carried out. We think HJR 5 deserves the support of Idaho voters. As importantly, we would like see every other state — and Congress — pursue this fundamental and rightful function. Too often Congress will pass legislation that includes concepts. The details are left to the executive branch, which consists of unelected bureaucrats who pick up the concept and fl esh it out in regulations. The problems arise when they get carried away. Regulations implementing the Food Safety Modernization Act and the Waters of the United States are examples of runaway bureaucrats. Instead of allowing the administration to jam those over-the-top rules down the throats of citizens, Congress should be able to review them to determine if they follow the intent and substance of the laws. If Congress were to routinely review new regulations and assure itself — and citizens — that they refl ect what was intended, we’d all be better off. In other states, legislatures would also do well to have such reviews. It is a common sense practice that would allow legislators to make sure their intent was not overridden by bureaucrats. In Idaho, the legislature has reviewed regulations under statutory authority. By adding it to the constitution, Idahoans will be assured that their elected representatives will never be denied the right to review regulations. It is an example of common sense. Idaho has long been know as the Gem State. HJR 5 is an example of why it should consider adopting another nickname: The Common Sense State. farmers about the possibility of flooding their land. Mitchell says that’s because Congress has not yet approved funding for the plan. That’s not the point. Ag groups say project proponents are out of touch with farmers, and don’t understand that farmland can’t be replaced. We agree. Whether funded or not, courtesy dictates that those impacted be included in the discussions from the beginning. The corps’ language demonstrates a disregard for the people whose lives would be turned upside down if the plan were to be pushed through. Sacrifi cing a farmer’s livelihood is neither acceptable, nor insignifi cant. More government overreach ahead By TOM MALLAMS For the Capital Press O nce again, our federal government is “pro- posing” yet another attempt to lock up more “pub- lic” land — this time, by ex- panding the Cascade-Siski- you National Monument in Southern Oregon and North- ern California. As a citizen and as a Klamath County commis- sioner, I have consistently opposed locking up more and more public land and not having the ability to use nat- ural resources in a responsi- ble way. These efforts seem to have no end in sight. Yes, at this point this is still “only a proposal.” But just look at the recent at- tempts such as the 2.1 mil- lion-acre Owyhee Canyon Lands, and the 500,000-acre Crater Lake wilderness area. If this recent attempt moves ahead, it will have devastating effects on the lo- cal communities. Also keep in mind that over 50,000 of these acres are O&C tim- ber lands. The loss of tim- ber harvests will also have a major effect on all 18 of the O&C counties. With no timber sales, there will also be little if any meaningful timber management that will decrease the amount of ma- jor wildfires. The supporters claim there is “strong backing from elected officials, citizens and chambers of commerce.” That actually equates to the Guest comment Tom Mallams cities of Ashland and Talent along with their chambers of commerce. Not exactly a mandate. In reality, very few in opposition even knew about the recent public meeting in Ashland. Local Bureau of Land Management offices in Klamath Falls and Redding hadn’t even been notified. If the expansion is approved the talk is that the Klamath office would likely be closed — a loss of 60 jobs. The sup- porters’ sea of blue T-shirts and professional campaign signs that were present show they had plenty of advance knowledge. Well-rehearsed, scripted comments by the supporters often mentioned moving forward on the Owyhee effort as well. The unfolding scenario certainly has the smell of “the fi x is in.” I have requested an addi- tional public comment meet- ing/hearing be held in Klam- ath Falls. These lands belong to the public. The government is supposed to manage them, not lock them up. These proposals need to die, and the quicker the bet- ter. Tom Mallams is a Klam- ath County commissioner and a rancher. He lives near Beatty, Ore. Letters policy Write to us: Capital Press welcomes letters to the editor on issues of interest to farmers, ranchers and the agribusiness community. Letters policy: Please limit letters to 300 words and include your home address and a daytime telephone number with your submis- sion. Longer pieces, 500-750 words, may be considered as guest commentary pieces for use on the opinion pages. Guest commen- tary submissions should also include a photograph of the author. Send letters via email to opinions@capitalpress.com. Emailed letters are preferred and require less time to process, which could result in quicker publication. Letters also may be sent to P.O. Box 2048, Salem, OR 97308; or by fax to 503-370-4383. Wikimedia Commons Thompson deserves vote for state House I am an organic gardener of 50 years who is supporting Jim Thomp- son for state representative in District 23. Jim is a champion for both home gardeners and small farmers. He is deeply concerned with the loss of pollinators and will work with other legislators already working on a pol- linator plan for Oregon. In the interim gardeners, fruit and nut orchards and other crops can benefi t by growing native fl owers in strips beside their plants. And remember that monarchs and bats are pollinators. When the last pollinator dies, so do we. We are running out of water. Homeowners can help by planting Xeric, ornamental grasses which, once established, need neither water- ing nor fertilizing and are attractive year-round. Farmers will eventually be forced to underground their irri- gation because of diminishing aqui- fers. As someone who was recently exposed to herbicides on a windy day — I would like to see buffer zones es- tablished for residents. I know that is a prickly issue, but it needs to be ad- dressed. If returned to the legislature, Jim with his six years of experience on the Agricultural and Resources Committee can perhaps bring com- promise to this issue. Jean Astrinsky Buena Vista, Ore. Readers’ views How agriculture can tell its story I enjoyed your article of Sept. 30 describing farmers’ concerns about losing control of their fate and clout to the rapidly urbanizing area sur- rounding Boise. This happened to California farm- ers as the Los Angeles and San Fran- cisco areas started dominating state politics in the 1970s and 1980s. A similar unfortunate fate fell on our farm neighbors in Oregon who saw their infl uence overwhelmed by Port- land. In Washington, the Seattle urban area dominates the state’s politics. In these states it is frequently to the detriment of our agricultural indus- try’s future. As farmers, we take pride in producing abundant high quality food and fi ber but unfortunately have tunnel vision when it comes to getting involved in issues important to all four states’ agricultural enterprises. Where we drop the ball is that we don’t invest the same time and effort in educating our urban neighbors who are now two, three or four generations removed from direct involvement in production agriculture. That being said, we need to be pro-active within our various com- modity organizations and ag organi- zations such as our local Farm Bu- reaus to continually present a unifi ed, accurate, and positive picture of the benefi ts of modern agriculture to our urban neighbors. To be successful in these efforts all commodity groups and farm or- ganizations should form a statewide umbrella organization with dedicat- ed leaders that would leave biases, egos and self interests at home and pool their resources to get our mes- sage economically and effectively to our urban neighbors. Such an effort would demonstrate to urban voters we want to partner with them as we share the same values and concerns about our environment, our children’s future, and the sustainability of our industry. Agriculture has a great story to tell so we need to tell it from our prospec- tive instead of our critics telling the story. Ed McLaughlin Durham, Calif.