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.