Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Aug. 13, 2021)
6 CapitalPress.com Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. Friday, August 13, 2021 All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Opinion Editor & Publisher Managing Editor Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com | CapitalPress.com/opinion Our View Riding from the parking lot isn’t ‘work’ W e eagerly await the resolution of an unusual claim made in a case to wrap up back pay claims in the bankruptcy of a Yakima, Wash., dairy. Mensonides Dairy filed for Chap- ter 11 bankruptcy in 2018, reorga- nized and kept operating. The dairy, however, has resisted a claim that its workers are creditors. Attorneys representing 27 dairy employees say that their clients are owed more than $500,000 in unpaid wages. Employees say that they were required to perform unpaid work before the start of the work day, such as servicing equipment. They also claim that they were forced to work through breaks. Typical stuff for this kind of claim. But one example of unpaid “work” seems a bit dubious, and caught the eye of the presiding judge. According to attorneys represent- ing the workers, employees were required to park their cars at the edge of the dairy property. They would then be driven to the main building a quarter of a mile away where they would clock in. When their shift was done, the employees would clock out and be driven back to the park- ing area. The trip reportedly took three minutes, and attorney Charlotte Mikat-Stevens says the employees should have been paid for that time. Really. Really? Judge Whitman Holt seemed skep- tical of the claim. He posed to coun- sel the hypothetical situation of hourly support employees of a big Seattle law firm, headquartered in the high reaches of a downtown sky- scraper. The ride up to the office in the morning could take 15 or 20 min- utes as the elevator stops for employ- ees of other companies on lower California senators must continue collaborative wildfire advocacy, reject BLM nominee Our View W Sierra Dawn McClain/Capital Press Oregon farmer Jim McKay with his nursery crops. McKay says he’s grateful that a temporary water transfer under a state pilot project allowed him to farm land that would otherwise be dry. Oregon leaders need to address water challenges T he Oregon Legislature has hit on a win- ner with the Irrigation District Tempo- rary Transfers Pilot Project. While the name sounds a bit off-putting, the project is effective. It allows some irrigation dis- tricts to internally make temporary transfers between water users. The project has been in operation 18 years. During that time it has been extended and expanded to 15 of the state’s 40 or so irrigation districts. The beauty of the project is its simplicity. A farmer or rancher within an irrigation district with an unused water allocation can transfer it tempo- rarily to someone who needs it. This not only addresses some of the water shortages that have arisen over the years, but it helps farmers and ranchers hold onto water allo- cations that otherwise might be lost, courtesy of the state’s “use it or lose it” law. While not perfect — nothing is — the proj- ect brings out the best in cooperative spirit among farmers in addition to getting water to where it’s needed. It is time for the legislature to expand the pro- gram to all Oregon irrigation districts and make it permanent. While they’re tackling water issues, legisla- tors should take a close look at the Oregon Water Resources Department, which appears to be chronically underfunded and understaffed. The department has a national reputation for its sluggish performance. Daugherty Water for Food Global Institute at the University of Nebraska has found the state has an unnecessarily complex and bureaucratic water transfer system. Year after year, the department also reports that it is behind in its work, in part because of red tape and in part because the Legislature does not pro- vide enough money from the general fund. Some believe water users should provide most of the department’s funding, but since the state floors, he said. “Is the law firm liable to pay that person?” Holt asked. “A court could find that time is compensable,” Mikat-Stevens said. It could, but it shouldn’t. And we can only imagine the offense Mikat-Stevens’ law firm would mount if its clerical help filed a claim for an hour or two of overtime each week for the in-building commute. Legitimate claims need to be paid, to the extent allowed under bank- ruptcy laws. But employers shouldn’t be put on the hook for the time it takes an employee to walk, or ride, from the parking lot into the work- place and back again at the end of the day. owns the water, all citizens should pony up ade- quate funding to manage it. After all, everyone eats the food grown with that water. More also needs to be done. Water issues in Oregon will not go away. The state needs a flexible game plan for man- aging the water that grows our food and pow- ers our economy. Leaders need to take a close look at everything from recharging aquifers in the winter to lake taps to increasing water stor- age behind dams. Instead of constantly talking about taking out dams, we should be looking at ways to increase their number and capacity. That’s because scientists say the mountain snow- packs that serve as water storage will continue to shrink. We should also come up with a statewide plan to transfer water from locations with plenty of water to those facing drought and other shortages. California, for example, has a massive intrastate water transfer system. Climate change means Oregonians will have to be smarter in how they manage water. In Idaho, a years-long effort is underway to replenish the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer. In the past five years, 2.3 million acre-feet of water has been added to the aquifer, a remarkable achievement. Idaho legislators know they have their work cut out for them, and continue to invest in aquifer recharge, adding to dam capacity and other efforts that will keep that state’s economy healthy and growing. They have a collective vision for mak- ing that happen. Oregon’s leaders would do well to take a close look at how innovation and investment can address the many water challenges facing them in the near and distant future. Expanding the Irrigation District Temporary Transfers Pilot Project statewide and making it permanent is just a start. ildfires and land manage- ment should not be a partisan issue, and nowhere is it more evi- dent than in California. In order to prevent the cat- astrophic dangers that fires pose to homes, busi- nesses, public lands, and the environment, we need active management and collaborative solutions. As California enters possibly its worst fire sea- son on record, we must have trustworthy leader- ship managing our pub- lic lands as our forests and the future of our com- munities depend on it. President Biden’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) nominee, Tracy Stone-Manning, does not embody that type of trust- worthy leadership. The Bureau of Land Management oversees 245 million acres of public lands across the West. Of these 245 million acres, the U.S. Forest Service’s fireshed mapping has identified 71% of BLM lands that have the poten- tial for wildfires to ignite and spread to communi- ties. In California alone, over 149 million trees have died due to insects, disease, and wildfires; and over half a million acres have already burned just this year. Ms. Stone-Manning is directly tied to an inci- dent of tree spiking in the Clearwater National For- est. Tree spiking is an act of eco-terrorism in which perpetrators place 8- to 10-inch metal spikes in trees with the intent to injure or even kill tim- ber workers. Her actions and the role she played during the tree spiking incident is unbefitting of a leader set to oversee our nation’s public lands and more than 10,000 federal employees. Tracy Stone-Manning lied under oath — not once, but twice. In 2013, she was nominated to head the Montana Depart- ment of Environmen- tal Quality, and she with- held the truth about her involvement in the 1989 tree spiking. Earlier this year, during her confir- mation hearing to serve as director of the Bureau of Land Management, she lied yet again to U.S. sen- ators on the Energy and Natural Resources Com- mittee. It is clear she believes herself to be above the law. Californians know that GUEST VIEW Rep. Doug LaMalfa any leader must work cooperatively with state and federal agencies and local communities on issues facing our public lands. President Biden’s nominee does not dis- play cooperation; in fact, Special Agent Michael Merkle, the Forest Ser- vice’s lead investigator of the tree spiking inci- dent, wrote, “Throughout this initial investigation in 1989, Ms. Stone-Man- ning was extremely dif- ficult to work with; in fact, she was the nas- tiest of the suspects” and was “vulgar, antag- onistic, and extremely anti-government.” Just a matter of a few months ago, Ms. Stone-Manning tweeted an article written by her husband in which he sug- gested letting houses built in forests burn: “Perhaps the solution to houses in the interface is to let them burn.” She called her hus- band’s article a “clarion call.” What kind of message does this send to commu- nities in California who have experienced utter devastation — and even the loss of loved ones — in the face of catastrophic wildfires? Tracy Stone-Manning has shown herself to be uniquely unqualified to lead a federal agency and has demonstrated a total disregard for rural Ameri- cans. Californians and the West need a leader who will protect their homes, recreation areas, and workplaces, and someone who will effectively col- laborate with state, local, and federal officials. Tracy Stone-Manning will not. I urge Senators Fein- stein and Padilla to stand up for California’s for- ests and public lands and oppose Tracy Stone-Man- ning’s nomination to lead the Bureau of Land Management. Congressman Doug LaMalfa is a lifelong farmer representing Cal- ifornia’s First Congres- sional District, includ- ing Butte, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou and Tehama counties.