Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Baker County press. (Baker City, Ore.) 2014-current | View Entire Issue (April 17, 2015)
FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS — 5 Local Grant County Court greets USFS supervisor and a gallery of disgruntled residents • AS IN BAKER COUNTY, FOREST ROADS ACCESS IS HOT TOPIC IN NEIGHBORING GRANT COUNTY BY BRIAN ADDISON Brian@TheBakerCountyPress.com CANYON CITY—Steve Beverlin, USFS supervisor for the Malheur National Forest attended a portion of the Grant County Com- missioners meeting April 8 and provided updates on two USFS landscape restoration projects: the Elk 16 and Big Mosquito projects. The Elk 16 project targets restoration of fuels, timber, and streams with thinning, slash treatments, and prescribed fire to reduce insect outbreak and fire hazard. The project site is within the Prairie Ranger District approximately 15 miles southeast of Prairie City, including a portion of the North Fork of the Malheur River watershed. The project includes a timber harvest of an esti- mated 30 million board- feet with a breakdown of 65 to 70-percent being saw logs and the remainder as biomass production. Elk 16 restoration project is expected to begin by Sept. 30, 2015 with most the timber harvest in 2016, ac- cording to Beverlin. The Elk 16 project calls for 16 miles of road decommission and three miles of road closure. Beverlin added that there already existed 15.8 miles of road classified as Maintenance Level 1 roads receiving no road mainte- nance and are closed for public usage. A “decommissioned road” is a road that is no longer on the USFS data- base, receives no main- tenance, and contains no existing roadbed, accord- ing to Beverlin. A closed road is clas- sified as a Maintenance Level 1 road, not open for public use, but may still be used by miners or ranch- ers, Beverlin explained. The Big Mosquito res- toration project proposes silviculture and fuels treat- ments, riparian restoration, range water developments, recreation site develop- ment, and associated road activities. Big Mosquito Creek lies about 25 miles north of John Day. The Big Mosquito proj- ect proposes 2.9 miles of road closure and 3.4 miles of road decommission, ac- cording to Beverlin. “To our knowledge there are no RS 2477 roads in the area,” Beverlin said referring to roads classi- fied under Revised Statute 2477, the federal law assigning certain roads within a county under county jurisdiction. Scott Myers, Grant County Judge, also stated that there were no RS 2477 roads set for closure within the two projects yet was uncertain about whether Grant County has a thor- ough RS 2477 road inven- tory. He said county road maps showed no conflict when applied as an overlay on the proposed Elk 16 and Big Mosquito road closure maps. Beverlin mentioned that he attempted several times to contact Grant County Sheriff Glen Palmer during the development of the two USFS projects and that his calls had gone unanswered by Palmer. Grant County Commis- sioners had a full house during their April 8 meet- ing and not all in atten- dance were pleased with the direction that county representatives have taken during forest management planning and projects implemented by the United States Forest Service (USFS). In summer 2014, Grant County commissioners authorized formation of the Grant County Access Board, a seven-member committee to concentrate on forest and road access issues as the USFS works on several major forest land planning projects within the Malheur and Wallowa-Whitman Na- tional Forests. During the past year, five of those seven appoin- tees have resigned from the Grant County Access Board and recently formed a public group, Citizens for Public Access, with the Brian Addison / The Baker County Press Steve Beverlin, Malheur National Forest supervisor presents progress on the USFS Elk 16 and Big Mos- quito landscape restoration projects in front of a largely disgruntled crowd, during the April 8 Grant County Commissioners meeting. mission of advocating for an open forest access pol- icy during the USFS Blue Mountain Forest Manage- ment Plan Revision and to protest road closures dur- ing the pending drawing and implementation of the USFS Travel Management Plan. “The Grant County Access Board disbanded because we couldn’t get the county court to listen to us on access issues,” explained Jim Sproul, for- mer chairman of the Grant County Access Board. “We’ve just started the group and already have 30- plus members. We’ve met twice,” said Sproul. Many of the members of the new group attended the April 8 meeting and voiced their concerns on access issues in the local forest. Sproul presented two of the Grant County Commis- sioners, county judge Scott Myers and Chris Labhart, a list of questions during the April 8 session asking about the county’s role in the USFS Blue Mountain Forest Management Plan Revision. “Is Grant County cooper- ating or coordinating with the USFS,” Sproul asked. While Myers didn’t claim Grant County has entered into the coordina- tion process with the USFS for the Blue Mountain Forest Management Plan Revision, he mentioned that he anticipates that the counties within the Blue Mountain forest region would sign the coopera- tive agreement spelled-out within a Memo of Under- standing presented by the USFS. There is no lack of input to the county court on forest issues from con- stituents of Grant County. Besides the newly formed Citizens for Public Access, there is the Grant County Public Forest Commis- sion, formed through voter initiative in 2002 and composed of nine elected members, and two col- laborative organizations influencing Grant County Commissioners, the Blue Mountain Forest Partners and the Harney County Restoration Coalition. “These two collaborative groups bring stakeholders from the community, in- dustry, county government and the conservation com- munity together in what has been demonstrated as arguably the most effective method of dealing with and working with our federal land management part- ners to date,” wrote Grant County Commissioner Boyd Britton in letter to his two fellow commis- sioners. Within that letter, Britton proposed to use $20,000 from the Grant County road fund to pay the col- laborative groups to write a new alternative to be added to the USFS Blue Moun- tain Forest Plan Revision. “The current Blue Moun- tain Forest Plan Revision Alternative as proposed is fraught with difficulties that will in all likelihood lead to litigation from numerous and varied orga- nizations and individuals,” Britton began. “It would be my sugges- tion that the Grant County Court be proactive by en- gaging the Blue Mountain Forest Partners and Harney County Restoration Coali- tion to produce a workable alternative to the plan with the primary goal of writing a Malheur National Forest alternative,” Britton wrote. Britton’s proposal piqued the interest of Citizens for Public Access, some of whom demanded account- ability for the $20,000 proposal. “What fund did the $20,000 for the county’s plan for the forest plan re- vision come from, and who got the money,” Sproul asked Commissioner My- ers. “There is no $20,000 agreement to rewrite the Forest Plan alternative on our behalf,” Myers an- swered. “Misinformation,” Myers called the assertion that the county had drawn a deal with the collabora- tive groups. Sproul then asked that commissioners uphold Grant County Ordinance 2013-01, An Ordinance Pertaining to Public Road Closures Within Grant County, Oregon. “We are doing exactly what the ordinance calls for,” answered Myers. “We are addressing that as we speak. The commissioners have standing and we’ll object if it is called for.” The Grant County Ordinance 2013-01 states in part, “for the safety and well-being of Grant County citizens all roads, trails, stock driveways, and by-ways over and across public lands within the boundary of Grant County, Oregon shall remain open as historically and custom- arily utilized consistent with the Grant County plans and policies, unless otherwise authorized for closure by the Grant County Court and the Grant County Sheriff.” “The sheriff will enforce the ordinance,” said Sproul referring to Sheriff Glenn Palmer’s stance on protecting local roads from closure by federal land management agency projects. McCormick is new Police Chief in South Dakota CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 Officer Mike Lary said, “I’ve been here a year, and it’s been outstanding work- ing with you, and I think I speak for everybody in the department, and the asso- ciation, about your wealth of knowledge. You’re a great leader, fun to work with, and I appreciate everything. This is a token of our appreciation.” Lary presented McCor- mick with a framed display case with badges, patches, pins, a photo of McCor- mick, and a plaque that reads, “Lt. Kirk W. McCor- mick, August 1994-April 2015, ‘Shepherd Of Our Community,’ Baker City Police Department, Baker City, Oregon, Oregon DPSST 11057.” He also presented McCormick with a Remington 870 pump shotgun, engraved with “Ducks Unlimited.” Jerry Boyd gave Mc- Cormick a fur hat and gloves that he jokingly said Dispatch ordered him to present, for the cold weather in Scotland. Officer Shannon Reagan presented McCormick with a tackle box containing his investigations kit. Several other individuals spoke about their experi- ences with McCormick, and McCormick said, “Thank you. As far as retirement, I’ve been doing this for 20 years, so, why quit doing something I en- joy? That’s kind of where I’m at.” McCormick’s last day with the Baker City Police Department is Friday, April 17, and he travels the next day to Scotland, a town with a population of about 850, with his wife, Bonnie, and his daughter, Julie—a trip that will take three days. Todd Arriola / The Baker County Press Sgt. Mike Regan with Lt. McCormick Todd Arriola / The Baker County Press Police Chief Wyn Lohner with Lt. McCormick
