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