FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2015
4 — THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS
Opinion / Local
Proposed Owyhee monument
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
Malheur County Court
(Commission) Judge Dan
Joyce said, “Generally,
when a president goes out
of office, they sign som -
thing normally detrimental
to all counties, without the
input of the local elected
people, or any citizens.
And, that’s the normal
process.”
He said, “During the
fire season here, in the
last month or so, we had a
group of people from Ari-
zona staying here—well,
we thought they were from
Arizona, they were Ari-
zona firefighters—but, the
were actually from Utah,
and, the county that had
the monument that they’ve
had to deal with for the
past few years. And, their
advice was, ‘If you can
keep it from happening
(the Owyhee Canyon-
lands national monument
designation), keep it from
happening, because, we’re
from Utah, and we had
to go to Arizona to get
jobs, so we could come to
Oregon to fight fire.
Joyce was referring
to the Grand Staircase-
Escalante National
Monument, an area of 1.8
million acres, established
in 1996 by President Bill
Clinton, and located in
southern Utah, in Kane
County. Clinton signed the
designation while seated
on the Arizona side of the
Grand Canyon.
“It’s just not a local,
user-friendly option for
us. It’s about a legacy
for a president, is what
it’s about. He’ll go down
in history, if it’s written
against the people of this
county, or eastern Oregon,
and, nobody will like him.
They may not like him
anyway, but, this will just
add fuel to the fire,” Joyce
said, speaking about the
potential designation.
Joyce said, last October,
the Malheur County Court
sent an opposition letter re-
garding the national monu-
ment designation, to Rep-
resentative Greg Walden,
who’s been playing a key
role in supporting Mal-
heur County’s plight. On
Wednesday morning, the
Court passed unanimously
a resolution in opposition
of the designation of the
Owyhee Canyonlands as a
national monument.
In July, Republican
Representative Cresent
Hardy of Nevada offered
the following Amendment
to House Resolution (HR)
2822, the Department of
the Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies Ap-
propriations Act, 2016:
“At the end of the bill,
before the short title, insert
the following: Sec.____.
None of the funds made
available by this Act
may be used to make a
Presidential declaration by
public proclamation of a
national monument under
chapter 3203 of title 54,
United States Code in the
counties of Mohave and
Coconino in the State of
Arizona, in the counties of
Modoc and Siskiyou in the
State of California, in the
counties of Chaffee, Mof-
fat, and Park in the State of
Colorado, in the counties
of Lincoln, Clark, and Nye
in the State of Nevada, in
the county of Otero in the
State of New Mexico, in
the counties of Jackson,
Josephine, and Malheur
in the State of Oregon, or
in the counties of Wayne,
Garfield, and Kane in the
State of Utah.”
Joyce said that the
Oregon Natural Desert As-
sociation (ONDA), based
in Bend, is promoting the
designation, and referenced
the Owyhee Canyonlands
Campaign’s website, wil-
dowyhee.org, which states
that, “Statewide and local
support for protecting this
special place is growing.”
Joyce said, “This is not
true, from local County
government. There’s prob-
ably about 70% opposition
within the County.”
Supporting the designa-
tion are groups including
the Owyhee Canyonlands
Campaign, ONDA, and
Malheur County-based
Friends of the Owyhee.
Joyce voiced his frustra-
tion with misinformation,
saying that representation
from ONDA was present
during a Malheur County
Court session, and visibly
taking notes, however, it
was discovered later that,
“They (the notes) weren’t
even close, and didn’t
align with what was said at
the meeting,” he said.
SEE OWYHEE PAGE 7
— Letters to the Editor —
Preserving the Forest
To the Editor:
One of the many excuses to restrict
use of our public lands by the Wallowa-
Whitman and Malheur National Forests
is that we need to “preserve” our forest
for the next generation, the only problem
is, the forest service isn’t doing that. The
Forest Service, with assistance from their
partners in the local environmental com-
munity, allow our forest to degenerate
into fuel dense stands waiting to take our
homes and property with it.
To preserve has many definitions – “ o
save from decomposition,” “To keep safe
from injury,” or “To reserve for personal
or special use.”
The only preserving I see is the third,
to reserve for personal or special use,
to which those special uses seem to be
geared only to those that mean to use pub-
lic lands for their personal enjoyment of
“recreational use” which comes from the
local environmental groups. That preser-
vation comes at the expense of our friends
and families homes and future generations
needs of the natural resources that are now
gone forever.
I’m not sure who, or if anyone reads
these letters, but in the west we are well
schooled in preserving our summer fruits
and vegetables. Would anyone that takes
part in canning to preserve those resourc-
es, go through that work and then open up
the cupboard doors and bust every jar with
a hammer, and then close the doors and let
the mess set?
But yet this is the mentality we are
watching unfold in our mountains.
It’s time it ends and I hope that this
summer brings the people of Eastern
Oregon and the west together to call for
sane, active, vegetative management to
both the Forest Service and elected county
officials who are responsible for protec -
ing the safety, health, and welfare of our
local rural communities.
John George
Bates
— Contact Us —
The Baker County Press
PO Box 567
Baker City, Ore. 97814
Open Monday-Thursday for calls
9 AM - 4 PM
Open 24/7 for emails
Office location: TBA
Phone: 541.519.0572
TheBakerCountyPress.com
Kerry McQuisten, Publisher
Editor@TheBakerCountyPress.com
Wendee Morrissey, Advertising and Sales
Wendee@TheBakerCountyPress.com
David Conn, Advertising and Sales
David@TheBakerCountyPress.com
Published weekly every Friday.
Subscription rates per year are $29.95 all areas,
e-mail delivery. $39.95 print issue, home delivery,
Baker City city limits only. $49.95 print issue,
mail delivery, outside Baker City city limits only.
Payment in advance.
A division of
Black Lyon Publishing, LLC
Copyright © 2014
YOUR ELECTED
OFFICIALS
President Barack Obama
202.456.1414
202.456.2461 fax
Whitehouse.gov/contact
US Sen. Jeff Merkley
503.326.3386
503.326.2900 fax
Merkley.Senate.gov
US Sen. Ron Wyden
541.962.7691
Wyden.Senate.gov
US Rep. Greg Walden
541.624.2400
541.624.2402 fax
Walden.House.gov
Oregon Gov. Kate
Brown
503.378.3111
Governor.Oregon.gov
State Rep. Cliff Bentz
503.986.1460
State Sen. Ted Ferrioli
541.490.6528
Baker County
Commissioners Bill Harvey;
Mark Bennett; Tim Kerns
541.523.8200
541.523.8201
— Guest Opinion —
Public lands:
mismanaged
at the
Federal level
By Sen. Doug Whitsett
The scope of the mismanagement of our
more than 300 million acres of U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Man-
agement (BLM) federal lands was once
again made evident by the smoke-filled
August skies.
Our timber and rangeland resources
have been incinerated by multiple, enor-
mous wildfires raging out of control in
most of the western states.
According to the National Interagency
Fire Center, over eight million acres had
burned as of the beginning of September.
Annual greenhouse gas emissions from
wildfires dwarfs our nation s emissions
from the combustion of fossil fuels. Their
massive destruction and wholesale pol-
lution has become an annual and ever-
enlarging consequence of failed federal
resource management.
Those repetitious wildfires are serving
to focus the attention of a rapidly growing
group of western legislators on the need to
change the scope of federal land manage-
ment. Many state legislators now believe
the transfer of federal lands into state
ownership is the method of choice for ac-
complishing that goal. I strongly agree!
The U.S. Government controlled more
than 90 percent of the land in 10 mid-
western and southern states for decades.
Missouri Democrat Senator Thomas Hart
Benton struggled for more than 30 years
to successfully rectify that untenable
situation. Largely due to his efforts, the
U.S. government has already transferred
all but about five percent of federal land
ownership, in the states east of the Rocky
Mountains, to the private sector and to
state governments.
However, our federal government con-
tinues to own more than 50 percent of all
the land in the 12 most western states. Ac-
cording to a recent 60 Minutes documen-
tary, that land contains more than $150
trillion in mineral resources and more
recoverable oil and gas than the rest of the
world combined. It also encompasses the
preponderance of our nation’s public for-
est, grazing and recreation resources.
Naysayers tell us the population in states
east of the Rockies want “their” public
lands preserved for the future at all costs.
We might suggest that they sell some of
their own private and state owned lands to
the federal government to be “saved” for
their posterity.
Other pessimists say the states do not
have the scope of management skills to
oversee such vast areas. They worry the
cost of resource supervision would be too
great for the states to bear.
It is true that the western states currently
manage much less public trust lands than
their federal counterparts. Most states
received ownership of between five and
10 percent of their land mass when they
obtained statehood. That public trust land
is generally fragmented, separated by long
distances and difficult to oversee
And it is also true that many of us are
not unwavering supporters of current
methods used to manage our state trust
lands. But the fact of the matter is that
states are currently doing an exponentially
better job of managing their public trust
resources than their federal counterparts.
According to the Congressional General
Accounting Office (GAO), the federal
government generates only 73 cents in
revenue for every dollar spent on resource
management. Incredibly, it loses 27 cents
of every dollar spent on managing the
most valuable public estate on the planet.
Western state governments can and al-
ready are doing better. According to a re-
cent Property and Environment Research
Center (PERC) report, on on average, the
western states generate more than $14 in
Letter to the Editor Policy: The Baker
County Press reserves the right not to pub-
lish letters containing factual falsehoods or
incoherent narrative. Letters promoting or
detracting from specific for-profit business-
es will not be published. Word limit is 375
words per letter. Letters are limited to one
every other week per author. Letters should
be submitted to Editor@TheBakerCounty-
Press.com.
Advertising and Opinion Page Dis-
claimer: Opinions submitted as Guest
revenue
for every
dollar spent
on resource
manage-
ment.
De-
spite the
fragmented
nature of
state trust
Submitted Photo
resources,
Sen. Doug Whitsett
western
represents Oregon’s
states
senate district 28.
generate
more than
50 times
more net revenue than the federal govern-
ment for every dollar spent on public land
management.
Federal lands are required by law to be
managed for multiple use. The 1960 Mul-
tiple-Use Sustainable Yield Act mandates
how the USFS manages its resources,
including timber harvest, livestock graz-
ing, mineral extraction and recreation. The
Federal Land and Policy Management Act
of 1976 similarly regulates BLM manage-
ment.
It turns out that managers of that federal
land lose money on all four of the man-
dated multiple uses! But at the same time,
state resource managers make significant
profits from all four sectors
The PERC Report found that the USFS
loses nearly $150 on each one thousand
board feet of timber it sells in Montana
and Idaho while the BLM loses nearly
$200. On average, state trust lands make
a profit of about $ 15 per thousand board
feet of timber marketed in those states.
The difference is stark! Management of
federal timber harvest sales costs between
$260 and $315 more per thousand board
feet of harvested timber.
According to the PERC Report and
GAO data, the USFS loses 90 cents of ev-
ery dollar spent on grazing management.
It generates only about six cents per acre
on its forest rangeland.
The BLM does only slightly better, los-
ing 86 cents per dollar spent on grazing
management. That agency generates about
eight cents per acre of rangeland man-
aged.
In contrast, average state trust lands
generate nearly $5 in revenue for each
dollar spent on state grazing management.
The state agencies earn more than $1.60
per acre managed. The state’s return per
acre, on grazing trust lands, is more than
20 times better than that of the federal
government.
Federal performance in managing rec-
reation is even more abysmal. The USFS
and BLM lose about 75 cents on every
dollar spent on recreation management.
State trust lands are nearly 30 times more
cost efficient, earning nearly $7 on each
management dollar spent on recreation.
The federal performance on the manage-
ment of mineral extraction is a little better.
Those federal agencies earn nearly $20
for each dollar spent on resource manage-
ment.
However, on average, state trust lands
earn nearly $140 in revenue for each
dollar spent on mineral extraction. Once
again, the states are outperforming the
federal government by a margin of about
seven to one.
According to the PERC report, depend-
ing upon their location, trust lands that
are managed by western states generally
earn from four to 10 times more per acre,
for local communities, than lands held
in the federal estate. And state-managed
trust lands return more than 10 times more
revenue, per full-time employee, than the
federal estate.
At least 10 western states have passed
resolutions, enacted laws, or have appro-
priated money for studies in order to move
forward with the transfer of federal lands
to state ownership and management.
It is long past time for Oregon political
leaders to get serious in their efforts to ad-
dress our state’s immense natural resource
issues.
Please remember—if we do not stand up
for rural Oregon, no one will.
Opinions or Letters to the Editor express
the opinions of their authors, and have not
been authored by and are not necessarily
the opinions of The Baker County Press, any
of our staff, management, independent
contractors or affiliates. Advertisements
placed by political groups, candidates,
businesses, etc., are printed as a paid
service, which does not constitute an
endorsement of or fulfillment obligation
by this newspaper for the products or
services advertised.