Applegater Summer 2015
21
MY OPINION FROM BEHIND THE GREEN DOOR
Public lands under siege
by cHRIS bRATT
“This land is your land, this
land is my land” is the first line of the
chorus in this famous Woody Guthrie
folk song. I’ve always taken it for granted
whenever I sing this song that it’s referring
to the hundreds of millions of priceless
acres of land federally managed in our
country (mostly in the west—see map).
The majority of these lands were acquired
through federal land purchases from
France, Mexico and Russia between 1786
and 1867. Seizures of Native American
territory were also made by the federal
government. Those lands are now public
lands that belong to and benefit every
American citizen.
While federal agencies like the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM), US Forest
Service (USFS) and National Park Service
(NPS) are authorized to manage most of
these public lands for us, as trustees, they
are mandated to protect and improve the
environment for succeeding generations. In
addition, more than 300 million citizens
throughout our country have the right
to express an opinion and comment on
the use, management, protection and
future of these vast invaluable lands and
the natural resources they contain. Also,
regarding these public lands, “each person
has a responsibility to contribute to the
preservation and enhancement of the
environment” per 42 USC 4331 (c) of
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) signed into law on January 1,
1970, by Richard Nixon.
But it has become a crucial
time for continuing public control over
public land as outlined above. There is
a growing number of defiant, aggressive
individuals and groups in our country
who don’t even recognize the legitimacy of
the federal government or environmental
laws. Neither do they acknowledge the
authority of the public land management
agencies. Many of these folks refuse to
Federal and Native American Lands
LEGEND
States
All Federal and Native American Lands
Where have all the
salmon gone?
by REx gAROUTTE
In late September 1998, you could
stop at the Applegate Store, walk to the
south side of the bridge, and see large
numbers of spent salmon in the eddy
below. Since then, the numbers of salmon
have dwindled to near nothing. What
happened?
The first thing we have to understand
is that, unlike the Rogue River, the
Applegate River is not stocked. The salmon
that use the Applegate are native or “lost”
hatchery fish.
We’ve been told that the decline
in salmon has been caused by habitat
destruction. This belief seems to fall apart
if you consider that this past winter the
steelhead run was one of the best seen in
years with a large percentage being natives.
Salmon and steelhead need the same
environment, so why would one be doing
well and the other declining?
The key is how and when the
migration starts. When steelhead start their
spawning cycle, they enter rivers randomly
and bunch up once upriver. Salmon tend
to school up at the river’s mouth. It is at
this point that salmon are vulnerable to
pinnipeds (seals and sea lions).
When pinnipeds are surrounded
by plenty, they focus their energy on
maximum nutrition with the least effort.
That makes the salmon’s liver the prime
target. This behavior means that they’re
not killing a few fish, but dozens a day.
If you’ve fished for salmon in the ocean,
you’ve probably had a fish stolen from you
by a pinniped. They seem to target the
middle of the belly to get the liver.
This behavior made the news several
years ago when pinnipeds found the Dalles
Dam fish ladder. When relocating the
offending pinnipeds didn’t work, they had
to be destroyed.
The reason this has become such a
problem is the 1972 Marine Mammal
Protection Act. Although the driving
force of this law was to protect whales, all
pinnipeds were added to the list.
A study begun in the 1990s found
that pinnipeds were having an impact
on salmon runs. The study estimated
that there were approximately 85,000
pinnipeds on the West Coast in 1998.
Current estimates have the population
doubling every 10 years, which would
mean that we now have around 300,000
hungry pinnipeds off our coast.
If you want to see this for yourself,
take a drive to the mouth of the Smith
River at the end of September to see the
hundreds of pinnipeds lying on the banks
of the river.
So with this problem getting worse
every year, what can we do to mitigate
it? There are three ways to control this
problem: (1) increase the number of
abide by the laws of the land and insist
that their rights to use public land for
private purposes trumps federal control.
Their intent is to eliminate the present
public land ownership safeguards and
weaken environmental laws. Among these
people are freeloaders, lawbreakers and
emboldened extremists carrying guns and
itching for a fight. They are definitely not
looking for compromise or concession on
any of their beliefs.
During the next few years, we
are going to see more and more anti-
government, anti-environment attacks
on public lands in the west (like the
recent BLM mining dispute in Josephine
County). On a larger scale, there are state
representatives and members of Congress
who are offering legislative proposals
that will give states or local governments
ownership authority to manage these
public lands. Recently, Alaska’s Republican
Senator Lisa Murkowski introduced
a budget amendment to sell off our
public lands and 51 senators (mostly
Republican) voted in favor. The goal of
these malcontents is to eventually privatize
the natural resources available on these
spectacular prairies, rivers, mountains,
forests and national parks and collect all
revenues for local or regional purposes
only. The result is “The Ruin of the West,”
which happens to be an excellent story on
the subject in the February 2015 issue of
Harper’s Magazine. Check it out.
A good example of what has
already transpired regarding the
transfer of public lands to state control
took place in Utah in 2012, when the
state’s legislature overwhelmingly passed
Utah’s Transfer of Public Lands Act. The
wording of this
state law demands
Chris Bratt
the federal
government turn over more than 30
million acres of public land to the state.
The transfer of these public lands was
slated to happen at the beginning of this
year, but no further state action has been
taken to enforce the law. These kinds of
laws are gaining momentum in eight other
western states, but it remains to be seen if
any of these state laws will be valid when
they reach the courts.
Hopefully, the movement to transfer
our public lands to the states will be resolved
by the courts before any congressional
action is taken on the issue. In a Nevada
case last year, a US District Court ruled
that “the public lands in Nevada are
property of the United States because the
United States has held title to those lands
since 1848 when Mexico ceded the land
to the United States.”
What does the future hold
for our public lands? I don’t have a
definite answer to that question. But I
do know that if we dispose of these lands
that we all own by transferring control to
unknown exploiters, we will lose all the
environmental protections and citizen
participation in decision making presently
in place—forever.
I say, don’t throw away these rights for
reactionary ideas that foster discord, greed
and hate. Abide by the present laws, rely on
the facts and best science, and make sure
everyone hears you sing, “This land is your
land, this land is my land.”
If you sing another tune, let me know.
Chris Bratt
541-846-6988
salmon to what the habitat can support, (2)
limit the human harvesting that is already
taking place, and (3) control pinniped
numbers. This would require changing
the Marine Mammal Protection Act to
allow harvesting of pinnipeds. If this can’t
be accomplished, then perhaps a breeding
program to increase orcas and great white
sharks could be implemented to reduce
pinniped numbers. Makes you want to
go surfing.
On a local level, request the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife to start
a salmon-stocking program to bring the
numbers up. And if you have a pond with
bass or sunfish, take steps to make sure
that during a flood, those fish cannot get
into the Applegate River. These fish are not
indigenous to Oregon and, if introduced
into the river, could have a negative impact
on the salmon fry. The river is already at
risk from the introduction of bass and
sunfish to Applegate Lake.
Rex Garoutte
rosellas@apbb.net
For more information, visit http://www.
psmfc.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/
expand_pinniped_report_2010.pdf and
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/SeaLion/
fact_sheet.asp.