Image provided by: Baker County Library District; Baker City, OR
About The Record-courier. (Haines, Baker County, Oregon) 1932-2016 | View Entire Issue (March 19, 2015)
5*1 *“****‘“*»ECRLOT 0074A**C007 BAKER COUNTY LIBRARY 2400 RESORT ST BAKER CITY OR 97814-2721 ■ It W)§/07/2Î)Ï5 MAR 1 9 2015 jjM r# * un www.therconline.com Est. Haines 1901 ~ Haines, Baker County, Oregon Thursday March 19, 2015 , . ..... ........ r Volume 114, Number 12 *10 Pages • 75 cents Local Governments Should Take Every Opportunity to Influence Federal Agency Decisions Story by and photo of Andy Rieber Photos and story by Gina Perkins Don't shoot me. Not only was it my first time ever at the Halfway Crab Feed, but I also learned that I'm not fond of crab...or rather, that crab isn't fond of me. Apparently, my Norwegian ancestors must have dined on something else. This also meant, however, there was even more crab for the hundreds and hundreds of aficionados who descended upon the Halfway Lions Hall last Saturday to attend the 49th An nual Crab Feed. Over a ton of crab was ordered according to Dick Crow, who said 2,600 pounds arrived the night before and was prepared that day by local volunteers. The bucketfuls of crab were accompanied by Wyona Edwards' famous homemade potato salad and baked beans, garlic bread, and there were rumors of great beer being served... It was easy to spot the veteran crab eaters as they stepped up to their spot at the table, rolled up their sleeves (as was the case with Dr. Bob McKim) and unpacked their crab meat removal tools of choice, special towels or secret sauce. There were a few like me who had absolutely no idea what to do. Seasoned eaters explained the task at hand and giggled when I managed to squirt myself while cracking the crab. When I visited with Mr. Crow and confessed that it was my maiden voyage, he passed no judgement, smiled, and answered my queries regarding the purpose of the funds raised from the event which has spanned nearly a half century.. "It costs about $1,000 a month to maintain and operate the Lions Hall, and we want to keep it available for the Halfway community," said Crow. The dedication gf the scores of volunteers including Crow? Ralph Smead (who wilt soon be celebrating his 90th birthday), Wyona Edwards (who has been part of the event for 38 years, generously sharing her super-duper top secret recipe for potato salad and beans) and countless others who are selfless community servants, are what Baker County is all about. These are great people who generously share their time, talent, and resources with their community. So what if I don't eat crab? There are plenty of reasons to go and support this event along with so many others hosted by amazing volunteers throughout the county allyear long. Mildred Bunch and Pattie Vanderwiele of Baker City enjoyed the Crab Feed. Oregon Association of Water Utilities names the City of Sumpter With the Best Surface Water of the Year for 2015 The Oregon Association of Water Utilities’ 37th Annual Technical and Management Conference, held each March at the Sunriver Resort, proved to be successful for all attendees. At the annual awards banquet the City of Sumpter was named as the Best Surface Water in Oregon for the 2015 year. The City of Sumpter has excellent water which was proven this year by an unbiased panel of four judges who blind taste tested drinking water from around Oregon, judging it on clarity, bouquet, and taste. The City of Sumpter has been a member of the Oregon Association of Water Utilities (OAWU) since December of 1987. OAWU is a non-profit organization with over 700 members and serves Oregon’s water and wastewater utilities in hands-on training and technical services. The association serves as a legislative liaison and is active in supporting -------- - legislation that improves the utilities that serve Oregon’s residents. For more informa tion about OAWU, visit their website at www.oawu.net or contact the office at 503-837- 0 94922 23720 0------- 1212. So... what have you been up to lately? Get down those ropes and shake out a loop— it’s branding time! Our unseasonably warm weather at least has the one small benefit that you likely won’t have to cancel your branding due to a blizzard. Always look for that silver lining... Speaking of silver linings, I’ve noted that recent major planning efforts by both the Forest Service (the Blue Mountain Forest Plan) and the BLM (Oregon Sage Grouse RMP Amendment), de spite their potentially major impact to grazing per mittees, have had one small positive influence—they have prompted an unprece dented degree of engagement by local Oregon governments to use all the tools at their disposal to help steer these decision-making processes in a positive direction. Our counties, as well as other government bodies like soil and water conserva tion districts, are getting serious about flexing their muscles and getting involved. Many of you are probably aware that federal law gives local governments (like counties, con servation districts, RFPAs, etc.) special opportu nities to have a say in public lands management decisions. These opportunities—which are not available to private, groups like environmental non-profits—go by the names of “cooperating agency status” and “coordination.” It has come to my attention recently that there has been a good deaFof debate around rural Oregon com munities over which of these tools is better, and whether or not both should be used. I’m going to take this opportunity to weigh in on this issue, and I feel I’m well qualified to do so. In 2012, the Public Lands Council in Washing-' ton D.C. hired me to do an extensive research project on cooperating agency status and coor dination, the result of which was two papers: “A Beginners Guide to Cooperating Agency Status” and “A Beginner’s Guide to Coordination.” The point of this exercise was twofold. First, PLC wanted to get to the bottom of vyhat these tools were and how they worked, and to cut through the noise and propaganda floating around out there about them. Second, we wanted to produce two definitive “go to” papers that would help to educate permittees and their local governments about the basics of these tools, and serve as a Starting place for local governments to start en gaging with agencies both as cooperating agen cies and through coordination. This project achieved those aims, and the resulting papers were read and approved by two leading public lands attorneys, Elizabeth Howard and Karen Budd-Falen. If you are unsure of what cooperat ing agency status and coordination are, I recom mend you get copies of these papers, which can be obtained from OCA executive director Jerome Rosa. The question that has been roiling rural Oregon is whether counties should abandon cooperating agency status, and exclusively use coordination as a means of leveraging their position as local governments. In response, my answer to this question is no, they should not—to fully exercise the full range of influence at their disposal, local governments should both coordinate and be co operating agencies. Here is a very.foreshortened explanation as to why. First, cooperating agency status and coordina tion are authorized under different federal statutes, and give local governments influence over different (though often overlapping) federal decision-making. Being a cooperating agency makes a local government a consulting expert on a NEPA study, allowing the local government to provide data, design studies, write alternatives, and weigh in on which alternative should be se lected as the “preferred alternative” and imple mented as the chosen course of action. In effect, it gives a local government entre into the “black box” of NEPA, both as a participant and observer. Though the local government has no veto power over the final decision, the “lead” agency (i.e. the BLM or Forest Service) is expected to follow co rve geen &XPING A HOUSE... operating agency recommendations to the extent that doing so doesn’t violate their responsibilities as a lead agency under NEPA. By contrast, coordination is an opportunity that is established under the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA) and the National For est Management Act (NFMA). These two statutes set forth the framework for land use plan ning on BLM (FLPMA) and Forest Service (NFMA) lands. The coordination language in these statutes requires the agencies to work to achieve consistency between agency land use plans and local land use plans and policies. The consistency language in FLPMA is notably strong, and requires the BLM to achieve consis tency with local land use plans and policies pro vided that doing so does not violate federal law or policy. Coordination is a powerful tool because it re quires the agency to continually work with a local government to seek consistency in its decisions and actions with the local government’s land use plan. Coordination should also be an ongoing process, and therefore holds the agency ac countable for working towards consistency not just at one particular time, but on a continual basis. Further, the powerful consistency lan guage in FLPMA puts a high level of responsibil ity on the BLM to acniev^onsistency wiirrlocal plans and policies. By contrast, cooperating agency status is tied to individual NEPA efforts—your cooperating agency status ends with the conclusion of the study. Further, there is no concrete requirement that lead agencies must follow the recommenda tions of cooperating agencies, although the NEPA regulations and other policy documents make clear that cooperating agency status goes beyond mere consultation, and involves mean ingful participation in the process and execution of a NEPA decision. What cooperating agency status does provide is a means for a local gov ernment to be on the inside of NEPA, a role that coordination does not necessarily guarantee. In summary, here’s my two cents on this issue. First, counties should be proactively engaging with the BLM and Forest Service both as coop erating agencies and through coordination. These tools provide different, though interlocking and complementary points of pressure that local governments can exert on federal agencies. If we’re not doing both, we’re leaving money on the table. Second, I think it has been made clear that in many instances, federal agencies do not wel come these forms of local government participa tion. The BLM and Forest Service have both been known to ignore the input put forward by local governments—both under cooperating agency status and under coordination. For my money, the most effective way forward is to use both of these tools, and to insist on their being taken seriously—by working within the agency hierarchy, by leveraging the influence of our congressional representatives, and if necessary, through the federal court system. In short, we need to use all the tools at our disposal, and put our efforts into keeping them as sharp as possible. That’s all for this month. If you have questions about cooperating agency status and coordina tion, again, please contact Jerome Rosa at OCA. Now get out there and put an iron on those calves! This article originally appeared in the Oregon Beef Producer magazine. Reprinted with permis sion from the author and OCA. About the author: Andy Rieber is a journal ist and public lands consultant living in Adel, Oregon. Her writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Wired, American Cowboy, Western Livestock Journal, Work ing Ranch, and Jefferson Monthly. Read more of Andy's articles at andyrieber.com. Wow! That's really something! H ù KSE'5 GOTTO PO, VAIATA HORSES GOT A 4005 23rd Street • PO Box 226 Baker City, OR 97814 (541) 523-3616
