Image provided by: The Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs; Warm Springs, OR
About Spilyay tymoo. (Warm Springs, Or.) 1976-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 24, 1978)
P A G E 8 F E B R U A R Y 24, 1978 Conclusion o f a Two-Part News Analysis I f Included in Wild & Scenic Rivers System . . . ».»s-i».»«« Who Will Benefit From The Deschutes River Bill? Private landowners feel the floaters will. The Tribes feel the fish will. And the proposed legislation which would include the lower Deschutes in the Na tional Wild and Scenic Rivers System, states that everybody will. As with the management of the river under the proposed bill, the benefits of federal pro tection are not consistently per ceived. In fact the way individu als and groups view the bill appears to be largely dependent on the management role they expect to have. If one were to rely on the language of the legislation alone, the intended benefits would be broad-based. Rivers under the Wild & Scenic Rivers act are to be “protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.” Administration of the rivers should not interfere with “ public use and enjoy ment.” Implied, of course, is the health of the river and its natural inhabitants, perhaps the most direct and obvious bene factors of protection. But who is the public? Will it be “ generations” of floaters, fishermen, farm ers or home- owners who will benefit from the federal classifications of scenic and recreational? A cursory look at the bill and its accompanying regula tions reveals a number of de velopment restrictions on pri vate landowners. When stru c tures are allowed in scenic areas they must be “unobtrusive” or “screened from the river.” But restrictions on the recreational use of the river are not offered. As was discovered in the first part of this series (see Spilyay Tymoo, Vol. 3 No. 3, P. 8) the teeth of the legislation will lie in the managem ent plans be developed by the federal, state and Tribal administrators. Benefits may not be obvious until those plans are implement ed. Therein lies another concern of those close to the river. Will planning for the lower Des chutes reflect my or my group’s development ideals? It appears, then, that there are two levels of benefits to consider. There is the advantage of being assured of a role in planning for the lower riv e r’s future. And there is the long term im pact on the river, its users and the people living near it. The two spheres are not easily separated and are in fact quite interdependent. At the agency level Neighboring counties on the lower Deschutes - Jefferson, Wasco and Sherman - feel that the benefits of the proposed bill lie anywhere but with them. County judges are fearing the removal of control from the local level. They feel that desig nation of the Deschutes as an Oregon scenic river is enough - they have more confidence in their ability to work with the state. Jefferson County Judge Herschel Read sees the legisla tion as “ more bureaucracy,” and opposes “anyone in Wash ington, D.C. coming in and setting up rules and regula tions.” “ We need local control in here and if we’re not doing a good enough job then the federal government can step in,” Read said. He already sees planning for the Deschutes as coopera tive. “ Don’t we always call on Cy Katchia and other tribal officials?” Judge Holmes in Sherman County is afraid that once the bill is law, counties “ would be out” and their comprehensive plans would not be considered. As long as Judge Elder of Wasco County does not have the information he seeks about the bill and its im pact, he feels hard-pressed to present its ad vantages and disadvantages to his constituents. Many people in Wasco County are opposing the bill until they receive more information, he said. The judges seem to agree that the lower Deschutes should be preserved while its recrea tional value is also utilized, but “doesn’t the state plan accomp lish this?” asked Judge Elder. Generally the counties per ceived the Tribes as an obvious benefactor. “ People feel the Tribes are getting benefits that others are not getting,” said Elder, “ and apparently so.” Their p arts of the river have been set aside for their own planning, he feels, and the river is not bejng “uniformly handled.” Holmes also understands “ Indian lands” to be exempt, and Read feels the Tribes would have input into planning but doesn’t see how the counties would. "People feel the Tribes are getting benefits that others are not getting, ably generous in its estimation of the benefits of federal pro tection. Funds would be avail able for more aggressive recrea tional management, according to BLM D istrict Recreation Planner Brian Cunningham. He sees restrictions on recreational use and on private development as ultimately beneficial to both interests. At the user, owner level Heavy recreational use has been the most recognized prob lem of the Lower Deschutes River. Cunningham in the Prine ville BLM office, points to the environmental damage done by vehicles going off the road and people camping where they please. On the river itself, Cunning ham sees weekends and holidays when there are so many people floating (“bumper -to-bumper” ) that they can’t enjoy a natural experience. Once the legislation is passed, the BLM can work with the state on analyzing patterns of use and with addi tional funds authorized by the act the agency can begin to distribute this use. Improved sanitation facilities, barricades and gravel roads are possible but Cunningham does not find further development desirable. A permit system for floaters might also prove to bring order to recreation on the river, said Cunningham. and apparently so" In reality much of the reser vation portion of the river would be m anaged as a scenic river under the law with the section from the re-regulating dam to the mill administered as recrea tional. The Tribal Council is very aware of the restrictions but has put a g reat deal of faith in the cooperative management be tween the Tribes, the state and federal agencies as outlined in the bill. For the Tribes the re sources of the river would be the biggest beneficiary if the bill should pass, but they also recog nize the right of all citizens to enjoy the river. Bob Potter, Oregon Scenic Waterways administrator in the parks and recreation depart ment, feels that inclusion in the federal system would “ assure continuity in management.” He also looks forward to the state being directly involved in plan ning on federal lands, which it can’t do under the state system. The Bureau of Land Man agement, which owns approxi mately half of the land along the lower Deschutes, is understand Some landowners are happy to see protection offered, how ever, and have no plans to develop their land any further. Tribal Council Chairman Gene Greene gave assurance that private property owners would have a part in planning. The Council would have final say in the Tribes’ input into the management plans, “ but we have to work with the land- owners because we can’t stop progress.” As far as reservation de velopment goes, Greene admit ted there would be restrictions on commercialization and in dustrialization. He said there may have to be tighter controls on elimination from the Mill (although waterways admini strator Potter said the state standards of environmental quality would remain the same.) But it is all for the good of the river and its environment, Greene noted. A question of involvement If satisfaction with the pro posed legislation is dependent on the details of the management plan, then the real benefits of federal classification may not be apparent until the bill is imple mented. In turn the impact of the m anagement plan on the river and its environment'will require longterm observation. But satisfaction seems also to depend on the degree of input an individual or group has into the planning. Much of the groundwork to date has been done at the agency level. Those rights will be infringed on same agencies, including the tribal government, have been by the recreational users' assured in the bill of a role in planning. right to enjoy scenery The role of local government and interest groups is less cer And what of the farm ers, tain. Bob Potter with State livestockmen and homeowners Parks and Recreation, promises who currently inhabit and utilize the involvement of the public. the lands within a half-mile of “Planning will be a very public the river, the area proposed for process,” he predicted, adding inclusion in the national system? that the “format of the planning Many feel that their rights will process” would depend on pass be infringed on by the recrea age of the legislation. tional users’ right to enjoy scen Potter has personally met ery and the federal govern with the affected counties and ment’s ability to regulate. with such private groups as steelheaders and livestock asso In Jefferson County private ciations to explain the proposed landowners fear that more bills. But many questions are campgrounds will be built a t still unanswered. tracting more people with less As Judge Elder of Wasco control, according to Judge County pleaded, “We need more Read. In Wasco County the live information . . . a better under stock association is “quite vocif standing.” erous” , says Judge Elder. They Satisfaction seems also and the farmers figure the bill would allow greater public ac to depend on the degree cess and endanger rangelands of input a group has and crops. Judge Holmes in Sherman into the planning county acknowledged the need The Tribes General Mana for recreation,” but we don’t ger Ken Smith echoed this con want to lose sight of other cern, listing many questions for needs,” such as the watering which he sought answers. rights of private landowners and The cry for more informa lessees of BLM land. Holmes tion and the cry for active input expects his county to strengthen seem ,to be one and the same. its comprehensive plan with Since the meat of the legislation these needs and the impending lies in the yet-to-be-drafted man legislation in mind. agement plans, today’s ques On the reservation one-third tions may become tomorrow’s of the land along the Deschutes input. Thus the current concerns is allotted. While any “ prior of individuals at the local and non-conforming” use would be agency level can form the basis permitted and a “wide range” of future planning. Compromises will be inevit (scenic) or “full range” (recrea tional) of agricultural activities able. But the cooperative plan would be allowed, landowners ning that is being sought for the are concerned about their future lower Deschutes through federal development rights. What struc protection will have become a tures would be allowed on my reality. And the benefits to the property? Can I build a restau rant or other business near the public will be that much more obvious. river? How will the fish and wild life of the Deschutes benefit by federal protection? Bill Pitney, Chief of the Environmental Management Section of the Ore gon Department of Fish and Wildlife, blamed decreases in spring chinook and steelhead populations on the Columbia River dams, not so much on the fishery. But “any take is signifi cant” when a population is de clining, he said. Pitney fears the opening of the Deschutes by improved roads and sees some advantage in federal protection, although it would be indirect. But he added, “I see the hand writing on the wall irrespective of federal classification,” mean ing that controls will have to be provided" whether the bill passes or not. Closing the sport or Indian subsistence fishery is not an answer, he said. Resident trout are more stable, noted Pitney, and the fishery would affect them less. Oscar Lange of Madras feels the fish resource is better now than it was eight years ago due to the bag lim it of two per day. Be sides, 90 per cent of the floaters are not fishing, so he questions the impact on fish of heavier use. Noting the impact on wild life and its habitat by too many people in a confined area, Pitney also sees the need for regulating the movement of people, especi ally the careless ones who camp The Tribes recognize the anywhere. same dangers of trespassing on the reservation, including fire Many feel that their hazard. Oscar Lange, who owns a guide service in Madras, agrees that better sanitation is needed, pointing to the “ human filth” that contaminate the shorelines, that contam inates the shore lines. But Lange opposes a per mit system, saying that it would just attract more people seeking a wilderness experience. Lange rather than letting the “federal government regulate itself pro blems.” He simply doesn’t float the river on heavy weekends. Judge Read shares Lange’s skepticism about federal protec tion. Look at the Rogue River, he said, which is in the wild and scenic system. “They opened it up and now they can’t handle the number of people.” Tribal N atural Resources Director Gene Greene feels en forcement of trespassing, fish ing and other regulations might be easier if the legislation is passed and a permit system set up. “Violations are hard to pin point,” he said, but if rafts are numbered when registered they can be more easily identified and apprehended.
