A4
Opinion
Blue Mountain Eagle
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Justice not
served in
Hammond case
y any measure, the ¿ve-
year sentence given to
Eastern Oregon rancher
'wight Hammond and his son
Steven was excessive.
That’s probably the one point
on which all sides of the case
can agree.
Beyond that, opinions vary
on what level of punishment
would have been fair in a case
that illustrates the shortcomings
of a skewed legal system
and a federal agency whose
employees — at least one
of them — use government
resources to reveal their biases
and criticize the Hammonds.
The case grew out of an
ongoing dispute between the
Hammonds and the U.S. Bureau
of Land Management.
Let’s back up a few years, to
2001, to be exact. That’s when
the 139-acre blaze called the
Hardie-Hammond Fire was
set on the Steens Mountain
Cooperative Management and
Protection Area, according to
court documents.
In 2006, the Krumbo Butte
Fire was set, burning 1 acre of
public land, according to court
documents.
In each case, the Hammonds
had leased the land to graze their
cattle. Fire is an oft-used tool to
clear land of weeds, Muniper and
other invasive plants, but the
Hammonds had no permission
to set ¿res on public land.
In 2012, the Hammonds were
taken to court. After a two-week
trial, 'wight Hammond was
convicted of setting the ¿rst ¿re
and sentenced to three months
in prison. His son Steven was
convicted of setting the second
¿re and sentenced to one year in
prison. Both also received three
years of supervised release.
The Pendleton, Ore., Mury
acquitted the father and son of
setting two other ¿res and the
government dismissed those
charges.
At the sentencing, U.S.
'istrict Judge Michael Hogan
opted for the lighter sentences,
but the prosecutor appealed to
the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, which agreed with him
that a mandatory sentence can’t
be ignored.
Two weeks ago, U.S. 'istrict
Judge Ann Aiken resentenced
the Hammonds to ¿ve years in
prison.
Though legally correct, the
sentence is patently unfair.
B
The Hammonds were charged
with violating a federal law
that carried with it a minimum
sentence of ¿ve years in prison.
The law is aimed at crimes
in which terrorists or others
destroy federal property through
bomb blasts or arson.
Though exercising
extraordinarily poor Mudgment
in starting ¿eld burns on federal
land without permission, the
Hammonds are not terrorists.
Other federal laws that
carry ¿ve-year minimum
sentences address treason, child
pornography, using a gun while
committing a violent crime or
importing drugs.
Burning 140 acres of back
country hardly compares with
any of those crimes.
That’s the danger when
Congress decides to tell Mudges
how to do their Mobs. Judges
must have latitude to use their
Mudgment in deciding sentences
that ¿t the crimes. That’s the
whole point of having Mudges.
When he originally sentenced
the Hammonds, Hogan
described ¿ve years in prison as
cruel and unusual and said such
sentences would “shock the
conscience.´
He was correct.
When people such as the
Hammonds are caught in a net
that was set for terrorists, Mustice
is not well-served.
A sideshow to this frustrating
and unfair case involves a
BLM employee who used a
government computer while
on the taxpayers’ time to post
comments criticizing the
Hammonds on the Capital Press
website.
Such an occurrence only
reinforces what we have long
believed — that some federal
employees have personal
agendas that deviate from
public policy. If this particular
employee really looks at
ranchers as “clowns´ who
endanger people, as he said in
his comment, then he needs to
reassess his career choice.
In hindsight, this case should
have been settled before trial.
It would have saved the public
the enormous expense of a
trial, appeal, resentencing and
providing the Hammonds with
room and board for ¿ve years at
a federal prison.
And the Hammonds would
now permanently be at home,
where they belong.
C ORRECTION
A headline and opening in last week’s paper, on an opinion article written
by Frances Preston, incorrectly referred to a forest plan rather than to forest
lands. The writer’s preferred term was “coordination or collaboration.´ And
her ¿nal sentence should have asked readers to “provide your input in the
form of letters to the editor.´
The Eagle regrets these editing errors.
W HERE TO WRITE
GRANT COUNTY
Grant County Courthouse — 201
S. Humbolt St., Suite 280, Canyon City
97820. Phone: 541-575-0059. Fax: 541-
575-2248.
Canyon City — P.O. Box 276, Canyon
City 97820. Phone: 541-575-0509. Fax:
541-575-0515. Email: tocc1862@centu-
rylink.net.
Dayville — P.O. Box 321, Dayville
97825. Phone: 541-987-2188. Fax: 541-
987-2187. Email:?dville@ortelco.net
John Day — 450 E. Main St, John Day,
97845. Phone: 541-575-0028. Fax: 541-
575-1721. Email: cityjd@centurytel.net.
Blue Mountain
EAGLE
P UBLISHED EVERY
W EDNESDAY BY
/ong CreeN — P.O. Box 489, Long
Creek 97856. Phone: 541-421-3601. Fax:
541-421-3075. Email: info@cityoÀong-
creek.com.
Monument — P.O. Box 426, Monu-
ment 97864. Phone and fax: 541-934-
2025. Email: monument@oregontrail.net.
Mt 9ernon — P.O. Box 647, Mt.
Vernon 97865. Phone: 541-932-4688. Fax:
541-932-4222. Email: cmtv@ortelco.net.
Prairie City — P.O. Box 370, Prairie
City 97869. Phone: 541-820-3605. Fax:
820-3566. Email: pchall@ortelco.net.
Seneca — P.O. Box 208, Seneca
97873. Phone and fax: 541-542-2161.
Email: cityseneca@centurytel.net.
GCRA – An uncut gem
One year ago I resigned my po-
sition on the Grant County Regional
Airport (GCRA) Commission after
11 years of dedicated service, max-
imum attendance at monthly and ex-
tra meetings, and even participating
via monthly conference calls during
my absences to the Philippines.
I was invited to become a commis-
sioner because I owned an airplane
and hangar at GCRA, was an instru-
ment rated private pilot as well as
having Àown many missions in U.S.
Air force ¿ghter Mets, was a Senior
FAA Aviation Medical Examiner, and
was a military Àight surgeon. 'uring
my time on the Commission I made
many personal friends and have high
individual regard for my fellow com-
missioners as well as members of the
Grant County Court.
I resigned because of numerous
frustrations related to our not cap-
italizing on the economic and civic
potentials of GCRA.
My concerns were based on the de-
velopment of a group complacency on
the part of the GCRA Commission and
the Grant County Court which may
have been inÀuenced by the fact six
years earlier we had an airport man-
ager who dreamed of our new $5.2
million terminal building becoming a
reality. His motivation and vision were
lost when he left the position for a
similar one in another city at almost
twice what he was earning at GCRA.
We were told the salary we could
pay was limited by rule. I was in-
formed by a previous County Judge
when I protested the loss of the man-
ager that I ³Must did not understand´.
The Commission came to accept the
status quo with the platitude “We are
Commission and the County Court.
The proposal is not to replace the
current manager but rather to add con-
trol at a higher level in order to allow
the manager to do the Mob for which he
was hired and to remove the onerous
responsibilities he has inherited.
GCRA is one of very few income
producing county owned and oper-
ated agencies. It must be regarded
as such and, in an atmosphere of no
progress, is not only a failure but an
embarrassment. The airport has the
potential to change Grant County into
a destination and into a business hub
with resultant economic growth for the
area. The Court must be able to offer
salaries commensurate with today’s
market in order to attract people and to
prevent the loss of talent for salaries
we refuse to pay based on antiquated
rules. Imaginative hiring tools must
be activated in order to modernize the
administrative structure of GCRA.
The new position of general manager
would soon pay for itself in terms of
an increase in airport revenues, not to
mention the positive economic inÀu-
ence of GCRA operating at its true
capabilities.
The GCRA Commission should be
regarded as the front line evaluator and
the director of airport personnel, with
the Court taking its lead from these
¿ndings. To work from the premise
that, “This is the way it’s always been´
is a dereliction of duties and obliga-
tions to the citizenry in a place which
my family and I call home.
Grant County deserves better.
Joseph Intile, MD, FACP,
Colonel (retired)
Mt. Vernon
L ETTERS TO THE E DITOR
How similar action
would be reported
in 1776
To the Editor:
Based on an unsigned column in
last week’s Eagle, railing against the
Sheriff and his hand-picked “band of
deputies´ who are responsible for a
county natural resource plan, similar
reporting on an action in 1776 would
be reported by the Blue Mountain Ea-
gle as this:
A hand-picked “band of patriots´
have hatched a document in secret.
This reckless move which involved
the sheriff has not been approved by
the King or his governors. The so-
called plan should have been imme-
diately available to the powers that be
and at the very least had input from the
loyalist segment of the colony.
This illegal action has caused con-
siderable consternation among the
royal court and could disrupt “collab-
oration´ that has become the norm in
recent years.
The audacity of locals to formulate
their own ideas based on a “law´ is
folly. Though this “coordination´ may
have been effective in other colonies,
we are staunch supporters of collabo-
ration. We know which side our bread
is buttered on.
It is rumored this resource plan
will be introduced as a county initia-
tive for a vote of the people. Vote?!!!
Who do these people think they are?
Their reckless plot could well incite
independence.
Dave Traylor
John Day
Grant County’s Weekly Newspaper
P UBLISHER ............................... M ARISSA W ILLIAMS , MARISSA @ BMEAGLE . COM
E DITOR .................................... EDITOR @ BMEAGLE . COM
A DMINISTRATIVE A SSISTANT ........ K RISTINA K REGER , KRISTINA @ BMEAGLE . COM
E DITORIAL A SSISTANT ................ C HERYL H OEFLER , CHERYL @ BMEAGLE . COM
C OMMUNITY N EWS .................... A NGEL C ARPENTER , ANGEL @ BMEAGLE . COM
S PORTS ................................... A NGEL C ARPENTER , ANGEL @ BMEAGLE . COM
M ARKETING R EP ....................... K IM K ELL , ADS @ BMEAGLE . COM
O FFICE M ANAGER ..................... L INDSAY B ULLOCK , OFFICE @ BMEAGLE . COM
MEMBER OREGON NEWSPAPER PUBLISHERS ASSOCIATION
getting what we can afford to pay
for´. This combination of Àawed
thinking and lack of imagination
herald the failure to accomplish the
promise of GCRA.
As an ex-baseball player through
my college years and an avid fan of
the sport, I have been impressed by
the administration of maMor league
teams. They each have a ¿eld man-
ager who is in charge of day-to-day
activities, the lineup, the ¿eld strat-
egy, and the player positioning and
replacement as the game progresses.
However, the manager is responsible
to the general manager (front of¿ce)
for the success or failure of his en-
deavors. His Mob depends on it.
GCRA needs a general manager.
This person should have previous air-
port operations experience, manage-
ment and marketing skills, and a desire
to bring GCRA to its unmet potentials.
This general manager would over-
see the performance of the manager
and at the same time be out in the local,
state, and regional community look-
ing for ways to enhance the GCRA
potential. He would be in control of
fuel pricing, marketing unused of¿ce
space at GCRA, establishing contracts
with local food vendors, marketing
the community use of the conference
room for meetings and celebratory
occasions, searching out commercial
aviation potentials, work as a liaison
with the Oregon 'epartment of Avia-
tion and the Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration, have an inÀuence in replacing
antiquated and dangerous equipment,
and, in general, putting GCRA, and
therefore Grant County, “on the
map´. The general manager would be
the individual answering to the GCRA
Gochnour’s letter
a wasted effort
Letter to the Editor:
'oug Gochnour, past Malheur 1a-
tional Forest supervisor, referenced he
has been busy in his Oct. 21 letter to
the editor contacting Martha the re-
tired schoolteacher from Miami, Bob
the Wall Street banker, hard core envi-
ro’s from Portland, Walter the retired
Manitor from S. Carolina and for good
measure, the 325 million owners of the
Malheur Forest.
'oug, you have been busy but it
is still questionable if you have cred-
ibility here in Grant County. Too well
we remember the travel management
plan of several years ago. A packed
audience heard your spokesperson say
“Please hold your questions until after
the supervisor speaks.´ Citizens duti-
fully heard you through and to their
amazement and dismay you ducked
out the back door and had the gall to
later say “I had no intention of answer-
ing questions.´
'oug, your letter to the editor was
a wasted effort. Perhaps Martha, Bob,
the enviro’s and Walter may believe
you but I have doubts about 325 mil-
lion people throwing in with you.
Gregg Haberly
John Day
Public comment
period removed
Letter to the Editor:
Tired of hearing that people want
an open motorized access forest,
the Grant County Court abolishes
1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION RATES
(including online access)
Grant County .....................................$40
Everywhere else in U.S. .....................$51
Outside Continental U.S. ....................$60
Subscriptions must be paid prior to delivery
Periodicals Postage Paid at John
'a\ and additional Pailing oIÀces
POSTMASTER
send address changes to:
Blue Mountain Eagle
195 N. Canyon Blvd.
John Day, OR 97845-1187
USPS 226-340
wwwMyEagleNewscoP
the public comment period from the
court agenda.
Two weeks ago, the court re-
moved public comment from the
county court meetings, effective-
ly abolishing your rights to speak
out on topics the court has Muris-
diction over and in what seems
to be an attempt to help move the
Forest Service agenda ahead to re-
strict motorized access in Grant
County.
Apparently it is more effective
for the court to be lobbied out-
side the open court time by men
looking to better their personal
and career positions, and keep the
local residents as silent as they
can.
Luckily, I didn’t vote for two of
the men on the court today, but un-
fortunately I did vote for one, and
I can assure you that will not hap-
pen again come the next election
cycle if he is on the ballot. If you
know removing public comment
from the county court meetings this
is wrong, I would ask you contact
Judge Myers, Commissioner Brit-
ton and Commissioner Labhart and
tell them so.
While what they’ve done may
seem effective to them, I’m sure
the people of Grant County feel
differently. You deserve a local
government that works for you, not
a group of three men who move to
circumvent the very people who
elected them into their positions.
John D. George
Bates, Oregon
See LETTER, Page A5
Copyright © 2015 Blue Mountain Eagle
All rights reserved. No part of this
publication covered by the copyright
hereon may be reproduced or
copied in any form or by any means
— graphic, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, taping or
information storage and retrieval
systems — without written
permission of the publisher.
wwwIaceEooNcoPMyEagleNews
@MyEagleNews