Forest Service can’t hide its road closure plans
The Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision may be under fire, it could also be said, “plan under water.” Fire or water, the so-called proposal needs to be aborted. Baker County Commission Chair Fred Warner, referred to the 1,300-page document as a “tomb of paper.” Countless people will concur.
Is it a misconception that the forest plan closes roads and trails? “Desired Conditions” is the core component in the plan. The forest plan is not a simple four-volume document. It may not say “road closures,” but the desired conditions can only be met by closures. The USFS know that… but they continue to sing their song of denial.
Eleven county governments in Eastern Oregon, supported by numerous city governments, organizations, and countless individuals have voiced strong opposition to the forest plan. Glancing at an Oregon map, 11 counties make up a solid quarter of the state. The word “substantive” aptly applies to the amount of opposition.
Rhetoric coming from the Forest Service in regards to the BMFPR, is reminiscent of the Travel Management, debate of two years ago. Same attack against public resources under a new term.
Two days after the BMFRP comments deadline, TMP launched the “existing condition road maps.” Once again we are being told, “This request is not about whether a road or motorized trail should be open or closed.” This is simply the USFS playing more of their bait-and-switch wordgames. I don’t believe it. How can anyone that has been engaged with this process during the past 15 years believe this? The USFS seems to think that the more they repeat this rhetoric, they can make us believe it. Where is this all going? I see designated routes and trails and entire seasonal closures where we once had free access. I feel much like a white mouse in a laboratory being picked up by the tail and dropped in a maze.
No golf course = no visit from President Obama
If any readers wonder why President Obama has not gone to Ferguson, Missouri, to try to calm down the rioting crowds, it is because Ferguson does not have a golf course. What a pity!
Ballot Measure 90 on the Nov. 4 statewide ballot would help to solve one problem we have the way many of Oregon’s primary elections are conducted.
But the measure would create an even greater problem in general elections, which is why we urge Oregonians to reject it this fall.
Measure 90 would create a “top two” primary, similar to the system both Washington and California use.
All voters could cast a ballot in the primary. That’s not the case now in some cases, including this spring’s two Baker County Commissioner races. Because all four candidates in those two races are Republicans, only registered Republicans, who make up about 46 percent of the county’s electorate, voted.
Lamenting the loss of good journalists
I certainly enjoyed reading Steve Paul’s column in the Aug. 22 issue of the Herald. One of my pet peeves has been the loss of good journalists. They are replaced by folks who don’t check facts or just make them up. I grew up with Huntley, Brinkley and Deep Throat who brought down a president.
Journalism is an honorable profession and some of us rely on journalists for our news, whether in a newspaper or on a screen. If we don’t get it, it is like living in a media-controlled state. We have to trust someone so we can make informed choices. Making up the story isn’t OK.
Speak out about the forest plan revision
“One of the big misconceptions is that this is a travel management plan and we are closing roads and trails. A forest plan does not close roads and trails. It is as simple as that,” Kramer said
We are smarter than this and it’s time we stand up to these claims.
Simply stated, if a road is not designated as a route, the road is closed. That language “designated routes” is not found in the current forest plans, and with its addition to the Forest Plan Revision, it allows for the closing of roads that currently is not a reality, nor is allowing the public cross country travel (motorized) acceptable under the Forest Plan Revision.
The Forest Plan Revision authorizes road closures through the designation of routes, and the USFS is attempting to sell you a bill of goods that it doesn’t, we all need to stand up and clearly speak out that this is unacceptable.
Please consider the below contacts and get active. While they may choose to not answer you, they clearly hear us. Please start contacting the below list and speaking out for yourselves, you can do this, we have complete faith in you.
You have to stay persistent in your contacts and not give up.
Jim Pena, Regional Forester –
John L. Laurence Forest Sup., Wallowa Whitman National Forest –
Teresa Raaf Forest Sup., Malheur National Forest –
Kevin Martin Forest Sup., Umatilla National Forest –
Jodi Kramer, Public Relations Officer Wallowa Whitman National Forest -
Fred Warner, Baker County Comm. –
Mark Bennett, Baker County Comm. –
Tim Kerns, Baker County Comm. –
Mark Davidson, Union County Comm. –
Mike Hayward, Wallowa County Comm. –
Paul Castilleja, Wallowa County Comm. –
Susan Roberts, Wallowa County Comm. –
Scott Myers, Grant County Comm. –
La Grande Observer –
Baker City Herald –
John D. George
We agree with Baker City Police Chief Wyn Lohner that the City Council should start discussing the regulation of marijuana stores, even though the city’s current ban on medical marijuana outlets continues until May 1, 2015.
But we also believe that in the end this matter has such significant potential ramifications that it should be decided by the city’s voters, not just its seven elected councilors.
Recent history in Oregon suggests that the public and the politicians don’t always agree on marijuana issues.
In 2010 the state’s voters rejected a ballot measure that would have legalized medical marijuana dispensaries.
I have very nearly exhausted my internal thesaurus in describing the breezes that buffet the Oregon Coast, delving on occasion into that subsection of words which aren’t fit for publication in a newspaper.
Being by nature lazy, I tend to grasp for the low-hanging profanity when I’m annoyed.
Although I believe even the rare saint among us would have his equanimity sorely tested if, say, he were scanning the retreating tide for agates while an onshore gale was trying to sandblast through his contact lenses to get at his corneas.
But never had I believed that the appropriate adjective for these almost constant winds was “refreshing.”
It was a queer feeling to be hiking through a rain forest of moss-laden Sitka spruce and Douglas-fir, the Pacific breakers visible (and audible) below, and there to pine, as a desert traveler might, for even a gentle zephyr to fan my sweaty face.
Stranger still that my walk on Cascade Head, just north of Lincoln City, happened only a few days after I had hiked in arid Eastern Oregon and there dealt with conditions more familiar to the beachcomber than to the backpacker.
Global warming is a threat that affects all of us
It is time for us to come together to limit global warming. The whole world is watching, including our younger generations.
This should not be a political issue. People around the globe, regardless of political affiliation, are concerned about man-made climate change. A prime example is the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose international scientists have been assessing the problem and possible solutions since 1988.
The most recent IPCC report concludes that commitments already made as part of existing international agreements can limit global warming, while still damaging, to less than 3 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.
Thus, there is reason to believe that timely and cooperative responses can limit destructive climate change (and can potentially provide millions of jobs in alternative-energy sectors).
We have already made good progress, but our ability to exert more powerful, positive leadership is hampered by those here in the United States who blindly deny the problem and/or reject cooperative solutions, often resorting to willful distortion.
One example of their deception is the Aug. 13 letter to the editor, claiming that President Obama is increasing gas prices in a conspiracy to cut fossil fuel consumption. But, truth be told, gasoline prices follow the law of supply and demand, and are actually lower today than they were under George W. Bush. They nearly tripled to over $4 per gallon under Bush, but then plunged to less than $2 during the onset of the Great Recession. Since Obama took office, gas prices have partially rebounded, but not back to the Bush levels. There is no conspiracy.
Our planet’s future would look brighter were it not for such deceptive confusion, inflamed by anti-social messages of hatred, fear, and falsehoods from right-wing talk radio and Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Channel. And echoed by the politicians who pander to them as well as to some fabulously wealthy campaign contributors.
Extreme, fact-free obstructionism may continue as a cornerstone of conservative orthodoxy, but, together, we can transcend it.
We’re all in this together. We can heed authoritative sources like the IPCC, and we can, together, develop meaningful, real-world solutions..
Disdain for the U.S. Forest Service’s draft plan for managing the Wallowa-Whitman, Umatilla and Malheur national forests is widespread.
Commissioners from 10 Eastern Oregon counties, including Baker, don’t much like it.
Local residents have expressed their concerns in letters to the editor and other forums.
Most recently U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, the Oregon Republican whose congressional district includes the three Blue Mountains national forests, summarized some of the most common complaints in a letter to Regional Forester Jim Peña. Walden wrote that the three national forests “are in poor condition and dire need of proper management that will restore forest health, reduce catastrophic wildfire, and sustain the economies in these rural communities. Unfortunately, it seems that this plan falls short of meeting these needs of the forest and the communities.”
We understand why people are worried.
We agree that the forest plan, which will replace management plans for the three national forests that date to 1990, should emphasize more strongly the need to do more logging and other work, including prescribed burning, to reduce the risk of large blazes.
British author George Orwell made the year 1984 famous decades before it arrived, but he was no Prince.
No Bruce Springsteen, either.
Orwell coined several iconic terms in his dystopian novel written in 1948, among them “Big Brother,” “Newspeak” and “thoughtcrime.”
But Orwell didn’t bust any ghosts.
Nor did he sweep the leg.
Three decades have passed since 1984, which bore little resemblance — in America, anyway — to the repressive regime Orwell’s fertile mind imagined and his agile pen rendered.
Certain Democrats might have disagreed, I suppose, what with President Ronald Reagan trouncing the hapless Walter Mondale that November to claim his second term.
Liberals’ disdain for the Gipper has dissipated slightly over 30 years, although I don’t believe this is because his critics have soberly reappraised Reagan’s record.
Self-serving politicians shouldn’t try to manage land
This letter is in regard to the Blue Mountains Forest Plan Revisions, which include Wallowa-Whitman, Umatilla and Malheur National Forests (almost 5 million acres that belong to all the citizens of the United States.
Every plant, microorganism, and animal on Earth exists within an ecosystem, a complex network of interdependent relationships in which each individual strand is important and contributes to the success of the whole. Ecosystems, in turn, interact with one another to form the biosphere (the zone of life on our planet). These systems, so important to the world around us, are far from stable. The intermountain lowlands of the western United States is considered one of the most imperiled ecosystems in North America.
The rapid growth of human population and their attendant technologies have created unprecedented forces of ecological change. Once you understand the biosphere’s interactive network of relationships, you develop a deeper appreciation of the complexity of the life around us.
Dale Bosworth, the former Forest Service Chief, named unrestricted motor vehicle use as one of the four major threats to national forests. He specifically cited the growing popularity of ATVs and their potential to contribute to erosion, harassment of wildlife and conflict with other forest users. He ordered each national forest to write a travel management plan that would designate which roads, trails and areas would be open to motor vehicles.
A ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that “there can be no doubt that the Dept. of Agriculture (of which the Forest Service is a part) possesses statutory authority to regulate activities related to mining even in non-wilderness areas in order to preserve the national forests.”
I believe this applies to all other activity in our national forests. We are looking at a situation where maybe 1 percent or less of the U.S. citizens are trying to dictate the use of our national forests to the other 99 percent. Is this social justice?
We need to keep the self-serving state and local politicians from trying to manage our public lands and let the Forest Service do their job.
Robert L. Kern
Editor’s note: The version of this letter that ran in Monday’s edition contained several typographical errors that were not contained in the original letter submitted for publication.
Thanks, counties, for opposing forest plan
Locked & Loaded Off Road Group of Baker City would like to thank the representatives from the Eastern Oregon Counties Association (EOCA), including our three commissioners from Baker County, for objecting to the Blue Mountain Forest Plan Revision 2014 draft.
Those of us who have been involved with the previous attempt to pass the WWNF Travel Management Plan, the BLM Draft Resource Management Plan, the BLM Sage Grouse commenting period and now the BMFPR comment period will stay vigilant and it is refreshing to know that we have the support of groups such as the EOCA.
We hope that all people who live, work and recreate in the Blues are paying attention at all times and that you make your voice be heard now and in the future. As stated in the Baker City Herald article on Aug. 5, timber harvesting has to increase and “the plan makes no guarantee that the forests will meet those projected timber volumes” as stated in the plan alternatives D and E. It will not only benefit the forest health but add revenue to surrounding communities and provide proper funding for USFS maintenance. The discussion that the “BMFPR sets a stage for the USFS to impose a TMP that bans motorized vehicles from a substantial number of roads in the WWNF” is all too real and it’s not fair. If maintaining the current forest roads is a money issue and in turn is the reason behind closing multiple roads in the Blues then increased timber harvesting is the answer. Those of us who spend time in the Blues for any reason, should not be denied access but should be encouraged to enjoy what is ours. The USFS multiple use mandate should be held in highest regard and properly managed by the USFS as a steward of the Blues and not a dictator.
Aug. 15 is the deadline to comment on the BMFPR
Guide to commenting: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/BlueMtnsPlanRevision
Submit comments to: http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/BlueMountainForestPlanRevisionComments
USPS Mail to: Blue Mountains Plan Revisions Team, P.O. Box 907, Baker City, OR 97814.
On behalf of the Locked and Loaded Off Road Group
Democrats’ ideas won’t save the planet
Save the planet! a local Democratic official tells us; vote Democratic. But this fellow doesn’t tell us that the Democratic climate change program is both expensive and ineffective.
One Democratic policy is to allow the price of gasoline to rise, so people will buy smaller cars. We now pay nearly $4 a gallon for gasoline; when President Obama was inaugurated, it sold for under $2. What’s that done to your budget? Wind turbine-generated electricity costs around four times as much as that from conventional generators; the Democratic plan requires public utilities to purchase that electricity despite its high cost. That expensive electricity shows up in your monthly OTEC bills. Energy costs are such a vital part of our economy that expensive energy makes everything else more expensive as well.
But do the Democratic policies actually save the planet? Not really. Consider the much ballyhooed higher standards for fuel efficiency in our automobiles. Cram Americans into motorized sardine cans for 30 years and you put off drowning of the Statue of Liberty for a whole month. As long as fossil fuels are burned, carbon dioxide will continue to accumulate in the earth’s atmosphere. This buildup will stop only when all countries in the entire world stop burning fossil fuels. That’s not going to happen. The only significant outcome of Democratic climate change policies is that Al Gore and his politically connected buddies are getting rich at our expense.
Our Democratic official also doesn’t tell us that there have been periods in recorded human history when the earth’s climate was significantly warmer than it is today. He leaves out the fact that none of the calamities shown so graphically in Al Gore’s film actually happened during those warm centuries. He fails to mention that the scientists who study the history of the earth’s climate call these warmest times climactic optimums, for conditions then were the most favorable for mankind.
Our local fellow wants us to vote Democratic so we can lower our standard of living yet have no significant impact on what will happen in the coming decades. No thanks!