O&C: A Permanent Fix

[Sidewinder]

I sent the following proposed Guest Opinion to the Courier. It will be interesting to see if they publish.

The Feds Should Do Their Duty First

Voters should not endorse any additional taxes unless the Federal Government first addresses its responsibility. The Federal Government does not owe us a living. It does, however, have a duty to rescue our public forests from the bondage it has created.

Historically, O&C counties were supported by timber sales on the O&C lands. Our present crisis has not arisen because timber sales naturally dwindled in the 1990s. Rather, the Federal Government, by act of Congress and decision of the Ninth Circuit, has allowed our public forests to be taken hostage by environmental extremists. Voters cannot ransom our forests. It is up to the Federal Government to rescue them.

Originally, to impose a standard of conservation upon our Federal forests and to provide a funding base for communities it had itself created, Congress legislated a policy of sustained yield timber harvesting on the Federal lands repossessed from the Oregon and California Railroad. The O&C Act of 1937 dedicated those lands to this primary purpose. The act provided for sales revenue sharing which funded both O&C counties and forest management and maintenance. The act has not been repealed.

The BLM's conservation approach worked remarkably well for half a century. We have harvested more board feet of timber than was originally inventoried and today we have more board feet of timber standing than when we started. Our forests have been well maintained, our wildlife were able to thrive, and the public was provide easy access to these remarkable lands. Revenue sharing worked so well in Josephine County that for eleven years the County imposed no property taxes whatever.

Then Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and set the stage for a collision of Federal laws. In 1990, environmentalists were able to get the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to add the spotted owl to the endangered species list. When the law was tested in 1992, the Ninth Circuit ruled the environmentalists could stop timber sales on Federal lands. It was a great victory for the environmentalists. It provided them with a weapon with which to end to public harvest of timber almost anywhere. There are not many strands of forest in the Pacific Northwest that do not harbor a spotted owl.

The new weapon was applied ruthlessly throughout the Northwest. Timber revenues dived and Congress did nothing to correct the situation it had created. Instead, in 1993 Congress embarked upon a program of Federal welfare to the counties whereby Congress provided an annual subsidy to the counties in lieu of the timber revenues they had formulated their existence around. Because this worked equally well for the counties, no political pressure was brought to correct the underlying problem. This year, Congress has decided to end those subsidies immediately or by way of phase out. And still Congress does nothing to end the problem.

Congress must do something.

The simplest solution is for Congress to exempt the O&C lands from the operation of the Endangered Species Act and thereby disarm the militant environmentalists. These extremists have shown themselves to be too irresponsible for this weapon. The 1992 Northwest Forest Management Plan set aside 80% of the O&C lands as ecological reserves. Yet the militants continue to ruthlessly challenge every proposed sale on the remaining 20%. In just the past 60 days they successfully stopped a host of contracted sales from California to Washington. They have proven that they will use every opportunity for litigation, frivolous or otherwise, to frustrate each and every harvest. It is time to take the question of how to best use our public forests back to the public debate arena and take it out of the courts. Exempting the O&C will do that.

By its own terms, the ESA is not intended to apply in situations where it is impractical. The unique constitution of the O&C lands being distributed in checkerboard sections surrounded by private lands over which the ESA has no influence renders the application there per se impractical. It is far more practical to relocate any incidental endangered species encountered to a contiguous ecological environment that is capable of effective management.

Such an exemption is not only justified, but demanded, on the grounds of the unique economic dependency of our counties created by Congress when it elected to reclaim millions of acres of private land, thereby removing those lands from the counties' tax base.

I would urge all voters to reject any new taxes until the Federal Government corrects the wrong it has created.

[hillclimber]

Very well constructed and delivered. The Courier should have no problem publishing that. I learned more in there than anywhere.

[rightminded]

Extremely well written and much easier to understand.

Is SORA taking a stand not to support the Criminal Justice Levy?

Are you not supporting it either? I am still on the fence, after reading this Jack, I don't think I will support the levy. This is so true, why should I have to pay additional taxes when the responsiblilty lies with Congress.

[FaerieChild]

My only problem is this:
In the meantime... I don't want my family to be at risk. Its all fine and dandy to say, "The Feds should take care of this!" but present your righteous anger to the mother of a child who has been shot in a drive-by, or the children of an elderly victim of a home invasion.

I agree with you philisophically...but...
What am I supposed to do to protect my family while the feds dink around with their politics?

Plus..... O&C funding will only put us back to extremely underfunded instead of tragically underfunded.

[rightminded]

My only problem is this:
In the meantime... I don't want my family to be at risk. Its all fine and dandy to say, "The Feds should take care of this!" but present your righteous anger to the mother of a child who has been shot in a drive-by, or the children of an elderly victim of a home invasion.

I agree with you philisophically...but...
What am I supposed to do to protect my family while the feds dink around with their politics?

Plus..... O&C funding will only put us back to extremely underfunded instead of tragically underfunded.

FC I totally understand your point on this matter. This is exactly what the commissioners and sheriffs office is banking on, that everyone will think this way and vote in favor, in the meantime. Then nothing will be done to see that we have our rights back, because the money will be there to operate. Fear and Greed FC.....Fear and Greed. That is what our country operates on.

[CrazyNewWay]

My only problem is this:
In the meantime... I don't want my family to be at risk. Its all fine and dandy to say, "The Feds should take care of this!" but present your righteous anger to the mother of a child who has been shot in a drive-by, or the children of an elderly victim of a home invasion.

I agree with you philisophically...but...
What am I supposed to do to protect my family while the feds dink around with their politics?

Plus..... O&C funding will only put us back to extremely underfunded instead of tragically underfunded.

FC I totally understand your point on this matter. This is exactly what the commissioners and sheriffs office is banking on, that everyone will think this way and vote in favor, in the meantime. Then nothing will be done to see that we have our rights back, because the money will be there to operate. Fear and Greed FC.....Fear and Greed. That is what our country operates on.

Whew..I thought you were going to suggest Halliburton or Black Water.

[Sidewinder]

Is SORA taking a stand not to support the Criminal Justice Levy?

SORA's stand has always been in favor of a return to sustained yield timber harvesting, even if it took a lawsuit to accomplish that. That the association of O&C counties had sued and that the BLM had agreed to apply all the laws to the O&C gave SORA pause. We are awaiting the BLM's WOPR (Western Oregon Plan Revision) due out late this summer. I personally expect to see that plan encompass a return somewhat to timber harvesting, probably about 50% of what we were used to. But the enviros will immediately challenge and there will be a long litigation.

I don't know that SORA has a stand regarding this proposed 3 year levy.

Are you not supporting it either? I am still on the fence, after reading this Jack, I don't think I will support the levy. This is so true, why should I have to pay additional taxes when the responsiblilty lies with Congress.

I would favor a one year levy at one half the level proposed. The problem with this levy, if successful, is that he will remove all pressure from the politicians to do anything to correct the problem. Given subsidies for 13 years, they did nothing.

I hate to say it, but the only prospect I see of getting them to put the heat on Washington is a levy failure. Absent that, things are just too easy.

[Sidewinder]

My only problem is this:
In the meantime... I don't want my family to be at risk. Its all fine and dandy to say, "The Feds should take care of this!" but present your righteous anger to the mother of a child who has been shot in a drive-by, or the children of an elderly victim of a home invasion.

I agree with you philisophically...but...
What am I supposed to do to protect my family while the feds dink around with their politics?

Plus..... O&C funding will only put us back to extremely underfunded instead of tragically underfunded.

It would have been nice if the commissioners had proposed a life boat levy rather than the QEII. They chose to play hardball, forcing us to exactly the dilemma you describe. They're betting you will cave.

Also, talk to the folks out in Illinois Valley who haven't had patrol protection for years. It is a rotten situation and it is time it was fixed.

[FaerieChild]

My only problem is this:
In the meantime... I don't want my family to be at risk. Its all fine and dandy to say, "The Feds should take care of this!" but present your righteous anger to the mother of a child who has been shot in a drive-by, or the children of an elderly victim of a home invasion.

I agree with you philisophically...but...
What am I supposed to do to protect my family while the feds dink around with their politics?

Plus..... O&C funding will only put us back to extremely underfunded instead of tragically underfunded.

FC I totally understand your point on this matter. This is exactly what the commissioners and sheriffs office is banking on, that everyone will think this way and vote in favor, in the meantime. Then nothing will be done to see that we have our rights back, because the money will be there to operate. Fear and Greed FC.....Fear and Greed. That is what our country operates on.

ok... but you didn't answer my question on what my family is to do in the meantime.... move away? buy a gun? I don't really like either option.

[diogenes]

In principle, I agree with Sidewinder. And, ultimately, I think that's probably the right thing to do. In reality, though, what are the chances of getting a Democratic congress to exempt the O&C lands from the ESA? Assuming we can make it happen, how long will it take?

Does the fed really care if Josephine County can't fund public safety services, or if the county goes bankrupt and is taken over by the state? Probably not. Do we, the people of Josephine County, care? I do. I don't want my property value to plummet because the county has sky-high crime rates and can't afford to maintain public roads. Where there's insufficient law enforcement, criminal activity thrives. I don't want to be at the mercy of meth addicts burglarizing my home. I don't want to have to be wary when I go outdoors after dark in my own neighborhood. I've lived in places like that, and I've chosen not to live that way anymore. I love this area. Out of this whole country, this is the place I've chosen to settle down and make my permanent home. I don't want to see it degenerate into a trashy backwater overrun with meth labs and tweakers who prey on everybody who has anything to steal.

I don't want to pay higher taxes, either. But we need to keep the boat afloat until we can get it out of the water. Once it sinks, it's going to be a whole lot harder (and more expensive) to recover than it would be to maintain it while we try to get it to shore. I'm not an advocate of taxation. I'm an advocate of zero-based budgeting and privatization wherever possible. But I don't see the benefit to us in letting the boat sink to prove to the fed that it's leaking, rather than patching and bailing until we can work out a permanent solution.

I'd really like to hear other people's thoughts on this. Since a lot of people are still undecided on the levy, this would be a good forum to thrash through all the ideas and concerns people have, and find out which way people are leaning, and why.

[Sidewinder]

ok... but you didn't answer my question on what my family is to do in the meantime.... move away? buy a gun? I don't really like either option.

Rely upon fundamental street smarts like they do in the big cities. Keep your eyes open. Recognize potentially dangerous situations, areas and avoid them. Get serious about neighborhood watch. Keep your doors and your car locked. Know where your kids are and what they're doing. Keep your eye on them.

It's not nice and it's not the reason we chose to live in GP. But maybe it's the price we have to pay to fix the problem.

Are you confronting any specific present perils?

[Sidewinder]

In principle, I agree with Sidewinder. And, ultimately, I think that's probably the right thing to do. In reality, though, what are the chances of getting a Democratic congress to exempt the O&C lands from the ESA? Assuming we can make it happen, how long will it take?

The chances of getting a Republican or Democratic Congress to do anything are ZERO unless every politician has his back to the wall and feels the pressure. That is our job.

The advantage of pressing an attack on the ESA is that the enviros will respond. How? By advocating for the subsidies. They don't care about spending our money if they can shut down logging and roads. The situation is a win-win for us.

[diogenes]

The chances of getting a Republican or Democratic Congress to do anything are ZERO unless every politician has his back to the wall and feels the pressure. That is our job.

I'm all for pressing the attack. I just want to have a backup plan in case either a) we don't succeed, or b) it's tied up in litigation for decades while our bankrupt county is overrun by dirtbags.

Rely upon fundamental street smarts like they do in the big cities. Keep your eyes open. Recognize potentially dangerous situations, areas and avoid them.

Been there, done that. Don't want to live like that.By the time we make it back even to where we are today, I'll be too old to enjoy it. Living like that takes a lot out of you. It sucks the joy right out of your life. This place is like paradise to me. I've already lived in hell, and I'd rather live in paradise. (Even if it costs a little extra.)

Fundamentally, Sidewinder, I think I agree with you. But my big concern is, how long will it take? It doesn't do any good to stop the bleeding after the patient is dead.

[Sidewinder]

Been there, done that. Don't want to live like that.By the time we make it back even to where we are today, I'll be too old to enjoy it. Living like that takes a lot out of you. It sucks the joy right out of your life. This place is like paradise to me. I've already lived in hell, and I'd rather live in paradise. (Even if it costs a little extra.)

It would have been nice if the commissioners had proposed a life boat levy rather than the QEII. They chose to play hardball, forcing us to exactly the dilemma you describe. They're betting you will cave.

Fundamentally, Sidewinder, I agree with you. But my big concern is, how long will it take? It doesn't do any good to stop the bleeding after the patient is dead.

If the levy is succesful, we have three comfortable years during which time we can expect no support from the commissioners.

If the subsidy renewal goes through, let's say Bush agrees to the pork if Congress will remove the poison pill, then we again have years but the pressure will be on the commissioners because of the annually declining subsidy.

If both fail, the pressure is on instantly and the O&C exemption is the only fix that can be accomplished by the stroke of a pen.

[diogenes]

If the levy is succesful, we have three comfortable years during which time we can expect no support from the commissioners.

If the subsidy renewal goes through, let's say Bush agrees to the pork if Congress will remove the poison pill, then we again have years but the pressure will be on the commissioners because of the annually declining subsidy.

If both fail, the pressure is on instantly and the O&C exemption is the only fix that can be accomplished by the stroke of a pen.

"If they both fail, the pressure is on instantly..." but whom is the pressure on? The County Commissioners, right? "...and the O&C exemption is the only fix that can be accomplished by the stroke of a pen," but whose pen? The County Commissioners are the ones under pressure to fix the problem, but they aren't the ones holding the pen that can fix it. If the County Commissioners could influence Congress, wouldn't they have already done it? Or at least have tried?

Perhaps I'm not clear on the way these things work. You know a lot more about this than I do. But, even in the best case, the stroke of the pen is just the beginning. After that, there will be years of litigation and, while it's going on, there will probably be an injunction against any timber harvesting at all in the disputed territories. Am I wrong? And what do we do during that time, with no Sheriff's Office to protect us and our property? Right now, the predators are held in check. Once the SO goes away, all of us are prey.

Or perhaps, in that case, the state just takes over. What happens then? I don't have any idea. But my gut instinct tells me the bigger the bureaucracy, the more money slips "between the cracks," and the less of what you pay into it actually comes back to you. For that reason, I prefer local government. Also because, the more local the government, the more influence the citizens actually have on it.

I'm curious about one thing, though. They're promoting this levy as a public safety levy. Is the revenue from it entirely designated for public safety? If so, I'm inclined to support it. If not, well, that's a whole 'nother bucket of worms...