Maybe this should this say, “Visitors welcome for now.”
Heather McNeill comments on Solladay’s remarks in the June 9th OPB News article on Rogue Navigability…
In other words, rather than state ownership, which falls under her department, Ms. Solladay would rather have some other arrangement that would be someone else’s headache.
There is a huge huge difference between easement and ownership. It is not the same. Please consider that travel, and transportation are only one of benefits that you reap from ownership of the river.
From public ownership in 1849 you also have ownership of the river bed (gravel & sand), you also have ownership of bank and the bank condition which affect water quality that you rely upon for drinking. You also have ownership of the full habitat that supports several ecosystems that support fish, water foul, your clean water, and flood control. You have ownership of the kinetic energy of the river to turn turbines, water wheels, and help move your goods downriver.
There is absolutely no comparison between an easement that only allows you to travel through a piece of private property, and the public ownership that Federal Government entrusted to the State to for all the people. That title of ownership given to the state at statehood predates your national forests, your BLM land, your national parks, your wilderness areas. That title of ownership, ensured a myriad of incredibly valuable resources would be protected for all the people in perpetuity.
Consider that before you had railroads, before you had state & federal highway systems, you had a network of rivers. Those rivers were owned for you, by the government, for your transportation needs, but they also provide a tremendous array of other values. Values that are truly fluid, and could never be maintained if chopped into parceled privately owned bits.
What Solliday has said would be the equivalent of abandoning ownership of the national forests, to the logging companies that worked there, for free, with the agreement, that you could still pass through (oh, what about the condition of the forest? what about the condition of the wildlife? What about the condition of the watershed? Sorry, you, no longer own those benefits/headaches, its up the private landowner to do what they will.) What Solliday has said would be the equivalent of abandoning the freeways to the adjacent property owners (think about the upkeep) with the agreement that you could still pass through.
Solliday is supposed to be an agent of the people, protecting the value of our state lands. Hmmmmmmm….
“The mission of the Department of State Lands is to ensure a legacy for Oregonians and their public schools through sound stewardship of lands, wetlands, waterways, unclaimed property, estates and the Common School Fund. “
Maybe she has been misquoted. I don’t know. I hardly see how the quote is in alignment with the mission entrusted to the Department of State Lands. –Heather McNeill
