The Future of Oregon River Rights?
“Scruffy Bearded Varmint” gives us a warning about the direction of Kate Brown’s Salem “work group” and who is really running the show.
This is a call to action.
From the Westfly.com Oregon forum June 9, 2010…
http://www.west-fly-fishing.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=613800#Post613800
River Navigability and the “Work Group” Direction
Ever heard the term, “Railroading?”
It is starting to look pretty grim. These are my observations:
Those that want to eliminate or severely curtail public use drive the discussion with virtually no recognition of the input from the recreational community. I have observed that those in favor of restriction have the floor on about an 8 to 1 ratio. In other words, they do most of the talking, provide most of the input, and definitely steer the direction the group is going.
During breaks, I observe the moderator of the group and the head of DSL always seem to huddle with folks that actively want to restrict public river use.
In the past, river users had three lobby groups to contend with: Oregon Cattlemen, Oregon Realtors, and The Farm Bureau. These folks recruited several more large and wealthy business related groups to join their side. The Oregon Association of Nurseryman, The Railroads, AOI, the sand and gravel industry, and many, many, more. The room is full of lawyers and lobbyists.
In addition to this new firepower, a handful of landowners, particularly from the Tillamook area, have gained a lot of power over the management of the group. They control much of the discussion.
Not once has the discussion involved protecting the public’s current rights on our waterways. The discussion is 100% focused on how those rights can be reduced, restricted, or eliminated.
Those that would strip away your rights to use Oregon’s Rivers are better organized than we have seen in the past. They have more money behind them, and they seem to have gained complete control of the situation regarding the writing of the new legislation.
The passage of a law in Utah stripping away public rights on that state’s river emboldened those that would do the same in Oregon.
In private discussions with some of the river users representatives, (And there are dang few of them at the meetings.) it looks like we will have a real fight on our hands come 2012. Don’t say it is unexpected.
Anyone that tells you that this group has anything other than the wholesale elimination of public rights as their underlying motive is either not paying attention, gullible, or lying for their own gain.
Some things to watch for:
- They will play the “endangered species” card as a way to take away your right to contact stream beds. “It damages habitat” will be the hue and cry.
- They will use the taxpayer subsidized “habitat restoration projects” as justification for eliminating boating and fishing along the restored habitat. “It will undo our hard work,” will be the claim.
- They will change the demarcation from High Water to “The water line.” “High Water is to hard to define,” will be the mantra. While it does not give them what they want, it does take them a helluva lot closer, doesn’t it?
- They will include a clause that says a river can only be used at a time when it can float a craft. This takes low water wading away from the public.
- They will attempt to eliminate all use below a certain cfs. (cubic feet per second) rating.
- They will restrict portage to boat users only, making it even more difficult for bank anglers in the winter months. “If a boat is not involved, it isn’t really portage,” they will claim.
This ain’t gonna be pretty folks. There is simply to much money to be made by privatizing our waterways. And they are too well organized for us.
What can you do to help stop this train wreck regarding your right to use your rivers?
Contact your state representative and Senator now. Let them know anything less than their full support of the Public’s right to use our waterways to the high water mark is unacceptable.
Find your Senator at:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/senate/
Find your Representative at:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/house/
Contact Louise Solliday
Director of the Division of State Lands:
http://oregonstatelands.us/DSL/DO/contact_us_directory.shtml
And most importantly, Contact Kate Brown:
136 State Capitol
Salem OR 97310-0722
phone (503) 986-1523
fax (503) 986-1616
oregon.sos@state.or.us
And ask every candidate for office how they feel about this issue. If it is important to you, you better be willing to join in the battle. We need 100% participation, or we will loose.
I cannot carry the ball for you. Heather cannot carry the ball for you. The Steelheaders cannot carry the ball for you. Either you get angry, organized, and involved, or kiss your river rights goodbye, cause that is where this is definitely headed.
Most importantly, if there is any way you can do it, show up, show up, SHOW UP. Warm bodies in the chairs can and will make a difference. Right now, at these meetings, I see at least seven paid lobbyists for every recreational user representative. Most of whom are volunteers. And because river users don’t “represent” anyone, they pretty much get marginalized by the big money boys.
Right now those that want to take away your rights are in the drivers seat. You either let them control the process, or you don’t.
The choice is yours.
The time is now.
And please, don’t think you can do something today and be finished with this. I’ve been involved since ’03. One guy at the meeting has been fighting for you for over thirty years. Don’t expect this to end anytime soon.
One finally note. We can’t just rely on Westfly to help us on this. Engage your families, friends, co-workers, and everyone else you can think of. This needs to be an issue for all Oregonians. After all, all Oregonians own these waterways.
July 15, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Hugh, I haven’t wanted to take the time, or burn the fossil fuel, to drive to Salem for the meetings. I’m sorry you have such a bad image of the folks at those meetings. I don’t know of any “organizations” or the than OIG, a property rights group, who have participated. I’m not saying you’re wrong, just that I haven’t heard about them anywhere else.
I did participate in yesterday’s telephone conference, though, and do not believe that your experience at the Salem meetings of “… those in favor of restrictions have the floor on about an 8 to 1 ratio” happened there. Far from it.
Secretary Brown did a yeoman job chairing this “meeting”. Even more impressive, though, was the fact that, even though a couple of dozen people with very diverse ideas on this subject, were all on a shared phone connection, an amazing amount of cooperation and courtesy were shown, by virtually everyone.
Just in case you aren’t aware of it, the people you call “those in favor of restrictionss” have a very different understanding of state law. In my experience, most of those opposing such things as camping, fires, human waste, etc on land they believe is theirs (and land that will apparently REMAIN theirs under SOS Brown’s law, if things go the way they seem to be going) think it’s THEIR rights that are under attack!
I believe the most positive thing that happened at yesterday’s phone conference was the acknowledgement, by Bill Cloran, attorney and cochair of the meeting, that AG Hardy Meyers’s oft mentioned opinion did not give any signal that river navigators any rights to utilize private land “below the ordinary high water mark”.
I personally am hopeful that some kind of consensus can be reached by boaters (such as myself) and landowners (such as myself, though I don’t believe my riparian land is at risk of “going public”.
I’m not at all optimistic, though, as there appears to be a huge difference of both opinions and desires among the stakeholders.
By the way. I gather, from your comments, that you believe the public should have-or perhaps already has-the right to use the banks of any stream in Oregon, regardless of its size? Is that true? If not, do you have an idea of what the minimum size stream should be?
thanks,
Malcolm