Bass, Richard

English

Research Papers in Economics

ENVIRONMENTAL  ISSUES
FROM A  COMMUNITY  PERSPECTIVE
Richard Bass
Owyhee County
Owyhee County is a rural,  agricultural county located  in the south-
western corner  of Idaho.  Its 8,400 people are spread over 4.9 million
acres.  We are the  second largest county in Idaho  and have one  of
the lowest population densities in the state,  and probably the nation,
at one person every  .9 square miles.
As is the case in much of the west, privately owned lands are a
minor  part of the total land  acreage  of the  county,  amounting  to
about  17 percent (850,000 acres) of the county's total land area. How-
ever,  these private lands  are the most productive and are extremely
critical  to  the long-term  sustainability  of the  county's  economy  and
its custom and culture. Public lands managed by the Bureau of Land
Management  (BLM)  account  for more  than 3.6  million acres  (73.8
percent)  of the  county land  area,  while  330,000  acres  of state-man-
aged lands are within the county boundaries.
The people  of Owyhee  County have  historically earned their  live-
lihood from activities reliant upon natural resources.  Livestock graz-
ing, mining and providing services  and  supplies to these  two impor-
tant sectors form the bulk of our economy.  In fact, nearly 62 percent
of the employment  in our county  is either directly  or indirectly relat-
ed to ranching, farming or mining.
Owyhee County ranchers operate  about 45,000 head  of beef cows.
Feedlots and dairies  add another  65,000 head of cattle  for a total cat-
tle population  of about 110,000 head,  or thirteen  head for every per-
son  in the  county.  Mining  first brought  settlers into  this area  of the
Great  Basin.  Silver  City was  a large  mining camp that supported
nearly  10,000 people in the late  1800s.  Silver and gold mining remain
a  significant  economic  sector  and part of our  county  custom  and
culture.
The bulk  (94  percent  of the total  acreage)  of our county  is  arid
rangeland  dominated by sagebrush, junipers and native grasses. It is
an area of outstanding scenic beauty, wide open space and historical
and  cultural  values.  This vast  area  of rangeland  provides  the  basic
resources  used  to  produce cattle.  As one  might guess from  the  ear-
lier figures on land ownership,  we are highly dependent upon lands
managed  by  the  BLM  (80  percent  of all county  rangeland)  for
rangeland  forage  for our livestock  herds.  These  lands are primarily
127grazed  in the spring through fall,  although there are some areas that
support winter livestock grazing.  The grazing  of these BLM lands
during the  growing season provides  a market outlet  for hay,  pasture
and grain that supports  our livestock during the winter and early
spring months.
We are extremely concerned  about the current direction  of public
policy that will determine  future  use of our county rangeland,  in-
cluding  the impacts  on our  private land as  well as  state land  and
BLM-administered  land.  The use of BLM land will determine to a
large extent continued use  of our private lands and state land leases.
The  intermingled  nature  of land  ownership  patterns  of private
land,  state  land and  BLM-administered  land  makes  coordination  of
public policy essential to our future.  We are dealing with land use
issues such as Rangeland  Reform  '94; endangered  species; state sov-
ereignty  over water  rights;  right-of-way  access over public  lands;
wild horse  and burro  management;  water  quality  and riparian con-
ditions;  wildlife  depredation;  wilderness  designations;  wild and  sce-
nic rivers;  national park proposals;  increased recreational  use by
hikers,  ORV's  and  others;  an Air Force  training  range;  urban
sprawl; and waste disposal.
All of these  issues are  changing the way we  are able to manage
our private  lands as  well as  state leased  lands and, thus,  our way  of
life.  As a  rancher in Owyhee  County  who is highly dependent  on
public land grazing,  I am concerned  about these issues and their im-
pact on continued operation of our ranch.  As a county commissioner
representing District  1 of Owyhee County,  I  am concerned  about the
potential disruption of our way of life and the impacts  on property
values and tax revenues that support county services  and provide
school funding.  My fellow commissioners  and many of the citizens
we represent  share these same  concerns.
Owyhee  County has been involved  in land use planning for nearly
fifty  years.  In fact,  the first organized  planning commission  in the
state  of Idaho  was established  in  Owyhee  County in  1945.  This on-
going process  has evolved  through the years and through several
generations  of county plans.  However, the basic premise of planning
continues  with  us today-"to  provide broad  goals and guidelines  by
which property  owners in the  county can attain the highest and best
use of their property and at the same time preserve  and enhance the
quality of the environment and pave the way for desirable  economic
and social development."  In  fact,  our 1990  Owyhee  County Compre-
hensive  Plan  states,  "The  overriding  and  predominant  goal  of
Owyhee  County throughout  its history  is desired  continuation  of the
lifestyle  in Owyhee  County which  assures quiet enjoyment  of private
property rights and assures the highest possible  degree of protection
of those rights."
To help us deal with these issues,  Owyhee  County began an effort
128to develop a land  use plan for federal  and state  lands in the county
in  1992  by creating  a thirty-two-member  County Land Use  Planning
Committee.  This committee,  and the numerous  subcommittees deal-
ing with different  issues facing users of federal  and state  lands with-
in Owyhee  County,  have  been working  continuously  since their  in-
ception.  The  commissioners  adopted  an Interim  Comprehensive
Land  Use  and Management  Plan for the Federally- and State-Man-
aged Lands in Owyhee  County in July,  1993.
This effort has provided  some  coordination  with federal agencies,
but reluctance  on their part has made the process slow to  show suc-
cess.  We anticipate that this planning effort  will be an ongoing  proc-
ess as new issues and concerns arise and reshape the planning proc-
ess.  The  plan must  adapt  and  evolve  with  these  changing
circumstances  and will continue  to improve coordination  of manage-
ment.  We are  concerned  that the  current direction  of public policy
changes could eliminate future success in this process.
Here are some examples:
* Rangeland Reform  '94  will either price  livestock off the range or
regulate them off.
* Proposals to  eliminate  historic  rights of way  essential  to good
range management.
* A ten-year absence of invading juniper control.
* Wild horse management that results in excessive numbers that
damage the resources  and exclude  legitimate permitted livestock
use.
* Cookbook  management  of riparian areas  through  compliance
standards instead of active progressive management.
* Efforts  to develop  allotment management  plans have been re-
placed  with policy that  imposes  annually  changing  terms  and
conditions.
* Legal challenges to public policy?
Let there be no misunderstanding.  Owyhee County  has no mis-
conception  about  the  intent  of the  so-called  "Rangeland  Reform
'94."  The intent  is to bypass the constitutional authority  of Congress
in order  to administratively  and  arbitrarily  rewrite  policy for use  of
BLM-managed  lands. The secretary  was appointed  by the president
to serve  the  political  agenda  of the vice-president  and  of the  vastly
wealthy  activist organizations  that oppose  multiple use  of the lands.
Secretary  Babbitt  officially  serves  as a  cabinet  officer,  but  as to
"Rangeland  Reform  '94,"  he serves  only as  a minion  of political  ex-
pediency  in promoting  the "nonuse" called for by organizations such
as the Wilderness  Society, the Sierra  Club, the Nature Conservancy,
the Audubon  Society and others  who self-style themselves  as "envi-
129ronmentalist"  groups. They grossly misuse the term "environment,"
defined in Webster's  College Dictionary  as follows:
1.  the  aggregate  of  surrounding  things,  conditions,  or  influ-
ences;  surroundings;  milieu.  2.  the  air, water,  minerals,  organ-
isms,  and  all other  external factors  surrounding  and affecting  a
given  organism at any time.  3.  the social and cultural forces that
shape the life of a person  or a population  (Random House).
This definition encompasses the full meaning of the term "environ-
ment"  and  shows  clearly  that in  protecting  the  "environment"  one
must be concerned  about those  social and cultural  forces that affect
the people  who live on the  land.  The organizations that stylishly call
themselves  "environmentalists"  ignore such forces.
When  the  devastating  fires  of coastal  California  destroyed  homes
with dramatic  and  tragic impact  on the  social and  cultural  needs  of
the  people  and families  who lived there,  employees  of the U.S.  gov-
ernment caustically  cast those concerns aside in a national television
statement that people  did  not belong  on the  Pacific  coastal cliffs.  In
the  "politically correct"  mind of the bureaucrat,  the tragic loss  of
property  and of the personal treasures that families  collect as part of
their  lives together  was well worth protection  of the kangaroo rat.
No  member  of Congress  would  make  such a  callous  statement-or
would  long  remain  a member of Congress if he  or she did.  The rea-
son?  The people  can vote a member of Congress from office if he  or
she takes such a ridiculous position.  But the people cannot reach the
arrogance  of an appointed bureaucrat  through  the inexpensive
method  of simply visiting the polling booth and casting a ballot. Such
arrogance  can be reached  only through the expense and personal
turmoil of litigation.
The people of the Bruneau  Valley of Owyhee  County, Idaho,  have
learned that lesson the hard and expensive way in their fight against
the bureaucratic  attempts to stop multiple use of the lands by pro-
tecting  a microscopic  snail uniquely  identified by its penis  size.
Thankfully,  these  folks  did  not  lose  their homes,  their  possessions,
their family  and personal  memories through  fire  damage  enhanced
by efforts  to protect a rat. But they faced  loss  of water,  that com-
modity upon which  all  life  is dependent  in the  arid west,  and loss of
their  livelihood  because  of bureaucratic  arrogance  in  attempting  to
list the Bruneau Hot Springs snail as an endangered  species.
With regard to the Bruneau  Hot Springs  snail,  we use the term
"arrogance"  because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the
snail even though the listing was not supported  in the scientific  stud-
ies it  commissioned  and paid for with tax dollars.  In fact, the  agency
ignored the very studies  it commissioned  and arbitrarily listed the
snail. At great expense,  with legal  fees in excess of $100,000,  the peo-
ple joined in the Bruneau  Valley  Coalition and litigated  the issue.
U.S.  District  Judge  Harold  Ryan  ordered  de-listing  of the  snail  be-
130cause  of arbitrary  governmental  actions  ignoring  procedural  due
process of law.  Why  did the  agency  ignore  its own studies?  Very
simply  because  the  "non-use"  activist  organizations  demanded  ac-
tion aimed at ending  cattle grazing  and supportive  agricultural  activ-
ities  in the  valley.  Even though  calling  themselves  "environmen-
talists,"  they attempted  to force their personal agenda on the people
of Owyhee County through federal  bureaucrats paid with tax dollars
taken from those same people of Owyhee  County.
The  bottom line  shows  that the  people  of this  county paid for the
actions of the U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service in commissioning the
studies;  paid  for the  studies which  did not support a listing; paid  for
the action of the agency in listing the snail; paid for all support activi-
ties  by  agency  personnel  in  the  U.S.  Fish and  Wildlife  Service  and
other federal agencies  such as the BLM,  which immediately jumped
into  action to  limit grazing  and  other agricultural  activities;  paid for
the government's  attorney  who  supported  the  listing  in  court;  paid
for the judge  and  all court personnel  involved  in the lawsuit;  and
also paid for their own legal representatives.
The bureaucrats  who  operate  the agencies  of the  U.S. govern-
ment did  not believe that the people  of Owyhee  County would sacri-
fice  financially  in the manner necessary  to  halt this exercise  in  gov-
ernmental  arrogance.  The bureaucrats  also  know that there  is  a
limit to  the  financial  ability  of the  people  to fight  their  own  govern-
ment  while there  is  no limit  to the  government's  financial  ability  to
litigate  because the government pays its way with the tax dollars pri-
ed from the people themselves.
In that same bureaucratic  knowledge  of financial limitations  lies
the rationale  for  Rangeland  Reform  '94.  The  secretary  attempts  to
bypass the  Congress  which  is  sensitive  to the  social and cultural
needs of the people,  trusting that eventually  the people  will run dry
financially  and be unable  to further resist administrative  tyranny
through litigation.
131Local Impacts of Trade Policy

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES FROM A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics