Boise County is hoping it can convince the Southwest Idaho Resource Advisory Committee to help it fund maintenance of Grimes Pass Road near Pioneerville.
If you have ever been on it you will agree it could use some work. The beavers have built dams that block culverts and have soaked the road regularly.
“It’s a long standing problem,” said Boise County Commissioner Jamie Anderson.
The Southwest Resource Advisory Committee is a panel of local officials, recreation people, industry, union folk and environmentalists who hand out 20 percent of the Secure Rural Schools money allocated to counties in the area that was developed by Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and former Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig.
The other 80 percent goes to schools and roads.
The RAC money can go for all sorts of projects ranging from trail and road maintenance to wildlife habitat improvement and forest thinning projects. Idaho’s Youth Conservation Corps projects has been one of the beneficiaries.
“It helps us get things done on the ground,” said Kim Pierson, New Meadows District Ranger on the Payette National Forest and the coordinator for the Southwest Idaho Resource Advisory Committee.
These groups have become very collaborative, sharing a common interest in creating jobs and working together to benefit the rural areas that no longer have a timber industry to drive the funding of forest projects. But because they are collaborative everyone has to agree.
And since there are more projects than funding, if someone doesn’t agree, then the project probably doesn’t get funding.
The Grimes Pass road leads up into the area where Mosquito Gold is exploring for copper and molybdenum. It’s CuMo drilling project hopes to show there is a huge deposit that can create hundreds of jobs and economic benefits for Boise County and the state.
But environmental groups fear the project could lead to pollution of the Boise River downstream. So when Boise County went to Mosquito and asked it to kick in $12,000 of the county’s share of the $151,000 for the roadwork, environmentalists became skeptical.
Why should the Resource Advisory Committee give Boise County money for Mosquito’s road? Asked John Robison of the Idaho Conservation League. The mining company will be closing off the area it is exploring to the public it wants to pay for the road, he said.
Not so said Scott Peyron, a communications consultant from Boise who is a spokesman for the company. Mosquito doesn’t need the road improved for its exploration project.
“Mosquito’s interest is purely to be a partner of the county,” Peyron said.
Anderson, who serves on the resource advisory committee, will make a presentation Thursday at its meeting in Cascade. It’s just one of road and bridge projects she’s hoping she can attract funding for in Boise County.
There are 16 projects worth about $1 million competing for an estimated $660,000 in funds. So it going to be hard for the Grimes Pass project to get the consensus it will need.
When the federal government hands out its next payments in February of 2012, it likely will be the last. That’s because Congress will have to reauthorize the program that brought as much as $45 million to rural schools and road programs in Idaho in 2008.
You heard they might be trying to cut the deficit.
The Secure Schools program only has $31 million for Idaho in 2012. At a time when school funds have been cut, it has been critical for rural schools in places like Idaho City and Cascade.
It also has brought old foes in the timber wars together. But they don't always agree.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
Idaho? Asking for federal money?
For shame! Don't they know we all need to tighten our belts and stop slopping at the government trough?
If we could mine and cut timber
There would be plenty of money for road maintenance and the like. Just like the old days.
Truth is hard to come by
What, exactly, are you inferring?
political_junkie:
Are you saying that if we actively managed our forests and actually used the resources they produce that we wouldn't need to ask the government for handouts -- and, in fact, would be putting unemployed people to work and sending money to our county, state, and federal treasuries instead of living off it?
That letting our forests and grasslands burn and rot and shutting down our roads is not a sustainable form of management or an ethical use of our land or time?
Or am I reading too much into your statement?
You'll be dead by then and so will I. Let 'er buck!
----------
If you could handle the truth, you wouldn't be spoiling our social hour right now.
I think you pretty much nailed it.
Production. It's what this country used to be about.
Truth is hard to come by
Independence ! sort of...
Darn Feds leave us alone ! and oh give us a bunch of money.
thanks
Clem and Susan, remember that is OUR money to begin with.
Just asking for it back in useful way- services provided by a government agency.
Our money
Your right pimp2 it is our money, including mine and I think this is a waste. Didn't Boise County declare Chapter 9 Bankruptcy on March 1 of this year, the same county where 24 % of the people employed work for government agencies, the same county that collected over $1.1 million in PILT payments in the past 5 years. Now grant it 74% of of the land in Boise County is owned by the Federal Governement but this has been the case since the county was founded in the 1860's. The county has been poorly run by people who take Federal payments as part of due course yet complain at the same time.
Why the h*ll doesn't Mosquito build the road themselves?
Why are the taxpayers responsible for building a road for a mining company? Seems Boise County could use the money for better projects than this. I live up there and hardly anyone uses that road except recreationalist. The USFS is always looking for reasons to close roads so what other reason could there possible be to improve it except for the FS and the county to cow-tow to this mining company? I'm no environmentalist but I do object to using public money to fund corporate interests, let alone foreign corporate interests(like it doesn't happen all the time anyway). Mark my word if the road is improved for this mining company it will be closed to the public. How about using the money to buy the hot springs and re-open it to the public. In the long run the pool will bring more money in than this mine. When is the last time you saw a mine that didn't cost the taxpayers more than it contributed? (See Superfund)
Idaho style Government at work
Look, if it's bad for the environment, bad for the public, and good for business, then the R's will go for it. No public input wanted or accepted.
One Fine Day...
One fine day the environmentalists show up on Boise County's doorstep and tell us "You don't need your forest industries any longer." That we need to save our environment and forests for us enviros to play in. When we residents ask what about our jobs the enviros very smugly tell us that "You Boise County folks can serve lattes to the tourists for jobs and a living."
Boise County is financially strapped because of environmental ideologies, overwhelming regulations and enviro micro management that has killed all forest related industries and jobs in Boise County. No working saw mills, no timber sales, no producing mines, ranching is on its last teat, and so...NO JOBS in Boise County.
The environmental community wants full protection for streams in Boise County where they don't live, but in Ada County where they do live it's okay for them to crowd and build all along the Boise River and it's riparian areas with million dollar homes, roads & malls. Why haven't you worked to stop development and protect the Boise River in the Treasure Valley? How many gov't funds & dollars has Ada County sucked up for roads eh?
In Valley County (Cascade) its okay to build a man made island in the middle of the Payette River for recreation and kayaking but, in Boise County we can't build a road 500 feet from water without you sophisticated socialites criticizing our stupidity. Boise County needs jobs and your common sense is drowning us in your double standards. We are always having to work around your one sided ideologies and so we are broke.
Where were you environmental types when Treasure Valley developers were building the South Fork Landing sub division, which includs a whitewater park along the Payette River riparian area in Garden Valley? Why is that okay with you?
The environmental movement has become an industry in itself. Of course the ICL and other enviro groups have to keep track of what the dumb rubes in Boise County are up to with "your water" as that keeps them in high paying jobs doesn't it? If they didn't have us to keep tabs on and you idiots to donate money to them they wouldn't have a good paying job? Funny how that works.
You enviro folks want your SUVs & your PCs, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and shopping malls, and homes along the river in Boise. In fact, you want it all, but oh lord, you don’t want mining, ranching, logging or jobs to produce those valuable commodities and muss up your pristine weekend of hiking. We'll just buy everything from China and make them rich as well as the new world leaders. Then when China’s yuan becomes the new world currency you will find yourself paying $8/gal of gasoline.
Thanks to your efforts we have become a nation of consumers...a nation of parasites.
How about reaching for the middle to create jobs as well as practice good resource management for a change?
The Dark of Night
rangerider45:
This is not just a problem for Boise County, but exists throughout the entire Pacific Northwest, and maybe even all of the western United States.
Ignorant voters telling their keepers what's what via the ever-increasing powers of centralized government. How did this come to be? "Wilderness?" ESA? NEPA? Socialism? How?
How to fix? That's the real problem. It is mostly a problem of numbers, with urban "environmentalists" vs. the common sense experiences of the rural populations who have been keeping them fed, clothed, housed, warmed, and transported. "Democracy" in action. "Science" in lieu of religion.
If you take a hungry dog off the street and feed and house it and take care of it's needs, they won't bite you and maybe even come to protect you. That's a basic difference between a dog and an environmentalist.
Boise County's dwindling funds
Boise County didn't help itself by NIMBYing itself into a 4 million dollar settlement, and the forward thinking folks of Idaho City didn't help themselves by voting (by 15 votes) to not buy the Warm Springs pool.
Economic Death
I particularly enjoyed hearing the difference between a dog and an environmentalist. That is good. Personally, I think environmental law has locked up the entire nation, not just the Pacific Northwest, and a big reason why we import more than export and are in a recession.
It's a good thing Boise County voters turned down the costly Warm Springs pool idea as that would have cost millions to develop and would be additional money owed on top of the lawsuit. Money we don’t have. The Boise County voters were not in love with the idea of county gov’t running a business and as it turns out the good owner of the Warm Springs pool is going to open it up again soon. So that will help.
Yeppers, Boise County Commissioners and other leadership have made some mistakes. Maybe I’ll even throw voters into the blame pool as in the last election only 24% of the registered voters made it to the polls…good move folks. Anyway, Boise County has very limited monetary/political/legal resources, and the mistakes and problems usually can be traced back to environmentalism, private interests, bad lawyers and poor advice. But the biggest problem is we have an enviro pit bull hanging on to our pant leg. Enviros are power brokers, they know it and just won’t meet in the middle to mitigate resource/economic problems or help work out solutions for jobs as well as resource protection. Environmentalism is a self perpetuating industry of control that points the finger of doom & gloom at others to insure their own high paying jobs.
Boise County has no jobs, very little private property and no tax base due to the huge amount of federal Forest Service system lands in the county. To make it worse the environmental movement has locked up all the natural resources on those lands and therefore our jobs. You can’t have a viable community without a healthy business community. For a healthy business community you need folks with jobs as well as tourists who spend money here.
Boise County and Idaho City has no lakes, no major rivers, salmon fishing or kayaking or anything unique to attract tourists. Bogus Basin Ski Resort is in Boise County, but the last I heard they don’t even pay taxes to Boise County. I would imagine they have a non-profit exemption and on top of that they want Boise County to plow the snow for the Boise folks. We can’t win and the environmentalist’s idea of Boise County making a living off tourism is a stupid, cruel joke.
I write in the hopes that the general populace will begin to realize some environmental protection is a must, but too much protection makes economic death a certainty.
Warm Springs pool
I still think they dropped the ball on the pool deal. It would have only cost them $40 a year in taxes. They would have found a way to pay for the needed improvements (especially if they hadn't messed up the juvy ranch deal which would have provided much needed jobs as well as more tax revenue). Was up there today talking to a bar owner who almost blew a fuse even talking about the subject of the pool. His numbers went into the toilet after the pool went away. I used to love to go up there and cross country ski, have a few beers and swim in the pool. Good times.
As for the new owner, we'll see. His original idea of building a 5 star gay oriented resort (which would have gone over like a pink lead balloon) doesn't give me confidence in his business sense. It's not the Wood River Valley.
Broke always beats decomposition in my book.
----------
If you could handle the truth, you wouldn't be spoiling our social hour right now.
tree huggers versus tree cutters
Heaping the blame completely on one side or the other of the forest resource issue is counterproductive. While it is amusing to make jokes about one side or the other, it leads nowhere, and only perpetuates the hard feelings which undercut both side's goals. There is room for compromise, but only when both sides sit down together and try to work things out. There is good reason for anger and mistrust on both sides, but if such apparently intractable differences such as those that produced "the troubles" in North Ireland can be worked out, then there certainly is hope for resolution of the impasse in the timber/environmentalist schism. There are examples of both sides working together;
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012464368_wilderness28m.html
http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_5960ac0c-874c-11e0-a444-001cc4c002e0.html
"Both Sides"
There are two sides to a coin, too, and there is no collaboration between them, ever -- and for lots of good reasons. The only other "side" to a coin is the edge, and that's probably where any really solution lies.
The argument is between active management ("workers") and passive management ("preservationists"), and there really isn't any legitimate common ground between them; heads and tails. That's why lawyers jumped in an continue making money; and why most politicians have a background in law.
There are solutions out there, but compromise between "amusingly" labeled "huggers" and "cutters" aren't among them. When both sides can laugh at themselves without getting their "feelings" hurt, then maybe some meaningful discussion can begin to take place.
Meaningful discussion has taken place
My links point to examples, and compromise is part of the solution.
True enough -- if "meaningful" means "more Wilderness."
Sorry, seevee, still not convinced. These look like desperate concessions made by a (very) few players looking after their own few remaining interests. Very much like the deal struck by John Shelk and Andy Kerr for Ron Wyden's benefit in eastern Oregon -- political band-aids as treatment for widespread skin cancer. Good media for the handful of local "collaborators" involved, but essentially meaningless for everyone else.
This is a problem largely created by Congress, and that's the most likely place for any truly meaningful discussions to take place. This localized nickel-and-dime trading of small diameter logs for evermore burgeoning "Wilderness" doesn't really resolve anything.
Tester's bill (in Congress)
if successful could provide an opening for further movement on an otherwise stagnant situation.
Rather than just blaming the whole thing on ignorant city dwellers or Marxists or evil environmentalists, or I don't know... hippies?, what would you propose as a solution?
Thanks, seevee: "active management"
The solutions are pretty simple, really, and based on local, active management of our forest resources -- including timber production.
Some examples:
1) Redefine "species" in the ESA to mean "animals that can breed and produce viable young amongst themselves, no matter their current or historical ranges." Hoot owls are hoot owls, no matter their localized markings; gray wolves are gray wolves, no matter their current ranges, and so on. Then return management of animals to the states.
2) Hire competent forest managers to manage our federal lands under 1960 Multiple Use Sustained Yield (MUSY) guidelines, and make all litigants post a bond before filing suits. Use modern standards; e.g., limited use of clearcuts and grid-like plantations.
3) Remove almost all sources of taxpayer funding from nonprofit organizations who file suit against the federal government.
4) Salvage as many dead trees as possible following mortality by windfall, wildfire, bugs, or disease. Then replant as needed.
5) Research historical conditions of most forestlands (including "Wilderness" areas) to determine primary tree species, tree ages, and stand densities at the time of contact, and use that as a management guideline for restoring formerly logged lands, or mitigating stand replacement events whenever possible.
6) Redefine the Clean Air Act to encourage the restoration of widespread use of landscape-scale fire to our national forests in order to greatly reduce risk and damage caused by catastrophic wildfires -- including uncontrolled pollution and damage to our air, water, and soil.
7) Restore and maintain historical road and trail networks wherever possible, for forest management and recreational uses.
8) Reopen and maintain historical campgrounds and toilet facilities whenever possible, for recreational and sanitation uses and purposes.
9) Require forest waste materials to be processed through local biomass cogeneration facilities in order to reduce dependencies on foreign energy sources and fossil fuels.
You can think of more. Essentially, recreate the conditions that allowed local managers to do their jobs in the 1960s and before, without centralized government regulations or picayunish legal restrictions, as now exist. These changes would produce tens of thousands of new jobs almost immediately, save $billions in wasted resources caused by wildfires, bugs, and diseases, rejuvenate hundreds of rural communities and industries, create stable wildlife populations and recreational opportunities, and put hundreds of $millions into county, state, and federal treasuries.
So, yes, I believe that proactive solutions exist, so long as people are willing -- once again -- to trust the decisions of paid professionals to do their jobs and to believe that people are an important part of the landscape, and not pathogens. Active management for common goals vs. passive management for untested and/or disproven theories. Heads vs. tails. One or the other.
There we go
I knew you had the background to provide some useful insight and not just be snarky. Thank you.
Is "landscape-scale fire" another term for intentional burning?
How do you feel about suppression of lightning-caused fires? I suppose that answer can vary depending on the present condition of the particular forest in question.
I wish you luck. Now if you can just get your head right about human augmented global warming.... :)
And vice-versa
You're welcome, seevee:
My intent is always to be proactive, rather than snarky. It's just that most of the time I am being critical of the types of statements that require a curmudgeonly response in order to be acknowledged -- at least that's my excuse/experience.
By "landscape-scale" I mean regular (probably "every few years," on average) broadcast ("across the surface, without pilings") burns several thousand acres in size; typically sufficient to cover much or all of a subbasin. This is a method successfully used by Indians throughout North America for thousands of years to maintain sustainable pine woodlands, oak savannnahs, prairies, meadows, and huckleberry patches. "Prescribed fires" are planned, intentional fires started by people in order to meet stated objectives.
I think that if the land is "prepared for fire" (i.e., surface fuels generally reduced to pre-white contact levels), then lightning fires become essentially irrelevant. Like lightning striking a Safeway parking lot in Boise today; or a softball field, golf course, or potato farm. No fuel, no problem. On the other hand, your observation that "suppression" becomes dependent on "the present condition of a particular forest" is exactly right. Most forests in the western US have become choked with living and dead fuels in which any type of ignition is apt to develop into a wildfire with serious negative consequences and major environmental damage. Such fires are not "natural" at all, but predictable and anomalous events exacerbated by unprecedented fuel build-ups. Predictable and preventable. "Suppression" then usually becomes a matter of "too little, too late."
I have the same basic perspective regarding AGW ("Apocalyptic Global Warming") as I do regarding "natural fire intervals" and The Rapture, but thanks for the good wishes. I believe anyone is welcomed to believe anything they wish, but should be able to differentiate between beliefs and facts.
One thing though, Bob...
Safeway closed it's SLC division in 1985? and a lot of them stores became Farmer John stores, a division on SEG Stores, Inc. That sale consequently caused a liquidation in bankruptcy court and so all of them became IGA stores or independents.
To my limited knowledge, there weren't any Safeways in Boise and Albertson's gradually pushed Buttrey's, Smith's and others out of business in the area.
Thus, the Safeway of Nampa's 12th Avenus Road that I shopped at in my youth became an IGA and the one in Payette is WICAP while the nearest Safeway store is likely in La Grande or Baker City.
----------
If you could handle the truth, you wouldn't be spoiling our social hour right now.
FO
If it's on the "other" side of the tracks in Baker City, good luck. You can't get there from here.
The Underpass
seevee:
I lived next to the railroad tracks while I was a kid in Baker in the late 1950s, on Myrtlewood Drive. The next street over had an underpass that went right under the tracks about 1/2 block from my home. That's how we got there from there.
Bob
I know that underpass
While driving to Union to play golf with three of my buds, we decided to check out the Baker City golf course. Well, the underpass was closed, and I spent 15 minutes driving aroud helplessly trying to get to the course. I got plenty of grief from the backseat, and eventually had to give up as we had a tee time to make. Obviously a "local knowledge" golf course.
It's right there by downtown and heavily shopped.
Come in of the exit outside of town and drive in that way.
----------
If you could handle the truth, you wouldn't be spoiling our social hour right now.
Active Management
In my replies I used the term "enviros" out of lack of imagination/laziness. I just couldn’t bring myself to type out environmentalist every time so I shortened it to enviro. It wasn’t intended to be derogatory. Still, I am obviously frustrated with where the environmental movement has taken Idaho and this nation over the years.
For me my world is divided into two camps which include the conservationists and the environmentalists. As far as I’m concerned there is a vast difference between conservationists and environmentalists. "Conservationists" want to use and manage natural resources wisely for sustained yield or preservation as well as for economical reasons by applying the best management practices and science available. "Environmentalists" want to permanently lock up natural resources for preservation and recreation by using the best political science available.
I would like to see a conservation organization formed whose agenda would be an unbiased, honest search for responsible management as well as economic balance. An organization staffed with economists, professionals and/or scientists to make professional scientific recommendations on projects in an effort to counterbalance environmental pressure.
Anyway, great reply Bob as you hit the nail on the head fairly squarely. If only there was a way to isolate land/wildlife/resource managers from politics. I believe the Forest Service used to be the best governmentt agency with its Multiple Use Management style. Now, I think the last two decades of environmental politics have shackled them nearly to the point of making them irrelevant to resource management.
Bob, are you now or have you been a forester or other resource manager?
My shady past and opinions
Thank you rangerider45:
I figured we were probably on the same page. And thanks to Internet communications, grassroot groups of conservationist (which is nearly the polar opposite of current definitions of the term contrived by the preservationist movement) foresters and scientists are forming and taking action. I will be presenting to such a group on June 2 at Weed, California, for example, in which participants will include retired USFS officials, foresters, forest scientists, current agency reps, local politicians, and concerned citizens.
My ancestors went through Idaho in covered wagons in 1851 and 1852, and an uncle was even killed there at Massacre Rocks. Idaho was still part of Oregon at that time. A great-grandfather operated a sawmill, and a grandfather logged, in Washington (nee "Oregon"),as did my father at the time of my birth. I operated a reforestation business and wrote and implemented tree farm plans ("tree planter,""forester," and "logger") for more than 20 years, before returning to school. My BS is in forestry, my MAIS thesis focused on forest history, and my PhD research in Environmental Sciences focused on Indian burning patterns and catastrophic wildfire history on the Coast Range of (what's left of) Oregon.
The two major problems I see that have evolved over the past 40 years on our federal lands is the adoption of numerous laws transferring management of federal lands from the states to the federal government (Wilderness, ESA, EPA, "roadless" areas, etc.), and the emergence of "wildlife biologist" influences in the field of environmental sciences, where "wildlife habitat" and new definitions of species and sub-species have become key drivers in the planning process, and marketable points of contention in the legal system.
Our forests and grasslands have become degraded and decimated -- along with our rural communities and industries -- over the past several decades as a result.
PS "Enviros" is a pretty accepted term for members of the environmental industry these days -- they even use it themselves. I do want to slap their mouths and make them leave the room whenever they have the audacity to refer to themselves as "conservationists," however, or make the ludicrous claim that they are "only trying to protect our threatened resources." I do have contempt for those types of nitwits, and see no point in trying to "collaborate" with such nonsense. Let the professionals do the jobs they were hired to do and let the Enviros go camping, take notes, and learn to say "thank you."
Shady Past
My family arrived in Idaho from Missouri in the late 1800s and depended on ranching & farming. I was raised in Hailey, Idaho, but when Averell Harriman sold the Union Pacific resort of Sun Valley, Idaho everything turned upside down, my family sold out and I left the ranching world to work with the Forest Service. As a young man the local district ranger, Dick Stemple, let me go to work with him in about 1957 and I was permanently hooked on the Forest Service forever.
I worked for the FS for 30+ years as a Forestry Tech and Range Tech. My great love was range work, but liked forestry as well and I fought fires in Idaho from 1968 to about 2000. I sure saw huge changes in fire behavior as well as fire prevention techniques over the years. I have done a lot of horse packing for the Forest Service because of my skills with horses/livestock, vegetation management and I was able to implement some good changes in livestock grazing during my time. I purposely limited my schooling to remain a technician because I did not want to be chained to a desk job. I wanted to work on the ground and believe me I have drunk from every creek on the forest.
Will your presentation be to a conservation group/org or is it more of a training seminar? You said, "Foresters and scientists are forming and taking action." Can you point me towards any of them that I might join or support?
Shady dealings.
rangerider45:
We may have crossed paths on the Sundance Fire in northern Idaho in the late 1960s. I started my reforestation contracting career there a few years later, in 1970, and met my future wife in Athol (probably named after "thum athol")during that time.
I'd start with the National Association of Forest Service Retirees: http://www.fsx.org/
Contact John Marker (coauthor) here: http://www.wildfire-economics.org/Contact.html
The second link will also put you in touch with me, but John is your man.
Best,
Bob Z.
PS I was able to stay in the woods for nearly 25 years before the spotted hoot owl sent me back to school; now I'm lucky to get out 5 or 6 days a month -- but I won't ever have to retire!
Just build and fix the roads, regardless of monies, and then
ask for a bailout....
No, start a BAILANDO...
----------
If you could handle the truth, you wouldn't be spoiling our social hour right now.
Wow
The discussion is much better than the blog. Thank you Bob Z. and Range Rider for your time and effort to educate folks.