A devastating year (so far) for Oregon and the environment…

April 9th, 2008

This year is bad. Very bad. Things are bleak, bleak. Here are the things on the top of my mind that have, are, or likely will happen in terms of the environment and Oregon… I don’t have time to link back, so search Google for specifics on any of them…

  • Palomar LNG pipeline ripping up farmland and forest.
  • LNG terminal at Astoria received county approval and will almost certainly get FERC approval.
  • Western Oregon Plan Revisions approval to massively increase logging on BLM lands (that even its own scientists say is badly flawed).
  • Hush money paid to Indian tribes to back-off and repudiate their formal demands that Snake/Columbia river dams be removed.
  • Destination resorts in Central Oregon, including at the headwaters of the Metolius River, are marching forward.
  • Casino in the Gorge increasingly likely.
  • Approval for mega-resort in the Gorge, with hundreds of houses, approved.
  • Salmon stocks declining to the point that all commercial fisheries are closing (even the fisherman want them closed which tells you something).

It’s on and on with this crap. And, as you know, once a destination resort is built, it is there for the long haul. It ain’t moving. To defend the environment, you need to win each and every battle. When developers “lose” a battle, they simply can try again and again. And if they ever win, there’s no turning things back.

The solution to these issues? Well, in the short term, for many of them, the courts.

In the long term, here are a few late night thoughts:

1. Increasing outreach and education of citizens as to the value and necessity of strong environmental safeguards, including land use planning and regulations. The concept of “community rights” needs to have as much play as the recently hyped and faulty notion of “(individual) property rights”.

2. In regards to education, the twin issues of the value of biodiversity and the value of habitat needs increasing play. Too much of the attention is on “energy” issues and global warming. And while these issues are indeed important, we’re seeing death by a thousand cuts with loss of critical habitat and biodiversity. To this end, these issues should somehow be tied to the increasingly popular issues of global warming, etc… you know, habitat as a heat sink, etc. I dunno… but the message needs to shift to facts on the ground, rather than lofty somewhat vague “scare” issues like energy and warming.

3. More Democratic judges and legislators. And I am not taking about rubes like Barack Obama and other compromisers who give with one hand and take away with the other (Obama went along with the Energy plan which has landed us with all these LNG terminals). We need Democratic fighters who won’t back down when faced with ugly pressure groups. And we need more Democratic judges (because there is no such thing as a disinterested judge… all judges are partisan one way or another) to help assert State’s rights to regulate and control what happens with our state.

4. Stronger land use laws on both the federal and local levels. As we’ve seen with some of these mega-projects, when approval by the state happens, they still need approval by the federal government under some different law. Or vice versa. As such, the best bulwark against the anti-environment forces at work are overlapping laws, allowing for multi-jurisdictional defenses.

5. More advocacy groups and more money to them. These groups are increasingly important in terms of the above points. But it would be nice to see some of them divested from their commercial or corporate benefactors, and the ability to be a bit more scrappy and flexible. Philanthropy, generally, needs to shift some of its efforts to conservation and the environment; such issues currently receive a fraction of overall giving.


Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Required (to fight spam)

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed



Try Angie's List!


Outdoor Kids Gear


Nitro-Pak Preparedness Center

About Land Use Watch

Commentary and hyperbole on land use issues impacting the NW, the US, the world... Contact at peter (at) landusewatch.com ... Please email postal address to inquire about receiving Land Use Watch in monthly hard-copy periodical format.

Recent Comments

DE: “From my point of view, they are the antichrist of the world.” —Ken Salazar, to a Colorado Springs television station in April 2006, about James Dobson’s Focus on the Family group. He later said, “I regret having used that term. I meant to say this approach was un-Christian, meaning self-serving and selfish.”
-- 1:08 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

DE: “Earned a perfect-100 ranking in 2008 from the League of Conservation Voters, a nonpartisan organization that tracks environmental-voting records in Congress. His lifetime LCV score is an 81.” A 100 ranking from LCV. This is a massive improvement over Bush’s henchmen. You’ll never be happy.
-- 1:07 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama just doesn’t get it

DE: This blog has become a depressing place to hang out. I enjoyed your coverage of M37-49, but it’s just angry hackery now. Maybe it will be more fun when Nader is elected in 2012 and you can celebrate his excellent appointments, but for now… Unsubscribed.
-- 1:03 pm, December 22, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

Zarathustra: Fremont County Veterinary Clinic in Sidney (the closest vet,) falsely identified as the clinic who would euthanize cats, issued a statement that they would in fact spay/neuter cats for Trap-Neuter-Return in an agreement with Fry‘s Country Bargains, a no-kill shelter in Creston. There are a lot in NE, if you want to go that far. Locally, beware of OHSU. They play loose with the regs and are not above paying people to round up cats, claim cats and dogs at the pound, etc., where they end up in OHSU labs. Hard to believe it can be hard to get that message out, here. I was shocked that saying that there...
-- 8:06 pm, December 18, 2008 in Trap, neuter, release and the Iowa cats

Zarathustra: Like it’s accidental? He gets it; it’s the Dems that voted for him that don’t get it! This was the wost from a third party POV in years.
-- 7:54 pm, December 18, 2008 in Obama just doesn’t get it

Zarathustra: Tomorrow’s my b-day. Hope it’s my last. No change; no hope! Hmmm, maybe a cunning plan to deal with health insurance; people not giving a damn if they live or die. Well, something to hope for. Bill Clinton doubled the Federal non-violent prison population. I’m predicting that BO will stink in the same way, only worse. Dems are suckers for that action and I stand to clean up when it does happen. Like I care about money. Yeah, back to no hope. Which is worse, to run as the face of evil and fulfill it, or run as hope and change and give us more of the same? I much prefer an open...
-- 7:51 pm, December 18, 2008 in Obama (and the Sierra Club) sucks, part 3

R: ***COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC*** Glad to see you’re back from your hiatus. I came to this site to post an obligatory comment about cats and birds, as my indoor cat is obsessed with birds this morning, but will refrain since you’ve posted new stuff. Keep fighting the good fight! :)
-- 9:10 am, December 15, 2008 in Raul Grijalva for Interior! (NO to Mike Thompson!)

johanna lynch: Mike Thompson is a bad joke here in Northern California. He is a good ‘ole wine boy! Anti-environmentalist and would be disastrous as Secretary of the Interior. Thompson would be as bad as it gets under the Reagan administration re environmental issues. Forestry, land use and wildlife would be brutalized. This man is a “trophy hunter” the worst kind of idiot-recreational hunters. An embarrassment for the US and a disgraceful example of disdain for nature, wildlife and diminishing natural resources
-- 10:24 am, December 14, 2008 in Raul Grijalva for Interior! (NO to Mike Thompson!)

SANDMAN: I don’t know, but when the Bush administration murdered 68,000 salmon on the lower Klamath river Thompson dumped 500 lbs of dead fish on the steps of BOR’s DC office building and demanded change. Last week parties announced an agreement in principle to remove the lower four Klamath dams - this would be the largest river resotration event in World History. Not bad pro-environmental credential if you ask me.
-- 12:06 pm, December 12, 2008 in Mike Thompson: Elephant hunter?

Peter: I’ve been through every vote he has made since 1991. When he votes for Bush’s “Healthy Forests Initiative”, against fish/widlife funding, against roadless areas in Tongass… and many times when he did such votes he was the ONLY California Democrat to do so (or one of only 30 Dems total to do so)… I can only conclude that he is anti-environment. Carl Pope might very well favor him versus a GOPer in that seat. Mike Thompson is a BAD choice for Interior. He hasn’t been a leader for the environment, save for dumping some fish and sponsoring a bill… he has simply...
-- 12:56 pm, December 11, 2008 in Is Klamath Riverkeeper anti-environment?

ed hochuli: You need to take it easy with the hyperventilating…” Bush-lite?” The guy won the Sierra Club’s Edgar Wayburn award last year. I went to a fundraiser of his in Santa Rosa and Carl Pope was there praising him over and over. Ask environmental groups in his district like klamath riverkeeper how he is on the environment. Anyone can pick through a few votes. Do your homework.
-- 10:43 am, December 11, 2008 in Is Klamath Riverkeeper anti-environment?

Peter: Thompson is hardly progressive. He is, after all, a member of the conservative Blue Dog democrats. And I’m not sure how many progressives get awards, such as Legislator of the Year, from pro-hunting outfits like Safari Club International (whose members hunt lions, rhinos, elephants, etc).
-- 7:24 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

John Mccarthy: Look, what were doing here is just having a useless argument between two well-suited democrats who would both do well in this position. I happen to know Mike personally, I happen to know that he just received an award this week from the Sierra Club because of his conservation efforts. Also, I don’t feel it necessary to instigate a battle with someone who does not think Obama is “progressive” enough, or someone who did not support Obama. Actually do some research, go on Thompson’s site, and you’ll find your results. And hey, I support Mike, but you support Grijalva, and power...
-- 6:47 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

Peter: You “could” do it? Well, go ahead and do so. If you don’t, then it is hardly evidence. Look at Thompson’s record. He is bought and owned by hunting interests and will do their bidding every time. Limits on roadless areas? Voted against it. Bush’s anti-environment policies, such as Healthy Forests? Supported them. Thompson may very well win. And that’s one of the main reasons I never supported Barack Obama. He is not a progressive.
-- 6:34 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

John Mccarthy: Mike Thompson happens to be a competent, capable person that I, and many others support to be Secretary of Interior. He has a long history of preserving the environment, which you have obviously failed to mention. Peter, I could do a long anti-environment blog against Grijalva, because I’m sure I could nitpick at all the bills he’s vetoed and passed, but I, unlike you, have better things to do with my time, as well as an actual sense of politics. There’s also a reason Obama has Thompson as the frontrunner, and not Grijalva. When Thompson is picked, I will be laughing at you and your...
-- 6:28 pm, December 8, 2008 in Mike Thompson is anti-environment

Posts by Date

April 2008
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Posts by Month

  • Blogroll

  • Land Use Advocacy

  • Tools

  • Feeds