Less Than 24 Hours To Go: Waiting For The Politicos to Decide Our
By Tom Chandler on Nov 12, 2007 in Natural Resources Nightmare
Around midday, the Undergrounders sent their 100th e-mail to Siskiyou County’s supervisors, and with that, our work is largely done.
All that’s left is to hold our breath and wait for tomorrow’s vote on Siskiyou County’s Natural Resources Plan (2:30 pm), which threatens to declare all the county’s river’s non-navigable (and non-accessible to most fly fishers).
No one will say you guys didn’t do your best; our voice was clearly heard by the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors.
Whether they heed it or not remains to be seen.
The public comment at the last Board of Supervisors meeting ran about 90% against the plan. I imagine it will be the same at this meeting, and god knows the supervisors have heard plenty from the Underground’s legions on the Internet.
If they’re going to vote for it at this point, they’ll do so against the weight of public opinion, which at the very least saps some of their momentum, and creates some sticky questions for them when they’re up for reelection.
One Small Victory
I found out this afternoon that we were able to force a few changes in the ordinance language, so it no longer forces the committee to use the existing Natural Resource Policy (the one we’ve been fighting). Unfortunately, neither does it force the creation of an all-new policy based on public input.
Still, it’s a start.
I’m going to make every effort to be at the meeting, and I’ll let you know what’s happened. (Naturally, the meeting’s taking place right smack in the middle of a drizzly day BWO hatch, proof that the Supervisors are anti-fly fisher…)
Thanks again! We now return you to your regularly scheduled fly fishing programming.
See you in board chambers, Tom Chandler
overmywaders | Nov 12, 2007 | Reply
Tom,
I enjoy your upbeat nature, but the change from the definite article “the” to the indefinite article “a” in the ordinance just gives more leeway to the BOS. Now, they can arbitrarily create “a Statement of Policies on Natural Resources”, revise it at any time, and all without public knowledge or input. The original reason to create the Natural Resource Advisory Committee (they already have one created with the Feds) and to have it covered by the Brown Act was in order to get their policies *apparently* open to the public, while, in fact, they used the ordinance creating the Committee to legitimize the policies. The Committee has no authority or responsibility, it is a paper tiger - it can’t even make recommendations to the BOS except “as directed.”
We were better off with “the” policies, which were known, than the black box that now exists, IMHO.
If you read past BOS minutes you will find that they were well aware of means to avoid public scrutiny while still obtaining legitimacy. If you read the Aug. 14th BOS minutes:
“Supervisor Overman suggested a resolution and shared concerns regarding the Board of Supervisors appointing members of the committee
vs. the County Administrator, because if appointed by the Board of Supervisors the committee would be subject to the Brown Act.
Mr. Curtis advised that Modoc County operates under the Brown Act advising that it keeps the public informed of proposed actions.
Discussion followed regarding the committee being an advisory committee
rather than a decision/policy making body….
“Supervisor Overman shared concerns regarding the possibility of
committee members having to complete Form 700’s, and concerns
regarding making the committee fall under the Brown Act.”
http://www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/bos/minutes/2007/081407.pdf
Of course, the Committee never actually has to perform a substantive function - it only has to have three (of 15) members meet once every two months. It has no role for the BOS other than as a decoy. :)
Kevin M | Nov 12, 2007 | Reply
Tom,
I’ve been wondering about the Natural Resources Plan. Is it a plan in the sense that it is guidance for enacting county regulations? After passing the plan would the BOS then need to propose and enact county regulations - something the Sheriff could actually enforce? In other words, the plan is a declaration of intent by the BOS, not enforceable until the regulatory step is taken?
- Kevin
Tom Chandler | Nov 12, 2007 | Reply
Kevin: The Supervisors are being tricky. The ordinance that’s being passed establishes the advisory committee, who uses the Natural Resource Policies as guidelines.
The policies themselves should be developed by the committee, but instead they’ve been largely written by one supervisor, and because they’re “guidelines” they only need to be passed by a resolution of the board.
That’s why it’s so important to stamp this thing out now; once the ordinance is in place, the Wise Use folks are off and running.
Tom Chandler | Nov 12, 2007 | Reply
Over: What’s becoming clear from the whole process is that the only real hope is to kill the thing now. There are too many holes to drive through and too many folks willing to take advantage of the process.
In fact, just late today I found out this whole tactic is the brainchild of the “Stewards of the Range” — another so-called “Wise Use” group.
The goal here is to prevent environmental and federal groups from protecting what natural resources are left for extractive industries — and to do so, they need both a committee AND a Natural Resource Policy.
While those involved have repeatedly stated this isn’t a Wise Use gig, based on some documents just received by an opponent, it’s become clear that it is.
Damnit. All along this whole process seemed a little too legally tricky to have been the product of our own supervisors. Turns out I was right.
Alex Cerveniak | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
Good job on this, Tom, no matter what the outcome. Do I see a Fly Rod & Reel “Angler of the Year” award in your future? I think your efforts on this issue are at least worth a nomination.
Tom Chandler | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
Alex: Thanks. It’s a flattering thought, but all I really want for Xmas is for this stinker to be over.
The BWOs are hatching downriver and instead of getting my ass kicked by trout, I’m driving to Yreka (with a carload of unhappy locals) and sitting in a big, dumb room.
And anyway, if we pull this off, it’ll be because of all of us.
kbarton10 | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
Angler of the Year? More likely they’ll find his bullet riddled vehicle when they dredge Lake Siskiyou sometime in the future.
This is “black helicopter” stuff, now that the Bush administration sez, “Waterboarding ain’t torture” - TC’s fate is sealed.
Tom Chandler | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
kbarton: Truer words were never spoken; I now carry a powerful 10wt for personal defense and am in the process of training Wally the Wonderdog in attack techniques.
Unfortunately, our only assault exercise was a dismal failure; Wally the Wonderdog enthusiastically licked the assailant’s face while I threw a monster tailing loop against the back of my own head, rendering myself unconscious.
Clearly, I need a bodyguard.
Don | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
Hey Tom, good work you’ve done here. I wish you and the rest the best of luck. It’ll be interesting to see where this ends up.
Don
Matt | Nov 13, 2007 | Reply
Good luck Tom. Your northern neighbors are pulling for you. If you get this cleared up, maybe you can help us stop the WOPR… a whole nother can of worms.