If ever there was a living example of how federal funding and bureaucrats can sometimes work against the communities they serve, the Blue Mountains Intergovernmental Council (BIC) and US Forest, is it.
We have recently obtained the "Blues Intergovernmental Council (BIC) Desired Conditions Current Contributions to Draft Forest Plan Desired Conditions." As indicated by the title, the document linked below outlines the BIC's current contributions to the development of the "Desired Conditions" for the Draft Forest Plan Revision. There are some key issues to "The BIC" contributing to this development and we're going to lay them out in this post.
The Forest Service states -
"The Blue Mountains Forest Plan Revision team is grateful for the support and guidance the BIC has provided throughout this process. Without community leadership bringing local voices to the table, this work would not be successful. We would like to acknowledge the amount of work and time committed to providing the team with the BIC's Desired Conditions. In response, our team continues to develop and revise materials considering these Desired Conditions. Below we outline how each Desired Condition from the BIC was considered and implemented in revision efforts to date. If there are any follow-up questions, we are always available for further discussion. Thank you again for your commitment to this robust process."
Any active member of the public who frequents the mountains of Eastern Oregon and Southeastern Washington should feel a chill when reading the Access Section of this document.
Click Here -> Full Blues Intergovernmental Council (BIC) Desired Conditions Current Contributions to Draft Forest Plan Desired Conditions.
So, who are the "members" of the BIC? You might think it's the County Commissioners of Eastern Oregon, and that it's a working group of intergovernmental local governments formed to address issues on the forest plan revision to represent their residents' concerns. However, that is NOT what the BIC is, nor is it the makeup of its "membership." The BIC includes 14 counties spanning from Eastern Oregon into Southeastern Washington, several state regulatory agencies, the WA/OR Wildlife Departments, WA Natural Resources, OR Dept. of Forestry, several tribes, and a well-known environmental group from Portland called Sustainable Northwest, represented by its satellite office in Enterprise, known as Wallowa Resources. The BIC is presented to the people of Eastern Oregon and Southeast Washington as a voice of the people but behaves more like a special interest group, prioritizing different forest uses for their personal interests over the desires of the region's residents, who have clearly expressed their views over the last 15-plus years, ranging from no more wilderness to no more road closures, to keeping an open forest for motorized access, these concerns have been articulated numerous times and ignored at every turn.
The Forest Service is truly "grateful" for a group of individuals pretending to represent public desires while knowing they are co-opting the process to achieve the agency's goal of closing the forest to motorized access on the Wallowa-Whitman and Malheur National Forests, and perpetuating the false narrative that Umatilla users are happy with the near-total closure of that forest.
Wallowa Resources staff is frequently listed in the BIC meeting minutes as a "member," clearly indicating their status in the group. This process was not about "bringing local voices to the table"; it was about confirming a predetermined outcome while giving the illusion of public participation, which did not actually occur. More shockingly, when counties tried to provide input that was counter to the agency desire, it was rejected and dismissed as ill-informed or repetitive, only for individuals to overrun subcommittees and draft their own desired conditions to fit the Forest Service's predetermined outcome.
For example, the Desired Condition for Access was led by Mr. Bill Harvey, now our Vice-President at FAFA and formerly Chair of the Baker County Commissioners. He advocated for an open forest system for motorized use for multiple reasons, including subsistence, industry, community protection, safety, recreation, and traditional and cultural uses. Bill was marginalized and treated poorly throughout his time in the BIC, in our opinion, as our members witnessed first hand when they were able to attend. Ultimately, Mr. Mark Owens (we do not call him Representative as we do not believe he deserves the title) was installed as the chair of the subcommittee since the Access Desired Condition was holding the group back, due to Bill's unwavering support for an open forest system. Mr. Owens famously said, "we have to give them something," and the "something" he gave was our Open Forest System. Mr. Owens worked to draft a Desired Condition that clearly supports Travel Management, now referred to as "Access Management," in the document, which supports closing the forest to motorized access and the resources needed to sustain our families.
Mr. Owens was presented two edits of acceptable Access Desired Conditions from both Grant and Baker Counties. Mr. Owens stated he had "heard before" and chose to ignore them because they supported open access and did not "give them something" in the form of a closed forest. He instead helped push through a desired condition that the agency found beneficial for restricting motorized access to roughly 95% or more of the Wallowa-Whitman and Malheur National Forests.
Members of FAFA continually tried to participate and have a voice in the process, but were regularly told they could not have a "seat at the table" because they were not members, while Sustainable Northwest and Wallowa Resources were allowed a "seat at the table," informing decision-making and guiding the development of the Desired Conditions.
The notion that this process or group helped bring "local voices to the table" is as far-fetched as one can get. The BIC held a series of public meetings in the fall of 2022 to roll out their Desired Conditions. When asked at the meetings if the public's comments from Travel Management and the Original Forest Plan Revision process were considered, the answer was NO. The BIC took its own concerns from the failed Forest Plan Revision attempt that was withdrawn in 2018, but never considered the thousands of comments submitted that advocated for retaining an open forest.
There was and is no interest in actual local voices informing these Desired Conditions, only a desire to confirm a biased process run by Forest Service staff, preordained for the outcome long before the group was formed. When individuals stood against the predetermined narratives, they were marginalized in what can only be called the most egregious example of Groupthink our region has ever seen.
How can you help stop it? Get involved. Attend Forest Service meetings and advocate for open motorized access to the forest. Communicate firmly, yet respectfully, to the staff that your family’s livelihood depends on these mountains, and that further restrictions would directly impact your ability to support them. Participate by commenting during open comment periods. We strive to provide you with information on the forest plan revision and related issues. Building the administrative record is crucial, and this is achieved through our written comments and objections throughout the process.
Comments