Oregon lawmakers hear arguments over Owyhee monument
SALEM — Advocates and opponents of a proposed 2.5 million-acre national monument in Eastern Oregon tried to enlist the support of state lawmakers during a recent legislative hearing.
The two sides are mounting competing public relations campaigns to influence the possible designation of the Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument, which will ultimately be decided by President Barack Obama.
Critics say the area is bigger than the Yellowstone, Yosemite or Grand Canyon national parks and would cover 40 percent of Malheur County.
Ranchers and other natural resource users in the region have objected to the proposal, fearing the establishment of a national monument will entail new regulations on public land and invite additional environmental lawsuits.
“We see it as a rash and somewhat of a belligerent move to force a monument in this area,” rancher Elias Eiguren told the House Committee on Rural Communities, Land Use and Water on May 23.
While grazing could theoretically continue within the national monument, the details of livestock management within its boundaries would surely be subject to costly litigation, Eiguren said.
Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, questioned why it’s necessary to designate the area as a national monument when it’s already protected under several federal environmental laws as a property of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.
“This land is so protected that nothing has happened on it for 150 years, that’s how protected it is,” Bentz said. “It’s already been frozen in place. Why add another layer?”
The Oregon Natural Desert Association and other environmental groups that support the monument proposal say they’re not trying to eliminate grazing, but instead want to prevent mining, transmission lines and oil and gas development.
The Owyhee Canyonlands currently aren’t protected from these threats under existing laws, said Brent Fenty, executive director of ONDA.
For about 30 years, the region has been a “wilderness study area,” which offers temporary protections that won’t become permanent unless approved by Congress, Fenty said.
He likened the situation to a marital engagement that hasn’t actually led to a wedding for decades.
“We have not made a commitment to holding this landscape together,” said Fenty.
Environmental groups have pushed for Congress to designate the Owyhee Canyonlands region in southeast Oregon as a “national conservation area,” but the effort hasn’t gained traction, which led to the national monument proposal, he said. National monuments can be established with an executive action by the president.
“You can only bring people to the table if they agree to come to the table,” he said of the Congressional proposal.
Supporters touted a poll they commissioned that showed 70 percent of Oregon residents supported permanent protections for the Owyhee Canyonlands, including 66 percent in Oregon’s 2nd Congressional District where the national monument would be located.
Tourism in the region would be boosted by such permanent protections, said John Sterling, executive director of the Conservation Alliance, which represents outdoor recreation companies.
“Protecting a place literally puts it on a map,” he said.
Monument opponents responded with their own poll results, which showed 73 percent of Oregonians believe that national monument designations should be approved by Congress rather than the president.
More than 60 percent of that poll’s respondents said the Owyhee Canyonlands area already has enough protections.
The surrounding community has only now begun to heal after the standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge earlier this year, so the monument proposal threatens to reignite those tensions, said Brian Wolfe, Malheur County’s sheriff.
Wolfe said he feared for public safety if the monument proposal attracts militants to return to the region. “I fear they will not be reasonable,” he said.