PUBLIC LANDS COMMISSIONER DOUG SUTHERLAND SPEAKS IN BELFAIR
By Mary Swoboda
Belfair, WA - May 14, 2002 - Washington State Public Lands
Commissioner Doug Sutherland spoke to a crowd of about 25 people at
Theler Center in Belfair on Thursday, May 9, 2002, on a wide range of
issues, from forestry practices, poaching and bug infestations to how
the Road Maintenance and Abandonment Plan (RMAP) will adversely impact
property owners, both public and private.
Mr. Sutherland oversees the Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
which manages 2.1 million acres of forestland, 1.25 million acres of
agricultural land and 2.6 million acres of aquatic land for seven
different trusts (the largest is the common school trust). The State
Constitution requires the DNR to manage these trusts with
"undivided loyalty" to benefit the beneficiaries and all the
people of Washington. "We try to earn as much money as we can
because the more we earn, the less burden on taxpayers," Mr.
Sutherland acknowledged.
Speaking specifically of the Tahuya Forest, Mr. Sutherland said it is
becoming more and more well known throughout Western Washington as a
great place to enjoy outdoor recreation because it is close to large
population centers. Public access to all DNR-managed forests is
encouraged, but Mr. Sutherland reminded the audience that his first
responsibility is to the forest and its health, and to maintain a
sustainable timber harvest in perpetuity for the benefit of the
beneficiaries.
Speaking of the forest's health, Mr. Sutherland shared a concern that
Washington forests "have a significant infestation of bugs"
that have migrated from California through Oregon and Washington and
into Canada.
"Forests are living mosaics," he said, and "require
active management, not passive management." The average life
cycle of mature trees is 35-70 years and if they are not harvested or
properly thinned, disease and bug infestation become more prevalent,
invariably leading to destructive wild fires. Currently, the DNR is
conducting an extensive, 2-year study to determine the proper level of
sustainable harvest for the trees they manage.
Shellfish poaching is a serious problem. Unchecked, poachers can
deplete the harvest so severely that people aren't able to harvest
shellfish in certain areas for a long time. Both DNR and Fish and
Wildlife enforcement officers monitor shoreline areas during the day,
but most "professional" poachers work at night. Mr.
Sutherland suggested that anyone who hears unusual sounds at night in
known shellfish habitat areas should call the State Patrol at
1-800-283-7808 to report suspected poaching.
Mr. Sutherland discussed the impacts of the Road Maintenance and
Abandonment Plan (RMAP), which will adversely impact nearly every
property owner who owns 2.5 acres or more of forestland or land with a
stream on it.
In 1995, the federal government issued a mandate requiring each state
to develop a plan that would provide assurances to the federal
government, which in turn would "protect" (indemnify) state
government from lawsuits on actions taken in forest areas.
Representatives from tribes, environment, industrial timber, small
landowner timber, and state agencies were involved in the negotiation.
In 1999, the legislature adopted and the governor signed "in
statute" the Forest and Fish Report, which was the outcome of
those negotiations. DNR was tasked to develop the implementing
regulations, taking effect on July 1, 2001. "It's an incredibly
thick book. Not quite as bad as the tax code, but almost, and the
language is sometimes very difficult to work your way through
it," said Mr. Sutherland.
There were several issues DNR had to resolve:
. Buffers on streams . Harvesting practices . Forest road standards . Culverts
Existing forest roads too close to streams would have to be abandoned
and standards would have to be developed on how new roads would be
built. New culverts would need to be large enough to have a bottom of
rock or other streambed material, rather than just bare culvert.
"Most fish won't swim through a culvert without some materials on
the bottom -- at least that's what they say -- because [the fish]
don't think it's a streambed," Mr. Sutherland said.
"This is how RMAP - the Road Maintenance and Abandonment Plan --
was born," he added.
Education of the public began in July 1999 with DNR land managers
targeting property owners with more than 500 acres first since there
are only about 1,200 to 1,500 owners of land in excess of 500 acres
and they have the highest probability of harvest activity. As a
result, many of the approximately 90,000 landowners with 500 acres or
less were unaware of this latest infringement upon their property
rights.
RMAP requires property owners of forestland or land containing a
stream to identify any streams on the property, then develop a plan as
to how they will deal with roads and culverts. Property owners have 5
years to put the plan in place and 15 years to make the improvements
(a total of 20 years). However, if the property owner plans to harvest
timber, the plan must be put into place at the same time the forest
harvest application is submitted. RMAP gave property owners with over
500 acres flexibility to complete one-fifth of their plan over each
year of the 5-year period. Smaller property owners have five years to
develop their plan.
DNR continued with their public education efforts and more people
became aware of the RMAP "problem."
DNR itself has had RMAP "problems," according to Mr.
Sutherland. "We had to replace a culvert, which cost us $18,000.
Two hundred feet above the culvert was a natural barrier that no fish
could get up. A quarter mile downstream was a county road with a
culvert that the county intended to change in about 15 years. However,
we had harvest activity above this road and that's why we had to
change the culvert. The culvert change came out of DNR's proceeds of
the harvest, reducing the value of that particular harvest by
$18,000."
"DNR has some 14,000 miles of roads," Mr. Sutherland
continued. "Our best guess is RMAP is going to cost us, in this
20-year period, about $200 million [in reduced revenue to the trusts].
But the private sector has the same problem." It's just a guess,
but it will cost the private sector somewhere around $300-350 million.
"Depending on how you look at it, there is a lot of confusion.
There are different definitions of what constitutes small landowners:
Is it 500 acres or less? Is it how much they harvest (2 million board
feet or less per year)? Is it the amount of precipitation or the
height of the man?" Mr. Sutherland said with a wry smile.
Some people believe existing roads built to previous standards should
be left in place. If a new road is built, then the new road should be
built to the new standards. "If you're going to redo an old road
[to bring it into compliance with RMAP]," Mr. Sutherland
explained, "that's like telling someone who's been living in the
same house since 1949 and has single-pane windows that they are now
obligated under energy regulations to change to triple-pane windows.
AND they've got to do it in 5 years."
"Now that we have some actual field experience," Mr.
Sutherland said, "we'll look at the specifics of what the
regulations say, then go out and look at a particular piece of
property and say [to ourselves], 'That's dumb. Anyone with any stretch
of common sense would never approach it that way.' "
"We're in the process now of trying to identify what we can do
administratively to adjust, change or modify the rules yet stay within
the flexibility and authority that we have in the Forest Practices
Board," he continued. "We've changed the forest and fish
agreement in each of the legislative sessions (2001 and 2002) by small
tweakings as we become aware of problems. This is a bigger problem
than what we've experienced so far, but I think it's beholden upon us
to see what we need to do to make it work. I'm not interested in doing
a lot of heavy-handed enforcement. I think it's more important to
understand the intent and purpose in the first place and then to be
able to adjust it accordingly."
"Interestingly enough," Mr. Sutherland added, "part of
the initial problems and concerns of the legislature were we couldn't
give people a lot of flexibility because what they'd do is lower the
thresholds of these regulations and continue to lower them to the
point where the federal government would no longer agree that the
assurances are in place. So [the legislature] made rule-making very
difficult. You can only do it through scientific analysis. Our ability
to make reasonable changes is very difficult because it has to go
through an adaptive management review with some scientific substance
in order to make that change. We're working on that and trying to
figure out just how much flexibility we have. Then we'll go back to
the legislature and say, 'Hey guys, this ain't gonna work and you're
going to have to change some definitions and give us some
clarification.' "
"This has been a huge education process for our people as well as
everybody else. We're all kind of learning together," Mr.
Sutherland concluded.
**MARY'S COMMENTS**
Over time, property rights have been so seriously eroded that today we
have only the illusion of owning property. We rent the land; the
government controls it. The nation - or collective - is exalted above
the rights of the individual. A centralized, dictatorial bureaucracy
imposes social conformity through regulation while suppressing or
marginalizing any opposition.
"We the people" delegate authority to public servants, not
the other way around. But we have grown complacent and irresponsible.
Public servants, because they are efficient at what they do, stepped
in to fill the void, taking upon themselves the right to decide what
is good "collectively" for "we the people."
At what point will each of us decide, "Enough is enough!"?
Doug Sutherland seems to be a leader who is willing to speak and act
with courage, confidence and truth. At the same time, he seems willing
to work both for the good of his employees and "we the
people" whom he serves. The current deafening silence of the
majority needs to become a deafening roar for reason and common sense,
with the rights of the individual protected above all.
"All political power is inherent in the people, and
governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed,
and are established to protect and maintain individual rights."
Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution
"The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to
the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do
not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for
the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people
insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over
the instruments that they have created. The public records subdivision
of this chapter shall be liberally construed and its exemptions
narrowly construed to promote this public policy." RCW
42.17.251
For more information:
Department of Natural Resources: www.wa.gov/dnr/base/aboutdnr.html Washington State Farm Bureau: www.wsfb.com Chelan/Douglas County Farm Bureau: www.chelandouglasfb.com/ "New Forest Practice Rules in Washington State," Brian J. Vrablick, Northwest Management, Inc.: http://consulting-foresters.com/Newsletter/i-index.html WASHINGTON STATE REGISTER WSR 99-09-078 PROPOSED RULES, FOREST PRACTICES BOARD: http://slc.leg.wa.gov/wsr/1999/09/99-09-078.htm "Individualism, Collectivism, and Terrorists" by Ray Thomas: http://www.sierratimes.com/02/04/22/raythomas.htm "The Green Matrix" by Diane Alden: http://www.newsmax.com/commentarchive.shtml?a=2002/2/20/170856
© 2002 by Mary Swoboda. Publication or redistribution is permitted
without prior notification provided it is published in its entirety
with no modifications.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml] |