One consequence of the Bundy Gang take-over of the Malheur National
Wildlife Refuge in central Oregon has been the abundant media attention
to their assertions of government “overreach” and “aggressive
enforcement“ of environmental regulations that according to Bundy and
Gang has driven ranchers, miners, and loggers from the land.
Unfortunately, the media have been slow to counter such assertions.
The reality on the ground is much different from the delusional
version put forth by Ammon Bundy and militant associates. Most federal
and state agencies are lax in their enforcement of environmental
regulations. Though many local people in Harney County, where the
Malheur Refuge is located, decry the use of armed intimidation and
threats, a sizeable minority or perhaps even majority agrees with the
Bundy gang assertions that local people should control management of
these public lands.
The irony of such claims is that local people already have a
disproportional control and influence on national public lands. They
can attend meetings, go on field trips, communicate their views through
local media and use their connections with local and higher level
politicians to promote their economic and other interests.
If they disapprove of federal management activities, local people
often exercise social manipulation against federal administrators. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest
Service (FS) managers and staff that live in rural areas. Federal
employees, like people everywhere, want to be accepted in their local
communities. Any manager or staff who initiates management action that
upsets the local people or local business interests like ranchers,
miners, or loggers, will quickly find themselves socially isolated,
their kids mocked or verbally abused in local schools, and at times
employees and/or their families are even subject to physical violence or
death threats.
I fear that in the aftermath of the Malheur event, no matter how it
is resolved, we will see federal administers even more “cowed” by local
hostility to national interests. What BLM or FS manager will be willing
to restrict or otherwise control activities that damage public resources
if he/she knows that local communities like Burns, Oregon, as well as
county, state and sometimes even Congressional members are opposed to
the laws or regulations these agencies are supposed to uphold?
Several years ago a friend of mine, who is high up in the BLM,
attended a meeting of BLM state directors and district managers convened
by Department of Interior lawyers. The purpose of the meeting was to
inform the managers that Department of Interior legal teams were losing
law suits over and over because they, the people on the ground, were
continuously violating the law. The lawyers were young and naïve. They
thought, according to my friend, that they were telling these managers
something they did not know. The BLM field staff sat stoically, with
arms crossed, and listened.
Finally one of them quipped, “Yes, I know I am violating the laws. I do it all the time. You know why? Because if I followed
the law I’d have every county commissioner, state legislator, the
governor and the state Congressional delegation on my ass–and you know
what? You’re not paying me enough to take that kind of abuse.”
Then another BLM manager followed up and said, “I don’t follow the
law either. I count on being sued by the environmentalists, so that I
can tell the delegation or the loggers or the ranchers that I had no
choice in the matter. The court is telling me I must do this.” He went
on to acknowledge that unless he was sued and had that political cover,
he would not enforce the law.
According to my friend, there were a lot of other people in the room nodding their heads in agreement.
With the recent empowerment of militant groups around the West,
particularly militants with guns and other weapons, what rational field
manager, especially one living in a small rural community is going to
challenge the local “custom and culture?” As one of the field managers
said, “You’re not paying me enough.” And indeed, we are not.
Most of the article discusses the intimidation of federal employees. No mention is made of the west-wide impact on ranchers of the Hammonds being labeled and convicted as terrorists by the feds.
Issues of concern to people who live in the west: property rights, water rights, endangered species, livestock grazing, energy production, wilderness and western agriculture. Plus a few items on western history, western literature and the sport of rodeo... Frank DuBois served as the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003. DuBois is a former legislative assistant to a U.S. Senator, a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Interior, and is the founder of the DuBois Rodeo Scholarship.

No comments:
Post a Comment