READER’S EDITORIAL: OPEN LETTER TO BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT: DO YOUR JOB TO PROTECT OUR PUBLIC LANDS FROM PRIVATE INTERESTS

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

After a takeover of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon by armed militia members, local wildlife biologist Renée Owens has sent an open letter to Bureau of Land Management directors and staff in Burns, Oregon.

"Your inaction to stop them only emboldens such criminal activity, and makes you vulnerable to a lawsuit by others such as myself whose public land rights and interests have been violated," she writes. 

Below is the full text of her letter:

By Renée Owens

January 5, 2016 (San Diego)--As an environmental consultant for the past 20 years in the U.S. and Latin America, as a conservation biologist, on-air presenter, college instructor, and a long time environmental consultant for the Sierra Club and other NGOs, I have worn many hats and worked with all kinds of people. I have worked side-by-side with agents from USFWS, USDA,  BLM, with developers, hunters, ranchers, ORV recreationists, and others. Therefore I appreciate the fact that in your job it is sometime important to be diplomats as much as scientists, rangers, interpretive guides, planners, bureaucrats, and government enforcement agents.

But this situation at the Malheur Refuge is not complicated: your job with these out of state criminals is to ensure they are arrested and tried for their illegal actions. How you do this may be a point of debate, but at the end of the day it is your primary job to defend our precious public lands and the species they protect, not the personal preferences of irate vigilantes.

The lands that they have usurped are my property as much as anyone else’s. My rights to visit it, and have the species on site protected  species that I enjoy as a hiker, birder, and photographer  - have been infringed upon and violated by the Bundys and their cohorts. Your inaction to stop them only emboldens such criminal activity, and makes you vulnerable to a lawsuit by others such as myself whose public land rights and interests have been violated.

I have spent years studying dangerous predators, including catching and releasing over 1,000 anacondas and endangered Orinoco crocodiles, plus rattlesnakes, jaguars, and other feisty creatures. The truth is I would gladly take on any of these animals, any day, over having to deal with the likes of Bundy and his clan. However, like it or not, that is now part of your job.

If these men are not arrested on site, they had darned well be identified now and arrested later after they return home.

I appreciate that your office has a long history with some of the members involved, including death threats; it can’t make work easy. But if you feel you cannot safely deal with these criminals yourselves, you should be urgently appealing to other federal enforcement authorities to step in to help you fulfill your job responsibilities. In fact, you should be demanding such assistance.

I am dismayed and angry, and I am hardly the only one. I have dedicated a good chunk of my life to helping protect our natural places, habitats, wildlife, and the right of Americans to enjoy these things, non-consumptively, peacefully. So when people like this Bundy clan charge in with self-serving, hypocritical demands even after having degraded public lands for their private profit for years, you bet I am angry. Meanwhile these men continue to squat, heavily armed, on public land, in public offices, all the while having a captive audience of every news outfit who interviews them for their sensational propaganda, while your office remains silent as schoolchildren cowering in a corner.

For you communication directors: Your silence on this matter is sending a message as powerful as the invader’s inane rhetoric, and it is not a message that is serving you or your colleagues well.

In case you are hoping that this incident will quietly burn itself out over time to be forever forgotten, you are seriously misguided. I cannot imagine this problem will go away at any time in the near future for the men and women in the regional Oregon offices. Neither will it disappear for those of you who work from 3000 miles away in D.C. and here is why: when Clive Bundy and his cronies defied the BLM in 2014, including committing the felony of pointing guns at BLM agents (or so it was reported), they were emboldened.

We are now seeing the repercussions of a lack of punishment for their past transgressions. These people do not behave based on logic, facts, or a sense of fair social justice. By their bigoted rhetoric they are clearly not the type who respect the common good or laws adopted by a democratic process. Worse, they will embolden like-minded extremists nationwide with the message that if you have guns and a dozen or so armed supporters, you can do whatever you want on BLM lands and no one will stop you.

I sincerely appeal to you to do your job and make this right by representing the taxpaying citizens and peaceful public lands stewards and recreationists of America who look to you for leadership. If you have already appealed to other enforcement powers for more aggressive action with no results, feel free to forward them my email.

On a final note: For those of you who have been actively fighting these battles in the past as true defenders of the land, the wildlife, and public rights to enjoy such (as opposed to apologists for ranchers who profit from allowing non-native cows degrade native habitats), for those of you who have placed yourselves in uncomfortable or risky positions on the front lines of public land protection, and for those of you who have pushed back against compromising authorities to defend what you feel is right at risk of losing your jobs, you have my most heartfelt thanks and gratitude, and my continuing support.

I look forward to your response, meanwhile I will be sharing this email as an open letter to your Office.

Renée Owens is founder/principal of Sage Wildlife LLC, an environmental consulting firm, and serves on the Imperial Valley College. 

 

 

 

 

 


Error message

Support community news in the public interest! As nonprofit news, we rely on donations from the public to fund our reporting -- not special interests. Please donate to sustain East County Magazine's local reporting and/or wildfire alerts at https://www.eastcountymedia.org/donate to help us keep people safe and informed across our region.

Comments

USFWS was sent a letter, too.

Someone remarked that the Refuge is USFWS jurisdiction, and they are correct. You can see on the website it is "closed until further notice". I sent them a letter too. But the primary issues regarding the Bundys and Hammonds are regarding BLM lands. Overall it isn't a one agency issue, it is a message for all federal public land and species oversight agencies. - R Owens http://www.fws.gov/refuge/malheur/

Take over government buildings?

Guess you missed that whole Vietnam protest thing....you know, burning ROTC buildings, occupying buildings, etc. Sounds like shoe is on the other foot.

Billtoo, you're misinformed on the Bundy arson convictions.

They intentionally lit the fires to coverup their illegal slaughter of protected deer on the refuge.  From Wildfire Today, a publication about wildland fires nationwide, here is how the U.S. Attorney described their intentional acts of arson:

Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Dwight Hammond, 46, both residents of Diamond, Oregon in Harney County, were sentenced to five years in prison by Chief U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken for arsons they committed on federal lands...Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property.  Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.”  One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson.  The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations…

http://wildfiretoday.com/2016/01/04/cnn-reporter-mischaracterizes-the-ar...

Not by a long shot, am I misinformed

But the real issue is that you still missed the point. I wasn't and am not going to pretend I know all the fact...but the government's case has some holes..One being; If all the evidence was destroyed, how does the government know about slaughtered deer.. read this...it brings up a list of other issues http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/ Back to my initial point....On one hand you have a citizen going to prison for terrorism(I find that absurd). Coupled with other government sanctioned harassment, mentioned in the article and the family will probably be forced to sell their land to the government...That seemed to be the governments goal in the first place. On the other, you have the foolish actions of government agency polluting an entire ecosystem...without repercussion...You'll note the original post was requesting more government intervention... Personally, I don't find the government qualified to take on the task.

Exactly right...

these criminals need to be arrested. The fact that there may not be justice everywhere doesn't distract from the need for justice at Malheur Refuge, a place that belongs to all of us, not these yahoos with guns.

I missed...

...all the open letters when the "Occupy" movement was blocking public access, etc. Why is that?

We did report on multiple opinions on Occupy

and ran news stories on local Occupy members who were arrested when they violated the law such as bringing prohibited items to rallies or disrupting a mayoral speech.

That said, the Occupy people were not toting guns, nor were they defending rights of convicted arsonists who slaughtered animals illegally and intentionally set fires to cover up their other crime.

 

Think about who your asking to do their job

On one hand you have a farmer that accidentally burned off 138 acres of grassland and invasive plants...On the other hand you have a government agency that foolishly polluted an entire river's ecosystem. The rancher/citizens get 5 years in prison while the head of the government agency can't be bothered to even go see the damage they caused. As your associated with the Imperial Valley, I'm sure you know which river I'm talking about. You should be more careful of where you put your trust...Then as founder/principal of an environmental consulting firm, your job wouldn't exist without the government, I have to assume your opinion is biased.

Saving public lands for everyone

Environmental consultants are contracted by developers, utility companies, NGOs, government agencies, private landowners, unions, all of the above. My company is an independent small business, and has been contracted by all of the above. So tell me, for whom and how exactly am I supposed to be biased? Makes for some very conflicting motivation if you want to accuse me of being inspired only by contracts. Like it or not there are still those like myself who are motivated by social justice and preservation of our natural ecosystems. Public land protections are hardly a black and white issue, and neither are the solutions simple. But any real life solution needs the support of those of us who enjoy and respect public lands and want them to remain public.

You won't be saving the land for Americans.

Face it, none of the companies you mention would contract with you if it wasn't for government regulation. So yes, I do find your opinion biased... The government is the biggest land holder in the west and like all government, their holding and regulation grow daily. Farmers and ranchers have a far more direct interest in preserving the land. Their interest is a problem as it doesn't spin like a legislator, when it comes to direction. To help expand your view, read this; https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/08/im-an-oregon-rancher-heres-what-you-dont-understand-about-the-bundy-standoff Ultimately your direction pushes farming and ranching overseas, the same as with manufacturing. Tell me, why do you think the government made it illegal to inform consumers of what country the meat they buy was raised in? It seems to me the government has an obligation to support american farmers and ranchers, as american citizens should also have the right to know were the food they eat comes from.

The BLM has made its share of errors.

There are cases where they were not good stewards of the land (the Ocotillo wind project is a prime example of that).

However disagreeing with a government agency does not give anyone the right to take up arms and takeover a federal building, which is a lot different than staging a peaceful protest that is not disruptive and does not infringe on other people's rights. Right now the wildlife preserve is closed to visitors because of these armed gunmen.

We all know if these had been black lives protesters, occupy protesters, Native American protesters with guns the authorities would not have tolerated takeover of a public building,nor should they, for any group of any color that comes armed and keeps the public off public lands. To do so amounts to anarchy.

 

Uranium in Oregon - The real reason for pushing out the cattle

Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (“yellowcake”) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the “New U” uranium claims. http://www.blm.gov/or/energy/uranium.php This is conservation? Here is the open pit uranium mining proposal: PIC2 Uranium mine plan Oregon Energy’s proposal calls for extracting ore from a mile-long, 600-foot wide, 250-foot deep open pit 10 miles west of McDermitt and 3 miles north of the Oregon-Nevada border. The mine, adjoining the former Bretz Mercury Mine, a contaminated open-pit site from the 1960s, would cost $200 million to develop and uranium extraction could continue for up to 20 years, said Oregon Energy President Lachlan Reynolds. Plans call for the ore to be crushed and mixed with an acid solution in enclosed vats to leach out the uranium, he said. The acid would bond with the uranium and when dry become a sand-like powder called uranium oxide concentrate, or yellowcake. Yellowcake would bring $52 per pound and could fuel nuclear reactors or be processed into weapons. Tuttle, spokesman for the Portland-based Center for Environmental Equity, foresees environmental problems. The likelihood of sulfuric acid being used in processing the ore means it could remain in the mine tailings after milling, he said. The snag is that sulfuric acid tends to continuously leach out heavy metals that occur naturally in waste rock and tailings, contaminating ground water. “Just because you are through with the processing, years later you still have the issue with that interaction,” he said. But probably the biggest environmental hurdle for the Aurora mine would be the release of mercury, Tuttle said. “The whole Owyhee Reservoir has been affected by naturally occurring background mercury,” and uranium mining could release more, he said. http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/01/malheur_county_targeted_for_go.html