"We will pull out all the stops to get a balanced solution"

Senator Wyden in conversation with Jean and Roger Findley

Senator Ron Wyden addressing a group at Ontario's town hall meeting

Oregon's Senator Ron Wyden met with a group of interested people at the Ontario Railroad Depot Sunday afternoon. Wyden fielded questions about the contentious cap and trade bill recently passed in the House; concerns regarding health care, including giving us an outline of his bipartisan Healthy Americans Act; a description of his proposed Fair Flat Tax bill, and a discussion on an issue of concern to us, federal energy policy.

Senator Wyden vigorously restated his support of a balanced approach to energy, including the protection of agriculture. "The balanced approach recognizes, yes we need energy. We also need to work with local communities so that we don't devastate that valuable farmland." In fact, these issues will not be going away soon, leading to his comment, "This isn't going to be the first rodeo, folks."

When faced with questions about higher taxes, water law, natural resources, and massive amounts of money being spent, he came out on the side of Oregonians. He said that those opposed to public use of natural resources have a right to disagree, "but not to a five-year delay" in the thinning of forests. . . I am very cautious about putting more taxes on Oregonians now," reminding the group that he was one of 22 U.S. senators who voted against the stimulus bill. As a member of the Senate Finance Trade Subcommittee, he hopes to use his influence to lower barriers to value added Oregon agricultural commodities for export.

Of our citizens group, he said, "You have handled yourselves very responsibly. You've been staking out a reasonable position - steady and thoughtful . . . We will pull out all the stops to get a balanced solution."

We wish to thank Senator Wyden and aide Wayne Kinney for stopping in Ontario to meet with interested citizens.

Wyden Town Hall Sunday 2:00 p.m.

Don't forget to attend the town hall meeting in Ontario with Senator Ron Wyden Sunday, June 28th, 2:00 p.m. at the train depot. Please be prepared with questions and concerns about topics important to you, including the future of energy transmission law in the northwest.

Motion to Withdraw the IRP Addendum

In which Idaho Power officially withdraws its February 2009 IRP Addendum instead of filing a complete IRP. We always enjoy perusing Ms. Rackner's legal missives. We look forward with anticipation as to whether IPCo will make a truly thoughtful case to the Oregon PUC in its requirement for "Need," or if it will again (mistakenly) equate the Idaho PUC with the Oregon PUC and assume that "Need" is simply a function of who ends up paying . . .

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON LC 41

In the Matter of ldaho Power Company's Application to include the Boardman to Hemingway Transmission Line in its Acknowledged Integrated Resource Plan ('lRP")

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to OAR-860-013-0031, ldaho Power Company ("ldaho Power" or "Company") hereby requests the Public Utility Commission of Oregon ("Commission") issue an Order authorizing Idaho Power to withdraw its Application to Include the Boardman to Hemingway Transmission Line in its Acknowledged Integrated Resource Plan ("lRP") filed in this docket on February 5, 2009 ("Addendum").

DISCUSSION

On February 5, 2009, ldaho Power filed the Addendum, requesting that the Commission include its proposed Boardman to Hemingway 500 kV transmission line (“B2H Project") in its acknowledged 2006 l RP.

At that time the Company had hoped to receive all necessary approvals –including Energy Facility Siting Council ("EFSC”) approval—in time to complete work and bring the B2H Project online by 2013. Since that time, however, the Company has extended the project in-service date to 2015 and has initiated a comprehensive public process to consider alternative routes. (The details of this public process are described in the Application for Modification of the Filing Date for its 2009 Integrated Resource Plan, filed in UM 1428, April 10, 2009.)

While unfortunate in some respects, this delay will provide the Company the additional time to perform an updated analysis of the B2H Project using current load forecasts and to include the project in the 2009 IRP as an uncommitted resource.Because the updated load information will not be available until August, and once it is available, the analysis will take several months to perform, the Company will be unable to complete the work for its 2009 IRP until the end of the year. For this reason the Company requested that it be allowed to delay the filing of its 2009I RP by approximately three months, from September of 2009 to the last business day December 2009. In that request, the Company stated that if the delay was granted, ldaho Power would withdraw the Addendum as moot.

On May 19, 2009 the Company's request to delay the 2009 IRP was included on the Consent Agenda of the Commission’s Public Meeting and was approved. For this reason, the Company requests that the Commission allow it to withdraw the Addendum.

DATED 6/16/2009
Signed, Lisa Rackner
McDowell & Rackner, PC
Attorneys for Idaho Power Company
520S W Sixth Avenue, Suite 830
Portland, OR 97204

http://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAO/lc41hao123421.pdf

The Ongoing Public Records Request

In which Move Idaho Power's Rich Adamo persists in trying to get information about sage grouse leks through the Freedom of Information Act . . .

----- Original Message -----
From: Teri Kucera
To: Richard and Nora Adamo
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 4:56 PM
Subject: RE: Public Records Request for Greater Sage Grouse Leks -#4698

Mr. Adamo:

Today, our Accounting Services Division mailed you an invoice for $5.00, which is the cost for the CD. Once the agency receives your check, I can release the CD to you.

Teri Kucera

From: Richard and Nora Adamo
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 12:33 PM
To: Teri Kucera
Subject: Re: Public Records Request for Greater Sage Grouse Leks -#4698

Ms. Kucera,

Thanks for the information in your e-mail attachment. Move Idaho Power and myself are evaluating the data in the attachment and the reference materials Mr. Hagen names in his memorandum.

Your e-mail did not contain the requested ODFW sage grouse lek maps within the B2H corridor. If Mr. Hagen's disc also does not contain the maps, please ask him to provide me with that requested information.

Again, thanks for the information.

Sincerely,

Rich Adamo
Move Idaho Power


----- Original Message -----
From: Richard and Nora Adamo
To: Teri Kucera
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Public Records Request for Greater Sage Grouse Leks -#4698

Dear Ms. Kucera,

I will include an extra remittance of $1.50 for shipping when I receive your invoice.

Thanks for expediting this request.

Rich Adamo
Move Idaho Power

Ada County hopes to find alternative path for Idaho Power's Gateway project

I don't know how I missed this one. Evidently Idaho Power's eminent domain in Idaho isn't always a done deal, when the municipality Planning and Zoning hangs together as Kuna's has done.

Meetings set on the power line proposal BY JOE ESTRELLA - Published: 06/01/09 http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/787803.html

The Ada County Board of Commissioners will lend a hand in trying to resolve a conflict between the city of Kuna and Idaho Power over the utility's plan to run about six miles of its 500,000-volt Gateway West Transmission Line project through the city. . .

Finding another route around Kuna for the project became essential Wednesday after the city's Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously approved a comprehensive plan that does not include provisions for the power lines.

The City Council still must approve the plan, but the P&Z recommendation means it considers the project contrary to Kuna's long-term growth plan.

It also means that Idaho Power will not be able to get the special-use permit it would require to run the lines inside the city, effectively trumping the utility's ability to use eminent domain to seize the land in Kuna, according to Boise land-use attorney Gary Allen.

"They could invoke eminent domain, but they still couldn't get a special-use permit," Allen said. . .

Federal Multiple Use Policy for Public Lands

There is more to the BLM than the management of sage grouse and range fires. Consider FLPMA, where Congress directs the BLM to provide multiple uses for the benefit of the American people on public lands:

In the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 as amended in 2001, Congress directs the Bureau of Land Management "To establish public land policy; to establish guidelines for its administration; to provide for the management, protection, development, and enhancement of the public lands; and for other purposes." http://www.blm.gov/flpma/FLPMA.pdf

Section 102 Declaration of Policy
(a) The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that–
(7) Goals and objectives be established by law as guidelines for public land use planning and that management be on the basis of multiple use and sustained yield unless otherwise specified by law.

Section 103 Definitions
(a) The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that–
(c) The term “multiple use” means the management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people; making the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these resources or related services over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions; the use of some land for less than all of the resources; a combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that take into account the long-term needs of future generations for renewable resources and non renewable resources. . .

From Gary Pearson: "Public land is to be used for public purposes and the subject proposed transmission line is the classic definition of a 'public purpose' endeavor."

Senator Wyden Town Meeting Sunday June 28

Oregon's Senator Ron Wyden will hold his annual Malheur County open-forum town meeting on Sunday, June 28, at 2:00 p.m. for citizens to ask questions and voice concerns.

The meeting will be in the old railroad depot in Ontario, 300 Depot Lane.

Press release information for Irrigon, Hermiston, Baker City and Ontario town halls:
http://wyden.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=314531&

For more information contact:

Wayne Kinney
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden
131 NW Hawthorne Ave., No. 107
Bend, OR 97701
(541) 330-9142 office
(541) 330-6266 fax
(541) 306-1865 mobile

Senator Ted Ferrioli Subject: RE: Bill 3058

Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009
From: ferrioli.sen@state.or.us

My Dear Friends,

Early in the legislative session, I was visited by former Senator Ken Messerle and former Representative John Watt who are now working on LNG issues in Coos Bay and Southern Oregon. These former colleagues from rural Oregon are veterans of many battles to strengthen and sustain the economic base of rural communities. They made a good case for linear facilities as an engine of economic development in rural communities.

Regarding HB3058, they argued that changing the order of application for Division of State Lands for fill and removal permits would not diminish the rights of landowners in questions involving condemnation.

Many of you have written, called and emailed with your concerns that as property owners, your right to the quiet enjoyment of your land supersedes the convenience of utility companies engaged in constructing linear facilities.

As a result of your direction on the matter, I agree. In carefully weighing the concept of the public good against the rights of individuals and families, I conclude that protecting the peaceful use and enjoyment of private property far outweighs the benefit of allowing those with no ownership interest to become the applicant on fill and removal permits.

Therefore, in consideration of your direction, I will vote “no” on HB3058 and I will oppose it.

Sincerely, Senator Ted Ferrioli
District 30 – John Day, Oregon
Senate Republican Leader

Please send your thank yous to Senator Ferrioli at the above email address!

Idaho Power’s Langley Gulch Power Plant Challenged

An interesting article on Idaho Power's plan for rate recovery:

“Unprecedented” Coalition Calls for Delay in Rate Recovery Proceeding
http://www.electricenergyonline.com/?page=show_news&id=112825

Boise, June 2, 2009 - An unprecedented coalition of intervenor groups has asked the Idaho Public Utility Commission to suspend for ten months its consideration of Idaho Power Company’s request for pre-approved rate recovery of its proposed 300-megawatt Langley Gulch Power Plant.

The groups, who filed their request on May 29th, assert that “significant and unforeseen events have taken place since Idaho Power initially filed its Application [for rate recovery]. Any single one of these events,” the groups argue, “would be sufficient cause… to seek to slow down the Company’s forced march to seek Commission action on its request for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN)…”

The groups argue that since “the Langley Gulch power plant will be the single largest capital investment made by Idaho Power since the Hells Canyon Complex was constructed 50 years ago” and given that the utility seeks an expedited decision on what the intervenors call the “edge of great uncertainty,” a suspension of the current CPCN docket for Langley Gulch is warranted. . .

“Granting a CPCN for the most expensive plant Idaho Power will have built in the last fifty years without a current IRP to instruct prudence questions,” the group argues, “is clearly an instance of putting the proverbial cart before the horse.” And, they add “this proposed plant should not be reviewed when the Company itself contends that its own IRP data is out of date . . . ."

Power officials and residents in Kuna square off over transmission line proposal

By Kiersten Throndsen 6/11/09 (Channel 2 video) http://www.2news.tv/news/local/47888117.html

KUNA - The debate over building a transmission line through parts of Canyon County, Owyhee County and Ada County came to Kuna Thursday night.

Some homeowners say they don't want the line running through private property but power officials say then they need an alternate route.

"It's going right over our house," said Robyn Thompson, a resident from Oreana. . .

The demand really increases in the summer when we reach the point of capacity, which really concerns us, this is a way to solve it," said Lynette Berriochoa, spokeswoman for Idaho Power.

Right now, the proposed line runs 50 percent on public land 50 percent on private land but that's where some residents take issue.

"Public utilities should go on public land," said Thompson. But the Bureau of Land Management says putting all of the line on public land may not work because there are environmental and wildlife concerns. . .

Idaho Power says they will continue holding town hall meetings about the proposed project throughout the summer. They say their line route has not been officially adopted yet.

Why residential development stops at the Oregon - Idaho border

Oregon LCDC 101

(1) Oregon's productive farm ground is not more valuable than Idaho's productive farm ground. Acre for acre and dollar for dollar, you can often sell Idaho farm ground for more money than Malheur and Baker County farm ground, especially for residential development.

(2) Oregon's productive farm ground is not less valuable than Idaho's productive farm ground. The problem is, you can't build housing developments on it.

(3) There is a reason that residential development stops at the Snake River. Oregon farm ground is under the control of the Land Conservation and Development Commission, LCDC, http://www.lcd.state.or.us/ the Oregon agency that oversees the writing of voluminous land use laws telling us exactly what we can and cannot do with our Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) zoned property.

(4) Idaho land use law protecting farm ground is minimal. In an examination of Idaho statutes, the following deal with farming: http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title22/T22.htm
Title 22 Agriculture and Horticulture, 52 chapters, only one of which actually addresses the necessity of allowing a farmer the "Right to Farm," in other words, to not have farming considered a nuisance.
Title 42 and 42, Irrigation and Drainage, and Irrigation Districts, dealing with reclamation, water systems, water rights and indebtedness.
Title 61, Public Utility Regulation Chapter 17, Siting of Certain Electrical Transmission Facilities http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title61/T61CH17SECT61-1705.htm in which the farmer has no legal recourse to protect his property except what political pressure can be brought to bear.

That's it.

(5) https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors_chapters/215
In comparison, Oregon Revised Statutes, Volume 6, Chapter 215, devotes thousands of words to zoning ordinances establishing exclusive farm use ground, permitted uses on marginal lands, the regulation of home occupations, minimum lot and parcel sizes, even the types of dwellings and how many are permitted on EFU land.

Since we as Oregon farmers are permitted only this agricultural use of our own property (with few exceptions), it is worth less money than developed property. Because it is less developed, earlier community advisory teams from Idaho assumed that we would not mind the routing of high-voltage lines across our farm ground in order to avoid crossing Idaho municipalities, subdivisions and farm ground.

As has been pointed out by Idaho Power representatives, utilities are one of the permitted uses for EFU ground. What was not fully examined by Idaho Power at the outset, is ORS 215.275, which directs utilities to avoid EFU land when alternate routes are available, leading to the need for Idaho Power to begin the approval process again, at great cost in time and money. https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/215.275.html

It has been the intention of Stop Idaho Power to protect EFU farm ground, since it is the main legally-approved land use permitted to us in earning a living in agriculture. What is not understood by our friends in Idaho, is that the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council must follow Oregon land use law in the siting of utilities. Our state agencies have assured us that they will follow through with the protection of EFU land as they adjudicate the EFSC process.

We have expressed willingness to work with Idaho Power's community advisory panel to find a solution acceptable to as many as are willing to find common ground.

We hope that Idaho Power and its advisory committees will be fully informed by Oregon state agency representatives of the ramifications of Oregon land use law and its utility siting process, in order to avoid further disappointment in the approval of transmission line routes through Oregon.

The HB 3058 debate continues

Two articles: (1) Why two members of the Oregon House voted for HB 3058 (now headed to the Oregon Senate) and (2) Why Brad Witt, one of the bill's sponsors, is now facing opposition in his own party for his House seat.

(1) Why we voted for House Bill 3058 by Chris Garrett and Tobias Read, guest opinion Thursday June 04, 2009 http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/06/why_we_voted_for_house_bill_30.html

One of the more contentious bills of this legislative session arrived on the floor of the Oregon House of Representatives a week ago. House Bill 3058 passed on a 35-24 vote. Democrats were closely divided, with 16 voting in support and 19 against. The bill now heads to the Senate.

HB 3058 was strongly opposed by environmental advocates, who labeled it an "LNG fast-track" bill. That made this a difficult vote. Both of us are committed environmentalists who have enjoyed the support of environmental organizations in our campaigns . . .

HB 3058, on its face, is unrelated to liquefied natural gas. The bill merely allows a third party (i.e., someone other than the landowner) to apply for a fill/removal permit with the Division of State Lands. Under current law, before anyone other than the owner can apply for such a permit, one must either get the landowner's permission or have the government condemn the property through eminent domain.

This law creates a logistical quandary for large-scale infrastructure projects that involve multiple parcels of land and have complex permitting requirements, such as highways, rail lines, pipelines and transmission lines. Under current law, a single holdout landowner can stall a project by preventing even the application for a permit. This creates a perverse incentive for developers to condemn property first -- before they know the final route their project will take, or whether it will even be approved. That does not serve anyone's interests.

. . . This is the important part: Before any construction may begin, the state or developer must acquire the property, have permission from the landowner, or have had the property condemned. The only change HB 3058 makes, in other words, is that a developer does not have to have all the property rights in place before submitting an application. (The bill also contains notice and hearing provisions to ensure that affected landowners have an opportunity to weigh in. . . )

(2) Huhtala to run for Witt's legislative seat Director of Columbia River Business Alliance says Witt’s bill on pipeline pushed him over the edge by Cassandra Profita The Daily Astorian June 9, 2009 http://dailyastorian.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=398&ArticleID=61607

Controversy in the state Legislature over liquefied natural gas development has prompted Astoria resident Peter Huhtala to seek the Democratic nomination for the Oregon House of Representatives District 31 position.

The seat will be up for grabs next year and is currently held by Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie, who recently set LNG opponents aflame with his sponsorship of legislation that would streamline the natural gas pipeline permitting process.

Huhtala, the executive director of the Columbia River Business Alliance, has actively spoken out against LNG both as a citizen and on behalf of the business alliance, which supports renewable energy development. He said he's thought about running for the state Legislature on and off for the past 10 years, and Witt's sponsorship of the controversial House Bill 3058 put him over the edge. . .

Witt has said he will run again for his seat. Huhtala said voters will now have a choice. . .

Skeletal Remains on the Snake River

With permission from Jim & Jill Conant:

"Herman"

Subject: Skeletal remains 1984

From: "jimandjillconant"
To: connolly@uoregon.edu Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009

In the late spring or early summer of 1984 we found skeletal remains on our farm.
The police officer we called took the bones and sent them to the crime lab. He later told us that the bones dated to be very old and were probably the remains of a settler.

The Utter Disaster (on the Oregon Trail) ended on this particular piece of property. We have pictures of the bones that we discovered. We were told that the bones ended with your museum.

We are looking for some facts. The most important is, do you have the bones and what is there actual age. This find is along the banks of the Owhee River near the old railroad bridge.
We know that if they in fact came to you, they came through the police department. My husband, Jim Conant, was the contact name given to the police.

We would be forever grateful to get information about these bones. I have attached a picture of the bones.

Thank you for your time,
Jill Conant


Dear Jill, Your email was forwarded to me by our Research Director, Tom Connolly.

I'll check our records later this week and get back to you. (we're on hold for a day or two due to construction on our new addition, and I'm using a computer at one of our near-by labs).
It shouldn't be hard to figure this out.

Sincerely,

Pam

Subject: Fwd: Skeletal remains 1984
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 07:49:49 -0800
Can anyone help with this? --


Dear Jill,

I apologize for the delayed response to your inquiry, but hadn't been able to verify the identity of the remains until now.

We do have those shown on your photo; according to our files, they were found near Adrian along the Owyhee River and were transferred to us by the Malheur County Sheriff's office in early 1985. They were inventoried and analyzed and reported as a requirement for compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

According to this research, the remains probably represent a Native American male, 30-50 years of age. As for when this individual lived -- we cannot establish that without additional (and destructive and costly) analyses.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely, Pam Pamela E. Endzweig, Ph.D., RPA
Director of Collections & Senior Research Associate
Museum of Natural and Cultural History & State Museum of Anthropology


Jill Conant wrote:

Pam, you are amazing. Thank you so much for finding the information for us. We have always called him "Herman". After we found the skull part, and the detective was with us, our (then 12 yr.old) son reached into a pile of slag left from the flood and pulled out a stick as a joke. He said, "Look what I found." You should have seen his face when the detective told him it was the femur! :) . . .

Jill Conant


Subject: Re: Fwd: Skeletal remains 1984
From: "Pamela Endzweig" Date: Thu, May 28, 2009

Hello again, Jill.

Oregon State Law protects Indian burials and burialgrounds. I would suggest that you contact Dr. Dennis Griffin at theState Historic Preservation Office for guidance.

Pam

Numbers of sage grouse in Oregon dropping

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/national-21/1243803929142160.xml&storylist=orlocal May 31 2009

BEND, Ore. (AP) — The Bureau of Land Management is using some stimulus money to study the effect of wind farms on a dwindling sage grouse population in Central Oregon . . .

Sage grouse numbers in Oregon last year were at their lowest in a decade but may be rebounding in some areas.

"2008 was not a good year for sage grouse, there's no question," said Christian Hagen, the sage grouse coordinator with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

It is difficult to gauge the population from spring counts. The sage grouse population in 2008 fell to an estimated 20,000 to 25,000 birds in 2008, less than half the estimate from 2005.

There was talk of including the sage grouse on the federal endangered species list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to visit the question again, Hagen said.

Hagen said reasons for the decline could be drought, invasive plants and encroaching junipers, West Nile virus and human activities. . .

State biologists have recommended siting wind turbines at least three miles from sage grouse breeding habitat, but in March, Crook County approved a proposed $220 million wind farm closer to the birds. . .

Crook County Judge Mike McCabe said the birds don't fly high enough to hit the turbine propellers.

So far it looks like numbers in the center of the sage grouse's Oregon range, Malheur, Harney and Lake counties, are up a little, he said. . .

Power Struggle Over Transmission Lines?

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/idaho/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1513425/IDAHO.Local/Power.Struggle.Over.Transmission.Lines June 3rd, 2009 Boise State Radio

Morning Edition Radio Conversation:

Idaho Power is doing its best to promote the "Gateway West" project, which would run more than a thousand miles of 500,000 volt transmission lines through Southern Idaho. But before any of that can happen, they have to convince residents, farmers, and elected officials that the plan makes sense.

Do we all notice a pattern here of waking up one morning to see a map of proposed high voltage lines crossing our productive farm ground with public lands not far away?

Move It! Move It!

The Cassia County Move It LLC organization has its public meeting with Idaho Power:

Public Hearing on Gateway Project by J. Michaels June 1st, 2009 http://www.kmvt.com/news/local/46670262.html

The Cassia County Commissioners called a public meeting today – on a proposed power line that would cross Southern Idaho.

The 'Gateway West' transmission line would stretch more than eleven hundred miles across southern Idaho and southern Wyoming. In Cassia County – the new 230 and 500 kilo–volt lines would cover roughly 70 miles – with almost 60 of those miles on privately owned land.

Brent Stoker, spokesmen for Move It L.L.C. says “We have more private ground being affected percentage–wise and mileage–wise than any other place along this Gateway West line. We believe that it should be better sited, for public use on public ground.”

The proposed route could affect almost 700 parcels of privately owned land – and more than 160 land owners in Cassia County alone.

The 'Move It' organization wants Idaho Power to reconsider the initial plan – and relocate the power line further south on public lands.

Best of luck to Move It LLC!

From their website: http://moveitmoveit.org/
"A big thank you to all those who gave up of their personal time to attend our June 1st meeting. It was a big success. Idaho Power says they are now willing to negotiate."

Sage grouse and the FOIA

From Rich Adamo in Baker City:

Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 9:21 AM
Subject: RE: Public Records Request for Greater Sage Grouse Leks

Dear Mr. Adamo:

I will send you an estimate of costs after staff reviews the information you requested in your March 21st request, and from the clarification in my letter dated April 9, 2009 to you . . . we gather that your public records request centers on the Boardman to Hemingway proposed transmission line.

You want sage grouse data for lands that the line would cross. You also want records showing BLM-ODFW interaction concerning the transmission line project. You specifically mention a meeting involving BLM and ODFW and ask that records of that meeting be included. Have we accurately understood the scope of your request? Please confirm.

Thank you for your prompt response immediately below.

Teri Kucera Executive Assistant
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

(snip several correspondences)

To: Teri Kucera
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: Public Records Request for Greater Sage Grouse Leks

Dear Ms. Kucera,

Not sure how much more information we can provide you with regarding "most recent" records involving the sage grouse leks. When we called Christen Hagen, your sage grouse expert asking for the same information I'm asking you for now, data that shows why ODF&W believes powerlines affect the sage grouse, he responded that "you will have to file a Freedom of Information Act request for that information".

I mentioned the U.S. Fish & Wildlife reports did not show any evidence that sage grouse were affected by powerlines close to the leks, he said there were a "number of studies" that reflect ODF&W's position on why the sage grouse can't have a powerline within 2 miles of the leks.

Mr. Hagen also stated to me that "he wouldn't have a problem with the powerlines being closer to the leks than the current 2 mile restriction if the sage grouse could not see them from the leks, such as behind a hill".

I have to assume that Mr. Hagen has data showing how far a sage grouse can see. I have to assume that these studies Mr. Hagen refers to are in his files or on his computer as he is apparently ODF&W's expert on these matters and would have no trouble at all accessing them for you with little trouble or cost to your department.

As you can see, without ODF&W studies, we are having to assume a lot. Mr. Myatt, of the Baker office of ODF&W has told me of studies that indicate that "when subjected to large powerlines, people don't tend to move and the sage grouse might."

Please call Mr. Myatt on that study, although Mr. Hagen may have that in his computer files or records as well. That call may save even more time and money that you have indicated in your first letter to me ODF&W does not have due to budget cuts. If Mr. Hagen had sent us the public information we ask for in the first place, ODF&W as well as myself could have saved time and money.

I do hope this e-mail has cleared up any questions you may have involving our FOIA* request which was filed some time ago. I will of course be sending all of our e-mail correspondence along with a cover letter to Rep. Cliff Bentz, Senator Ted Ferriolli, Baker County Commissioner Fred Warner, Move Idaho Power, and Stop Idaho power so that they too can understand what goes into collecting " most recent data".

Thank you so much for your time.
Rich Adamo

*Freedom of Information Act

Power lines and agriculture don't mix

Electrocuted bulls under fallen power lines

Two stories:
(1) Bulls explode after power lines collapse Friday, May 29, 2009 http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?Bulls_explode_after_power_lines_collapse&in_article_id=675288&in_page_id=2

Seven bulls exploded and caught fire after power lines fell on a dairy farm in New Zealand. The incident happened north of Auckland at Wilks Road farm. Dave Taylor, who leases the farm, said he got a phone call from his father who was driving along the motorway, telling him his cows were exploding.

'I found seven dead and on fire in the paddock,' he said.

Three bulls were electrocuted after the power lines fell and four were killed when they walked into the live area.

A hedgehog was also killed.

Stanton Blvd. entrance to SRCI on the morning of May 30th

(2) There are some very practical reason why 500 kV power lines should not be on EFU land. The above picture shows what happens when a riser valve on a pressurized irrigation line breaks.

What would happen if a 500Kv power line were directly above this eruption?