Document text
Group revisits monument issue Analysis of letters conflicts with county's message By PAUL FATTIG The Jackson County Board of Commissioners was flat wrong when it concluded that the overwhelming majority of the roughly 6,000 written comments it had received on the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument were in opposition, according to an analysis of the documents by monument supporters. The group, which says its examination of the letters shows a solid 74 percent supporting the monument, is asking the board to correct the letter it sent opposing the monument to Interior Secretary Gale Norton. The board's July 16 letter indicated that more than 84 percent opposed the 52,947-acre monument created on federal land by former President Clinton in June 2000. The monument is located where the Cascade and Siskiyou mountains merge southeast of Ashland. Scientists have identified the region as one of the most biologically diverse in North America. About 30 volunteers worked nearly two weeks analyzing the letters. It cost them nearly $1,000 to obtain and make copies of the public records they originally requested June 29. "Upon close inspection, the documents simply do not substantiate the claim by the county," said Nancy Ames Cole, one of the volunteers who also owns forestland adjoining the monument. "I feel they (the commissioners) should issue a clarification - a correction - to Gale Norton. "They have represented us incorrectly," she added. "I don't believe the commissioners are going to change their opinion. But they do need to change the record." Don't count on it, said board Chairwoman Sue Kupillas. "We're not going to reconsider," she said. "I have no idea how they came up with that. The letters we had were 10 to 1 in opposition. We had numerous people count them. "They are nit-picking this to death,' she added. "They got outgunned on this issue and they're trying to make up for it." Both Kupillas and fellow Commissioner Ric Holt noted that the input from the public was only part of the reason the board voted to urge Norton to substantially reduce the size of the monument. They say they also took into consideration other factors such as private property rights, recreational use and future management. Early last spring, Norton asked the board for a recommendation concerning the monument. The county sought public input in the form of letters and held three meetings to gather additional input. "We've already made our recommendations," Holt said. "It wasn't based just on the number of people or letters we got for or against the monument." He and Commissioner Jack Walker recommended the monument be cut to 16,580 acres. Kupillas recommended that it be reduced, but not quite as much. Despite the reaction by Holt and Kupillas, those who analyzed the letters intend to submit a letter to the board asking for a correction, Cole said. The board may have counted the overall letters, but they did not inspect them very closely, she said. Looking at all the letters without any analysis, 3,359 supported the monument while 2,673 opposed it, Cole said. Of the slightly more than 4,900 Jackson County residents weighing in on the debate, 2,997 supported the monument, she said. There were also 55 letters that failed to mention the monument but instead addressed the water problems in the Klamath Basin, she said. In the many form letters opposing the monument, about 31 percent from Jackson County were multiple submissions in which one person may have signed a half-dozen copies, Cole said. Of those supporting the monument, about 10 percent were duplicates, she added. "I'm a supporter of the monument - those of us who volunteered were pretty much supporters," Cole said. "We don't pretend that we're neutral." Noting that those poring through the records have not yet finished their work, she urged others to analyze the documents. "Only a handful of opposition letters actually addressed the issue from an understanding of the facts," she said. Located on the Bureau of Land Management's Medford District, the monument has attracted the national spotlight. Both Time and National Geographic magazines have focused on it in recent weeks. A BLM draft management plan for the monument has been temporarily placed on hold by the Interior Department. The source of the argument comes from the fact that, in addition to the nearly 53,000 acres of federal land, the monument is adjacent to about 30,000 acres of private land. Monument land surrounds some private parcels, causing some property owners concern that federal management will impact their land. Cole noted that federal officials and others, including some monument opponents, have repeatedly said monument designation does not affect private land. Yet she said the study of the letters received by the county indicates an orchestrated effort by monument opponents to use scare tactics about private land being affected, access being denied and firefighting being suppressed. "There appears to be a systematic campaign of a false representation of the facts," she said. Volunteer Bruce Sargent, owner of Buckhorn Springs, a historic retreat located within the monument's boundaries, echoed Cole's concerns. "It's real unfortunate that the commissioners have turned this into a street fight," he said. "We've lost track of what the real issue is: that beautiful section of land that the opposition and supporters would all agree is a very special part of Southern Oregon. "What we need to be working on is, with a dialogue involving all the parties, what we can do that is best for the land," he added. Reach reporter Paul Fattig at 776-4496 or e-mail him at [email protected] Mail Tribune Home | Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. | Dow Jones & Co., Inc. | Privacy | Contact Us Copyright � 2001 Mail Tribune, Inc.