|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology.
By JOEL ASCHBRENNER
H&N Staff Reporter
August 5, 2010
The commissioners have drafted and plan to sign Tuesday a resolution that asks El Paso Corp., the company building a $3 billion natural gas pipeline, to break an agreement with Western Watersheds Project and the Oregon Natural Desert Association.
In the agreements, El Paso would donate $20 million over 10 years to two conservation funds. A portion of the funds would be used to purchase grazing permits, including some in Lake County.
Klamath County Commissioner Cheryl Hukill said allowing the environmental groups to buy and retire grazing permits on Bureau of Land Management and federal Forest Service lands would hurt local ranchers and the local economy. She added she supports the pipeline project, but not the agreement with the environmental groups.
“We are a farming and ranching community, but this is about a bigger picture than just Klamath County,” she said.
The Lake County Board of Commissioners passed a similar resolution Wednesday.
The pipeline will be
built in nine counties in Oregon, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming.
All nine counties are considering or have signed a similar resolution, said Grant Gerber, a private attorney from Elko, Nev., who is working with representatives from the counties.
The two
environmental groups agreed in early July to drop their opposition
to the 685-mile pipeline after El Paso agreed to donate the funds.
El Paso and WWP established the Sagebrush Habitat Conservation Fund,
which would receive $15 million. The Greater Hart-Sheldon
Conservation Fund, established by El Paso and the ONDA, would
receive $5 million.
El Paso would not pay WWP and ONDA directly. A three-member board consisting of a representative from El Paso, the environmental group and an independent third party will manage each of the two funds.
Dave Becker, ONDA staff lawyer, said the fund would support restoration efforts in the Sheldon and Hart Mountain Wildlife refuges in Nevada and Oregon, respectively. Work would include removing fences, replanting natural vegetation and restoring springs. Little of the money would go to buying grazing permits, Becker said, and the fund would buy permits only from willing sellers.
“If there is someone interested in retiring their permit, this is an avenue for them,” Becker said. “If people want to keep ranching, this doesn’t have to affect them.”
Officials opposing
the agreement hope to convince El Paso to not pay into the funds,
despite the risk of being sued for breaking the agreement,
“If the nine
counties come together and stand unified, there is a chance we’ll
put enough
Becker said El Paso would have little to gain from breaking the agreement, and it’s not probable the company would. A call to WWP Wednesday afternoon was not returned.
ONDA and WWP in April asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a rehearing on the commission’s initial approval of the project. FERC gave the project a notice to proceed Friday, but at least two other environmental groups are still asking FERC for a rehearing, Becker said.
Gerber and two county commissioners from Utah and Nevada have organized a meeting in Salt Lake City next week. Officials from the nine counties, El Paso, WWP and ONDA were invited. Gerber said officials from adjacent counties, legislators and other state officials have expressed interest in dissolving the agreement.
“We think the coalition of groups against El Paso paying these groups will continue to grow,” Gerber said.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml