Source: http://hugoneighborhood.org/lucompatibility.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 16:30:06+00:00

Document:
Purpose. The purpose of this Cooperate and Collaborate Paper is an initial land use report of a proposal without any commitment to action; it is brainstorming. It is potentially the first step in enhancing the land use compatibility between private lands and nearby BLM-administered lands. It is about lands adjacent to or nearby lands to BLM Rural Interface Lands (RIA)/Resource Lands in Westside Oregon.
This paper is open ended. It can also be known as an initial consultation document proposing a BLM Westside Oregon management strategy to be considered during BLMs on-going evaluation of BLM Westside Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview Districts 1995 resource management plans (RMPs). It is anticipated that it will be updated as it is refined through the involvement and networking of other co-sponsors.
Interest is growing with landowners adjacent to and nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and land use groups in having the BLM play a significant role in land use compatibility planning for BLM RIA/Resource Lands. Although the BLM cannot dictate local land use policies, it can play a role in facilitating the coordination, cooperation, and collaboration between management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands and local, county, and regional planning agencies to ensure that compatible land use planning is considered around our nations BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
This issue is not a BLM operational management issue about BLM project-level actions; it as a Western Oregon BLM and local government land allocation issue. For example, it is not about the seemingly never ending conflict over BLM project-level actions that can shift with a new Federal Executive Branch and Executive Departments.
Land Use Compatibility Issue. Although a Westside BLM Oregon land use compatibility issue, this paper in some cases focuses on its form in Josephine County, Oregon and the interior Rogue Valley.
In the 1990s the BLM in Westside Oregon, including the BLM Medford District Office (MDO), needed its own management tools to try to effectively manage public RIA resources lands it administered adjacent to or nearby the countys private RIAs as BLMs and local governments attempts to solve the conflicts between the activities on resource lands and adjacent residential lands had not been effective.
In most private RIAs concerns of the residents are related to forest and range managementpractices, wild fire, visual quality, and potential effects on domestic water sources and water supplies. More than 500,000 acres in the BLM MDO have been inventoried as RIA lands, 220,084 acres are private RIA lands (43 percent) and 292,096 are public RIA lands (57 percent).
Rural interface areas were a new innovative idea for the BLMs 1990s planning cycle for Westside Oregon. They were the result of the consistent and persistent concerns of the general public and the residential public living on lands adjacent to or nearby BLM managed resource lands. It had become difficult for BLM to accomplish its resource management job with the numerous public complaints and lawsuits, and BLM decided to address the public concern issue directly.
Addressing the public controversy of the management of BLM resource lands adjacent to or nearby rural residential living activities resulted in the RIA concept becoming standard for BLMs 1990s planning cycle Westside Oregon-wide, including the BLM MDO, because, in part, local governments mitigating measure/conditions of approval provided by the local governments planning systems were not effective in mitigating the conflicts between the management activities on BLM-administered resource lands and the home living activities on adjacent residential lands. This included Josephine Countys planning efforts associated with ineffective conditions of approval and conflict preference covenants.
The 1995 BLM MDO Record of Decision (ROD)/Resource Management Plans (RMP) objective for the RIA is to consider the interests of adjacent and nearby rural residential land owners in the private RIA during analysis, planning, and monitoring activities occurring within the managed public RIA. These private interests include personal health and safety, improvements to property, and quality of life.
When adjacent or nearby private lands are allocated to residential under a local governments post-acknowledgement plan amendment (PAPA) proposal, their benefit as an impact buffer to BLM/RIA Resource Lands become lost and a portion of any nearby BLM Resource Lands could become a public RIA. In Josephine County the reallocation of adjacent or nearby private RIA lands from Woodlot Resource to Rural Residential 5 acres will be a loss of the impact buffer benefit to BLM and will interfere with accepted forest operations on BLM lands by significantly impeding or significantly increasing the cost of the practices or operations on the public RIA. This private allocation PAPA impact is not an isolated impact to individual tracks of public RIA, but part of a cumulative impact significantly increasing the cost of the forest management practices or operations to potentially 292,096 acres of public RIA lands in the Rogue Valley.
In the 1990s the BLM spent an enormous amount of energy recognizing the RIA issue, identifying the private and public RIA lands, lands with the highest potential to become conflict RIA lands, and developing RIA prescriptions to attempt to address adjacent residential landowners concerns. All BLM Westside Oregon districts have this RIA management issue and RIA prescriptions in their existing RMPs because BLM and local government mitigating measures/conditions of approval were not effective.
History has since shown that BLM was no more successful than Josephine County in effectively mitigating the conflicts between resource use practices on BLM-administered lands adjacent to rural residential living activities.
In summary, the development of land uses that are not compatible with management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands is a growing concern across Westside Oregon. In addition to commercial forestland management, there are other environmental impacts to land uses around BLM RIA/Resource Lands which need to be considered when addressing the overall issue of land use compatibility. Forest land includes lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses including adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices, and other forested lands that maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources.
Compatible Land Use Planning. The following ideas about compatible land use planning are open ended as is this entire paper. They are part of the brainstorming ideas identified in Section III or future ideas yet to be expressed. They are a draft recommendation for BLM Westside Oregon to consider framing a management strategy to consider compatible land use planning objectives.
If it occurs, it is assumed that it will occur on the existing checkerboard of BLM-administered forests Westside Oregon where the land is meant for timber production -- after laws like the Endangered Species Act are accommodated. Once the needs for those laws are satisfied, then BLM looks at what's left of its land base, and then it applies different management prescriptions to determine the allowable cut.
The main objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible with management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands, such as residential, schools, churches, etc., to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and to encourage land uses that are more compatible, such as industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc. to locate adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
There is known interest from neighbors and land use groups for BLM to provide guidance on how to establish and maintain compatible land uses around BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and/or, if not possible, for BLM to consider trading the existing BLM RIA/Resource Lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential property owners, including selling these BLM RIA/Resource Lands outright.
The BLM could consider establishing a one time Compatible Land Use Planning Task Force. The Task Force could be charged with identifying how to better cooperate, coordinate, and collaborate through the BLM RMP planning processes, and its local site specific projects with local governments comprehensive land use planning processes by considering the brainstorming issues. The Task Forces mission could be to develop a resource guide to assist local governments and BLM in identifying and implementing appropriate compatible land use tools (i.e., maintenance of forest land resource allocations, private RIA allocations, legal resource compatibility easements, compatible land use planning research papers, testimony papers on whether land falls within the Oregon Statewide Goal 4 definition of forest lands, and other related compatibility issues) as one way to prevent or slow down the proliferation of incompatible land uses adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
The Task Force could consist of representatives from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) interdisciplinary (ID) teams, land use planning consultants, city/county planning departments, state land use and resource departments, and BLM supervisors and managers. It could be disbanded after the Compatible Land Use Planning Resource Guide was finalized and published. The Compatible Land Use Planning Resource Guide could be developed by the Task Force. It would be a resource to local planners, governments, neighbors, and other interested parties and would not be construed as BLM regulations or official agency policy. Case studies could be contained within the Guide as examples to illustrate specific techniques and strategies of how and where some of the compatible land use tools across the country have been applied and implemented. Inclusion of these examples would not in any way represent official endorsement by the BLM.
Compatible land use planning research papers would be encouraged by the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies, including BLM professionals and work groups. These papers could cover the range of pros and cons of the land use compatibility issue. The papers might be published as determined appropriate by the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies, including BLM, on their web sites.
Significant Benefits of Compatible Land Use Planning. The objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible with management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.) to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (e.g., industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc.) to locate adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands, or, conversely, for BLM to consider trading the existing BLM RIA/Resource Lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential property owners, and/or sell these lands outright.
A public BLM education and outreach compatible land use planning program for BLM RIA/Resource Lands have a significant potential to provide benefits to BLM, local neighbors, and local governments. In a nut-shell there are opportunities for BLM to cooperate and collaborate with local governments, and especially private landowners adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands located below approximately 2,000', that can be realized through the State of Oregons land use planning system, especially the application of Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land.
Compatible Land Use Planning Between Local Governments And BLM. A significant opportunity for BLM to meaningfully cooperate and collaborate with local governments and neighbors is the development of a compatible land use planning program. This could be one foundation element of any future collaborative planning effort toward the goal of developing consensus around BLM management alternatives which will bring together the support of the majority of the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies.
A major benefit could be compatible land use planning between local governments and BLM. The BLM could share with local government decision-makers its vision concerning the allocation and management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands as there appears to be a disconnect between local governments normal support for BLM project-level actions, and their normal support for an expanded private residential RIA land allocation adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands. For example, local governments normal support of an expanded noncompatible private residential allocation is in conflict with their normal support of project-level BLM actions.
Local governments could share with BLM their desire to expand residential allocations adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and the need for BLM to consider the goal of trading out or selling these low elevation BLM RIA/Resource Lands. BLM could eventually trade these lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential living activities, or just sell them outright reducing the forest land base.
Regardless of whether BLM stays or leaves, the objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible to locate away from BLMadministered lands and to encourage land uses that are more compatible to locate around BLMadministered lands. The objectives of compatible land use planning is not to encourage or have allocated incompatible land uses to be located adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
BLM Expert Testimony Provides Foundation For Neighborhood Support Base. The BLM has opportunities to cooperate and collaborate with local governments, and especially private landowners located adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands located below approximately 2,000' that can be realized through the State of Oregons land use planning system, especially through Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land.
Benefits to BLM could be the development of a neighborhood base that supports the management allocation for BLM RIA/Resource Lands in their communities backyards (i.e., strive for a common vision on the allocation prescription of BLM RIA/Resource Lands).
Benefits to local neighbors could be the BLM as an expert witness testifying to the value of private forest lands adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands remaining compatible forest lands: private resource lands and private RIA resource lands.
Promotes Employment And Economic Development Through Stable And Efficiently Managed BLM RIA/Resource Lands. In the long-term a stable land use pattern of BLM RIA/Resource Lands, that is effectively and efficiently managed, promotes local employment and economic development opportunities. The O & C lands in Westside Oregon have an obligation to generate revenue. BLM owes the counties some stability n whatever that is, so that they have something to plan against. The issue of jobs, the issue of timber sale receipts as the law is currently structured, is critically important to them, and it's critically important to BLM.
When land allocations involve forest land, Oregon families depend on stewardship of BLM RIA/Resource Lands to promote the social welfare of the citizens of the area by working to preserve, protect, and enhance the livability and economic viability of its farms, forests, and rural neighbors. Forest land includes lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses including adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices, and other forested lands that maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources.
If potentially harvestable timber lands are identified as one of the uses of the land under BLMs allocations to General Forest Management Areas (GFMA), Adaptive Management Areas (AMA), and Connectivity/Diversity Blocks, they should be effectively and efficiently managed toward the goal of the allocations in order to contribute to the economic stability of local communities, and providing recreational opportunities.
Compatible land use planning between local governments and BLM for BLM RIA/Resource Lands promotes a long-term stable land use pattern of BLM RIA/Resource Lands that can be effectively and efficiently managed. This efficiency promotes local employment and economic development opportunities by lower operating costs and increasing economic sustainability.
commitment to action; it is brainstorming. It is potentially the first step in enhancing the land use compatibility between private lands and nearby BLM-administered lands. It is about private lands adjacent to or nearby lands to BLM Rural Interface Lands (RIA)/Resource Lands in Westside Oregon. Rural interface areas are areas where BLM-administered lands are adjacent to or intermingled with privately owned lands zoned for 1 to 20-acre lots or that already have residential development. Westside Oregon is a term used to identify all BLM districts west of the Cascades.
This paper is open ended. It can also be known as an initial consultation document proposing a BLM Westside Oregon management strategy to be considered during BLMs on-going evaluation of BLM Westside Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview Districts 1995 RMPs (Appendix A). It is anticipated that it will be updated as it is refined through the involvement and networking of other co-sponsors (Appendix B). Hopefully it can serve as part of a solution where BLM issues a paper released to launch a public consultation process, or perhaps establishes a Compatible Land Use Planning Task Force.
compatibility planning for BLM RIA/Resource Lands. Although the BLM cannot dictate local land use policies, it can play a role in facilitating the coordination, cooperation, and collaboration between management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands and local, county, and regional planning agencies to ensure that compatible land use planning is considered around our nations BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
This paper is also a request to Westside Oregon BLM to provide guidance on how to establish and maintain compatible land uses adjacent to and nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
Although a Westside BLM Oregon land use compatibility issue, this paper in some cases focuses on its form in Josephine County, Oregon and the interior Rogue Valley (Appendix C).
220,084 acres are private RIA lands (43 percent) and 292,096 are public RIA lands (57 percent).
Westside Oregon. They were the result of the consistent and persistent concerns of the general public and the residential public living on lands adjacent to or nearby BLM managed resource lands. It had become difficult for BLM to accomplish its resource management job with the numerous public complaints and lawsuits, and BLM decided to address the public concern issue directly.
Addressing the public controversy of the management of BLM resource lands adjacent to or nearby rural residential living activities resulted in the RIA concept becoming a standard element for BLMs 1990s planning cycle Westside Oregon-wide, including the BLM MDO, because, in part, local governments mitigating measure/conditions of approval provided by the local governments planning systems were not effective in mitigating the conflicts between the management activities on BLM-administered resource lands and the home living activities on adjacent residential lands. This included Josephine Countys planning efforts associated with ineffective conditions of approval and conflict preference covenants.
When adjacent or nearby private lands are allocated to residential under a local governments post-acknowledgement plan amendment (PAPA) proposal, their benefit as an impact buffer to BLM/RIA Resource Lands become lost and a portion of any nearby BLM Resource Lands could become a public RIA. In Josephine County the reallocation of adjacent or nearby private RIA lands from Woodlot Resource to Rural Residential 5 acres will be a loss of the impact buffer benefit to BLM and will interfere with accepted forest operations on BLM lands by significantly impeding or significantly increasing the cost of the practices or operations on the public RIA. This private allocation PAPA impact is not an isolated impact to individual tracks of public RIA, but part of a cumulative impact significantly increasing the cost of the forest management practices or operations to potentially 292,096 acres of public RIA lands in the Rogue Valley (Appendix C).
identifying the private and public RIA lands, lands with the highest potential to become conflict RIA lands, and developing RIA prescriptions to attempt to address adjacent residential landowners concerns. All BLM Westside Oregon districts have this RIA management issue and RIA prescriptions in their existing RMPs because BLM and local government mitigating measures/conditions of approval were not effective.
Although BLM Westside Districts include RIA standards or guidelines as part of their RMPs, the primary responsibility for integrating BLM RIA/Resource Lands considerations into the local land use planning process rests with local governments. The objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible with BLM RIA/Resource Lands (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.) to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (i.e., industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc.) to locate around BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
The objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible with BLM RIA/Resource Lands (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.) to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (i.e., industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc.) to locate around BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
Many think that any future effort must be collaborative in order to develop consensus around alternatives which will bring together the support of the majority of the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies (Appendix D).
(3) whether the forested land is necessary to maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources.
The BLM has opportunities to cooperate and collaborate (Appendix D) with local governments, and especially private landowners located adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands located below approximately 2,000' that can be realized through the State of Oregons land use planning system, especially through Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land (Appendix E).
Benefits to BLM could be the development of a neighborhood base that supports the management allocation for BLM RIA/Resource Lands in their communities backyards (i.e., strive for a common vision on the allocation prescription of BLM RIA/Resource Lands). Benefits to local neighbors could be the BLM as an expert witness testifying to the value of private forest lands adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands remaining compatible forest lands: private resource lands and private RIA resource lands.
While not the only compatibility issue, commercial forest operations has been the primary driver for the land use compatibility conflict issue. Since the 1990s there has been a constant technical effort to reduce site specific project conflicts with neighbors. Although it is believed there has been a significant reduction in neighbors concerns, little more is expected. Consequently another idea to reduce conflicts could focus on BLM RIA/Resource Lands and land use compatibility planning.
This idea of this paper is probably only applicable if BLMs strategy is to continue to manage low elevation BLM-administered resource lands versus eventually trading them out and concentrating on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential property owners.
There is always the possibility that a future BLM strategy could be to eventually trade these lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential property owners. Some benefits of a stable BLM RIA/Resource Lands land use pattern follow.
with forest operations on BLM resource lands.
versus the often lower standards of the Oregon Forest Practices Act.
If implemented, it is doubtful this approach would quickly develop into a consensus around BLM alternatives and/or management with a majority of the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies, especially for project-level actions. It does, however, have a significant potential as an effective tool that BLM has management control over in beginning a local collaborative process toward the goal of a common land allocation vision. A BLM program could start small with an educational and outreach program applicable to all Westside Oregon BLM districts with private and public RIAs. For example, a program could focus on web publications that is potentially expanded to include testimony for private site specific Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land proposals to local governments (Appendix E). By private site specific actions it is meant private land use PAPA proposals to change a local governments comprehensive plan allocations from resource to residential for lands adjacent to, or nearby, BLM-administered resource lands.
improved compatibility on nearby or adjacent private lands to BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
The guide could identify a wide variety of possible land use methods as they relate to compatible land use planning efforts. The guide would also recognizes that state and local governments are responsible for private land use planning, zoning and regulation, and could present options or tools that can assist in establishing and maintaining compatible land uses around BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
To assist in those efforts, the BLM could expend significant funds related to BLM RIA/Resource Lands planning and land use compatibility planning in Westside Oregon. These efforts can take the form of future RMPs, site specific projects, research on compatibility studies, land acquisition and/or compatibility easements, public consultation processes, and a Compatible Land Use Planning Task Force.
This paper is also a request to Westside Oregon BLM to provide guidance on how to establish and maintain compatible land uses adjacent to and nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands. The authors of the paper are identified in Appendix A.
improved land use compatibility nearby or adjacent to BLM RIA/Resource Lands. These entities include the neighbors, BLM, (list of users of BLM RIA/Resource Lands), Southern Oregon Resource Alliance (SORA)?, etc.), state and local governments, and the community at-large. Knowing the interwoven roles and responsibilities for land use compatibility planning and implementation is important to helping understand the responsibilities placed on each entity and individual involved.
nations BLM RIA/Resource Lands, along with the increasing conversion of private resource lands nearby or adjacent to BLM RIA/Resource Lands to non-compatible land uses (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.), it was recognized that site specific projects could become a major constraint on effective and efficient management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands. To address the issues of BLM RIA/Resource Lands and land use compatibility, future legislation and regulation could be considered.
2. Providing funding for BLM RIA/Resource Lands compatibility planning and projects.
minimally recognized the implications of planning for BLM RIA/Resource Lands and off-site, BLM RIA/Resource Lands-related development. Local land use planning, as a method of determining appropriate (and inappropriate) use of properties nearby or adjacent to BLM RIA/Resource Lands could be an integral part of the land use policy and regulatory tools used by BLM managers and local land use planners. Very often such land use planning coordination is hampered by the fact that BLM RIA/Resource Lands can be surrounded by a multitude of individual local governmental jurisdictions, each with their own comprehensive planning process.
Coordination during the early stages of planning RMPs and local land use planning is extremely critical for ensuring some level of land use compatibility. Ideally, this coordination must occur before the creation, adoption, and implementation of both BLM RIA/Resource Lands and local land use plans.
In this case, BLMs RMPs and the local governments comprehensive plans and zoning maps are in place. Local governments comprehensive plans and zoning maps are officially acknowledged in Westside Oregon by LCDC. The focus then could be on coordination, collaboration, and implementation of future revisions to BLM RMPs, including allocations to RIA/Resource Lands, and local land use planning allocations. Cooperating and collaborating with local governments, and especially private landowners adjacent to, or nearby, BLM RIA/Resource Lands located below approximately 2,000' would be critical to the success of compatible land use planning.
Such coordination requires open dialogue and, at the least, some type of basic understanding of each others planning processes.
It turns out this issue is timely as the BLM Westside Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District are in the process to complete plan evaluations of their 1995 RMPs. The evaluations will evaluate the implementation of the RMPs through FY 2010. The evaluations will begin in January 2011 and will be completed by July 30, 2011. The Oregon State Office (OSO) will provide overall coordination for the evaluations and will complete the plan evaluation findings report with the assistance of the districts (Appendix A).
BLM managers or local planning agencies that expect a reasonable chance of success in their planning efforts must provide for public education and awareness in the planning process.
Dissemination of information is a one-way flow of a desired message or philosophy.
The type of audience may range from a very narrow one to the community at-large.
advertising, newspaper inserts, and Internet Web pages.
exchange opportunities are public workshops, public advisory committees, radio/T.V.
talk shows, and speaking engagements.
ODFW v. Josephine County, LUBA 2008-022, 6/18/2009 (Appendix E).
Where a local code provision mirrors a state statute, the local officials interpretation of the local code provision is not entitled to the usual deference for interpretation of local code provisions. Rather, LUBAs standard of review, under ORS 197.829(1)(d), is whether the interpretation is contrary to the state law that the local law implements. That review requires interpretation of state law according to the usual LUBA rules of statutory construction.
Research Question: Do Josephine County PAPAs involving JCCP GOAL 11: Policy 3.C. and RLDC 46.050.B.C.) satisfy the ODFW v. Josephine County standard for a local code provision mirroring a state statute? If this connection is made ODFW v. Josephine County applies, and LUBAs standard for review would be Oregon Statewide Goal 4: Forest Lands - OAR 660-015-0000(4) and its applicable OARs.
Management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands and community planning processes are intertwined. To that extent, the material contained in this paper and the proposed compatibility land use guidebook would focused on communication and cooperation, and directed toward the establishment of those common goals that are necessary for the development of compatible land use programs.
The following ideas about compatible land use planning are open ended as is this entire paper. They are part of the brainstorming ideas identified in Section III or future ideas yet to be expressed. They are a draft recommendation for BLM Westside Oregon to consider framing a management strategy to consider compatible land use planning objectives (Appendix A).
If it occurs, it is assumed that it will occur on the existing checkerboard of BLM-administered forests Westside Oregon where the land is meant for timber production -- after laws like the Endangered Species Act are accommodated. Once the needs for those laws are satisfied, then BLM looks at what's left of our land base, and then it applies different management prescriptions to determine our allowable cut.
generally considered to be incompatible with management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands, such as residential, schools, churches, etc., to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and to encourage land uses that are more compatible, such as industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc. to locate adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands.
departments, state land use and resource departments, and BLM supervisors and managers.
The Task Force could be disbanded after the Compatible Land Use Planning Resource Guide was finalized and published.
The Compatible Land Use Planning Resource Guide could be developed by the Task Force. It would be a resource to local planners, governments, neighbors, and other interested parties and would not be construed as BLM regulations or official agency policy. Case studies could be contained within the Guide as examples to illustrate specific techniques and strategies of how and where some of the compatible land use tools across the country have been applied and implemented. Inclusion of these examples would not in any way represent official endorsement by the BLM.
At a minimum of Guide could be published on the BLM Oregon-Washington web site.
considered to be incompatible with management of BLM RIA/Resource Lands (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.) to locate away from BLM RIA/Resource Lands and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (e.g., industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc.) to locate adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands, or, conversely, for BLM to consider trading the existing BLM RIA/Resource Lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential property owners, and/or sell these lands outright.
RIA/Resource Lands have a significant potential to provide benefits to BLM, local neighbors, and local governments. In a nut-shell there are opportunities for BLM to cooperate and collaborate (Appendix D) with local governments, and especially private landowners adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands located below approximately 2,000', that can be realized through the State of Oregons land use planning system, especially the application of Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land (Appendix E).
governments and neighbors is the development of a compatible land use planning program. This could be one foundation element of any future collaborative planning effort toward the goal of developing consensus around BLM management alternatives which will bring together the support of the majority of the public, stakeholders, and cooperating agencies (Appendix D).
strive for a common vision on the allocation prescription of BLM RIA/Resource Lands).
private forest lands adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands remaining compatible forest lands: private resource lands and private RIA resource lands.
In the long-term a stable land use pattern of BLM RIA/Resource Lands, that is effectively and efficiently managed, promotes local employment and economic development opportunities. The O & C lands in Westside Oregon have an obligation to generate revenue. BLM owes the counties some stability n whatever that is, so that they have something to plan against. The issue of jobs, the issue of timber sale receipts as the law is currently structured, is critically important to them, and it's critically important to BLM.
preserve, protect, and enhance the livability and economic viability of its farms, forests, and rural neighbors. Forest land includes lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses including adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices, and other forested lands that maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources.
Lands promotes a long-term stable land use pattern of BLM RIA/Resource Lands that can be effectively and efficiently managed. This efficiency promotes local employment and economic development opportunities by lower operating costs and increasing economic sustainability.
The purpose of this Cooperate and Collaborate paper is an initial land use report of a proposal without any commitment to action; it is brainstorming. It is potentially a step in enhancing the land use compatibility between adjacent or nearby private lands and BLM rural interface area (RIA)/resource lands in Westside Oregon. This paper is open ended. It is an initial consultation document proposing a BLM Westside Oregon management strategy to be considered during BLMs 2011 evaluation of its 1995 RMPs.
Historically the RIA issue was the consistent and persistent concerns of the general public and the residential public living on lands adjacent to or nearby BLM managed resource lands. It had become difficult for BLM to accomplish its resource management job with the numerous public complaints and lawsuits, and it decided to address the public concern issue directly. Therefore, in the early1990s the BLM in Westside Oregon, including the BLM MDO, decided they needed their own management tools to try to effectively manage public RIAs administered adjacent to or nearby local governments private RIAs. The need was because the BLM and the local governments attempts to solve the conflicts had not been effective. History after 1995 demonstrates that the BLM MDO was no more successful than Josephine County in effectively mitigating the conflicts between resource use practices on BLM-administered lands adjacent to rural residential living activities.
The issue is alive today when adjacent or nearby private lands are reallocated to residential under a local governments PAPA proposal because their benefit as an impact buffer to public RIAs become lost. For example, in Josephine County the reallocation of adjacent or nearby private RIAs from Woodlot Resource to Residential will be a loss of the impact buffer benefit to BLM as it interfere with accepted forest operations by significantly impeding or significantly increasing the cost of the practices or operations on the public RIA. The private reallocation of a PAPA impact is not an isolated impact to individual tracks of public RIAs, but part of a cumulative impact over the long-term significantly increasing the cost of the forest management practices or operations to potentially 292,096 acres of public RIA lands in the Rogue Valley.
accommodated. Once the needs for those laws are satisfied, then BLM looks at what's left of its land base, and then it applies different management prescriptions to determine the allowable cut.
considered to be incompatible (e.g., residential, schools, churches, etc.) with management of BLM RIAs to locate away from BLM RIAs and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (e.g., industrial, commercial, commercial forest, woodlot resource, agricultural, farm, etc.) to locate adjacent to or nearby BLM RIAs. From a basic zoning 101 scheme you place industrial uses next to industrial uses, you do not locate residential activities next to industrial activities.
A BLM education and outreach compatible land use planning program for public RIAs has a significant potential to provide benefits to BLM, local neighbors, and local governments. In a nut-shell there are opportunities for BLM to cooperate and collaborate with local governments, and especially private landowners adjacent to or nearby public RIAs located below approximately 2,000', that can be realized through the State of Oregons land use planning system, especially the application of Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land.
A major benefit could be compatible land use planning between local governments and BLM. The BLM could share with local government decision-makers its vision concerning the allocation of resource lands. Local governments could share with BLM their desire to expand residential allocations adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands, and the need for BLM to consider the goal of trading out or selling these low elevation BLM RIA/resource lands. BLM could eventually trade these lands out and concentrate on higher elevation lands away from the normal conflicts with private residential living activities, or just sell them outright. Regardless of whether BLM stays or leaves, the objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible to locate away from BLMadministered lands and to encourage land uses that are more compatible to locate around BLMadministered lands.
In the long-term a stable land use pattern of public RIA/resource lands, that is effectively and efficiently managed, promotes local employment and economic development opportunities. The O & C lands in Westside Oregon have an obligation to generate revenue. BLM owes the counties some stability n whatever that is, so that they have something to plan against. The issue of jobs, the issue of timber sale receipts as the law is currently structured, is critically important to them, and it's critically important to BLM.
neighbors. Forest land includes private and public lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses including adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices, and other forested lands that maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources.
Compatible land use planning between local governments and BLM promotes a long-term stable land use pattern of public RIAs that can be effectively and efficiently managed. This efficiency promotes local employment and economic development opportunities by lower operating costs and increasing economic sustainability.
The BLM Westside Districts and the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District are in the process to complete plan evaluations of their 1995 RMPs. The evaluations will evaluate the implementation of the RMPs through FY 2010. The evaluations will begin in January 2011 and will be completed by July 30, 2011. The Oregon State Office (OSO) will provide overall coordination for the evaluations and will complete the plan evaluation findings report with the assistance of the districts (December 21, 2010 Instruction Memorandum No. OR-2011-015. From: BLM State Director, Oregon/Washington To: DMs, DSDs, Staff, and Branch Chiefs. Subject: Western Oregon Resource Management Plan Evaluations).
The background to the BLM evaluations is that the BLM 1601  Land Use Planning Manual and the BLM Land Use Planning Handbook (H-1601-1) state that RMPs should be periodically evaluated (at a minimum of every 5 years). The purpose of evaluations is to determine whether the land use plan decisions and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses are still valid and whether the plans are being implemented. The RMPs for the 6 west-side districts were last evaluated in 2004. An RMP revision effort for western Oregon districts was completed in December 2008. The new Record of Decision (RODs)/RMPs were withdrawn by the Department of the Interior in June, 2009 (i.e., the WOPR - Western Oregon Plan Revision). Due to the withdrawal of the 2008 RODs/RMPs, the districts have continued implementation of the 1995 RMPs. The 5-year evaluation cycle means that evaluations are now past due.
A new BLM Westside Oregon RMPs revision process, like the past WOPR, is likely in the near future. The 2011 plan evaluation of Westside Oregon RMPs is required prior to plan revisions or major plan amendments to understand why certain RMP objectives have not been met and what issues should be brought forward into the planning process. The plan evaluation serves as the starting point for the preparation plan. The preparation plan serves as the foundation of the entire planning process. A new plan revision or major amendment will take years to complete, the plan evaluation will identify needs for interim plan amendments or maintenance.
This Cooperate and Collaborate Paper is an initial land use report of a proposal without any commitment to action; it is potentially the first step in enhancing the land use compatibility of lands adjacent to or nearby BLM RIA/Resource Lands in Westside Oregon. This draft brainstorming paper is open ended. It can also be known as an initial consultation document merely proposing a BLM Westside Oregon management strategy to be considered. It is anticipated that it will be updated as it is refined through the involvement and networking of other co-sponsors.
Adaptive Management Areas (AMA) are one BLM allocation prescription in Westside Oregon that can be managed as commercial forest land. Most timber harvest volume comes from matrix lands, which includes General Forest Management Areas, AMAs, and Connectivity/Diversity Blocks. This paper is, in part, a case study of AMAs, Rural Interface Areas (RIA), and private lands in Josephine County which are suitable for commercial forest uses including adjacent or nearby lands to BLM RIA/Resource Lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices on BLM RIA/Resource Lands. It applies to all of Westside Oregon.
Adaptive Management Areas The BLM MDOs policy, for land it administers in Josephine County, Oregon, is that commercial forest land is all forest land that is capable of yielding at least 20 cubic feet of wood per acre per year of commercial tree species (Reference 1, Reference 2, & Reference 3). It does not matter that Josephine Countys internal rate of return (IRR) standard for private lands is 85 cubic feet of wood per acre per year of commercial tree species. What matters is that the private lands are adjacent or nearby resource zoned lands (BLM RIA/Resource Lands) managed by BLM using the 20 cubic feet of wood per acre per year standard.
Reference 1 USDI, BLM, Medford District Office. August 1992. Draft Medford District Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Volume II, Appendix 3-T-1: Timber Production Capability Classification. provides, in relevant part, page Appendix 3-46.
Reference 2 USDI, BLM, Medford District Office. October 1994. Final - Medford District Proposed Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Volume I. provides, in relevant part, pages Chapter 2-20 - Chapter 2-22.
Reference 3 USDI, BLM, Medford District Office. June 1995. Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan. provides, in relevant part, pages 36 - 39,103, & 108.
A the largest forest manager in Jackson and Josephine counties, the BLM, has large amounts of land in the Applegate area it administers as AMA. Land allocated by BLM to AMA inventories as commercial forest land, and except for a small amount of land withdrawn for riparian protection, it can be managed as commercial forest land under the AMA land use allocation.
The BLM MDO RMP records that lands allocated to AMAs available for timber harvest and management for future harvest (USDI, BLM, Medford District Office. June 1995. Record of Decision and Resource Management Plan. provides, in relevant part, pages 36 - 38). The allocation objectives for AMAs follow.
The land is not vacant in terms of its natural resources, its ecological functions, and the jobs resulting from BLM management. AMAs are managed with ecological, economic and social objectives, including management for wildlife habitat and timber production.
Fire management, including hazard fuels reduction, is part of the safety and property protection issue. This is certainly a hot topic for the citizens located in the interior Rogue Valley. Hazard fuel reduction projects reduce the unnatural build-up of fuel in the forest. Fuels can be natural fuels, forest vegetation or debris, activity fuels, debris left over from woodcutters or forest thinning projects or ladder fuels, small trees or brush that carry a ground fire up into the canopy.
residential development [page - Glossary - 13, Final BLM MDO EIS].
where county zoning has created or allows for creation of lots as small as 1 - 20 acres.
for rural, ruralresidential, or farm/forest [page 3-116 Final BLM MDO EIS].
292,096 are public RIA lands (57 percent) [page 3-116 Final BLM MDO EIS].
land [page 3-116 Final BLM MDO EIS].
(approximately 35,000 residences) [page 3-116 Final BLM MDO EIS].
Rural interface areas (RIAs) were a new innovative idea for the BLMs 1990s planning cycle for Westside Oregon. They were the result of the consistent and persistent concerns of the general public and the residential public living on lands adjacent or nearby BLM managed resource lands. It had become difficult for BLM to accomplish its resource management job with the numerous public complaints and lawsuits, and BLM decided to address the public concern issue directly. [December 27, 2010 Interview of Mike Walker by Leta Neiderheiser and Evelyn Heinrichs: Mike Walker was the 1986 - 1994 BLM Rural Interface Area/Outdoor Recreation Planner Interdisciplinary Team Member for the Medford District Proposed Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement; Walker wrote the rural interface chapter of the BLM MDO Final EIS (USDI, BLM, Medford District Office. October 1994. Final - Medford District Proposed Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Volume I.. Chapter 5 Consultation and Coordination, pages 5-16 through 5-20, List of Preparers].
The BLM in Westside Oregon, including the BLM MDO, needed its own management tools to try to effectively manage its public RIA resources lands adjacent to the countys private RIAs as local governments attempts to solve the conflicts between the activities on resource lands and adjacent residential lands were not effective. This included Josephine Countys planning efforts associated with ineffective conditions of approval and conflict preference covenants (RLDC 46.050.C.5. & 6.).
History has since shown that BLM was no more successful than Josephine County in effectively mitigating the conflicts between resource use practices on BLM-administered lands adjacent to rural residential living activities (December 27, 2010 Walker Interview).
If adjacent or nearby private RIA lands becomes Residential under a PAPA, their benefit as an impact buffer (RLDC 46.050.C.1.) to the nearby BLM Resource Lands, or adjacent BLM/RIA Resource Lands, will become lost and a portion of the nearby BLM Resource Lands will become a public RIA. The reallocation of adjacent or nearby private RIA lands from Woodlot Resource to Rural Residential 5 will be a loss of the impact buffer benefit to BLM and will interfere with accepted forest operations on BLM lands by significantly impeding or significantly increasing the cost of the practices or operations on the public RIA (RLDC 46.050.C.2). As an example, this impact is not an isolated impact to 40 acres of public RIA, but part of a cumulative impact significantly increasing the cost of the forest management practices or operations to potentially 292,096 acres of public RIA lands, especially those surrounding the subject property and the surrounding forest operations (RLDC 46.050.C.3.).
identifying the BLM private and public RIA lands with the highest potential to become conflict RIA lands, and developing RIA prescriptions to attempt to address adjacent residential landowners concerns. All BLM Westside Oregon districts have this RIA management issue and RIA prescriptions in their existing resource management plans because local mitigating measures/conditions of approval were not effective (RLDC 46.050.C.5. & 6).
Oregon Statewide Goal 4 defines forest lands and requires counties to inventory them and adopt policies and ordinances that will "conserve forest lands for forest uses."
An affirmative answer to any one of these three inquires means the land is forest land protected by Goal 4. DLCD v. Curry County, 33 Or LUBA 728 (1997).
findings of compliance with Oregon Statewide Goal 4 - Forest Land, including for Josephine County, the Josephine County Comprehensive Plan (JCCP) Goal 11 Policy 3.B., JCCP Goal 11 Policy 3.C., Josephine County Rural Land Development Code (RLDC) 46.050.B.3. and RLDC 46.050.C.
Goal 4 defines forest land to include adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or practices. JCCP Goal 11 Policy 3.B implements this element of Goal 4 and requires findings that the subject property is not necessary lands. JCCP Goal 11 Policy 3.C., RLDC 46.050.B.3. and RLDC 46.050.C explain what facts and factors are to be considered and how the analysis is to be conducted.
is whether the interpretation is contrary to the state law that the local law implements.
Research Question: Do Josephine County PAPAs involving JCCP GOAL 11: Policy 3.C. and RLDC 46.050.B.C.) satisfy the ODFW v. Josephine County standard for a local code provision mirroring a state statute? If this connection is made ODFW v. Josephine County applies, and LUBAs standard for review would be Oregon Statewide Goal 4: Forest Lands (Appendix D) - OAR 660-015-0000(4) and its applicable OARs rather than the countys interpretation.
Josephine County Comprehensive Plan (JCCP) GOAL 11: Policy 3.C.
Josephine County Rural Development Code (RLDC) 46.050.B.C.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.