PAGE 1 Show Image
2
4
S Siskiyou County Comprehensive
6
7 Land & Resource
8
9 Management Plan
PAGE 2 Show Image
Slsklyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
Februa~ 1996 page 2
I Table of Contents
2
3 S[SKJYOU COUNTY COMPR~HENS[VE LAND & RBSOURC~ MANAGEMENT PLAN 4
4 PART 1. INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF PURPOSE 4
5 PARTI[ E~MPLES 5
6 PART IH. GENERAL PROCESSEs, METHODS AND GOA[£ OF AN ANALYS[S BY AGENCIES 6
7 APPENDIX 1 REGULATIONS. JuRlSD1~QN AND COORDINATfON I 1
8 SISKIYOU COUNTY & THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT: 12
9 JOINT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING: 15
10 THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION ACT: 16
1 1 US FOREST SERV[CE LAND & RESOURCE PLANNINGINEPA PROCESSES: 17
12 US BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAND & RESOURCE PLANNINGINEPA PROCESSES: 18
13 SISKIYOU COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & REVIEW: 20
14 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT 21
15 CALIFORNYA ADMINISTRATIVE ACT 21
16 APPENDIX 2 CUSTOM AND CULTURE 24
1 7 IDENTIFICATION AND RECOGNITION OF CUSTOMS AND CULTURE 26
18 OVERV[EW AND DEFINING OF CUSTOMS AND CULTURE 26
19 APPENDIX 3 CUSTOMS AND CULTURE MINING IN S[SKIYOU COUNTY 28
20 APPENDIX 4 CUSTOM AND CULTURE AGRICULTURE SUMMARY 31
21 APPENDIX S CUSTOMS AND CULTURE FARMING 33
22 HISTORICALNOTES:
33
23 EARLY RECLAMATION EFFORTS: 36
24 HISTORICAL STATICS: 37
25 "RIGffr TO FARM ORDINANCE": 38
26 GENERAL CQNSIDERATIONS: 38
27 SOIL CffARACTERI~CS: 38
28 CLIMIMAJIC CIIARACTERI~CS: 40
29 WATER AVAILABILITY: 40
30 APPENDIX 6 CUSTOMS AND CIJL1~JRE RANCHING AND DAIRY 48
3 1 SISKIYOU COUNTY RISTOR~CAL NOTES: 48
32 IIISTORICAL STATISTICS: 53
PAGE 3 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 3
l CONSTITUTION OF THE SISKIYOU COUNTY STOCK PROTECTWE
2 ASSOCYNTION 57
3 RANCHING TRADITIONS OF ALTA CALIFORNIA 59
4 HISTORY OF THE "PUBLIC LANDS" GRAZ[NG SYSTEM 61
5 APPENDIX 7 CUSTOMS AND CULTURE WATER US~ 66
6 HISTORY 66
7 AGRICULTURAL WATER USE: 88
8 WATER USE IN GOLD MINING 97
9 WATER LAW PRINCIPLES 103
10 APPENDIX 8 CUSTOMS AND CULTURE FORESTS AND FOREST PRODUCTS 114
Ii ADDENDUM 116
12 REFERENcES 120
13 APPEND[)( 9 CUSTOMS AND CULI~JRE- RECREATION AND TOURISM 121
14 BACKGROUND 121
1 S HIKING1CLIMBING~AND RECREATIONAL SNOW ACTIvITIES 121
16 FISHING 121
17 CAMPING AND HUNTING 122
I 8 APPENDIX 10 CUSTOMS AND CULThRE TRANSPORT~ON AND RIGHTS-OFWAY125
19 BACKGROUND: 125
20 DEF~ON OF A "HIGIIWAY": 128
21 ABANDONMENT & STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FEDERAL PERSPECTIVE: 129
22 HISTORIC REFERENCE TO OLD ThAILS, ROADS AND RAII~ROADS IN
23 SISKWOU COUNTY 130
24 END NOTES 142
25
26
PAGE 4 Show Image
Si&kiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 199G page 4
2 Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land &
Resource Management Plan
4
5 Part 1. Introduction And Statement Of Purpose
6
7 The management and regulatory actions of federal and State agencies ~vi thin
8 Siskiyou County have a profound impact on the citizens of this county. The
9 Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California
10 provide for a republican form of representative government with specific
I I limitations and separations on the governing powers of federal and State bodies
12 of government and the executive, legislative and judicial branches therein; as in
13 respect to one another and to the people in which sovereign power resides. The
14 limited power of government in relationship to the individual citizen is
l 5 expressed, in parts by the recognition of certain rights as inalienable by
16 governance and the enumeration of specific guarantees of protection in regards
17 tomanyothers.
18
19 The duly elected Board of Supervisors of the County is empowered by the
20 citizens of Siskiyou County with adrniriistering the general law of California in
21 respect to the "police powers'1 of regulation in regard to the public health1
22 safety, welfare and morals within the territonal bdundaries of the County and
23 in accordance with a sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the
24 United States. As such, the Board of Supervisors of Siskiyou County embodies
25 the convergence of both generally and specifically delegated authority and the
26 poh.tical jurisdiction to represent the interests of the citizens of Siskiyou
27 County in the administration of civil governance by all agencies affecting
28 citizen actions as well as individual rights within the territorial boundaries of
29 Siskiyou County.
30
3 1 The National Environmental Policy Act and the many other federal and state
32 laws creating agencies, as well as authorizing the agencies to manage and
33 regulate resources, require that the agencies consult and coordinate with the
34 County in decision making when proposing actions that have physical1 sodal or
35 economic irnpacts on the County or its dtizens. In discharging its
36 responsibilities in this regard, the Board of Supervisors of Siskiyou County
37 recognizes vaijous ctiltural populations within the boundaries of the County
38 that are distinct from one another, yet linked in identity by customs, social
39 communities, lifestyles, values arid institutions; and defined largely by common
40 resources-based economic activity that warrant specific consideration ill agency
41 decision mal~ng processes.
42
43 The Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan~seeks
44 to describe these distinct cultural populations in terms of common actions,
45 economic enterprises and uses of real and personal property as exist within the
46 : boundaries' of Siski
you County. The purpose of such description is to advise
47 federal afrd state agendes of the existence of these cultural populations and the
48 need to protect, conserve and enhance the cultural and economic diversity
49 within the County and to take no actions which dimimsh, or tend to djmir~~sh
so the political and legislative jurisdiction of the State of California or the County
PAGE 5 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 5
I of Siskiyou in the civil governance of its citizens in regard to the interests of
2 the health1 safety1 welfare or morals of its citizens and the general prosperity of
3 its communities and the county as a whole.
4
5 Accordingly1 the Board of Supervisors of the County of Siskiyou declares that it
6 is the policy of the county to require each and eves federal (see Appendix I)
7 and state1 agency ad.m~stenng, managing or regulating lands or natural
8 resources within the county to fully coordinate with the county at the initiation
9 and throughout the planning process1 whenever proposed plans, actions,
10 regulations, restrictions or establishment of productivity levels are being
II considered.
12
13 Furthermore1 the County of Siskiyou has adopted Resolution No. 93-2-84, which
14 provides for County participation in environmental review and coordination
15 when federal and state agencies are proposing actions within the County which
16 affect or may affect a wide range of County and citizen interests.
17
18 Part II Examples
19
20 Examples of an agency and/or regulatory entity actions or undertakings that
21 invoke, or may invoke consideration of this plan, including1 but not limited to
J 22 the~following:
23
24 1. Federal: Proposed National Forest Management Plans and Bureau of Land
25 Management Plans or changes thereto, including the setting of timber harvest
26 levels; changes in policies regarding salvage of dying and dead timber;
27 changes in grazing fees and policies; changes in in~g policies; proposed
28 changes to tribal trust lands; changes in percentage of forest receipts to the
29 county as in lieu payments; proposed additions to wilderness areas and wild,
30 scenic and recreational rivers; proposed creation of natural areas; proposed
3 1 creation or designation of historic areas; proposed land exchanges; proposed
32 purchases of private land; proposed changes in habitat requirements for
33 endangered, threatened and sensitive species; proposed additions to wildlife
34 areas; proposed changes to access to public lands; proposed changes in
35 wetlands arid riparian designation and management; proposed biological
36 surveys; proposed National Parke and Monuments; proposed reallocation of
37 water resources.
38
39 2. State Agencies: Proposed changes in regional water p1~S; proposed changes
40 in wildlife habitat requirements; proposed changes m etidangered1
41 threatened ai'd sensitive species designation; proposed changes in game and
42 fish species designation and management; proposed changes in lists of
43 beneficial uses of water; proposed changes in dassification of navigability of
44
streams; proposed changes in pesticide regulations; proposed changes in
45 Forest practices regulations; proposed changes in mining and redamation.
46 regulatiQns; proposed changes in air quality regulations; proposed
47 designation of wildlife preserves; proposed changes in stream discharge
48 requirements; proposed changes in stream bed & bank alteration
I California Envirnnment~1 ()ii~1itv Act: C~1iforni~ Adniini~tr~tiv~ Proc~~4~ire~ Act ~nd otb~r ~
PAGE 6 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 6
l requirernents; proposed additions to wiid~ scenic and recreational rivers;
2 proposed changes in water management practices on agricultural lands;
proposed land exchanges; proposed water diversions and/or well drilling for
4 state purposes; proposed purchases of private land, proposed State Parks and
S Monuments; proposed reallocation and/or export of water
6
7
8 Pad IlL General Processes, Methods And Goals OfAn Analysis By
9 Agencies
l0
I I Plans or actions by agency1 inter-agency or other decision-makirig groups shall
12 contain information and discussion to facilitate a coordinated plam~g effort
13 between the agency and county government. Participation by the county in
14 multi-interest plann'ng1 advisory or decisiorimaking processes does not
1 5 replacef abridge or satisfy the requirements for coordinated consultation and
16 coordination between county government and the decision making agency(s).
17
1 8 This information for a coordinated planmng effort shall include effects on the
19 physical1 social and economic envirorii~ent. This includes the physical
20 environment, histonc customs, culture, useage, property rights, econornic
21 welfare, general prosperity and economic stability of communities in Siskiyou
22 County. Actions or plans with non-significant impacts or negative impacts on
23 the physical environment shall also be included since those actions or plans
24 may have significant social and/or economic irnplications, including curnulative
25 impacts.
26
27 Since the majonty of land in Siskiyou County is non-private land, and the
28 County's major industries livestock, fann~g, timber, mining and recreation -
29 are tied to that land and peruflent resources either directly or indirectly, then
30 all economic or social and natural or physical environmental effects are
3 l interrelated. When federal and state agency actions will potentially impact the
32 physical environment, sodal, cultural, economic factors and/or property nghts,
33 then the following information should be provided:
34
35 The purpose and need for the actions should indicate the underlying puipose
36 and need that brought about the proposed plan, program or projects The
37 perceived purpose or need for an action or plan should be addressed in a
38 maimer to penn't consideration of alternatives accomplishiflg or satisfying the
39 needs and purpose Alternatives for accomplishing the purpose or need should
40 also be includes Each of the alternatives should be describes Descriptions
41 should indicate limitations or factors (mduding costs) that may prohibit
42 alternatives, as well as benefits accruing from each alteniativ~
43
44 The affected or created physical, social and economic environment shall be
45 describes Since these efforts are to pennit coordinated planning with county
46 govemmept such descriptions shall be germane to county units. The maximum
47 level of aggregation is as a county Due to cultural and clirnatic differences and
48 geographic isolation, discussions should include descriptions of affected or
49 created impacts on sub county uflits induding the principal valleys of Butte
so Shasta and Scott as well delineated historically and generally by water drainage
PAGE 7 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 7
l The Tulelake area would be considered distinct from Butte Valley for histoncal
2 developmental, cultural and pbysical reasons. The Kiamath River corridor,
3 particularly in the western stretches of the county, and the mountainous
4 Salmon River area in western Sislciyou County are also considered separate
S areas for social and economic discussions.
6
7 Economically the I-S corridor is a functional unit. However, operationally and-
8 for these planning processes, it consists of north (Yreka and vicinity) and south
9 (Weed, Mt. Shasta, Dunsniuir and McCloud complex) county working areas.
10
I I Objectives of the planned projects or actions shall be evaluated for impacts on
12 the human environment. These objectives and their defjnitions, defined for
13 specific sites (areas)1 must include the commodity and amenity outputs or
14 production thresholds needed to ensure continuity and diversity of the heritage
15 of customs, culture and usages of the citizens of Siskiyou County; the integnty
16 of private property rights and investment backed expectations; and to acliieve
!~ the values that have been determined to be jinportant or necessary to the well
18 being, general community prosperity and economic welfare of the citizens of
19 Siskiyou County. These objectives and production or output levels will then
20 become the goals and evaluation cnteria against which all related proposals and
2 1 alternatives shall be evaluated.
22
23 Desired future conditions, such as vegetative mosaic1 landscape, watershed or
24 watercourse conditions, detemiiiie production or output levels to meet
25 objectives, within the physical capabilities of the natural resources. Since
26 different landscape, watershed and watercourse descriptions will produce
27 different levels of output, Siskiyou County must be involved in designing
28 landscape, watershed and watercourse descripuons to best preserve the quality
29 of the physical environment, continuity of the heritage of customs, culture, and
30 usages integny of private property rights, economic stability of communities
3 1 and economic welfare of County citizens when choices have to be made
32 between conflicting management objectives.
33
34 Discussions of effects on the County's natural resources and environmental
35 quality should indude but are not limited to:
36
37 1. fisheries and wildlife resources
38 2. forest and tirnber resources
39 3. range resources
40 4. drylandcrops
41 5. watershed resources
42 6. pnvate surface and ground water rights and ~gated
43 cropland
44 . 7. rniiieral resources
45 `p8. recreational opportunities
46 9. environmental quality of air, water, and soils
47 10. integrated resource plai~rnng and management ill which
48 county private parties arid/or public interests are involved
49 11. multiple use, sustained yield and range resource laws
so 12. private investments, property interests and regulations into
S 1 public land resources
PAGE 8 Show Image
SISkly~~ CO~~ty Comprehensive Land & esource Management Plan
February 1996
I 13. ~ on privately owner lanci~ irnproverne~ts and
2 resources or adjacent to federal or state managed land
where t~e plan1 program or prQect is proposed
4
S Discussions of effects on the County's culture, governance, sc~ools1 social
6 services and other local programs include bu~ are not limited to:
7
8 1. The culture of the county due to potential population loss.
9
2. The culture of the county from possible limitations and
10 restrictions on cultural beliefs and practices, diversity and
ii choice of lifestyle, and maintenance of cultural, community,
12 generational and familial cohesion and kinship.
13 3. Cultural and community aesthetics, including historic sites,
14 natural resource vistas, r
15
iver ~vays and landscapes.
4. The County's ability to protect and provide Services for the
16 health, safety, and social and cultural well-being of its
17 citizens
18 S. The County's ability to finance public programs and
19 services through bonding, lending and other financing
20 mechanisms
21
6. Local governments (towns, etc.) and schools from identified
22 tax revenue loss
23 7. Local emergency medical se~~ces, law enforcement, fire
24 (and wildfire) protection and nuisance abatement
25 8. The local infrastructure, including transportation,
26
community water, sewer, power, electric power generation
27 and transmission systems, (including irrigation and
28 reclamation districts), Service districts, and landfill services.
29 9. Local community well-being, stability of governance, and
30 the education and welfare of children from cumulative and
31
long-term impacts
32 10. Pest and predation control, and weed abatement.
33
34 Discussions of effects on the County's economy, customs, useages, services and
35 businesses to include but are not ijinited to:
36
37
1. Economic diversity
38 2. Private investment backed expectations
39 3. Direct, indirect and cumulative employment (including
40 those who are self-employed) and wages
41 4. The industries of cattle, fairrng, timber, rn~g and
42 recreation - specifying unit cost effects (e.g. economic value
43
of animal unit months (AUMs)1 million board feet (MMBF),
44 measurements of cubic feet per second (cfs) or acre feet of
45 water, yield per acre, acres in production), recreational user
46 days or other units of measurement as appropriate
47 5. Local businesses directly and indirectly related to the
48
resource decision or pl~
49 6. Housing, real estate values, residential energy, water, sewer
so and sanitation needs.
S' 7. Variable thresholds for business demand and markets.
52 8. Marketability of workforce skills
PAGE 9 Show Image
Siskiyou Gounty Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 9
I 9. `3'1siness and financial ~Iannin~ and t~e ability to obtain
2
financing dependent upon continued availability and
productive use of a natural resource.
4 10. The level of manufacturing or processing teclinology
S required of local industry, dependent upon the availability
6 of suitable raw materials.
7
I 1. Local community well-being, stability and ability to
8 maintain current and future debt service by long-term and
9 cumulative impacts.
10
I 1 Direct and indirect impacts on economics, and ramihcations of planned
12 activities on local economics shall use appropriate multipliers.
13 Discussions shall include any effects on property rights and protectable
14 interests in the County. In addition to these requirements, there shall be an
is evaluation of the irnpacts on property rights, as subject under California
16 ~\`ecutive Order D-78-89 on Regulatory Takings, the United States Presidential
17 Executive Order No. 12630, entitled "Government Actions and Interference with
18 Constitutionally Protected Property Rights", and the Attorney General's
19 guidelines entitle "Evaluation of Risks and Avoidance of Unanticipated
20 Takings", mandating that the following tests or criterion be used in assessing
21 possible taking of private property rights:
22
23 1. Whe~er the plan, program or prrnect constitutes an actual
24
physical intrusion or actual tahng
25 2. Whether the plan, program or prrnec~ constitutes a
26 regulatory taking
27 3. Potential for partial or full loss of economic value or
28 investment backed expectation
29
4. Related effects on custom, culture and usage
.30 S. Whether the agency action conforms to constitutionally
3 1 protected property rights and commonly accepted notions
32 of fairness and due process
33 6. Cost of compliance.
34
35 Discussions shall include cumulative, long-term effects on the County's
36 economy, culture, usage, services and businesses. Plans, programs or actions
37 may have insig~icant impacts when analyzed individually, however,
38 cumulative long-term impacts when combined with plans that have sinnlar
39 direct or indirect impacts may be significant. Infrastructure of economic
40 sectors1 culture, customs, usage, services and coinnunity stability must be
4 1 evaluated and protected from cumulative effects.
42
43 Alternatives shall be described in a manner permitting comparative evaluation
44 am~ong the options by decision makers and the public. This shall indude all
45 reasonable alternatives and why alternatives were eliminated, including
46 reasonable alternatives not within the jurisdiction of the lead agency and the
47 alternative of no action. Identification shall be made of the preferred
48 alternatives.
49 -
so It is the policy of Siskiyou County that federal and state agencies shall not
S I approve plans, programs or projects as proposed if there are feasible
` . . . . - .
PAGE 10 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 10
I reduce or ekn~nate significant impacts to both the physical social and
2 economic environment. Mitigation plans for all alternatives ~4U provide
3 detailed and realistic alternatives in accordance ~tk NEPA. These plans shall
4 identify each impact that the rnitigation rneasure is intended to address. This
5 should include the responsible agency for implementation and monitoring of
6 the mitigation measure. These rnitigation measures shall also be evaluated by:
7
8 1. How impacts may be avoided altogether by not taking certain actions.
9 2. How impacts may be minimized by 1imi~g the degree or magnitude
10 of the proposed actions.
I I 3. How impacts may be rectified through repair, rehabilitation or
12 restoration of the affected environment.
13 4. How impacts may be reduced or eliniiiiated over time through
14 preservation and maintenance actions during the life of the action.
15 S. How the agency could compensate for the impact by providing
16 substitute resources of equal utility or econornic value.
17
I 8 Each mitigation measure should also discuss its legal authority1 technical
19 feasibility, fiscal and economic feasibility1 social, cultural and political
20 feasibility. To help ensure implementation of the mitigation plan a monitonng
21 plan based on specific objectives and performance standards shall be
22 implemented. Monitoring and the mitigation plan shall be regularly provided
23 and discussed with the Sishyou County Board of Supervisors or designee.
24
25
PAGE 11 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996
I Appendix I ~ Jurisdiction and Coordination
2
3 us Supreine Court Decision: Jurisdiction of State & Local Courts
4
S On May 20, 1991, the United States Supreme Court declared that the federal
6 agencies are required to submit to the jurisdiction of state and local courts.2 In
7 a unanimous decision, the court declared that federal agencies sue&under State
8 law in a State court cannot seek to have the case removed to federal court The
9 question before the Supreme Court was whether the National Institute of
10 Health, an agency of the federal government, could force a case under State la~~
I I to be heard in federal district court The Supreme Court ruled that cases
12 involving federal agencies could not be automatically removed to federal court.
13 The Court concluded that although persons or officers of the federal
14 government specifically named in a State action in State court can cause a case
Is to be heard in federal court, federal agencies named as sole defendants cannot
16 cause a case to be removed to federal courL Individuals or county governinents
I 7 seeking to protect their rights under State or local law, in State or local courts,
18 against the federal government should name only the federal agencv creating
19 the statutory violation rather than naming individual employees.
20
21 The key elements for achieving consistency and coordination trace back to the
22 doctnne of concurrent jurisdiction::
23
24 federal jurisdiction to manage the resources on public lands1 and
25 local/State jurisdiction to protect the health, safety, economic welfare
26 and rights of its citizens.
27
28 The statutes related to federal-local consistency and coordination in land use
29 planning are highlighted below. For a more in-depth presentation of all the
30 federal and State statutes related to coordination with County governments, see
3 1 Appendix I, The Legal and Administrative Environment.
32
33 Siskiyou County economy is primarily dependent upon federally-managed lands
34 and resources. The National Environmental Policy Act (and other relevant laws
35 discussed later) contain provisions for Siskiyou County to plan in regards to
36 public, as well as private land to protect its natural environment and to protect
37 the customs and culture, social and econoim~c well-being of Sislayou County
38 citizens. Siskiyou County's priniary plannmg mechanism for planning on public
39 lands is to coordinate with federal land ageiicles to reach consistency between
40 federal land agency plans and Siskiyou County land resource plans.
41
42 Federal statutes and regulations require federal agencies to consider and
43 protect from adverse impacts, the econornic structure of counties. Furthermore,
44 federal agencies must consider and protect more than just economic structures.
45 For example,.the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires all federal
46 agencies to assure safe, healthful, productive, aesthetically and culturally
47 . pleasing surroundings, to preserve cultural aspects and maintain an
48 environment supporting a variety of ~dividual choices. More significantly1
~ -
PAGE 12 Show Image
SISkIy~~ COUnty Comprehensive Land & esource Management Plan
February 1996
I federal agQncies rnust specify mitigation p[ans to reduce or e[iniinate adverse
2 impacts to local cornrnunities.3
4 The US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management regulations require the
S agency to consider effects of its actions on communities adjacent to1 or near,
6 public lands, and on employment in affected areas The spirit and the letter of
7 the statutes and regulations require agencies to protect a community's ~vay of
8 life-the delicate fabric holding families together-as well as a cormnurnty's
9 economic base, before taking actions that might prove harmful This
10 comprehensive plan refers to the federal agency's obligation in terms of
I I protecting and preserving the corninunity's econornic base as either `economic
12 stability or cornrnunity stability."
13
14 SISKIYOU COUNTY& THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICYACT:
Is
16 The NEPA is the basic national charter requiring consideration of the
17 environment. It establishes policies, sets goals, and provides the means for
18 carrying out policies and attaining goals. NEPA is extremely important to coun~-
19 governments. ~~hlle it is a federal la~v, each State is expected to assist in
20 implementation of NEPA. Under the concept of "federalism", states and local
21 governments can develop their own enviromnental plans under NBPA.
22
23 NEPA: Congressional Declaration of Policy
24
25 Public land and resource agencies are required to carry out the mandates of
26 NEPA within Siskiyou County. This requires that these federal agencies consulz,
27 coordinate and jointly conduct environmental studies, plans, reviews and
28 hearings with Siskiyou County's Environmental Plan.
29
30 As the umbrella environmental law, NEPA declares:
31
32 "...that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in
33 cooperation with State and local governments, g14 use all
34 practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of
`35 national policy, to irnprove and coordinate Federal plans, functions,
36 prograi~~, and resources to the end that the Nation may- ~ ...assure
37 for all Americans safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and
38 culturally pleasing surroundings;"6 and "...preserve ~portant Iiistori~
39 cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain,
40 wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety
41 of individual choice."7 [Emphasis added]
42
~4O ~FR ~ 1$02.14(F),1s02.16(H),1508.20
442U5c4331(a)
~42 usc 4331w)
6
42 usc 433,1 (1,)(2)
7
42 usc 4331~)(4)
PAGE 13 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 13
l NEPA: Protection of Culture & Custom
3 NEPA not OfllY requires that the federal government consider the impacts of its
4 actions on the environment1 but it also requires federal agencies to preserve
5 culture and heritage. NEPA states that cooperation and coordination will occur
6 with t1locaI governments," and that the culturally pleasing surroundings and
7 cultural aspects of community will be preserved so as to support diversity and
8 variety of indi\Tidual cVYoice.
9
10 Each county under NEPA must deterrnine and define its local custom and
I I culture and then act to protect them. Siskiyou County has defined its custom
12 and culture. Once a county government has identified and defined its custom
13 and culture1 it must inform the federal agencies of the definition and request
14 that custom and culture be preserved under NEPA. State agencies should also be
15 informed and requested to comply, accordingly.
16
17 Mandate to Federal Agencies Under NEPA
18
19 NEPA mandates specific performance requirements which are crucial to the
20 Siskiyou County Comprehensive Plan:
21
4
22 all agencies of the Federal Government shall...(C) include in every
23 reconimendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major
24 Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human
2S environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on...
26
27 (i) the environmental impact of the proposed action
28
29 (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cani~ot be avoided
30 should the proposal be implemented;
31
32 (lii) alternatives to the proposed action;
33
34 (iv) the relationship between short-term uses of rnan's
35 environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-
36 term productivity; and
37
38 (v) any iireversible and irretnevable corrirnitments of resources
39
which would be involved in the proposed action should it be
40 implemented.
41
42 A significant element of (i) above is the cumulative effects or impacts:
43
44 Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively
45 significant actions taking place over a time period8 ... Effects include
46 ...historic cultural, economic, social or health, whether direct1 indirect or
47 cumulative.9
84OCFR§ 1S086.
PAGE 14 Show Image
Siskiyou County Compretiensive Land & kesource Management Plan
February 1996 page 14
2 in addition, means of Initigation1 (reducing the negative impacts) shaU be
3 detailed and provide realistic alternatives'0 In order to develop realistic
4 mitigation plans and alternatives, it is necessary to coordinate with local
5 government officials to adequately identify1 at a minirnum, the fiscal
6 relationships between federal agencies and local governments. ldentifving
7 miti~ation alternatives in a coordinated way between Siskiyou County
8 Supervisors and federal agencies is the kev element to achieving consistency
9 between the Siskiyou County Plan and federal agency Dlans
I0
I 1 FURTHERMoRE, NEPA REQUIRES:
12
13 Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible federal official snaIl
14 consult with and obtain tne cornrnents of any Federal agency wLiich has
15 jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental
16 impact involved. Copies of such statement and the comments and view of the
17 appropriate Federal, State1 and local agencies1 which are authorized to develop
18 and enforce environmental standards, shall be made available to the President
19 the Council on Environmental Quality and to the public as provided by section
20 6S2 of title S~ and shall accompany the proposal through the existing agency
21 rC\FICW processes;
22
23 (G) Make available to States, counties, municipalities, institutions, and
24 individuals, advice and information useful in restoring, maintaining, and
25 enhancing the quality of the environment'
26
27 Sisidyou County should be alerted to any federal proposals, plans, legislation, or
28 other federal actions that fall under the prevue of this plan and request, when
29 necessary, that an environmental inipact statement be prepared, if one is not
30 otherwise prepared, by the involved federal agency.
31
32 The President, the federal agencies1 and the courts share responsibility for
33 ehforcing the Act so as to achieve the substantive (pertaining to NEPA
34 substance] requirements..12 A major oi~ective of the NEPA regulations is:
35
36 (13) Emphasizing cooperative consultation among agencies before the
37 environmental linpact statement is prepared rather than submission of
38 adversary comments on a completed document.'3
39
40 NEPA requires agendes to circulate both the draft and final environmental
41 impact statements, except for certain appendices and unaltered statements, to
42 appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies authorized to develop and enforce
43 environmental standards.
44
`0ibid at 19
II 42 USC 4332(2)(C)(i)-(v) and (2)(G).
1240 ~FR 1.SOO (a)
1340 CFR 15O~.1 (b)
`~4O cFR 1SO2.19(a)
PAGE 15 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 15
I Joint Environmental Planning:
2
3 NEPA provides the following guidelines for federal coordination with county
4 governrnents to integrate federal environmental plans with local planning
5 processes:
6
7 (b) Agencies stall cooperate witLi State and local agencies to the fullest
8 extent possible to reduce duplication between NEPA and State and local
9 requirements, unless the agencies are specifically barred from doing so
10 by some other law. Except for cases covered by paragraph (a) of this
I l section1 such cooperation shall1 to the fullest extent possible, include:
12
13 (1) Joint planning processes;
14 (2) Joint environmental research and studies;
`5 (3) Joint public hearings (except where otherwise provided by
16 statute); and
17 (4) Joint environmental assessments.
Is
19 (c) Agencies shall cooperate with State and local agencies to tLie fullest
20 extent possible to reduce duplication between NEPA and comparable
2 1 State and local requirements1 unless t~e agencies are specifically barred
22 from doing so by some other law...such cooperation shall to the fullest
23 extent possible include joint environmental impact statements. In such
24 cases, one or more Federal agencies and one or more State or local
25 agencies shall be joint lead agencies. Where State laws or local
26 ordinances have environmental impact statement requirements m
27 addition to...those in NEPA, Federal agencies shall cooperate in
28 f[llfimng these requirements as well as those of Federal laws so that
29 one document will comply with all applicable laws.
30
3 1 (d) To better integrate environmental impact statements into State or
32 local planning processes, statements shall discuss any inconsistency of a
33 proposed action with any approved State or local plan arid laws, (whether
34 or not federally sanctioned). Where an inconsistency exists, the
35 statement should describe the extent to which the agency would
36 reconcile its proposed action with the plan or law. `~
37
38 The NEPA process is intended to help public officials make decisions that are
39 based on environmental consequences, arid that take actions to protect1 restore,
40 and enhance the environment arid preserve local custom and cu1tur~ NEPA and
41 the implementing CEQregulatiozis require all federal agencies to coordinate
42 with county governments as outlined above County govenii~eiits can. always
43 resort to use of the NEPA process regardless of the federal agency, law,
44 program, or,action involves Significantly, peruflent federal agencies (e.g., US
45 Forest Service, US Bureau of Land Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
46 and US Pare Service) are mandated in a wide range of laws to comply with
47 . NEPAL Accordingly, the Council on Environmental QualiW has promulgated
48 regulations to guide federal agencies through the NEPA process.
49
PAGE 16 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resoufce Management Plan
February 1996 page 16
I Four major fed~raI statutes-tee NEPA, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act
2 (ICA)1 the National Forest Management Act (NF~t~)1 and the Federal Land Pohcy
and Management Act (FLP~)-mandate intergo~'erninental coordination and
4 cooperation~ especially where local and State governments can be or are
S affected by federal agency decisions. Furthermore~ these federal statutes
6 mandate resource allocation decisions and land uses on public lands must be
7 made through a comprehensive public planning process. The complex mt\ture
8 of data collection, analysis of impacts, re\qew of alternatives and
9 implementation of strategies includes ~~tensive public revie~\ and in\~olvement
0 by county government.
II
12 The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act:
13
14 In addition to NEPA1 the ICA requires federal agencies to coordinate and re~ew
is. with State and local governments1 federal government programs and project
16 plans. ICA:
17
is ...provides opportunities for strengthening the consultation and
19 coordination between federal1 local and State governments through
20 coordination and review of proposed federal assistance and direct
21 federal development programs.'6
22
23 Furthermore, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 12372. It
24 requires federal agencies to coordinate with State and local governments. I~
25 requires federal agencies to comply with State processes for intergovernmental
26 review and coordination of federal programs and actions.
27
28 Executive Order 12372 states:
29
30 Section 1. Federal agencies shall provide opportunities for consultation
3 1 by elected officials of those State and local governments that would
32 provide the non-federal funds for or that would be directly affected
33 by proposed federal financial assistance or direct federal
34 development.
35
36 Section 2.
37
38 (a) ...federal agencies shall to the extent perinitted by law:...detennine
39 offidal views of State and local elected officials.
40
41 (13) Communicate with State and local elected officials as early in the
42 program plug cycle as is reasonably feasible to explain specific
43 plans and actions.
44
45 (c) Make efforts to accommodate State and local elected officials'
46 -.* concerns with proposed federal financial assistance and direct
47 federal development...wliere the concerns cannot be accorninodated,
16
Intergovernmental Cooperation Act1 § 401 and 3 USC § 301
PAGE 17 Show Image
Slskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 17
I federal officials stall explain the basis for their decisions in a tirnel~
2 mariner.
3
4 Section 3. (a) The State process referred to in Section 2 shall include
5 those where States designate1 in specific instances to local elected
6 officials the review, coordination, and conrrnumcation ~~th federal
7 agencies.
8
9 It should be noted that under ICA and t~e L\'ecutive Order 12372, the revie~\
10 body has the unique authority to appeal federal decisions directly to the US
I 1 Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior departments. At present1 only these
12 government entities can appeal federal land decisions and plans directly to
13 these cabinet heads. Furthermore, under the new federal appeals process, the
14 general public and special interest groups will not be afforded liberal appeals as
15 in the past; only the Executive Order 1237? ICA organizations TAll have the
16 unique appeal access to these cabinet heads.
17
18 US Forest Service Land & Resource Planning/NEPA Processes:
19
20 Laws require the US Forest Service (USFS) to cooperate and coordinate with
21 Siskiyou County government in its planmng processes. The discussion belo~~
22 highlights the major policies of the Forest Service.
23
24 The Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960 directs the Secretary of
25 Agnculture "to develop and administer the renewable surface resources of the
26 national forests for multiple use and sustained yield of the several products
27 and services obtained therefrom."'7 The Act authorizes the Secreta~~ of
28 Agriculture "to cooperate with interested State and local governmental agencies
29 and others in the development and management of the national forests."'8 The
30 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planrirng Act of 1974 (RPA)
31 strengthens the opportunity for county input. In Section 3, the RPA recognizes
32 the iniportance of renewable forest and range resources, and directs the
33 Secretary of Agriculture to prepare a Renewable Resource Assessment. The RPA
34 elevates the relationship between the USFS and county governtnents from one
35 of cooperation to one of coordination with the following requirement:
36
37 6(a) As a part of the Program provided fo r by section 3 of this Act1 the
38 Secretary of Agiiculture shall develop1 maintain, and1 as appropriate,
39 revise land and resource management plans for units of the National
40 Forest System, coordiflated with the land and resource management
41 plan~g processes of State and local governments and other
42 Federal agencies. 19 [~~phasis added]
43
44 The RPA was extensively amended by the National Forest Management Act of
45 1976. Significantly1 Section 6(a) of the RPA, quoted above, was not amended
46 . The National Forest Management Act requires that each plan developed "be
47 revised (A) from tirne to time when the Secretary finds conditions in a unit have
17 16 USC 529
181~TT~C~~fl
PAGE 18 Show Image
SI~kIyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 18
1 sigrufican~~ chauged, but at least every fifteen years. `0 It u~ust coordinate land
2 use planning efforts with those of county governments under this Act and
~ through the NEPA process:
4
S The resulting plans shall provide for multiple use and sustained yield of
6 goods and services from the National Forest System in a way that
7 maximizes long-term net public benefits in an environmentally sound
8 manner.
9
10 (b) Plans guide all natural resource management acti~ties and establish
11 management standards and guidelines for the National Forest System.
12 They determine resource management practices, levels of resource
13 production and management, and tbe availability and suitability of
14 lands for resource management. Regional and forest planning will be
is based on the follo~ving principles:
16
17 (S) Preservation of important historic, cultural, and natural
18 aspects of our national heritage;
19
20 (9) Coordination witi' the land and resource planning efforts of
21 other Federal agencies, State and local governments, and
22 Indian tribes;
23
24 (13) Management of National Forest System lands in a manner that
25 is sensitive to econoniic efficiency; and
26
27 (14) Responsiveness to changing conditions of land and other
28 resources and to changing social and economic demands of
29 tIle American people.21 [Emphasis added]
30
3 1 Specific requirements for accomplishing the purposes of planning coordination
32 ~vith county governments are provided as follows:
33
34 (a) the responsible line officer shall coordinate regional and forest
35 planning with the equivalent and related plannmg efforts of other
36 Federal agencies, State and local governments, and Indian tribes.
37 [Emphasis added]
38
39 (c) The responsible line officer shall review the plan~~g and land use
40 policies of other Federal agendes, State and local governments, and
4' Indian tribes. The results of this review shall be displayed in the
42 erivironmental irnpact statement for the plan (40 CFR 1502.16(c),
43 1506.2).
44
45 us Bureau of Land Management Land & Resource Planning/NEPA
46 Processes:
47
20 16 USC 1604(f)(S)
21 36 CFR 2 19. 1(a),~)(S),(9),(13),(14)
PAGE 19 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 19
l The guiding statute for t~e Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to administer
2 public lands is the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. ThQ
3 statute defines the term public lands" as any land and interest in land o~rned
4 by the United States within the several States and administered by the Secreta~
S of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management, without regard to how
6 the United States acquired ownership, except: (1) lands located on the Outer
7 Continental Shelf; and (2) lands held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and
8 Eskimos. FLPMA specifically requires the BLM to prepare land use plans:
9
10 (a) The Secretary shall1 with public involvement and consistent with the terms
1 l and conditions of this Act1 develop1 maintain, andg when appropriate, review
12 land use plans which provide by tracts or areas for the use of the public lands
13 Land use plans shall be developed for the public lands regardless of whether
14 such lands previously have been classified~ withdrawn, set aside1 or othenvise
15 designated for one or more uses. 2'
16
17 It is significant to note that FLPMA provides explicit directives for the BLM to
is coordinate public land use planning with county governments, and to ensure
19 that federal land use plans are consistent with local plans to the maximum
20 extent possible. The statute details the BLM's mandate as follows:
21
22 (c) In the development and revision of land use plans, the Secretary
23 shall-
24
25 (9) ...to the extent consistent with the laws governing the
26 administration of the public lands1 coordinate the land use
27 inventory, planning1 and management activities of or for
28 such lands with the land use planning and management
29 programs of other Federal departments and agencies and of
30 the State and local goverrirnents within which the lands are
3 1 located1 including1 but not luni~ted to, the statewide outdoor
32 recreation plans developed under the Act of September 3,
33 1964 (78 Stat. 897), as amended, and of or for Indian tribes
34 by, among other things, considering the policies of approved
35 State and tribal land resource management programs. In
36 implementing this directive, the Secretary shall1 to the extent
37 he finds practical, keep apprised of State, local, and tribal
38 land use plans; assure that consideration is given to those
39 State, local, and tribal plans that are germane in the
40 developinent of land use plans for public lands; assist in.
41 resolving, to the ~~ent practical, inconsistencies between
42 Federal arid nori~Federal Govemment plans, and shali
43 provide for meanmgful public involvement of State and
44 . locai government officials, both elected and appointed, in
45 . . the development of land use programs, land use. regulations,
46
and land use decisions for public lands, including early
47
public notice of proposed decisions which may have a
48 * significant impact on non-Federal lands. Such officials in
49 each State are authorized to funnish advice to the Secretary
so with respect to the development and revision of land use
PAGE 20 Show Image
Siskiyou County Compekensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 20
plans, laud use guidelinQs1 land use rules, and land use
2 regulations for the public lands `vithin such State and ~vitli
respect to such otter land use matters as may be referred to
4 tbem by iijm. ~nd use plans of the Secretary under this
S section shaU be consistent witli State and local plans to the
6 maximum extent he finds consistent with Federal la~v and the
7 purposes of this Act
S
9 (f) The Secretary shall allow an opportunity for public involvement and by
10 regulation shall establish procedures, including public hearings where
I I appropriate1 to give Federal¶ State1 and local governments and the public1
12 adequate notice and opportunity to comment upon and participate in the
13 formulation of plans and programs relating to the management of the public
14 lands.23 [Emphasis added]
Is
16 Both the Forest Service and the BLM regulations require coordination and
17 consistency with State and local governments. The requirements pertain to both
18 long-range plans (e.g.1 forest plans) as well as coordination and consistency \\rith
19 county governments in plan implementation; that is1 project planning and
20 development.
21
22 SISKIYOU COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & REVIEW:
23
24 Purpose ofthe Environniental Review Plan
25
26 Under NEPA guidelines1 Siskiyou County shall establish and implement
27 environmental review to protect the resources for future generations as well as
28 protect the economic and community~ customs1 customs usages and cultures,
29 stability for present and future generations. The plamung process is designed
30 for early detection and mitigation of possible negative impacts of proposed
3 1 State or federal decisions on resources in Siskiyou County, and on the custom,
32 culture arid the economy of the citizens of Siskiyou County. To carry out this
33 plan, coordination between federal and State agencies and Siskiyou County is
34 important.
35
36 Intergovernmental Coordination
37
38 Federal statutes and Presidential executive orders provide the framework for
39 coordinated planmn~g between Siskiyou Countyg State and federal agendes.
40 Federal statutes and regulations require these agendes to coordinate ~vith local
4 l governments in the jnitial plainrug stages.24 They also require that federal
42 agencies work in close consultation when there are changes in their federal
43 *~resource plans. To date, such coordinauon has not happened in a coordinated
44 or consiste way.
45
2343 ~ 1712(c)(9),(f)
24
16 usc § 1604 ~6O4 a, and 43 cr~ § 1601.O-S,c,e
PAGE 21 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 21
l In addition, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act (42 USC §423 1) specifies
2 coordinated plaruiing requirements between local1 State and federal agencies.
3 Under ICA1 t~e Presidential Executive Order 12372 further mandates teat
4 federal agencies coordinate federal actions and projects with local
5 governments, especially when federal projects impact local governments.
6
7 Plan Elenients For EnviroRmental Review
8
9 The Major elements of Siskiyou County Environmental review shall be:
l0
I l A. Coordinated Environmental Planning and Review
12 B. Environmental Assessment (Social and Economic)
13 C. Impacts on Private Property Rights
14 D. Cumulative Effects
I S E. Mitigation Plans
16
17 Siskiyou Count economy is dependent upon federal and State-managed lands
I 8 to a large extent. It is, therefore, necessary that county, State and federal
19 agencies and regulatory entities work closely to determine the effects of
20 resource plans and decisions. By pooling local, State and federal resources, the
2 1 general public will be better informed about resource decisions and the process
22 will provide an unique opportunity to cooperatively develop realistic mitigation
23 alternatives to reducing negative environmental, social and economic trflpacts.
24
25 NEPA provides the legal framework for intergovernmental coordination:25
26
27 1. Joint environmental planning approach
28 2. Jdint environmental research
29 3. Joint public hearings
30 4. Joint preparation of environmental documents
3 1 5. Cumulative effects
32 6. Joint mitigation planning to include:
33 realistic alternatives
34 . detailed alternatives
35
36 Sisk~you County Supervisors shall promulgate environmental review to protect
37 natural resources, stabffize the economy, and protect the custom, culture
38 usages and social resources arid property rights of the people of Sishyou
39 County.
40 California Environmental Quality Act
41 Ml applicable portions shall be applied.
42 California Adininistrative Act
43 The California AdmInistrative Procedures Act mandates any state agency that
44 proposes to impose a new rule, order or regulation, or proposes to change any
45 existing Ili1e1 order or regulation, upon Siskiyou County or its atizens, to first
46 consider all reasonable alternatives and create a formal "...statement that no
PAGE 22 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & esourne Management Plan
Feb~ua~ 1996 page 22
I alternative considered by t~e agency would be more effective in carrying out
2 the purpose for which the regulation is proposed or would be as effective or
3 less burdensome to affected private persons than t~e proposed reguIation~'
4 This Act clearly shows tfie California Legislaturets intent that its agencies
S carefully consider the customs1 culture and econornics of California citizens
6 during the process of consideration and adoption of new or changed rules,
7 orders and/or regulations in Siskiyou County.
S
9 California Administrative Procedures Act
10 1)cflnitions
I l Section 1 1342. In this chapter unless othe~vise specifically indicated:
12 (b) "Regulation11 means every rule, regulation, order, or standard of general
13 application or the amendment, supplement or re~sion of any such rule,
14 regulation, order or standard adopted by any state agency to implement,
is interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by it, or to govern
16 its procedure, except one which relates only to the internal management of the
17 state agency....
18
19 Statement ofReasoris forAdoption orAmendmen(; Specific technology or
20 Equiptiieut; Alternatives
21
22 Section 11346.14. The initial statement required by Section 11346.7 shall also
23 include, but not be limited to, the following:
24 (a) Where the adoption or amendment of a regulation would mandate the
25 use of specific technologies or equipment, a statement of the reason why the
26 agency believes such mandates or prescriptive standards are required.
27 (b) A description of the alternatives to the regulation considered by the
28 agency and the agency's reasons for rejecting those alternatives, and a
29 statement that no alternative considered by the agency would be more effective
30 in carrymg out the purpose for which the regulation is proposed or would be as
3 1 effective or less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed
32 regulation. In the case of a regulation which would mandate the use of specific
33 technologies or equipment or prescribe specific actions or procedures, the
34 imposition of performance standards shall be considered as an alternative.
35 Any statutory reference to Section 11346.7 shall be construed to also be a
36 reference to this section.
37
38 Notice ofProposed Action; Mailing; Delivery; Publication, Effecttve Penod; Notice
39 ofAdoption, Amendment or Repeal after Completion and Approval; California
40 Requlatoty Register
4'
42 Section 11346.4. (a) At least 45 days prior to the hearing and dose of the
43 public comment period on the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation,
44 notice of the proposed action shall be:
4S (1) Mailed to every person who has filed a request for notice of regulatory
46 actions with the state agency.
47
48 Express Te:jis ofproposed Action, List ofsmall Business Enterprises and Initial
49 Statement ofReasons; Availability to Public; Final Statement ofReasons and
50 Updated Informative Digest; Adoption or Amendment ofFederal Regulations
51
PAGE 23 Show Image
Slsklyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 23
1 Section 1 1346.7. Every agency subject to this chapter shall;
2 (a) Prepare1 submit to the office ~~rith the notice of the proposed actionq and
3 make available to the public upon request, a cope' of the express terms of the
4 proposed action as described in subdivision (b) of Section 1 1346.S1 a list of the
5 small business enterprises or their representatives to whom the notice of
6 adoption1 amendment1 or repeal of a regulation will be mailed and an initial
7 statement of reasons for proposing the adoption1 amendment1 or repeal of a
8 regulation. The statement shall include, but not be limited to, all of the
9 folIo~ving:
10 (~) A description of the public problem, administrative requirement1 or
l I other condition or circumstance that each adoption, amendment1 or repeal is
12 intended to address.
13 (2) A statement of the specific purpose of each adoption1 amendment1 or
14 repeal and the rationale for the deterimnation by the agency that each
15 adoption, ainendment, or repeal is reasonably necessary to carry out the
16 purpose for which it is proposed.
17 (3) An identification of each technical1 theoretical1 and empincal study,
18 report, or similar document, if any, on which the agency is relymg in proposing
19 the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation.
20 (4) A description of any alternatives the agency' has identified that would
21 lessen any adverse impact on small businesses. It is not the intent of this
22 subdivision to require the agency to artificially construct alternatives or to
23 justify why it has not identified alternatives.
24
25 (b) Prepare and submit to the office ~vith the adopted regulation a final
26 statement of reasons whicli shall include all of the following:
27 (3) A summary of each objection or recommendation made regarding the
28 specific adoption, amendment, or repeal proposed, together with an
29 explanation of how the proposed action has been changed to accornmodate
30 each objection or recommendation, or the reasons for making no change. This
3 1 requirement applies only to objections or recommendations specifically
32 directed at the agency's proposed action or to the procedures followed by the
33 agency in proposing or adopting the action.
34 (4) A deterinination with supporting information that no alternative
35 considered by the agency would be more effective in carrymg out the purpose
36 for which the regulation is proposed or would be as effective and less
37 burdensome to affected private persons than the adopted regulation
38 (5) An explanation setting forth the reasons for rejecting any proposed
39 alternatives that would lessen the adverse economic impact on small
40 businesses.
41
42
43
44
PAGE 24 Show Image
SI~kIy~u County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plafi
February 1996 page 24
I Appendix 2 Custom ~ Culture
2
) Culture is an outgrowth of the natural environment. PeopI~ respond to specific
4 envirorunental force in a manner that en\'ironmental forces produce a material
5 way of living as a way subjected to it ~ produces ~vays to overcome natural
6 obstacles. Cultures evolve as different ways of meeting the same problem1 such
7 as developing or producing a salable product to be exchanged for raw material
8 or products not avai~ble locally.
9
10 A cu~ure consists not of people but of ways people in a given environment act
I I Culture is the integrated system of learned behavior patterns it is non-
12 instinctive. Standards of rightness and ~~rrongness (value) and of usages and
13 effectiveness (customs) are relative to the given culture.
14
Is Relating to custom and culture1 NEPA requires:
16 It is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Goverrrrnent to use all
17 practical means1 consistent with other essential considerations of
18 national policy1 to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions,
19 programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may-
20 (2) assure for all Ainencans safe, healthful, productive and
21 aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings,...
22 (4) preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of
23 our national heritage and maintain, wherever possible, an
24 environment which supports diversity and variety of individual
25 choice
26 Culture1 as used in NBPA¶ is defined as:
27
28 The body of "customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits
29 constituting a distinct complex of tradition of a racial, religious or social
30 group"-that compl~~ whole that includes knowledge, belief, morals, law,
31 customs1 opinions, religion1 superstition and art.1'
32
33 As stated in the above deftnition, culture includes custom.
34
35 Custom is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as:
36 "A usage or practice of the people, which by common adoption and
37 acquiescence, and by long and unvary'ng habit, has become compulsory,
38 and has acquired the force of a law with respect to the place or subject-
39 matter to which it relates...An habitual or customary practice, more or
40 less widespread, which prevails within a geographic or sociological ares
41
42 Custom1 as used in the context of the Comprehensive Plan, refers to land or
43 resource usages and practices that have ,, acquired the force of a tacit and
44 common consent". Such land uses and practices, livestock grazing, logging,
45 farmirig, mining, recreation and hunting, to mention just a few, are concrete,
46 readily identifiable and are the foundation of Siskiyou County's economy.
47
48 Culture is/a people's identity and the foundation upon which political society
49 and an economy are built. The people of Siskiyou County are unique products
50 of the complex web of land and resource uses and practices; values and beliefs
5 1 that nurture their communities, sustain their economies, empower their local
PAGE 25 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 25
I government and give form and shape to their spiritual and physical
2 efl~ronments.
4 The importance of custom and culture resides ultimately in the principle of
5 commurnty stability. Community stability is equated to economic stability the
6 condition under which communities can chanqe, adaptf and develop by the
7 dictates ofcustorn and culture rather than by the conirnands ofoutside groups
8 and govemnients. Community stability entails an en~ronment where people
9 and their customs and cultures are left to their own democratic means; where
10 eve~7 community is the arbiter of its own survival; where people1 subject only
I I to the rule of nature and free markets, are masters of their own destinies.
12
13 Ob\~ously, community stability depends on the right of people and
14 commumties to pursue and protect the custom and culture most essential to
I 5 their ~vell-being and most suited to their personal visions. Public policies that
16 injure or dirninish custom and culture by injecting elements of outside control,
1 7 (whether intended to be beneficial e.g. subsidies, or invasive and destructive
18 e.g. regulations,) are ultimately disruptive of community stability. Such policies
19 take away from local people the degree of independence, political integrity,
20 economic discretion and responsiveness necessary to retain a way of life
21 commensurate ~vith custom and culture. In Siskiyou County, federal and State
22 land or resource laws and regulations have disrupted community stability by
23 denying both ~cal government and local citizens their legal sovereignty in
24 matters of local land or resource use.
25
26 For these reasons, the people of Siskiyou County have concluded that a proper
27 goal of comprehensive land and resource use planning is to ensure community
28 stability. In an environment where private lands are increasingly subject to
29 arbitrary federal and State control, and where federal and State properties
30 comprise an overwhelming majority of the county's land base, that goal can
3 l best be achieved by empowerment; by protecting the integnty of property
32 rights, and independence of every citizen; and by making custom and culture
33 an issue of local rather than national consensus. A planrdflg strategy based on
34 these assumptions is attainable only by allowing the people who use and live
35 upon the land to participate and make the crucial decisions that deternnne
36 their welfare and the welfare of the environment at large. No plan can, or for
37 that matter should isolate or protect community stability and custom and culture
38 from the force ofchange in response to nature and the free markets. This plan
39 should, and does, insulate Siskiyou County from the abuses sterririung from
40 national and State public p6licy and from the actions of those whose ambitions
4 1 are directed at denying individual and local self~etermination. Such abusive
42 practices and policies constitute cultural genocide.
43
44 There is one last aspect of custom, culture and community stability that is
45 essential to the goal of the comprehensive pl~ A peoples' custom and culture
46 and the economic stabffity of their community is not only a political and moral
47 issue of great import, but it is also an obligation placed upon the federal
48 governmen[t and the State through collaborative agreements by law and
49 regulation. The federal government is constrained by specific statutes and
50 associated regulations from adversely impacting custom, culture and
51 community stability in Siskiyou County or in any county in the United States.
PAGE 26 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resoufce Management Plan
Febfuary 1996 page 26
1 In £ac~ t~Q Policy of ttie federal government, from the establisLiment of forest
2 reserves iu Siskiyou County, to t~e passage of tile National Forest Management
3 Act and tfie Federal Land Policy and Management Act1 to t~e passage of the
4 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, has repeatedly asserted the rights of
S local coulmunities1 the inviolability of custom and culture, and the key
6 consideration of community stability in the promulgation of land and resource
7 use laws, regulations, and policies.
8
9 Identification and Recognition of Customs and Culture
10
I 1 Defi~tions of culture and customs, as previously described1 can be used to
12 identify and permit recognition of Siskiyou Count customs and culture1 as
13 illustrated by the following examples. By design this is an evolving process.
14
15 It is recornrnended that interested individuals work together to identify
16 customs and culture in a written manner as presented here. It is anticipated
17 that timber1 `nining and recreation groups be formed to identify their specific
l 8 activities and practices. Federally recognized Native Arnencan groups are
19 considered separate entities by the governrnent1 and hence their specific
20 customs and culture are best addressed through their organizations.
21
22 Overview and Defining of Customs and Culture
23
24 Traditionally, Siskiyou County citizens have suvvived, and supported farces
25 and communities, around the primary economic activities of land and natural
26 resource development, including, but not limited to1 ranching, farmirig, timber
27 harvesting, mirieral recovery, tourism and recreation. Naturally1 the use of our
28 water resources play a vital role in these activities, along with other domestic
29 and commercial usages. Access to lands and resources within Siskiyou County
30 through highways, roads1 trails and other types of rights-of-ways are also
3 1 extremely important to these economic activities and others, as well as the
32 traditional way of conducting sodal customs and cultural activities within the
33 county. Therefore1 historical infonnation on each of these very important
34 traditional uses of ranchirig1 farrningf timber, mirieral recovery, tourism and
35 recreation, water and transportation withiii Siskiyou county is provided. The
36 purpose is to show that these and other important usages do exist and have a
37 long and established tradition within SisIayou County, and are vitally linportant
38 m the cultural and economic well-being and security of the dtizens and
39 communities which make up Siskiyou County
40
41 In no way do these simple historical essays convey the complete history of
42 these important usages in Sislayou County, and they barely touch upon the
43 important and weWestablished customs and cultures which have formed
44 around these and other activities. Furthermore, it is important to make it very
45 . dear that this document is not intended to cover every custom, cultural, or
46 economic~c~tivity and/or traditional usage of land and natural resources within
47 Siskiyou County.
48
PAGE 27 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 27
I [t is also vera' important to point out that future usages of these vera,' sam
2 resources1 and others, are just as important, or even more Lrnportant to
) Siskiyou County, than present and past usages as covered here. In order fo o'er
4 citizens to feel secure in our livelihoods, to promote cultural and econorm~c
5 well-being and community stability, we MUST also be assured that continu~d
6 access to, and sustainable development of, these important resources, anc
7 others, ~vill be readily available to Siskiyou County citizens.
S
9 Projected future land and resource uses are not specifically covered in this
10 document; they are recognized as evolving from historical uses and complianz
1 1 with present and future residents. In fact, future access to the land and
12 resources are of primary importance to the security, stabiliW, economic and
13 cultural well-being of our citizens. For ~\`ample, miners must know that, as
14 technologies improve and new mineral reserves are located, that ~ge `vill have
15 access to make reasonable development of these resources. Farmers and
16 ranchers must feel secure that they will~be allowed to farm and ranch. Timber
17 and mill workers must feel secure that they will have reasonable access to
is timber resources which will provide a sustainable yield. Tourism and recreation
19 enterpnses must feel secure that access to the public lands ~~ill not be hindered
20 without good reason. Siskiyou County citizens must feel cornfortable that their
2 l water resources, and free access to the public lands and their traditional u~aue
22 of natural resources within Siskiyou County will not be taken away ~vithout a
23 thorough evaluation pf the consequences, and without fair compensation paid
24 to those who will sustain a loss of their property and/or their traditional rneai'~
25 of creating a livelihood. Failure to consider and accommodate continuinu ~~ter-
26 dependent relationships between Siskiyou County citizens and their land and
27 natural resources would result in underrnining the complete cultural well-being
28 of its citizens.
29
30
PAGE 28 Show Image
SI~kly~u County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 2o
1 Appendix 3 Customs and Culture Mining in Siskiyou County
2
The extraction of minerals from the earth's -crust for man's use has been a practice since
4 the beginning of~itten history. Extraction ofresources has played an important part in
S the development ofthe customs, culture, and usage in Siskiyou County Gold is the
6 mineral which has been mined Siskiyou County with the greatest economic impact on the
7 County. Other minerals and extractive resources have been mined in the County, but no~
S with th~ intensity that gold has been mined. Mining districts were fd~ed and still exist
9 throughout the county.
10
l I Lindsay Applegate in 1 849 mined for a few days at the headwaters of the Scott River.
12 That same year James Abrams discovered gold in Cecilville, on the South Fork of the
I 3 Salmon River. Gold was also discovered on the Klamath River, Shasta River, Yreka
14 Creek, and Greenhorn Creek. The ground was so rich on McAdams and Cherry Creeks in
15 the Deadwood District that it was mined over six times. Min[ing districts and claims were
16 forrned throughout the western halfofthe County.
17
18 Each ofthese mining districts had its own set ofregulations for governing claims `~There
19 were no well-developed American mining codes before the gold rush, but in Europe,
20 South America, and Mexico, a body ofordinances had evolved through centuries of
2 1 experience in regulating mining practices. It was these ordinances brought primarily by
22 English and Latin-American gold seekers that provided the basis for California mining
23 law.4
24
25 The fundamental principles were the same in the districts---that men who discovered a
26 section ofgold-bearing ground had the right to exploit it, and that this right lasted only as
27 long as a man continued to work his claim. Each man could locate or `4claim" only one
28 section ofground, but he could purchase the claims of others.
29
30 The body of laws regulating gold mining has grown since the gold rush. The California
3 1 Practice Act of I 85 1 stated that In actions respecting mining claims, proofshould be
32 admitted ofcustoms, usages, or regulation established and in force at the bar or diggings
33 embracing such claim and such customs, usages, or regulations, when not in conflict with
34 the Constitution and Laws ofthis State, should govern the decisions ofthe action.
35 Miners' claims were upheld by the cQurts as possessory rights, which were good among
36 the miners themselves and against any other claimant but the government.
37
38 The Civil Rights Act of 1866 established that all the mineral lands ofthe public domain
39 should be free and open for exploration and occupation; that rights which had been
40 acquired in these lands under a system of local rules, with the apparent acquiescence and
41 sanction ofthe government, should be recogrnzed and affirmed; and that titles~atents)
42 * on lands containing certain classes of mineral deposits might be ultimately obtained.
43
44 The l 870 U. 8. Mining Law amended July 9 provided that all patents granted, or
45 preemption or homestead nghts allowed, should be subject to any water rights or rights to
46 ditches and reservoirs used in connection therewith, as may have been acquired under or
47 recognized by the Act of I~66.
PAGE 29 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February i996
2 The Gen~ra1 Mining Act ofMay 10, 1872, confirmed the Acts of 1866 and 1870(See
3 attached)
4
S California Civil Code 1410-1422, effective January 1, 1873, was essentially a
6 codification of the principles and practices that had been developed in the mining districts
7 and camps and the first legislative authonzation by the State for the appropriation of
S water. It is evident that the appropriation doctrine was established in California only as a
9 result ofcustoms and usages developed in the mining districts and camps.
10
I I Mining and providing services and supplies to the miners have contributed greatly to the
12 economic stabilit\' oft
he many mining communities which developed in Siskiyou
13 Countyts mining districts. Scott Bar was a relatively large mining town. By October of
14 185 1 the town contained about 50 houses and included stores, boarding houses and
15 saloons. In I 88 1 the town consisted ofa hotel, 2 stores, a butcher shop, a drug store, a
16 blacksmith, saloons and residences. Other communities which developed and grew as a
17 result ofthe minina ac
18 Camp, and \§reka. ~ tivity nearby included Forks ofSalmon, Sa~~'ers Bar, Happy
Within six months ofthe discovery ofgold at Thompson's D~
19 Diggings in Yreka (known then as Shasta Butte City), th~ population had grown from
20 about 1,000 inhabitants to over 5,000 people.
21
22 Mining activity has been continuous in Siskiyou County since the first gold discovenes.
23 There have been fluctuations in mining activity and output. These fluctuations have been
24 caused by depletion ofore bodies, new discoveries, improvements in extraction
25 techniques, regulatory impediments, price changes ofgold and general economic
26 conditions. The general prosperity that began in 1 9 1 6 and continued until I 929, with
27 accompanying high costs, caused a general decrease in gold output. The Gold Reserve
28 Act of 1934 changed the price ofgold from ~2O.67 per ounce to ~3S.OO per ounce. This
29 rise in the price of gold ultimately resulted in a large increase in gold output and in much
30 greater exploration. World War II caused a drop in gold output. War Production Board
3 1 Limitation Order L-208, issued on October 8, 1 942, caused the gold mines to be shut
32 down. When the American dollar was devalued and then set completely afloat in 1973,
33 the pnce ofgold went as high as $800.00 per ounce. Between 1975 and 1980 suction
34 dredge permits issued by the California Department of Fish and Game quadrupled in
35 number.
36
37 Mining is a classic free enterprise activity where any person can go out and prospect to
38 find hidden deposits ofgold or other valuable minerals and develop for one's own benefit
39 arid survival. Many citizens supported their families by small-scale mining for gold
40 du.nng the depression years when no other work was available.'
41
42 While small-scale gold mining is mostly being done as a hobby today, bringing in
43 . thousands of'recreationists and tourists each year (which provides substantial income to
44 rural comrn~unities within the county), some still pursue the activity to provide for their
45 livelihood. If the value of gold anCUor other minerals increases during fliture years, it is
46 more likely that mining will play an even larger economic roll in the county. Also,
PAGE 30 Show Image
Siskiyou County Compehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996
page 30
I methods is ukely to increase the value ofthe county's gold and/or other mineral reserves.
Therefore, Siskiyou County, as a matter ofpolicy, has a strong interest in maintaining the
) availability ofmineral resources fdr Americans to discover and develop.
4
S [
PAGE 31 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resourne Management Plan
February 1996 page 31
I APPENDIX 4 Custom and Culture Agriculture Summary
2
3 Farming, dai~ing and ranching have been established historic economic use of the land in Siskiyou County
4 for almost 150 years. Agriculture is one ofthe highest value added industnes, creatin new wealth from the
5 naturally occurring elements of seed animals, sunshine, minerals and water to produce high quality and
6 quantity food and fiber. Specialization in this industiy has enabled phenomenal levels ofproductivity, freeing
7 the vast majority of Amencans to pursue other enterprise and cultural development as hallmarks of our
~ niodem civilizatioti.
9
10 The concept of ~ resources" includes cultural propevties and traditional lifeway values. Cultural
I I properties associated with ranching, for instance, would be physical structures or characteristics of the
12 landscape, including: livestock, developed springs, wells, ditches and watering tanks, fences, corrals, graa:ing
I 3 allotments, open range, ranch houses, sheep herding camps, shearing pens, loading chutes, grange halls and
14 community centers, one room school houses and livestock.
15
I 6 Traditional "lifeway valuest are often abstract, nonmaterial, ascribed ideas that may or may not be closely
I 7 associated with definite locations and are important to the
groups traditional cultural practice, social
I 8 interaction or economic forms.
19
20 Agricultural operators require broad knowledge and experience in a variety of fields. Acquiring this complex
2 1 knowledge and perfecting necessary skills most offen requires a long apprenticeship, commonly established as
22 a `1lifeway~' passed from one generation to another. For instance, according to kichard Boles in What Color is
23 Your Parachute? ranching is an extemely complex career field. Working with animals alone requires the
24 skills of: serving, sensing, communicating, persuading, performing mana~in~ ne~otiat mg, leading , treatinci
25 and trainina ~ rancher, in addition to ~`1orking ~vith (and riding) animals, must.work pith the physics of
26 handling irrigation water, the mechanics of working with machines, the skills of operating heavy equipment,
27 the agronomy of growing hay crops, the chemistry of pest manaGement, th e veterinary medicine aspects of
28 animal health, the genetics of husbandry, the marketing and sale of a product, the planning and financial
29 management of a small business, the athletics of a physical lifestyle a sense of meteorological prediction, the
30 skills of filling out forms, and a grasp of the biological and geological processes of his surrounding
3 1 environment.
32
33 In Siskiyou County, ~e institution of the small family owned and operated farm, dairy or ranch, not only
34 provides the opportunity for apprenticeship, but reinforces cultural and social values such as being self-reliant,
35 cooperating in teamwork, being reliably responsible for living crops and animals, being valuing the family
36 homestead and its historic traditions, and enjoyment ofoutdoor worl:.
37
38 Raymond Fir, in Human Types. An Introduction to Social Anthropology. The New Amencan Lib~~,
39 c1963, gives and excellent overview of the elements that comprise ucultureu. According to Firth, and other
40 experts, one key to defming culture is the identifiable manifestations or "lifeways" ofa group in responding to
4 1 or living with their environment.
42
43 A combination of climate, topography, soil productivity and the availability ofwater in mountainous Siskiyou
44 County has created several different "micm~nvironments" to which agricultural practices have responded
45 with specialized crops most suited to constraints and risks ofhigh altitudes and a short growing season.
46 Ranching, for instance, was fi~ced with climatic realities that created a need for winter hay or summer gras in
47 timesofdrought
48
49 The historic limitation on homestead parcels to 160 acres also resulted in the adaptation of early ranchers of
so driving cattle up into the surrounding high mountains of the west, north and south. This allowed them to
5 1 . harvest home pastures and access lush patches of meadow with more moisture available at higher elevations
52 with a later melting snow pack. In tum, this fostered the cultural and social tradition of the cattle drive and
53 roundup, and competitions for skill performance, such as the rodeo.
54
55 Although the season of use has been restricted to late summer and fall, and the allotments are generally
56 restricted. many tiublic land ranchina fi~milies ofthe co~?ntv tod~v iv~e the ~me r;~no~I~nd ~ ~r ~
PAGE 32 Show Image
&iskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 32
I did (heir ancestors. Althouali hiohw ay use pefmi~s and ~ have begun to impact the practice in ~avo
2 of large cattle tnicks, many public land grazes still drive their herds to their allotments. With a warnino car a
the head and rear, family and friends on horseback with dogs nudge the slow-mooooving procession alon£
4 back country roads to trails leading to their allotments Most still monitor rangelands and move salt blocks on
S horseback. [n the fall, they still (ound-up ~e herd, search for stray and drive them back to home pasture
6 Calves are usually bom in late spring, weaned in the fall and sold before winter in rhythm with the orazino
7 cycle. Like those of five generations ago, facing the same limiting factors of climate, topography and space.
8 public graders continue to employ the same adaptations.
9
I 0 Firtli also discusses the cultural charactenstics of social oQ0anization that creates a sense of kinship or tribe~~.
l 1 social position, status or function, and acts as the motivation for behaviors and other cultural manifestations.
12
I 3 Agriculturalist tend to go tlirough their lives in *~age sets,~ bonded by repeated shared experiences in 4-H.
14 sports, Future Faders of Amenca rodeo and other competitions. As adults, they rotate through boards
I S together such as Fair Boards, Rodeo Associations, irrigation Districts, Resource and Conservation Districts.
I 6 ~ey belong to "clubs" comprised mostly of others of the "lifeway" such as Young Farmers and Ranchers.
l 7 Farm Bureau, Cattlemen's Association, Grange and Growers Associations.
18
1 9 ~e customs associated with agnculture include many of the early possessor rights that were reco~~nized and
20 respected as local practices, sometimes supported by f~)rmally Associations and sometimes acknowledged in
2 1 law. Examples include the establishment of gr~ing allotments tied to a family base ranch, water use rights
22 that developed into law, and public rights ofway over public land.
23
24 Agriculture has been a long time traditional land use and lifeway in Siskiyou County and has come to firm a
25 major component of local cultural celebrations and the economy. It is important that the many elements
26 associated with agricultural land, water use, rights of way and easements be recognized and preserved as
27 necessary to support this valuable aspect ofthe heritage ofSiskiyou County.
28
29
30
PAGE 33 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 33
I Appendix 5 Customs and Culture - Farming
2 HISTORICAL NOTES
3 Sectional variations in physical characteristics naturally divide Siskiyou Count' into four identifi~bl areas
4 where fanning has played a significant historical role: Shasta Valley; Scott Valley'; Butte Valley: a£~d the
S Tule Lake or Upper Klarnatli Basin The following spot sketches are meant only as an illustrative sample
6 ofthe history offanning trends in Siskiyou County:
7
8 SHASTAVALLEY:
9 PASTUkE Robert Martin has been credited with being the first rancher in Shasta Valley, establishing the
10 Table Rock Ranch in 1849. The 3,500 acre Brady Ranch near Gazelle is also considered one ofthe earliest
I l ranches It was later purchased by Josiah Edson in 1852. It should be noted that most early ranches did
12 not have enclosed pastures, leaving stock vulnerable to Indian raids ln 1 85 1 , Indians drove off 2u~~ head
13 ofminer's horses being herded in open range. (Please see separate sections on Rancliin~ and WaL~- Use.)
14
15 FIELD AND RO\V CROPS As early as 1851;land claims were taken up in the Shasta Valley. Tne first
16 "crop" was grass hay cut for the Yreka market. In 1852, William and Jackson Brown are said to have
17 raised a crop in at Butteville, (a.k.a. Edgewood or Cavanaugh's.) Ale' Boles also began a farmin£
I 8 operation in 1 852, raising wheat, barley, oats and vegetables.
19
20 By 1853, amounts ofbarley, oats and wheat were raised in Shasta Valley. In 1853, crops were raised by
21 John B. Rohrer, the Davis Brothers and John Kegg in Little Shasta. Fire destroyed all but Rohrers crops.
22 In 1856, Henry Davis planted his first grain crop in Shasta Valley, but it did poorly because of
23 grasshoppers. One morning the family awoke to find that their field had been set afire by Indians
24 harvesting roasted grasshoppers from the fields.
25 By 1861, the William Miller ranch in Little Shasta was reported to be producing as much as 40 bushels of
26 wheat an acre and three tons ofhay an acre. There were three cuttings ofhay per year, all consumed by his
27 cattle. Around 1 870, August Louie and Joe Rose purchased "squatters rights" from claimants at Bi~
28 Springs and established homesteads. Both families raised tons ofpotatoes, watermelons, dry beans. fava
29 beans, onions, cabbages, corn, squash, garlic, saffron, cumin seed, and red and green peppers. ~en the
30 railroad arrived at Gazelle, they sold Red Top, Timothy and tons ofhay to the cattle dealers. In the 1890s,
31 they grew alfalfa.
32
33 In 1912, Jim Burns, Bill Wilson and Edward Stallcup formed a corporation known as Edward Stallcup and
34 Sons, Co., Inc., which, in addition to supplying feed for their o'vn cattle at Big Springs and 1 50 head of
35 boarded horses, sold as much as 1,000 tons ofhay each year to the Weed Lumber Co. In addition to the
36 StaIlcup sons, John, Joe and Tom, 15 men were hired during the summer for haying.
37 In 1853, Ch&les Schlicht began construction ofa flour mill on the Shasta River. In 1861, the Yreka Steam
38 Mills ran regularly and were said to he capable ofgrinding 16,000 pounds offlour daily, when necess~e'.
39 Another flour mill was located at Tailholt in Little Shasta~ (By 1878, there werc seven grist mills in the
40 entire county two steam and five water power driven. These produced 2 l ,OOO barrels of flour and ground
4 1 2,800 bushels ofcom.) By 1 885, there were ako two breweries in Yrek~
42
43 ORCHARDS Forest House or Forest Ranch was established on the Yreka side ofForest Mountain by
44 Horace Knights in 1851. By 18S2, there was a distillery. A large orchard had been planted by 1861,
45 ihcluding pears, peaches, plums and more than 4,000 apple trees, (250 of which were already productive.)
46 In I 869, the orchards at Forest House were expanded and a cider mill with two large wooden wheek was
47 added along with a vinegar room. Thejuice was concentrated by boiling for shipping. By 1873, Forcst
48 . House yielded a yearly product of fi~iit totalling 6,000 bushels.
49
50 By 1 86 1 , Batterton had also established an orchard in Shasta Valley and the Edson Ranch included a large
5 1 orchard planted in I 865. Nelson H. Eddy raised fruit on his ranch, established near the foot of Mt. Shasta
52 in 1867.
PAGE 34 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
Februa~ 1996 page 34
I SCOTTVALLEY:
~ PASTURE As early as 1850, Pool and Wicks had established a land claim in Scott Valley with a corral to
) graze cattle for meat for the miners at Scott Bar (See separate section on Ranching and \Vater Use.)
4
5 FIELD CROPS The first oats oro~ ~ in Siskiyou Cotinty ~~~ere bro~gl~t from Oregon in I ~ I and sown by
6 Robinson, Brown and Godfrey on the Star Ranch in Scott Valley. In 1852, Godfrey brought one bushel of
7 planting wheat from the Suisun Valley by pack mule to Shasta Valley, and then through the snow to Scott
8 Valley. It produced a crop ofSO bushels. In the following year, P.A. Heartstrand and Asa \Vhite brought
9 30 mule loads ofwheat to Scott Valley for planting. In I 852, John McKee homesteaded a large tract of
10 land in Scott Valley. The land was later subdivided into several fanns including those ofPeter Smith, Rev.
I I D.H. Lowry, O.V. Green and John and Stafford Wilson. Farming was also taken up in 1852 by Winegar,
12 Glendenning, Kidder and Calhoun. By 1853, considerable arnounts ofbarley, oats and wheat were raised
13 in Scott Valley. By 1877, a harvest ofat least 250,000 bushels ofgrain were anticipated in Scott Valley
l 4 and four steam threshers were in operation. Of note, in 1917, during W~
VI, seed from the alfalfa grown on
15 the d~ land ofNoyes Valley brought a premium price because ofits characteristic ofgro~vth in arid
16 ~
17
1 8 The Lafayette/ShoreslPhoenix flour mill was the first grist mill in Siskiyou County, erected in Scott Valley
19 in 1853. In 1954, Charles McDermit, Jeremiah, William and D.M. Davidson built the "Old Aetna Mills"
20 and distillery. In I 855, P.A. Heartstrand, Abisha Swain, Obediah Baer and James Stevens built the `tRough
21 and Ready Flour Mill' near Etna. In 1860, the Festus Payne grist mill was built in French Creek. It was
22 operated by a hurdy gurdy" water wheel along with a saw mill. In 1865, Joseph Young and his brother,
23 the Swain brothers and George Smith purchased the machinery ofthe flour mill in Yreka for their mill in
24 Rough and Ready, which they operated by steam. The "Union", the principal flour mill at Rough and
25 ReadylEtna, had a capacity of3O,OOO bushels a day.
26
27 The "Farmers Flour Mill" in Fort Jones was built as a cooperative association of farmers and merchants to
28 protect themselves against the four combined flour mills then in operation at Rough and ReadylEtna, which
29 controlled the price ofwheat. Later, in 1919, the Parrott flour mill was built by Charles B. Parrott and John
30 Johnson in Etna, producing "Flavo Flour" and grinding feed for fanners. It was closed in 1931.
31
32 In 1854, Jeremiah Davidson and William Miller built a distillery on \Vhiskey Creek operated by Ensign
33 "Whiskey" Smith. In 1 868, C. Kappler purchased a brewery from P. A. Heartstrand on the east side of
34 Scott Valley about three miles from Rough and Ready. In 1872, he moved the brewery to Rough & Ready.
35 A fire destroyed the original building in 1 875 and a larger one was built. Kappler's brewery had four beer
36 wagons and it is said his business netted a quai~er ofa million dollars annually.
37
38 BUTTE VALLEY:
39 There are numerous accounts of immigrant trains that reached Yreka bcginning in 1 852 over the Yreka
40 Trail, which passed through Butte Valley. This branched from the Applegate Trailjust west ofthe divide
4 1 between Willow Creek and Laird's Landing on the Lower Klamath Lake, turning soudiward until it met the
42 old trapper's trail coming down from Military Pass.
43
44 Settlement of Butte Valley itself, however, was hampered by fear of Indian raids and lack ofwater. It was
45 called the "Desert" for many years. Early agricultural use was limited to ranching, although thousands of
46 tons ofnatu~l g,rass hay were harvested at early ranches established in 1862 on the west side ofButte
47 Valley. (See separate section on Ranching and Water Use.)
48
49 : FIELD CROPS: In 1876, crops grown on the Julius Russell homestead 6n Butte Creek were reported as
50 timothy, red top~ oats for hay, wheat and barley, which were cut by a reaper and later stacked and threshed
S I by machine. Some grain was hauled to the granary for home use and the rest to the grist mill in Little
52 Shasta and sold. By 1903, there were 1 1,000 acres ofdry-land farming producing alfalfa hay and grain.
53
PAGE 35 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 35
I In 1 906, the extensive Butte Valley landlioldings of Miller and Lux were sold to the (Southern) Pacific
2 Improvement Co. Much ofthis was sold to William Macdoel and the Butte Valley Land Company. It was
3 then cut up into small farms and sold largely to farmers who were members ofthe Church ofthe Brethren
4 (or Dunkards.") Various plans for groundwater and surface water irrigation systems failed and many left
5 bankrupt. An attempt by the Bureau ofReclamation to channel waters ofAntelope, Butte and Bear Creeks
6 to Macdoel met with similar failure in 1920.
7
8 Butte Valley Irrigation District (BVID) was formed in 1921. Due to insufficient surface water available to
9 landowners in the district, a bond was floated for S547,000 in I 923 to divert water from Shovel Creek to
10 irrigate ta~ land within the (BVID). After the project was completed, the creek went dry and most
1 1 flirmers lost their land and were forced to leave the area. In 1929, BVID drilled the first irric'ation well.
12 The BVID continued to drill wells as the surface water decreased each year.26 In the 1950s, with
1 3 formation of a successful Irrigation District utilizing deep wells, hundreds of acres had been cleared,.
14 leveled and brought into productivity in alfalfa, grains and potatoes.
15
16 In 1937, the Bankhead4ones Farm Tenant Act, Title III authorized purchase ofsubmarginal, erosion prone
1 7 flirmlands to retire from agncultural developmenL Approximately 1 8,425 acres to the east of Meiss Lake
I 8 were acquired under this act. They were administered by the Soil Conservation Service until I 950, and
19 formally designated as National Grasslands administered by the U.S. Forest Service in 1991.
20
21 ORCHAI~DS AND ROW CROPS: For a briefperiod in the 1880s, a group ofsettlers from Pennsylvania
22 attempted to fence the open range and grow oranges. This enterpnse failed and the settlements were
23 abandoned. By 1903, \Vheeler's Nursery employed 300 men in growing and marketing 15 million
24 strawberry plants to southern California and Sacramento.
25
26 TULE LAKEJUPPER KLAMATH BASIN:
27 Many immigrants to California took the Applegate Trail, following the eastern shore ofTule Lake. In
28 I 849, the first ofmany violent deaths by raiding tribes occurred between Goose Lake and Tule Lake
29 giving the area the name "Bloody PoinL" Early settlement was limited, first by tribal raids, then by lack of
30 water, short growing seas6n and inhospitable climate. (See separate section on Ranching.)
31
32 By 1 867, the former Modoc tribal lands around Klamath Lakes and Lost River had been settled by many
33 immigrants. Lingering Indians were removed to the Klamath Reservation in I 869, but a group under
34 Captain Jack returned to the area, eventually resulting in tile Modoc War of 1872-3.
35
36 CROPS: In 1 899, Milo and Alice Coppock homesteaded land on the Sand Strip or Peninsula at the
37 southeast end ofTulelake, where they g[~W vegetables and fhii~ In 1907, J. Frank Adams, Ch&les L
38 Moore, E.P McComack, Alexander Martin, Alexander Maitin k. and Ruftis Moore formed the Lakeside
39 Company, purchasing an initial 6,500 acres from the Tule Lake Land and Livestock Co. on the north end
40 ofTule Lake. The company interested The Bohemian Colonization Club ofOmaha, Nebraska, in
41 establishing a Czechoslovakian community on the site (Malin, 9regon) in 1909-10. Despite wind, frost,
42 thousands ofjack rabbits and flocks ofbizxis, the colony was successfti1, growing potatoes, beets, wheat,
43 oats, rye and hay, as well as garden vegetables.
44
45 Experiments on the new Klamath Prqjcct homesteads (see section below) in raising VariOUS cmps
46 concluded that potatoes, onions, horseradish and cereal crops were most able to survive the climate and
47 find a profitable marker Tule Lake fartners sustained devastating crop loss when their barley and wheat
48 fields proved atfractive feeding grounds for thousands ofducks and geese. Various unsuccessfiil attempts
26 Oct. 9, 1992 letter from Theodore Risner1 Water Master, BVID.
PAGE 36 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 36
I were made to dissuade the birds, includiug: flring shotguns loaded with blanks; using planes to bu~ Fields;
2 air dropping firecracker-type noisemakers; and using a mobile searchlight to roust night feeding birds27
4 [n 1940, Earl Ager moved his grocer)' and general store to Tulelake. It has been described as the "\Vall
S Street ofwestern barley, the crying wall ofthe potato industry..." In 1993, 19,532 acres ofleaselands in
6 Siskiyou and Modoc Counties generated $15,796,785 in crop sales. In the Klamath basin, onion
7 production has been centered on the leaselands and the area is considered to be excellent for beet
8 production, introduced around 1991. Potatoes are a large crop in the basin, with 40% ofCalifornia's fresh
9 potatoes ono
~inating there. Nearly 45% ofthe nation's horseradish is also grown here. Grains are also
10 grown with maintenance ofspecial habitat buffers and residual grains left for bird feeding under
I I government programs
12
13 EARLYRECLAMATION EFFORTS:
14 In 1862 and 1866, John A. Fairchild had secured grazing privileges into the eastern part ofButte Valley
l S through private treat)' with the Modoc Indians. (See separate section on Ranching.) When his partnership
16 with Si Doten, dissolved, he repined 17,000 acres called J.F. Ranch, a considerable portion ofwhich was
1 7 covered by Lower Klamath Lake. He reclaimed a large area through drainage, turning it into rich pasture
I 8 land. In 1 868, the Langell family began to rechannel the Lost River, reclaiming nearly 4,000 acres of land
19 for faring and ranching over the border in Oregon. In the 1870s, lames Poe rechanneled the Lost River
20 in Oregon, downstream from Langell's, to reclaim swampland for farming. (See separate section on \Vater
21 Use.)
22
23 KLAMATH RECLAMATION PROJECT:
24 In 1904, Reclamation Service Director Frederick Newell presented a proposal to reclaim marshlands in the
25 upper Klamath Basin for agriculture. In February of 1905, California relinquished ownership of Clear
26 Lake, Lower Klamath Lake and Tule Lake to the federal government. In addition, Congress passed
27 legislation to permit the draining ofthe lakes and cessation ofnavigation. The Bureau of Reclamation
28 (BoR) began construction in 1906, with the draining ofTule Lake beginning in 1907. Through diversion
29 of Lost River water into the Klamath River, drainage through holes in the lava at Scorpion Point and
30 evaporation, Tule Lake was reduced in size from 98,600 to 68,000 acres between 1907 and 1919, and
3 1 parcels opened for homestead in phases.
32
33 Portions ofthe Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge system that are located in Siskiyou County include
34 Lower Klamath and Tule Lake In I 908, Executive Order #924 preserved islands and marshlands
35 unsuitable for agriculture for bird habitat in the Lower Klamath Reflige. In 19 12, the Northeastem
36 Railroad was permitted to build a causeway across the northwestern end of Lower Klamath Lake, which
37 cut off the lake from its main source of water. The Lower Klamath Lake was originally 8 l ,6 1 9 acres in
38 size. When drained, the northern end ofthe lake proved suitable for fanning, but the southern end was
39 heavy with alkali. By the 1920s, peat fires started in the lake bed, burning to a depth ofsix feet or more in
40 some areas. [n the aftermath, a large alkaline, ashy lake bed choked the region with dust clouds. Due to
4 1 detenoration ofthe water quality ofthe lake and spread ofavian botulism, some ofthe drained land was re-
42 flooded.
43
44 In 1928, Executive Order #497S set aside the 10,300 acre Tule Lake Bird Reflige. When Tule Lake was
45 drained, 37,000 acres ofTule Lake had been set aside as an evaporation sump, but in the 1930s1 most of the
27
Responding to a negative article published in the San Francisco Chronicle in 195 1 conceniiiig the
impact of farini~~g on the Tule Lake Reflige, local editor, John B. Edmonds of The Tulelake Reporter stated:
our ranchers pay and pay again with thousands of bushels of grain consumed each year off private farm
land. . Not a 30,OOO acre refuge, Mr. Thomas; no rather a 93,000 acre paradise of water and grain and
clover on which these birds feed each spring and fall at our expense.
PAGE 37 Show Image
Slsklyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 37
I land was not under water and was leased for fanniand. [rrigation on the homesteads threatened the
2 leaselands with flooding and a pump and tunnel was constructed to the Lower Kiamath By connecting the
3 sump with Lower Kiamath Lake by tunnel and a pumping facility in 1942, the Tule Sump was reduced to
4 1 7,000 acres with leaseland farming on the remaining lands. mm- l 65
5
6 The new agricultural lands gradually created by the Klamath Project were homesteaded through a series of
7 open allotments beginning in 19 1 7. (Most ofthe homesteads awarded after 192 1 were in California.)
S Applicants had to nieet certain criteria to qualify, and preference was given to veterans of both \VWI and
9 WWII. In 1929, the tradition ofdrawing names from ~ e ligible applicants ~vas begun. ~e 1 946
I 0 lottery drawing was aired live throughout the west coast through radio hook-up. The last homestead was
I I awarded in I 949 to Ernest L. Tacker of ~emet. (Due to its high alkali content1 it had been refused by 20
I 2 prior alternates.) As the Klamath Project extends into southern Oregon and Modoc Count, many farmers
I 3 also leave ties to those regions. In fact, it is not uncommon for a Siskivou
County farm to have one or more
I 4 operations situated in another of these locations.
15
1 6 After tl~e last homestead period, I 3,000 acres under Bokjurisdiction remained reserved from homestead
1 7 and maintained under lease. [n 1 95 1 , the US Fish and Wildlife Service announced intention to exclusively
I 8 manage I 5,253 acres of land in the Tule Lake Basin, including the areas known as 2,500 acre "League of
I 9 ~ and "Frog Pond'~ which had been under consideration for homestead.
20
2 1 Protests were raised based on the question oforiginal intent ofState transfer oftitle to the federal
~ ~overnnient in regard to purposes ofhomesteading. This led to clari~ing legislation known as the 1964
23 Kuchel Act (Public Law 88-567,) which states that leaselands are `~dedicated to wildlife conservation, but
24 with full consideration to optimum agricultural use that is consistent therewith."
25
26 In 1977, an agreement between the BoR and the Tule Lake Refuge acknowledged that: 1) the US Fish and
27 Wildlife Service (USF&WS) was in charge ofadministering the land and water within the boundaries of
28 the refuge and that their decisions affecting this area were binding; and 2) the Bok would prepare and
29 conduct leasing programs on the land designated for agricultural use within the refuge, under the approval
30 ofthe USF&WS. In 1980, the refuge expanded to include land encompassing the "Peninsula" so that
3 1 currently, the Tule Lake Refuge encompassed 38,908 acres; 1 5,270 ofwhich are leased to farmers residing
32 within a 50 mile radius ofthe refuge on a five year basis and 1,400 acres ofwhich are planted in barley as a
33 buffer to attract feeding winter fowl.
34
35 The Lower Klamath National Wildlife Reftige now stands at 47,600 acres, and is a mixture of shallow
36 marshes, open water, grassy uplands and cr6plands. There are 6,900 acres of leaselands on the lower
37 Klamath Refuge. According to the Tulelake Growers Association, potatoes account for only 13% of the
38 crops grown on 22,000 acres of lease land in the refliges, yet generates nearly 60% ofthe S 1 5.7 million in
39 receipts for farmers leasing this land in Siskiyou and Modoc Counties.28 (Please see Attachment D.)
40
41 HISTORICAL STATISTICS:
42 (Please see the following "attachments" on historical estimates on acreage and crop production excerpted
43 from the Siskiyou County Annual Crop and Uvestock Reports, I9S7~l994.) It should be noted that more
44 recent developments in fanning in Siskiyou County have included the establishment ofwineries, (where
45 micro~Iimates have permitted,) nurseries for reforestation stock, medicinal herbs and the application of
46 organic fanning practices.
47
28
Statistics taken from a Feb~ 14, 1994 letter from the Tulelake Growers Association to
Congressman Wally Herger.
PAGE 38 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 38
I *`RIGHT TO FARM ORDINANCE":
2 On September 25, 1 990, the County of Siskiyou passed Ordinance 90-28 adding Chapter l I to Title I 0 of
~ the Siskiyou County Code or `1Right to Farm Ordinance
4
S Section 1 0- 1 l 02 states: "It is the purpose and intent of this section to reduce loss to the County of its
6 agncultural resources by limiting the circumstances under which agricultural operations may be considered
7 a nuisance.
S
9 Section 10- 1 1 .03 states: 1'No agncultural activity, operation or facility or appurtenances thereof, conducted
I 0 or maintained for commercial purposes, and in a manner consistent with proper and accepted customs and
I I standards and with all chapters ofSiskiyou County code, as established and followed by similar
1 2 agricultural operations, shall be or become a nuisance, public or private, pursuant to the Siskiyou County
I 3 Code after the same has been in operation for more than three years, if it was not a nuisance when it
14 bezan."
IS
16 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS:
17 The availability ofsuitable soils, climate and water ofsufficient quaiitity and quality arc hindamental to
I 8 farming. where environmental, land use or government fairri program regulation does not otherwise
I 9 intrude, the decision by a modem fanner to bring or maintain a particular piece of land in production
20 depends on a number of additional factors: ( 1 ) access to reliable resources in order to acquire necessary
21 production "inputs"29 ; (2) the amount ofeapital investment required for necessazy production "inputs";
22 (3) reliability ofcrop yield or "output" 30 ; (4) marketability ofproduct, including market price.
23
24 A commercial farmer will not generally bring a particular piece of land into production where there is no
25 foreseeable profit in doing so The balance of profit, loss and the weighing of risk variables is further
26 complicated when the crop is to be utilize as an input for another end-product, such as livestock, or when
27 it is a long-lived perennial crop, such as alfalfa or pasture.
28
29 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS: 31
30 LITTLE SHASTA RIVER:
3 1 The source area ofthe Little Shasta River is marked by soil ofa coarse texture descnbed as sandy and
32 stony in nature and from material derived from volcanic ash. The soil in tlliis area ranges frorn well~kaincd
33 to excessively drained and is slightly to strongly acii The underlying geology is igneous rock from lava
34 flows - basalt or andesite. Moving into the valley edge, the soil becomes neutral to mildly alkaline in
35 nature.
36
29
This would include such ujflp~tsu as skill, experience, parts, capital and financi~, labor, costs of land,
nutrients, ~cides, equipment, transportation, processing and storage facilities, structural improvements,
water delivery systern~, seed, packaging, etc.
30 mis wotild include risk factors such as crimatic and natural events, disease, pestileoce and loss by
wildlife, reliability of water supply, etc.
31 SOIL'~~SURVEY OF SISKIYOU COUNTY CALIFORNIA. CENTRAL PART USDA Soil
Conservation Service, 1983.
PAGE 39 Show Image
Siskiyou County Comprehensive Land & Resource Management Plan
February 1996 page 39
I Terraces on the north side oftue river range from mildly alkaline to mildly acid in the top several inches
2 and neutral u