Oregon Magazine   Traveling the West?  Stay at  Shilo Inns
    Cover  |  Table of Contents  

 
Commission walking tightrope on moraine issue

By Rocky Wilson
of the Wallowa  County Chieftain


New county land-use laws are in the public hearing process to protect the Wallowa Lake moraines. The fact that all of the moraines are under private ownership complicates the process. (Photo at left by Kim Lamb  Photo at right is from the Wallowa Lake State Park website.

Oregon Magazine note: a "moraine" is an accumulation of glacial till, or disturbed ground.  It is a mixed-up jumble of topsoil, clay, gravel, larger stones and even boulders.  There are a number of kinds of moraines.  The two which most frequently cause the lakeshore ridges you see in the photos above are the "push" and "ablative" types.  In the first, a growing glacier acts like a snowplow.  When it retreats, it leaves a ridge where it stopped.  The second kind scrapes the sides of canyons or even mountains.  When it melts, a ridge of till is left where it rubbed against the wall.

Private property rights vs. the protection of a major natural resource is the issue at stake in Wallowa County, where renewed hearings began Tuesday, Nov. 27, to protect the ecologically sensitive Wallowa Lake moraines.
   The Wallowa County Planning Commission has opened its public process to consider Article 44, the latest attempt to walk the fine line between private rights and the public good.

   According to the Trust for Public Lands, the Wallowa Lake moraines are endangered because of inadequate local laws. "Gutted" was the term used by attorney Rahn Hostetter to describe what Oregon's Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) did to the existing local law, Article 28, following
an appeal in 1996. Hostetter was representing the largest landowner within the protected Goal 5 area, Ron Yanke (RY Timber) of Boise, Idaho, when he made the reference during last Tuesday's hearing.

   At the outset of the hearing Wallowa County deputy planning director Harold Black gave an outline of changes made from Article 28 to the proposed Article 44, the latter being in its eighth draft. He also addressed the changes in the Economic, Social, Environmental and Ecological (ESEE) analysis which has been updated from the Article 28 model.
   Primary in those changes are a reduction in exclusions and clearer definitions of key words and phrases.
   Ten people addressed the commission Nov. 27, with the hearing to be continued Dec. 18.

   Bruce Dunn of RY Timber and Hostetter presented the argument that Yanke has already given up many rights on the 1,550 acres of Goal 5 property he owns, all on the undeveloped east moraine.  Hostetter cautioned the commission that any attempt to make more restrictive zoning on property
owned between the highway and the lake would be considered as a "takings."
   Dunn said that Yanke now owns three miles of shoreline on Wallowa Lake and cannot, under current law, tie one dock to his property. "Of all the restrictions Ron Yanke has agreed to on this property we're not ready to make any more," said Dunn. He did suggest, however, the idea that Yanke might be willing to agree to further protection along the shoreline in return for being allowed to place a dock near the southeastern corner of the lake.

   Jean Pekarek testified that the reason the strip of land between the highway and the lake had never been placed in the highest level of protection (preservation) was because it had always been considered to be unbuildable. She said that new information now finds the land buildable. "Some day if ground is broken on that piece of land people will be outraged," said Pekarek.
   While talking of the desirability of having a dock along the shore, Hostetter said, "Practically speaking, it is probably true that there won't be a residence there."
   Another issue of prime importance to the county was that of a destination resort. The wording of both Article 44 and of its ESEE allows for such a development if a series of strict criteria are met.

   On page 7 of the 50 page ESEE draft it states, in regards to destination resorts: "If Wallowa County adopts Ordinance Article 20, Destination Resort and completes the necessary mapping, resorts and development of similar recreational activities could create a substantial conflict with the Scenic Resource. If the development adheres to the criteria of Article 44, especially with regard to the scenic Retention Level defined for resorts, and the requirements associated with especially sensitive big game habitat, then the development would not be in conflict. Any resort Development must also meet the applicable requirements of Article 20."

   Former Wallowa County Judge Arleigh Isley contended that the new proposal was "too restrictive, too long and lacks clarity."
   Lostine resident June Colony argued that Article 20 has not been adopted and should not be used as a reference point in either Article 44 or the ESEE. She physically ripped up Article 20 before the planning commission, then went on to use scissors and other means to take every reference to the proposed destination resort article from both documents being considered.
   Some individuals such as Liam O'Callahan and Millie Frasier, plus Colony as far as contended that Article 44 would be less restrictive than the existing Article 28, as far as "new language for cut and fill regarding roads and buildings.".

   One man who owns 244 acres of land in the protected Goal 5 area between Joseph and Wallowa Lake, Lowell Lewis, argued that the land should be protected by a purchase of the land similar to what the Nature Conservancy has done on the Zumwalt Prairie northeast of Enterprise. "I agree with saving the moraine," he said, "But it should be bought, not taken by zoning." (OMED: See Zumwalt Prarie item on Natural History page.)
   Among letters read into the record at the mid-point of the meeting was one from Wallowa resident Anne Oveson. She stated that while attending college in 1937 her geology instructor had referred to the Wallowa Lake moraines as the most perfect glacial moraines in the world. She went on to say that she was opposed to any new development on the land in question.

Copyright 2001 Wallowa  County Chieftain  Reprinted by permission 


 
      Around Oregon News Digest  |  Arts&Lettres  |  Business  |  Editorial  |  Events  |  Life&Styles 
      Natural History  |  Outdoor   |  SciTech  |   Sports  |  Travel  |  Peg's Bottom Gazette  |  Contact