1. I like this new feature already - good idea!

2. Thanks to Stacey for offering this perspective.

How is this possibly an appropriate "notable comment" on the issue?

The mention of SB30 in the Willy Week article was one 50 word paragraph in a 500 word story containing numerous facts about the completely separate issue of a questionable land deal and subsequent legislative activity that raised the value of that land.

The point is, and remains, that if Johnson wants to be making private business deals that depend on and benefit from special legislative action, she needs to get out of the legislature.

Dycus' comment, offered as an ad hominem response to distract from the substance of WW article, demonstrates exactly what is wrong with some of our legislatures and their staff members.

And it raises further legitimate questions about Westlund's integrity if he stands behind them.

Yeah, I think we can all agree this doesn't have anything to do with the merits of SB30, but the undisclosed land sale followed by SB680 to increase the value of that land should be called out for what anyone can see it is: corruption. If our Democratic leaders think people won't see it as corrupt if they put on big smiles and say they support Betsy, they're wrong, they're just making themselves look bad. Johnson should apologize -- not for a mistake, but for intentional wrongdoing -- and Kulongoski should not be on television saying how he supports an unrepentant Johnson "100 percent."

After watching the video of her in 2002 I bet I know exactly who it was. Port of St. Helens and Columbia County Commissioners.

She tore them a new one for not selling property to Ed Freeman.

As My Dad Said as he was Running For Baker County Commission Bill Sullivan Poor But Honest. If Elected I will do my Best to Change them Both. He Lost And His whole life he Hated politicians

3000 homes and two golf courses within four miles of the Metolius headwaters

Great! Oregon needs more of these and the Metolius, "4 miles away", won't be harmed at all. Proving once again that the anti-progress naysaying enviros made up their opposition fear mongering predictions of destruction.

What a shock, somebody is playing politics to try to stop a piece of legislation that would prevent them from making a lot of money.

When a legislator uses their position for personal gain...the lobbyists keep these little nuggets in their back pocket until it will benefit them most. Here's a novel idea, wealthy legislators should not use their position to make more money.

Others (especially from our party) should not be out there publicly trying to defend Betsy Johnson, either. They should instead be pointing out that SB 30 is a completely separate issue that can stand on its own merits, and state publicly that Betsy Johnson is the only one who can defend her decision to risk damaging her value as a public representative for $119,000, when she is already a wealthy woman.

Why would anyone want to stand up to defend somebody for misrepresenting their constituents for personal gain? If what she did truly is indefensible, then that should be her problem alone. If there is some defense, then only she can present it - so please stop trying to make her actions somehow seem more OK.

Perhaps if we paid our legislators better we could encourage more hard working folks with a mortgage to pay, to run for these public offices. Then we wouldn't have to worry about the wealthy being the only ones who could possibly run for these jobs. It seems to me that the hardworking Democrats in this state are very honest and good, and we deserve representation that reflects more on us than on the Betsy Johnson's of our party.

This morning (Monday) the Bend Bulletin has yet another editorial slamming Johnson over SB 30, this time claiming there was something "shadowy" about her taking Sen. Vicki Walker on a flight over the Metolius in Johnson's private plane -- even though The Bulletin's own news story about the flight, which ran Friday, clearly stated it didn't violate any ethics rules.

The Bulletin editorial board is desperately trying to make it seem there's something sleazy about Johnson's support of SB 30 because it knows damn well if it debated the bill on its merits it would lose.

The Bullshiten is not our friend.

Because it is, and has been for fifty years, my "backyard", I took rare interest in this aspect of the story, and nowhere other than the aforementioned corporate spokespaper for out of state developers did I find Mrs. Johnson's intent to be nefarious. As ever this is The Bullshiten manufacturing controversy where none exists - the concensus around here is don't build the damn things. The Bullshiten is not our friend.

Sadie-- You are correct--these are two different issues. I think SB 30 should pass because it is a good piece of legislation. I think the Bulletin is wrong and they are afraid to debate the merits of the issue.

But, the land sale--that is Sen Johnson's deal and her's alone--she needs to defend her actions, not dirty good legislation in the prcess. Actions speak louder than words.

Yes, Westlund's camp is wearing the true white hats here. Yes, Betsy Johnson's alleged ethics violations and SB 30 are two separate issues. Where Johnson really seems to gotten herself in hot water is with the land near the airport, not the land near the headwaters of the Metolius, or with the plane ride she gave to Senator Vicki Walker over the Metolius.

Regarding the plane ride, the Bulletin printed another "idiotorial" as a friend of mine calls them chastising Johnson this morning. Since they've been forced to admit that the plane ride did not constitute an ethics violation, they are now trying to claim that Johnson is acting imprpoerly in regards to her legal case before Jefferson County. The paper's editors write:

"But it's shadowy for Johnson to use her position and a plane ride to advance the goal of her legal case."

I hope I'm not the only one who has noticed how ludicrous this argument is. Walker is a State Senator. The appeal will be heard by the Land Use Board of Appeals. There is no connection. So how does this plane ride advance her legal case???

This is really, really reaching, even for the Bulletin. It just goes to show that as this bill gets closer and closer to passing that the paper is willing to throw logic, common sense, and decency out the window. This should come as no surprise given that papers' track record but it's dissapointing nonetheless.

We must try to keep Scapoose and the Metolius seperate, because they are just that.

I agree that Scapoose gives the appearance on the surface of being a conflict of interest. Let Betsy's constituents worry about it.

Now, let's go back Southeast 125 miles to the heart of this discussion: the Metolius Basin. Keep in mind that parties with self-interest in mind are stirring the pot. Why would anybody else object? Any reasonable person with any sense of right or wrong can clearly see that 2500 homes and two golf courses would compromise this area so severly that we might as well be annexed by California. Developers have their way there.

Last week I drove through this area proposed for development---just to make sure I didn't sound like a knee-jerk liberal, which I am not. Having done that, I am even more concerned for the future of this wilderness area than ever before.

Try to conjure the image of Tom McCall---raised in Prineville---oblivious to party lines---who practiced what he preached. Where are our champions and our press when we need them?

Bill Failing Native Oregonian who likes outsiders

Bill,

Don't you mean the Tom McCall who, as Governor, had a secret corporate financed slush fund? Or do you mean the Tom McCall, who when he was running for Governor for the third time in 1978, lived off of loans provided by special interest groups? Or could you be refering to the Tom McCall who cut secret deals with several Oregon moneymen, who in turn were essential to elect him Governor and also helped him financially with his son's legal and drug problems?

McCall was not a progressive, certainly was not a populist, but was an opportunist.

Note: All of the information cited is contained in Fire at Eden's Gate by Walth.

"Bill" says: "3000 homes and two golf courses within four miles of the Metolius headwaters. Great! Oregon needs more of these and the Metolius, "4 miles away", won't be harmed at all."

We need more golf courses? Are you serious? Here in Central Oregon you can't throw a rock in any direction without having it land on one.

And how the hell do you know those resort developments won't hurt the Metolius? Are you a geologist or hydrologist? Have you made a detailed study of the Metolius watershed and its groundwater system?

The water for those golf courses -- and the 3,000 homes -- will have to be pumped out of the aquifer that serves the Metolius. The Metolius is a spring-fed river. More water out of the aquifer means less water for the river. This is pretty elementary stuff.

The USGS (and ODFW) has already established (and testified to the fact) that a well at the Colson site for a development of that magnitude will impact local springs - which would reduce their flow or potentially even dry them up. It would affect not only the headwaters and springs of the Metolius but also many of the springs that feed the Whychus to the south - where steelhead were returned a few weeks ago for the first time in several decades.

This resort would run counter to millions of dollars being invested in the restoration of these watersheds, and also impact Fly Creek, which is home to a unique population of Redband Trout and which flows into the lower Metolius.

Although there is a mitigation program in place for the Upper Deschutes watershed that will force a resort on that (or any) site to put water back in the Deschutes to maintain stream flows there, that program is wholly inadaquate for protecting streams and tributaries.

Bottom line - this resort will impact the river.

"Bottom line - this resort will impact the river."

No it will not. You are wrong and misguided.

The development is 4 miles away. I have considerable experience with wells, aquifers and the state agency experts who monitor both. For any of you to say this is "pretty elementary stuff" that the Metolius springs will be effected is just plain poppycock. You simply don't know what you are talking about. Heck, I've had our state people tell that wells 1 mile away are not being effected by a particular problem. Here this development will be four miles away. Sorry you're all nuts or exagerating as a means to stop this development like many others.

Bill D., Stacey's original comment on the first Betsy Johnson post included a link to Westlund's website where uploaded documents from the U.S. Geological Survey's hydrologist and OR Water Resources Department both attest to the potential damage. Are you saying that your "considerable experience with wells" makes you more of an expert than them?

Bill D: (rant coming...) So you're telling me that USGS employees got up before the Oregon legislature to represent the US Dept. of the Interior and deliberately misinformed them? Either that or you're saying that the leading experts on this issue don't know what they're talking about, yet are pretending they do. Those are pretty strong statements, Bill D. Care to back them up?

I'm not the expert here, and I don't consider myself one despite that fact that I have an advanced degree in physical geography and years of classes on groundwater hydrology and the physics and math that describe how groundwater hydrology works. I know just enough to be dangerous, but I know that I'm no expert. I wouldn't be writing what I've been writing were it not sufficiently backed up by expert opinion, of which you've provided none.

Here's a quote from the USGS: "In the Metolius River Basin, ground-water pumping most likely will result in diminished discharge at principal spring complexes that occur at the head of the Metolius, along the main stem, along many of the tributaries, and near the confluence of the Metolius and Deschutes Rivers."

The confluence of the Metolius and Deschutes??? Hmmm, that's a bit over four miles! They said it, not me.

This letter was written regarding the two proposed resorts, and substantial testimony to this effect was provided before the Senate Committee on Education and General Government in April. The letter also describes what's commonly referred to as a "cone of depression" that occurs around a well. The larger the well, the larger the cone. A small well will have a small cone. But the well as the Colson site would a mother of a well, or numerous smaller wells. Either way, we're talking major impact to the groundwater hydrology.

You can hate the cause all you want, Bill D. but don't hate the science - it's not a flattering look for you.

"I have considerable experience with wells, aquifers and the state agency experts who monitor both."

That's pretty vague. I've known a couple of physics professors but that doesn't make me a physicist.

State your actual credentials. Are you a geologist or hydrologist? Have you studied the Metolius Basin? Are you better qualified than the USGS experts who say the destination resorts will have an impact on the springs that feed the river? Can you refute their findings with your own research?

Time to put up or shut up.

Hey guys, all they are saying is if water is taken out of the ground there will be less left in the ground and "most likely will result in diminished discharge".

The exact same experts have testified that well use at government facilities most likely do not diminish the private wells on adjacent properties.

So you see how this works? These same people can make things out to be nothing or as one of you embellished, " major impact to the groundwater hydrology". Depending on their agenda and desired outcome.

And yes I am telling you that USGS employees got up before the Oregon legislature to represent the US Dept. of the Interior and deliberately misinformed them. Oh the shock. That happens all the time within the environmental arena and especially with Oregon government agencies. It's happened recently with governmental testimony on M37 and impact to farmland.

It is my contention that these resorts represent no threat to the Metolius Basin at all. That the water issue is the spotted owl to stop the resorts. That these resorts would be and can be fully compatible with the Metolius. Even complimentary despite the obvious disdain many of you have for places such as Sun River Resort. Ironically the very place Oregon Democrats chose to meet.

I suggest to put away your prejudice for these wonderful resorts and plan a future party meeting at one of the new Metolius resorts. And briing your family. That's what they are for.

Bill D. You still have yet to provide any credible evidence for your position or any credentials. All you have provided is doubt as to what others - true experts - have said. All I see from you is a bunch of handwaving. I'm going to disregard pretty much whatever you write about this until that changes, and I suspect others will as well.

You're free to express your doubt, but don't try to masquerade it as fact. When I say that the river will be impacted, it's becuase it will, and it's quite likely that impact will be severe. If you can't at least engage in the possiblity that this might be the case, then I have to assume you've lost the ability to think about this objectively.

I'd suggest you put away your prejudice, Bill D., about these resorts which despite having some benefits can have tremendous impacts as well. This is a more complex issue than you give it credit for.

I think I got the quote the first time I read it.

Apparently you did not.

"In the Metolius River Basin, ground-water pumping most likely will result in diminished discharge"

I completely agree. Most likely, ground water pumping anywhere results in diminished discharge of some kind in some way. But it is also most likely the diminished discharge will not be significant or noticeable. In this case of the Metolius it is likely NOT to be noticeable. NOT at principal spring complexes that occur at the head of the Metolius, NOT along the main stem, NOT along any of the tributaries, and NOT near the confluence of the Metolius and Deschutes Rivers.

It isn't enough to simply say that there will likely be a diminished discharge then assume the "diminishing" is certain and that it will be significant. The most likely outcome is if any diminishing does occur it will be immeasurable, insignificant and go unnoticed as everyone currently enjoying the basin continues doing so for decades after the resorts are in place. All of you have completely ignored this most plausible potential. That's what happens when you have an agenda clouding your judgment. Just as you do with the snipe that the D is for developer.

I on the other hand have no agenda at all. The golf courses at these resorts, like many other recent courses, can be irrigated with earth friendly use of retention ponds and recycled water. Yet some of you assume every sprinkler would be pumping the life out of the Metolius. Impressive systems are all over the state. They do not suck the life out of local water resources.

Please try and gain the whole perspective on these issues? There are many integral components that diminish the potential for detriment while escalating the benefits.

With these new resorts the Metolius Basin can and will remain pristine, preserved as well as prime for it's owners and users with high caliber food, lodging and sport readily available for the choosing.

It's about variety and choice. I happen to like finer facilities along side natures best. So do many Oregonians and tourists from afar.

Your efforts should be directed at making the mix the finest in the country instead of blocking the choices available.

Frankly, I can't see why the USGS didn't go ahead and say the down system Columbia River would be diminished as well. Is it not just as likely if the Metolius and Deschutes are likely to be diminished? You see how far this can be taken from reality and proportionality?

If you are going to pull a quote from the USGS why not find one that says something more severe than "ground-water pumping most likely will result in diminished discharge"? I read that as a pretty light concern.

",, likely will result"?

The point here, and in the UGGS testimony you cite, is that diminished discharge isn't even certain let alone anticipated to be severe.

Yet some of you have concluded that it is certain and will be severe. Why? Because you want to block the development if that's what it takes?

There are many other approaches to this. Phased development and monitoring of the impacts will allow any eventual adverse effects to be mitigated. If it can be shown that a moratorium must follow then so be it. Hopefully such a moratorium would be based on far more than you are offering to kill this now.

Suppose the resorts result in the various cabins in the area disconnecting their sewer and cesspool systems and connecting to a new system similar to the one that saved the Umaqua River? That recent system works because it has part of it's design, a new Myrtle Creek golf course and irrigation system using the treated water.

Is there no concern for the antiquated septic systems in the Basin?

Has Ben Westlund considered anything but the politically correct headlines he clings to?

Bill D: "And yes I am telling you that USGS employees got up before the Oregon legislature to represent the US Dept. of the Interior and deliberately misinformed them. Oh the shock. That happens all the time within the environmental arena and especially with Oregon government agencies."

Yes, it's all a big, evil conspiracy by the commie-libs and the enviro-wackos, right, Bill?

Typical right-wing nut job.

Bill D: "It is my contention that these resorts represent no threat to the Metolius Basin at all."

Your (unsupported by any evidence) contention and $1.25 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, Bill.

Give it up. When you start spouting conspiracy theories it's obvious you've shot your wad, credibility-wise.

The map posted at www.oregongolf.com/cent/ shows 24 golf courses in Central Oregon and more will be coming on line as the Pronghorn and Thornburgh developments are completed. We need a couple more near the Metolius like we need a couple more hemorrhoids.

1. I like this new feature already - good idea!
2. Thanks to Stacey for offering this perspective.

Pat Ryan, "Do not site it right next to,,"" Why not "next to"? That's how it gets preserved and enjoyed by more people.
That's how it will remain unspoiled. The fact that you don't own real estate anywhere in Central Oregon is probably part of your opposition. Jealously. I grew up in Oregon, frequent much of it and you folks are condemning some of the nicest improvement in the state. Why don't you all quit playing games. Having some development NEAR some natural attractions does not do a thing to it. This just demonstrates wilderness protections are never enough. You want to block development adjacnet to many areas as well.
You declare (unsupported by any evidence) there are enough golf courses in central Oregon? According to what? Your own conspiracy theory?

I'm not a right wing nut job and I didn't suggest any big, evil conspiracy by the commie-libs and the enviro-wackos. That's one of your excape hatches when cornered.

I did however mention the UGGS quote didn't say severe diminishing of discharges were imminent. All they said was well pumping would most likely diminish discharges. Carefully chosen words. But allows demogoguery and implied severity when the diminishing could be at an essentailly meaningless level.
I did mention succesful sewer systems irrigating golf courses. And what do I get back in reply? There's enoug golf courses and "The whole area east of Crooked River, north of LaPine, and west of Black Butte Ranch is a damned mess now"

Huh? a mess? I am abundantly familiar with the whole area and I say BS.

dar, I don't need seperate evidence when the opposition can't even establish that there will be harm to the Metolius. And I never spouted conspiracy theories. The credibility problem exist with you folks who spout imminent demise of the Metolius Basin if these development are placed next to it. The Basin won't be harmed and it's possible any ground water depletion won't be at a level that will even be noticeable.

Did SunRiver destroy the Deschutes? Did Black Butte destroy the area environment? Please direct me to one of these horrible resorts where the environment was trashed.
You folks are conspirators in a sense. You band together to dream up ways to stop the Pellican Butte ski resort in Klamath County, stop the Smith Rock resort, stop the new Mt.Hood Meadows resort, the resorts next to the Metolius Basin and others around the state resort.
None of which would have resulted in what YOU predict. None.

we might as well be annexed by California. Developers have their way there.

You mean like Portland?

Bill D:

Just checked back into this post, and you seem to have killed the debate. I wouldn't be too proud, though - I don't think your dazzling intellect is what did the trick.

"I don't think your dazzling intellect is what did the trick."

I don't either. It's reality many of you have trouble with.

Bill D, you might ask the farmers around Cloverdale what has happened to their water table since the beautiful new golf course went in. The drop is not "essentially meaningless" for them. It does make successful farming harder, and thus increases the pressure on them to sell their property for housing and resort developments.

Why would I ask them that? Let me guess. They opposed the golf course? Is there any evidence the golf course has hindered their ability to farm or is this just another hypothetical theory?

And what does this have to do with the Metolius Basin? Nothing. Of course regardless of the real effects once those developments go in they will be blamed for any and every fluctuations in any area water. If for nothing more than to pretend the prior hysteria was not BS.

I'll wager that the Cloverdale golf course has not made a single dent in the ability to farm in the area.