JOHN DAY, Ore. - The small-town sheriff who made front-page headlines in Oregon this week also tops an investigative report by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The group says Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer is part of a growing movement of law-enforcement officers who swear to uphold the Constitution - but only as they interpret it.

Mark Potock, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the movement is anti-gun-control and recognizes the county as the highest legitimate form of government, and the sheriff as the ultimate authority within the county.

"If you believe the federal government has a secret plot to seize all Americans' weapons and that kind of thing," Potock said, "our view is that this can only lead to very serious conflicts within the law-enforcement community, and to making all the rest of us less safe."

At least a dozen Oregon counties have sheriffs with similar views, according to the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. That group describes sheriffs as "the first line of defense in preserving the Constitutional rights of a citizen."

Palmer gained prominence in the movement for backing the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Across the West, the Southern Poverty Law Center report said, these tensions have led to more conflicts between local law enforcement and federal agencies, such as the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service, and to sheriffs deputizing people even with no law-enforcement training.

When a sheriff decides to adopt a far-right stance, Potock said, the most effective counter may be public input.

"I think the most important thing we all can do is expose the beliefs of some of these radicalized sheriffs and hold them up to the light of public examination," he said. "Ultimately, the voters in each county can decide whether these people should continue to represent them."

All sides in the debate over sheriffs' roles agree that law enforcement has gotten tougher and more dangerous. However, Potock said it isn't helpful that rural officers are being "bombarded with propaganda from groups like the Oath Keepers and the Constitutional Sheriffs," trying to get them to sign up.



get more stories like this via email

The Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation has issued flood alerts following wildfires burning huge swaths of the state.

Floods are more likely after fires because there is less vegetation on the land to absorb water. At least 64 wildfires are burning in Montana right now and the state is closing in on a thousand for the year.

While wildfires can burn quickly and threaten structures and human lives, they create another danger even after the flames are out.

Traci Sears, national flood insurance program coordinator for the department, said the blazes leave behind acres of barren land unable to absorb rain water.

"Essentially, that soil actually becomes what they call 'hydrophobic,'" Sears explained. "It will repel water almost like concrete would. It can cause situations where you don't just have flooding but you could actually have mud flows as well."

The state is creating an interactive flood plain map to track where floods are likely to happen and to help residents plan for them when heavy rains come.

The severity of the flooding varies based on the terrain and type of vegetation destroyed by the fire but Sears pointed out it can take as long as seven years for some areas to regrow shrubs and other ground cover, and longer for trees. On the positive side, Sears noted the issue is drawing more attention because the state has been making residents more aware of the threat.

"There has definitely been more awareness, I would say, in the last six to seven years," Sears observed. "Montana has been really proactive in working not just with the flooding department but also looking and working with our fire department as well, to try and coordinate on some of this messaging."

The fires in Montana have scorched nearly 90,000 acres as dry and windy conditions persist throughout the western United States.

The federal government is looking to combat the climate crisis and protect public lands in Utah and around the country by empowering young adults.

Ken Goodson, director of the National Civilian Community Corps for AmeriCorps, said its newly launched partnership with the U.S. Forest Service will give people ages 18-26 hands-on experience in wildfire mitigation, reforestation, conservation and resource management.

"The origin story here is largely one based on successful history of AmeriCorps programs and working in the environmental, conservations space," Goodson pointed out. "Then just the increasing risk that we see through a greater frequency of fires and a greater intensity of fires, particularly here in the Mountain West."

Goodson pointed out the U.S. Forest Service launched its wildfire crisis and reforestation strategies over a year ago and approached AmeriCorps in an effort to grow its "people power" to implement both strategies, and invest in a future workforce.

Goodson said the Forest Corps is one of the first new programs launched as part of President Biden's American Climate Corps, an initiative aimed at training young people in high-demand skill areas for jobs in the clean energy sector.

"Under the Climate Corps initiative you have the opportunity to help get these disparate efforts largely rowing in the same direction," Goodson emphasized. "Thinking about greater, collective impact and then also individual programs being able to share their successes, their challenges."

More than 40,000 acres have burned in Utah so far this year, significantly more than last year's 18,000 acres.

With climate change having an effect, Goodson added it is another reason the Forest Corps program is so needed.

"The moment in time right now with fires becoming more frequent and more intense really causes me to feel like the Forest Corps is the right program for the right time and would certainly welcome any 18- to 26-year-olds who are interested to please check us out," Goodson concluded.


get more stories like this via email

Environmentalists are applauding a Bureau of Land Management decision to allow the sale of a small national public land parcel for an affordable housing development.

The sale of public lands is controversial, with Republicans and conservative groups seeing states as preferable stewards. Conversely, Democrats and conservation groups argued states cannot afford to protect public lands and would sell them to private companies.

Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, said there are public lands adjacent to metro areas in some Western states well-suited to development, which could help solve the nation's housing shortage.

"But that's the kind of stuff that happens five, 10, 20 acres at a time," Weiss explained. "Not the wholesale transfer of tens of thousands or even millions of acres to states and private parties."

For the first time ever, the BLM this week approved the sale of 20 acres of national public land near Las Vegas to the Clark County Department of Social Services for an affordable housing development. Weiss pointed out the federal "memorandum of understanding" is specific to the Nevada parcel but he believes there are others near Phoenix or Tucson that would make sense for consideration.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Gov. Joe Lombardo, R-Nev., are the most recent politicians citing the housing shortage as a need to sell off public lands to developers. In a letter to President Joe Biden, Lombardo urged approval for the transfer of 50,000 acres of public land around Las Vegas with few restrictions, which Weiss believes would create urban chaos. He contends mixing in housing is a new approach to how conservatives now talk about public lands.

"Much of the Republican Party finally recognized that calling for wholesale transfer was a political third rail in the West," Weiss observed. "No matter how conservative the state, voters everywhere across the political spectrum do not want to dispose of national public lands on that scale."

Weiss added any sale of public lands for housing should require it be affordable and not end up providing "McMansions" or "trophy homes" for billionaires.


get more stories like this via email