HinesSight

Why Measure 49 is needed to protect Oregon groundwater

Lots of Oregonians take the water that comes out of their faucets for granted. But if you rely on a well, you don't.

Measure 37 opened up farm and forest land for development that lacks enough water for subdivisions. Fortunately, Measure 49 is riding to the rescue of people like us and our neighbors whose rural water supply is threatened by Measure 37 claims in groundwater limited areas.

Maybe you think that Oregon already has protections against subdivisions causing surrounding wells and springs to go dry. If so, think again.

My wife and I know whereof we speak. As do more than thirty other property owners in our area who have formed a Keep Our Water Safe committee to, well, keep our water safe.

Last night our email inbox contained the final order from Marion County approving a 42 lot, 125 acre subdivision on groundwater limited farmland in the south Salem hills. Two of the three county commissioners signed it: Sam Brentano and Patti Milne.

Failing to heed loads of evidence that there isn't proof of enough water to supply 42 more wells without existing water users being harmed, Brentano and Milne voted to approve the subdivision (Commissioner Carlson correctly voted "No").

So it was appropriate that these two signed the final order. We've been curious to learn what sort of twisted logic could be used to support the crazy decision to allow the development to proceed after experts hired by Marion County, as required by its groundwater ordinance, gave a Hydro Review prepared by the applicant a big thumbs down.

I called that another Measure 37 outrage, because it completely ignored the property rights of the many people already living in an area in favor of the Measure 37 rights of a few would-be subdivision builders. (See the "Protect Oregon Property Rights" blog).

Like, the right to not have our wells go dry.

For those land use junkies who'd enjoy pouring over the 26-page Marion County final order, here it is in its 2 MB pdf file glory: Download boc_decision.pdf

For the broadband limited, I fashioned two pages relating to the Hydro Review prepared by the Measure 37 applicant (Leroy Laack) into picture files. They're readable, if you've got good eyes.

But be warned. You might feel like tearing your hair out if you value common sense (and careful editing – there are obvious wording and spelling errors, which reflects how little thought went into this turkey of a final order).

I'll summarize what's going on here for the benefit of those concerned about Oregon groundwater who want an explanation of why Measure 49 deserves a "Yes" vote.

Politicians can't be counted on to enforce their own groundwater protection ordinances, because many are so pro-Measure 37 they refuse to recognize clear evidence of insufficient water for a large subdivision.

So Measure 49 is needed. It will limit developments on groundwater limited farmland, like this one, to three home sites. That still may be three too many in our area, given how many wells already have had to be deepened or replaced, but it's a heck of a lot better than 42.

Groundwater is real, not political. It's either there, or it isn't. Hydrogeologists have ways of learning whether there is enough water for a subdivision. The Measure 37 applicant's consultant, Malia Kupillas, prepared a Hydro Review report that tried to show this.

She failed. The scientific process called for in Marion County's groundwater ordinance is to submit a Hydro Review to an independent expert for an unbiased assessment – the same thing that's done in reputable science journals before a paper is published.

The expert concluded that there isn't sufficient information available to prove that the subdivision won't harm surrounding wells and springs. Thus the Measure 37 applicant's report was failed.

Under the groundwater ordinance this should have triggered a much more extensive Hydro Study. But the two county commissioners ignored this law and cherry-picked conclusions provided by Leroy Laack's own hired gun.

And their final order conveniently fails to mention a central, key, all-important fact: the Hydro Review that was submitted to the independent expert failed.

Sam Brentano and Patti Milne either don't understand their own county ordinances, or they're choosing to ignore them. Either way, this is reason to vote them out of office when they're up for re-election.

And to vote for Measure 49 in November. Because politics can't be allowed to trump common sense.

Which is: your property rights stop when they make my well go dry.

I just found out I’m 10 years younger!

I took ten years off of my age today. To be precise, 10.3 years. So says RealAge, which offers a nifty calculation of the difference between your calendar age and your "real" age.

Like a lot of baby boomers, I've never felt that I really was 58 years old. Physically, I'm just about in as good a shape as I've ever been. Mentally, I'm still an adolescent in many ways. But, hey, that's par for the course if you're a man.

I decided to look for a real age online test after I came across a story on CNN called "What men should eat every day." Of the eleven recommendations, I nailed every one – aside from #7, eating fish three times a week.

Nope. As a longtime vegetarian, I won't buy my health at the expense of another animal's death. So I get my omega-3s from vegetable sources, not fish.

But with a score of 10 out of 11 under my belt I was curious to learn whether my exemplary diet, combined with other lifestyle and health indicators, meant that I was considerably younger than 58.

Google brought me to the RealAge site, where I spent 20-30 minutes answering a bunch of questions as honestly as I could.

(The web site had a few glitches; if these happen to you, just go back to the previous page and continue from there; I got hung up at the very end until I took the final step of forwarding the survey to my wife via email, which seemed to make the RealAge web server happy).

After a hour or two my real age – 48.7! – and recommendations for making it even lower were sent to me in an email message, and also made available on the web site (before taking the test you sign up for a personal account; you can decline all the offers to send health-related information, which I did).

My wife and I are health junkies, so I'm a discriminating judge of advice in this area. I found "My RealAge Plan" to be pretty darn good, though it did seem to miss the mark a few times.

I was told that I'm consuming less than the average amount of unsaturated fats. Maybe, but my daily salad dressing is olive oil and vinegar, and I rarely use any sort of saturated fat. I also was advised to consider buying a mid- to large-size motor vehicle next time I purchase a car, because my compact (Prius) supposedly is more dangerous than a larger vehicle. Questionable, given SUV rollover statistics.

However, I agreed with most everything else I was told. Such as:

--increase my lycopene intake by eating more tomato-based dishes or tomato sauce
--increase my vegetable intake (though a vegetarian, I don't always eat at least five servings of vegetables a day)
--increase my whole grain intake (I should be eating 6 to 11 servings a day; man, that's a lot)
--do more strength-building exercises (I lift weights three times a week for a total of about 45 minutes, but twice that is the goal)

The RealAge web site lets you update answers to your test questions and then see how this affects your real age. That's handy, considering the test takes quite a while to complete.

Psychologically, I like the idea of getting an estimate of how old you are health-wise, right now. I've taken a couple of "how long will you live?" tests. One told me 92. The other, 96.5 (though I called that post, "Don't believe those longevity calculators").

I enjoyed learning that I've got a good chance of making it to my 90s. But finding out that today, at this very moment, I'm actually 48 rather than 58 – this was way better news.

For one thing, I can start telling friends and family to start shopping for insulting Over the hill at 50 birthday cards, because that's what I'll be expecting to get when I hit my next decadal celebration.

Measure 49 lawsuit arguments demolished by Oregon AG

Whew! I feel a lot better now about the chance of the Oregonians in Action lawsuit against Measure 49 being rejected by federal Judge Hogan.

I just did a quick read-through of the Oregon Attorney General's response to the lawsuit (thanks to Peter Bray of Land Use Watch, who made it available on his blog).

You can read the 31 PDF'd pages yourself. Download oia_lawsuit_response.pdf

Some points that leapt out at me:

--(page 5) Yes, it would cause voter confusion if Measure 49, which fixes many of the flaws in Measure 37, were to go on the ballot without a title or description. But that's what Oregonians in Action wants. Confusion.

--(pages 9-10) The Oregon legislature routinely writes the descriptive language for measures it refers to voters. Nothing different is going on here, contrary to claims made in the OIA lawsuit.

--(page 12) The Attorney General never said that the ballot language for Measure 49 was an "advocacy piece." Rather, the AG was commenting generally that such language shouldn't advocate for a "yes" or "no" vote. Here again, OIA twisted the facts.

Prediction: Judge Hogan will rule against OIA, decisively. The final lines of the AG's argument will come true.

The present motion for preliminary injunction lacks merit. It is late without explanation, it presents no colorable claim on the alleged constitutional violations, and it threatens to cause far greater harm than it could ever forestall. The motion should be denied.

Nature Conservancy Measure 49 support deserves a “Winner”

Bad choice. The Salem newspaper is leaning toward giving a "Tossup" to The Nature Conservancy for contributing more than $350,000 to the Yes on Measure 49 campaign.

Measure 49 is a much-needed fix for Measure 37, which trashed Oregon's land use system and gave special rights to a few privileged property owners.

The Statesman Journal editorial board is asking for comments on their planned Winners and Losers piece that will run tomorrow (Monday). This is what I told them:

Come on. The Nature Conservancy should get a big thumbs-up, not a tossup, for contributing $350,000 to the Yes on 49 campaign. Gee, the Nature Conservancy is trying to conserve Oregon nature. How can they get an equivocation from the Statesman-Journal for that? Passing Measure 49 is absolutely essential if Oregon farmland, forestland, and groundwater limited areas are to be protected from unnecessary greedy development. I urge you to change your Tossup to a Winner.

There's probably still time to send in more feedback about the Statesman Journal draft opinion about The Nature Conservancy. You can write to the newspaper editorial board here or here.

The Nature Conservancy has explained why they're supporting Measure 49, even though they usually don't weigh in on ballot measures. These are good reasons for every Oregon voter to do the same.

Alder Springs – hike to a Central Oregon oasis

First bit of Oregon hiking advice: buy the 2007 edition of William Sullivan's "100 Hikes in the Central Oregon Cascades." We had the first edition. The $16.95 I forked over last Sunday for the third edition at the Paulina Springs Book Company was money well spent.

Because it has a dozen new hikes and other fresh features. Which gets me to my second bit of advice: turn to page 82 and follow the directions to the start of the Alder Springs trail.

If you don't yet have the book, here's Sullivan's instructions.

To find the trailhead from downtown Sisters, take Highway 20 east to the far edge of town and fork left towards Redmond on Highway 126 for 4.6 miles. Then turn left on Goodrich Road for 8.1 paved miles. Along the way the road zigzags and changes name, but keep going. When you reach a marker for milestone 7, turn left on gravel road 6360 and pass through a green gate. Follow this one-lane track 4.1 miles, turn right at an "Alder Springs" pointer, and take a rough gravel road 0.8 mile to a parking turnaround at road's end.

Here's the view from the parking area. That's our dog, Serena, not a skulking coyote.

The beginning of the 3.6 mile round trip to Alder Springs (it's 6.2 miles to the Deschutes and back, which we journeyed) tells you you're in the high desert.

Before too long there's a glimpse of Whychus Creek. Used to be called Squaw Creek until political correctness got the name changed in 2005.

Descending toward the creek I thought I could see an Indian on the skyline. Or maybe it was a flashback from all the Westerns I watched in my boyhood.

Alder Springs truly is an oasis. Temperature was just in the high 70s the day we hiked the trail. If it was 90, you'd really consider it an oasis.

Our dog surely did. Here she is in Whychus Creek.

There's a board that tells about the springs, which bubble up 40 miles from snowmelt.

I loved the contrast between the rocky desert look and the green oasis'y look.

If you wade across the shallow water, you can continue on downcreek 1.6 miles until it runs into the Deschutes River. This is on the way, looking back toward Alder Springs.

The trail is lush in places, even in late August.

More rock/green contrasts.

The end of the trail is a great Deschutes watching/resting spot.

A dog/human photo op.

Water was a bit too cold to jump in completely. But I baptized myself, wearing my newly purchased (in Sisters) "Desert Mystic" t-shirt, appropriately enough.

I caught a tender moment between Laurel and Serena.

And a posed photo. Where, Praise Dog!, Serena's ears are actually (and rarely) standing up. She looks like more than the 50% German Shepherd that she is.

I carted along my GPS receiver. Total trip: 6.16 miles. Moving time: 2 hrs 32 min. Moving average: 2.4 mph. Stopped time: 1 hr 00 min. Total ascent: 1112 feet (felt like more, when we were in the sun). Maximum elevation: 2615 feet.

We stopped a lot for various reasons.

A sign-in sheet at the trailhead had frequent mentions of "saw rattlesnake," "saw big rattlesnake," and such. Whenever Serena seemed overly interested in a pile of rocks quite a ways from the trail we paused and whistled for her. Wasn't interested in carrying a 70 pound dog with a snakebite back to the car.

I also stopped to take lots of photos. But one of the biggest contributions to our stopped time (aside from the Deschutes River resting) was Laurel's frequent scanning of mountainsides for cougars. She's absolutely determined to see one, though it's unlikely that we ever will.

And I'm not even sure that this was cougar country. Regardless, it was beautiful Central Oregon country.

The road to the trail head is passable with any sort of car. It's bumpy, but not at all outrageous. So try the Alder Creek hike if you're in the area. You'll like it.

“Senior sex” includes 58 year olds?

Driving home from central Oregon today I tuned to OPB just in time to hear the results of a survey that cast new light on the sex life of seniors.

I turned up the car radio, not because my youthful 58 year old ears have any difficulty hearing. Rather, I was interested in learning about the carnal proclivities of an age group that, Tao willing, I would enter one day.

Old people, I thought, twisting the volume knob. Got to keep up on what's going on with them so I'll know what to expect when I become one.

Then I heard the first words of the report, which went something like: "This study of 3,000 seniors aged 57-85…"

What the hell??!! instantly became a new thought. What kind of crazy ass research was this? How could they include middle-aged 58 year olds in a study of senior sex?

Ridiculous. I assume the lead author, Dr. Stacy Tessler Lindau, an assistant professor of obstetrics, gynecology and geriatrics at the University of Chicago, will be called before some sort of investigational inquisition to explain herself.

This is obviously some sort of age discrimination. I'll leave it to the class action lawyers to figure out the legal basis for the settlement that I'm clearly entitled to, since my psyche has been sorely wounded.

On the plus side, it turned out that sexually active Americans aged 57-85 have sex as often as those aged 18-59. (Legal note to self: mention the 57-59 age overlap in this report of findings when class action lawyer contacts you; could be significant).

I find this a bit hard to believe, though supposedly if one has a partner, the frequency of sex doesn't change much between age groups.

I wanted to see what posters to the Web MD message board related to this study said about the question, "Has aging affected your sex life?"

Unfortunately, when I looked all seven of the posts were from Marilyn. All exactly the same. She said, "Sorry, my computer got stuck." Sounds just like a senior. Well, actually it also sounds just like my youthful computer-challenged wife, who also is 58 years old. So scratch that Sounds just like.

Since Marilyn went to the trouble of hitting the "Post" button six extra times, here's her message. Glad to hear things are going so well with your "intimate relationship," Marilyn.

Just because there is snow on the mountain doesn't mean there is no fire in the furnace. We just stoke that fire in different ways. He takes me away for a weekend and buys me flowers. We've been together for 47 years and believe in the saying "grow old with me, the best is yet to come". We are trying to stay healthy and active, and that carries over into our intimate relationship. Marilyn

Oregonians in Action Measure 49 lawsuit: read it here

Just got this. It's way too late for me to read 60 pages of Oregonians in Action B.S. about why the Measure 49 ballot language is bad, bad, bad (not to mention unconstitutional).

But maybe there are some insomniac land use lawyers surfing the net right now.

So here you are: a Memorandum of Law in Support of Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Download oia_lawsuit.pdf

Yawn.

Read my Measure 49 voter’s pamphlet argument

It's going to cost my wife and me $500 to put a "Vote YES" argument in the Measure 49 section of the Oregon voter's pamphlet. So please read the 323 words that I crafted this afternoon (see continuation to this post).

Every additional person who peruses this electoral work of literary art makes me feel better about the check I'll soon be writing to the Elections Division.

If you want to follow in my politically active footsteps, click on this page and find the link to SEL 405, the cryptically numbered PDF form for filing a measure argument for the November 2007 special election.

(For some reason the form still refers to "2006 Voter's Pamphlet Filing Fees and Deadlines, but I was told by the Elections Division to use it anyway).

We've never paid for a voter's pamphlet argument before. But then we've never cared so much about a ballot measure before.

Our neighborhood's wells and commonly owned lake are threatened by a Measure 37 subdivision. That's made a whole lot of people around here into land use activists and Measure 49 supporters – even many who voted for Measure 37 and have come to see what a mistake that was.

It's nice to see that a poll of Oregon voters by Riley Research found that 58% said they were likely to vote "Yes" on Measure 49, while just 12% opposed it.

Hopefully this will put a sock in the mouth of Oregonians in Action and other die-hard Measure 37 supporters who keep blathering about how voters shouldn't be asked to express their opinion on Measure 37 again.

It sure looks like their opinion has changed, now that Oregonians have learned that large subdivisions on farm, forest, and groundwater limited land are the true face of Measure 37, not sweet old Dorothy English.

Here's our argument in favor of Measure 49. It might change some before I submit it along with our check. The truth of which we speak is unalterable though: Our groundwater is threatened by the proposed 42-lot Measure 37 subdivision. And Measure 49 is our best hope for keeping our wells and lake from drying up.

Tai Chi as a kick-ass martial art

Like I said in "10 reasons for guys to like Tai Chi," this flow-with-it martial art doesn't have much of a macho reputation.

Yet, it should.

And does, among those who are skilled enough to look beneath the surface of the frequently femininely named Tai Chi postures, like "soft ladies hands" and "fair lady works the shuttle."

The Yang style of Tai Chi (named for the family that founded it, not the yin and yang of Taoism) was taught to the Palace Battalion of the Chinese Imperial Guards by Yang Lu-ch'an, founder of the style.

Pretty clearly, the Chinese Imperial family wouldn't entrust their lives to a wussy self-defense system.

But my understanding is that when Tai Chi was taught to the royal court themselves, and thence made its way into the general culture, it got de-martial'ized. The emphasis shifted to soft flowing movements without obvious combat application.

Still, Tai Chi is a martial art, as this guy discovered during a walk in the park. And as I've learned after taking up Tai Chi three years ago after thirteen years of hard style martial arts experience.

It's more difficult to apply than a hard style like karate. Tai chi is classed as an internal, rather than external, martial art. The distinction isn't absolute, of course, since every martial art is a blend of external moves and internal intentions.

Tai Chi, though, stresses emptiness, flexibility, and fluidly adjusting to an opponent's movements. Tension is a big no-no, along with relying on power and strength.

Thus practicing Tai Chi as a combat martial art goes against most people's (men especially) FIKI instincts. Warren Allen is my Tai Chi instructor. His ongoing project, seven years and counting now, is to cure me of my Shotokan karate-fueled tendencies toward matching force with force.

With its foundation in Taoist philosophy, Tai Chi seeks to meld yin and yang, soft and hard, yielding and resistance. You've got to be able to master both sides of the Tai Chi coin to be an adept, which I'm a long way from.

However, I know enough about the combat side of Tai Chi to recommend it to anyone seeking a softer martial art, or an exercise system with self-defense applications (I'm not sure how much good Pilates would do you in a bar fight, though you'd probably laugh at a punch to the stomach).

It's pretty difficult to find an instructor who can competently teach the marital aspect of Tai Chi along with the exercise aspect. Most Tai Chi instructors don't have much martial arts experience. I'm fortunate to be learning Tai Chi from someone who took up the art after twenty years or so of hard style training and the earning of several black belts.

That's rare. So if you want to learn the martial applications of Tai Chi, don't be shy about asking what qualifications your prospective instructor has in this area.

Perhaps best of all, ask if you can throw a punch at them or engage them in an attempted grappling take-down. If you find yourself on the floor or hurtling toward a wall, that's a sign they know something about combat Tai Chi.

To see how Tai Chi works as street-fighting, check out Glenn Hairston's Internal Damage site. Watch the videos. Yes, you can do Tai Chi to rap music. Hairston proves it.

YouTube has lots of other videos in its "combat Tai Chi" section. I enjoyed this one. You see an unlikely looking Tai Chi practitioner doing his thing, using nicely salty language in the process. I like. Take a look.

Poll shows Measure 49 looking strong, Measure 50 weaker

The Portland Business Journal is reporting that a poll to be released Monday shows Oregon voters strongly support Measure 49, a fix for the seriously-flawed Measure 37, but are more "if'y" about Measure 50, which raises the state tobacco tax and earmarks it for children's health care.

Guess this shows why Oregonians in Action, the main Measure 49 opponent, seems to be putting all of its effort into a federal lawsuit that challenges the description that will be on the ballot.

If voters are given honest information about what Measure 49 does – protect farm land, forest land, and groundwater, while giving Measure 37 claimants additional transferability and survivorship benefits – it'll pass easily.

Muddy the waters, confuse the public, spread disinformation. That's the OIA game plan. Pathetic, but that's all they've got going for them, since most Oregonians don't want our beautiful state trashed.

Laughter, amazement, befuddlement

A triple threat blog post. Cleaning up my office today, I came across some must-share items.

You'll laugh. You'll be amazed. And befuddled. At least, I was when I read them.

"Share Our Joy" by Larry Doyle is one of those The New Yorker pieces that make me realize that if I have $50 left to my name, I could do a lot worse than spend it on a subscription to this always entertaining and informative magazine. Hugely humorous, Doyle is.

Also from The New Yorker, "Fragmentary Knowledge" is about what may be the world's first computer – the Antikythera Mechanism. It's at least two thousand years old, and way more sophisticated that you'd expect from the ancient Greeks. Made me think: we don't know it all, not even close.

Along those lines, "Where is the universe expanding to?" is a great question that I've spent quite a bit of time pondering. Scientists know that when the Big Bang banged, the universe began to expand. But into what? This answer in Scientific American befuddles as much as it explains, but that's the nature of cosmological reality – befuddling (quantum theory, even more so.)

(If you're up for more befuddling, check out "What is the universe expanding into?")

Measure 37 claimants should vote for Measure 49

Me thinketh Oregonians in Action (OIA) doth protest too much about Measure 49, a balanced effort to fix Measure 37 – which trashed Oregon's land use laws and threatens our state's vaunted livability.

Most Measure 37 claimants are going to make out better under Measure 49. If OIA really cared about their constituency, they'd be urging a YES vote this November.

As I said in "Measure 49 truth and lies," deception is the only avenue open to OIA and other Measure 49 opponents. They aren't fighting fair because they know they'll lose an honest fair fight.

Oregonians don't want more billboards and pumice mines in national monuments, which Measure 37 will bring them if it isn't changed.

And Measure 37 claimants don't want the headaches that this poorly written law has brought them, such as the inability to transfer their waivers.

What this means is that if a claimant has the right to build a house on land where that currently isn't allowed, but was when they bought the property, they can't transfer that right to a buyer of the property. This is a big drawback for a prospective buyer. And, naturally, for the prospective seller.

Measure 49 allows the transfer of waivers. This should be enough to make Measure 37 claimants rush to check the YES box when they get their ballots. Land is much more valuable with development rights attached.

But Measure 49 opponents are muddying the water on this issue, fearing that Measure 37 claimants will see through the untruths on the OIA web site. Strangely, transferability isn't even mentioned as one of the "drastic changes to current law" even though this is indeed a big change to Measure 37.

One which benefits Measure 37 claimants. So if you're one of them, head on over to the Yes on 49 web site, which does speak the truth about Measure 49.

Get the facts. Claimants who follow the "express lane" (1-3 homes) or "conditional path" (4-10 homes) options will be able to transfer their development rights to new owners.

Don't believe the ill-informed Measure 49 opponents who are spewing the lie that Measure 37 waivers won't be transferable. Do believe the real estate and land use lawyers at Davis Wright Tremaine LLP who have put up an informative "Potential Impact of Ballot Measure 49 on Existing Measure 37 Claimants."

They say that under Measure 49 the waivers will run with the land and be transferable. This will be good news to buyers who either want to build their own home on Measure 37 property, or want to be assured that they can add on to a home built by a Measure 37 claimant.

Measure 37 claimants also should read a brief, clearly stated discussion of vesting in relation to HB 3540 (which became Measure 49) and the upcoming November vote on this Measure 37 fix. This is a memo written by Ralph Bloemers of the Crag Law Center. Download memorandum_on_vesting_for_the_public_7_24_2007.pdf

"Vesting" occurs when development has reached a certain stage and the owner has the right to continue development and put the property to use as intended. (Read Bloemers' memo for a more complete legal definition).

It's almost certain that some Measure 37 claimants who want to put more than ten houses on their property, or pursue commercial/industrial development (which would be prohibited by Measure 49) are hoping to get vested before December 6 – when Measure 49 will go into effect if approved by voters.

Bloemers suggests caution. There's a "good faith" requirement for vesting. If you know that a change to a land use law is around the corner, you can't plow ahead with your development, pretending that you aren't aware of what's coming.

In sum, under the common law, property owners with unvested Measure 37 claims may not circumvent the impending legislative fix to ORS 197.352 by moving to establish a use that will be impermissible under the proposed new law.

Even if a use meets all of the common law “vesting” requirements and becomes a fully established “non-conforming use,” that use may be subject to a number of limitations as described above. The potential for future litigation makes ownership of a fully vested nonconforming use a burdensome and perhaps risky proposition.

The Davis, Wright, Tremaine lawyers offer similar advice:

If a claimant has valid waivers but has not begun construction, at this point it would be risky to move forward. Because the "vested rights" doctrine is a form of estoppel under the equitable powers of the courts, the good faith of the landowner will be in question.

After the passage of HB 3540 and the press coverage associated with it, one can imagine a court concluding that any landowner would be on notice of potentially significant changes to the relief available under the waiver system.

Plus, it's a cool housing market at the moment. Measure 37 went into effect during a time when "get rich quick" was a real estate mantra. Things have changed. Waiting a few months before beginning development generally would make good financial sense.

So far from Measure 49 being the end of the world for Measure 37 claimants, as OIA would have them believe, in truth it's the beginning of a sunnier day. There are quite a few pluses for claimants in Measure 49.

Again, get the facts. Make up your own mind. Once you do, I'm confident you'll vote YES this November.

Me hunter. You gatherer. I need GPS.

This cartoon reveals how it all began. How men became hunters and women gatherers. Naturally, the guy was told to do it by his woman.

I don't know which sex ended up with the better deal. However, I do know that this goes a long way toward explaining why Laurel, my wife, was bewildered when my Garmin GPSMap 60CSx Handheld GPS Navigator arrived in its Amazon box.

"Don't you already have a GPS receiver?," she asked. "Sure I do," I told her. "But it's ancient. This one has a color display and does a lot more than the old one."

Unwilling to relent, Laurel pressed on. "I bet it cost a lot. $500, right?" "Actually, it was about $300. Amazon sells them at a deep discount. And your point is?"

Which brought the conversation to an end.

Because if it'd continued Laurel knew I'd bring up the rather significant price difference between (1) the GPS receiver and (2) the continued remodeling of our kitchen and living room areas, which carried on last week after a several month hiatus.

Once part of our thirty-five year old house appeared more up-to-date, Laurel couldn't stand how old the adjoining rug looked. Plus, she wanted Dura Ceramic tile to lead from the front door into the kitchen.

So the family gatherer arranged for the tile and carpet guys to come in for four days, seriously disrupting my blogging and Internet life. In other words, my life (my office got recarpeted also).

The cost was well over an order of magnitude greater than what my GPS receiver set us back. It was worth it – I'm happy with the new tile and carpet now that my laptop life is back in order – but this experience pointed out to me again how different Laurel and I are when it comes to our respective hunter-gatherer tendencies.

Evolution: you can't argue with it. I do most of the grocery shopping, but in a hunterish way. Laurel shops in a gatherish way. She browses. I track down my grocery prey with ruthless efficiency.

I don't use a GPS receiver. But I'd like to. I've already gotten more than $300 worth of enjoyment from the Garmin 60CSx (which I can highly recommend, along with lots of other satisfied users).

The first day I got it, I went on my usual around-the-lake dog walk with the receiver in hand. When I walked into the house I yelled to Laurel, "Pretend that you're interested in the GPS details of my walk."

I made her listen to how far I went (1.15 miles), my average moving speed (2.98 mph), the time I spent moving (26 minutes), and other fascinating facts I can't recall numerically: total elevation gain, highest elevation reached, total time (which included the minutes I spent standing still trying to figure out a receiver feature), and more besides.

Laurel was careful not to say anything back to me, not even a "that's nice," because that might have encouraged me to bore her further with how absolutely wonderful the 60CSx is.

No problem. I'm happy talking with my new friend Garmie about himself. The fact that he's a piece of electronic machinery and I'm a conscious human being doesn't keep us from bonding. I just hope Laurel feels the same way about her new carpet and tile.

I've no doubt that my caveman ancestors would have been just as thrilled to have a device that told them exactly where they were and how to get back to the cave.

I've also got no doubt that while they were doing what they had to do – hunting down mammoths with nastily large tusks – their women were pondering a different arrangement for the hides on the floor.

Like they say, Plus ça change.

10 reasons for guys to like Tai Chi

I'll readily admit that Tai Chi doesn't have a macho reputation. You don't find many would-be street fighters aspiring to be a Tai Chi master who can kick butt.

Partly this is due to the familiar photos of people doing Tai Chi in China. They usually look pretty darn old and harmless.

Which is one side of Tai Chi, for sure. But Jet Li's The Tai Chi Master shows another side, along with a more recent movie with the same name.

OK. I haven't seen either film. But I'm three years into thrice weekly Tai Chi classes at Warren Allen's Pacific Martial Arts studio here in Salem. So I'm qualified to talk to guys like me who might have qualms about taking up Tai Chi.

By "guys like me," I mean more than 58 year old men with previous martial arts experience who are aging halfway gracefully, but want to help assure this trend continues. Maybe even more than halfway – 75%, say.

I'm using guys in the modern generic sense, just as the waitress does who comes to take our order, looks at my wife and me, and says "So what do you guys want for dinner?" (I suspect she says the same thing to a table full of women.)

So here, in no particular order, are ten macho and not-so-macho reasons for guys to like Tai Chi.

(1) The older you get, the better. Tai Chi embraces the Chinese respect for old age. The Tai Chi magazine I get regularly features glowing articles about eighty year olds. Try finding that sort of thing in an Ultimate Fighting mixed martial arts publication.

(2) It really is a martial art. I've heard skilled hard style black belts say, "I don't do Tai Chi because it's too damn difficult." Yes, it is, when pursued as a martial art. It's a lot tougher to redirect and control an opponent without punching and kicking. But more effective. Really.

(3) You don't get hurt. A big benefit. Today I ran into a guy I used to play tennis with years ago. He says he gave it up because he got tired of injuries (like tennis elbow). Tai Chi will make you more healthy, not less. When I was into karate I always wondered why this "self defense" activity caused people to get hurt so much.

(4) There's more women involved. Tai Chi is pretty well balanced, male and female wise. Not surprising, given its foundation in Taoist Yin and Yang. So you aren't surrounded by sweaty guys for an hour and a half, which was par for the course in my previous martial arts and tennis days.

(5) You don't sweat. Well, rarely. Mostly Tai Chi is practiced (or "played," in Tai Chi lingo) at slow speed. You'll feel a kind of burn, but not the dripping with perspiration kind. More of the "I didn't know I had that muscle" kind.

(6) The dress code is casual. In my classes, at least. Compared to my Shotokan karate days, it's refreshing to be able to wear whatever the heck you feel like. Shorts. T-shirt. Shoes. Barefoot. Whatever. I like not having to change clothes from street wear, except for my shoes.

(7) Tai Chi-ish t-shirts are cool. The first thing I did, when I started Tai Chi, was go online and find some cool-looking t-shirts to wear in class. I figured that even if I didn't know much Tai Chi, I could look like I did. Yin-yang symbols are a common theme. Dragons too. I like.

(8) It comes with a built-in philosophy. Taoism. Which is so inclusive, you can be a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or anything else and also be a Taoist. Does tennis have a profound philosophy attached to it? Does golf? Nope. Tai Chi is great for philosophical types like me. Also, for non-philosophical types.

(9) Tai Chi will make you a better dancer. I've never considered myself much of a dancer. But after taking quite a few tango, nightclub 2-step, and other classes, I'm a lot more confident than I used to be. Tai Chi has helped a lot. You learn the importance of balance, weight differentiation, not thinking too much, and having a good time.

(10) It's fun. Which brings me to the most important reason. Try it. You'll probably like it.

Measure 49 opponents aren’t fighting fair

Figures. Those who brought Oregon the unfairness of Measure 37, which elevated the property rights of a few over the rights of the many, are at it again – fighting Measure 49 unfairly.

This is a much-needed fix for Measure 37 that's going to be voted on in November. It limits large subdivisions and protects our state's farms, forests, and groundwater.

The ballot measure language drafted by the 2007 legislature says just this. But truthfulness isn't part of the Oregonians in Action game plan. So they've filed suit in federal court challenging the language that'll be on the ballot.

I read the lawsuit. I couldn't find where they quoted HB 3540 (which became Measure 49) and showed how the ballot measure language is at odds with the bill. There's just a bunch of verbiage about the language being inaccurate, unfair, and underhanded.

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black.

The Measure 49 ballot measure language says:

RESULT OF 'YES' VOTE: 'Yes' vote modifies Measure 37; clarifies private landowners' rights to build homes; extends rights to surviving spouses; limits large developments; protects farmlands, forestlands, groundwater supplies.

RESULT OF 'NO' VOTE: 'No' vote leaves Measure 37 unchanged; allows claims to develop large subdivisions, commercial, industrial projects on lands now reserved for residential, farm and forest uses.

Exactly right. I've read every word of HB 3540. I've read an accurate summary of how Measure 49 works. The legislature's language is true; the opponents aren't willing to face that truth head-on.

Over on a NW Republican blog post about Measure 49 someone commented, "Have you read the ballot title? It might as well ask voters 'Do you love your mother?'"

Well, the ballot title is:

MODIFIES MEASURE 37; CLARIFIES RIGHT TO BUILD HOMES; LIMITS LARGE DEVELOPMENTS; PROTECTS FARMS, FORESTS, GROUNDWATER.

Yes, Oregonians do love their mothers. They also love farms, forests, and groundwater. And they don't want large developments to destroy what they love. So you can see why Oregonians in Action is afraid of telling Measure 49 like it is.

I've written before about Measure 49 truth and lies. A quick comparison of the Yes on 49 campaign and Oregonians in Action web sites reveals who is dedicated to truth, and who to lies.

The Yes on 49 folks make it easy to read factual information about Measure 49. They have the stories of real people who are being harmed by Measure 37 claims. By contrast, OIA just throws out emotionality that has no basis in fact.

One example: they keep saying that the "express lane" option of Measure 49 won't really allow Measure 37 claimants to build 1-3 homes on their property. The most recent OIA newsletter stretches the truth like taffy:

While the supporters of Measure 49 will tell you that it's easy to qualify for three homesites under Measure 49, they are wrong. In fact, very few claimants will qualify for three homesites under the bill, and if the Oregon appellate courts interpret Measure 49 in the way they should based on how the bill was written, no property owner whose land is zoned for exclusive farm use (EFU) will qualify for three homesites. This point should be clear – if the Oregon courts read the law as it is written, NO ONE ON EFU ZONED LAND WILL QUALIFY FOR THREE HOMESITES.

Have you no shame, Dave Hunnicutt and comrades? That's two big "If's" in three sentences. Please, talk about Measure 49 as it is written, not about how your conservative little minds envision Oregon courts ruling on it.

The language of HB 3540 is clear. A Measure 37 claimant qualifies for up to three home sites if their waiver entitles them to the number being requested. All they have to do is supply a few pieces of information to the state. Their claim isn't "wiped out," as OIA falsely says.

Over on Peter Bray's truth-telling Land Use Watch blog, a post about the OIA lawsuit stimulated this right-on comment:

I am very happy they are bringing this suit. I am even happier that they are doing so in federal court.

Now they will have to come out and state exactly how the ballot title is inconsistent with the provisions of the Measure. I followed this bill through the legislative process; I have done line by line analyses of the Measure to identify where OIA finds the evidence it rattles off about the Measure.

Now they have to tell us, well before the election, and well before their advertising campaign begins, just what it is that is wrong, misleading, and unconstitutional about the bill.

They won't be able to toss out misleading, inaccurate, and wilfully misleading statements to frighten voters.

Each and every time someone says there is no fast track and that a person will not be able to build the one to three homes the Measure provides for, I ask, and I ask repeatedly, SHOW ME WHERE IN THE MEASURE I CAN FIND THE WORDS, PROVISIONS, AND/OR SECTIONS OF THE MEASURE that support their kneejerk responses.

So far, no one, not one single person or group has been able to answer this very simple statement. If it is so easy for them to find, it really ought to be easy for them to point out to a poor dumb person such as myself.

The Measure 49 opponents are running scared. This is excellent news for the clear majority of Oregonians who want to have the property rights of everyone in this state preserved.

And are going to vote for Measure 49 this November.

Hornets sting me. Bees are disappearing. Got to be Bush’s fault.

I've been stung twice by hornets recently. A longstanding hive of wild bees on our property also has disappeared. Naturally I'm blaming George Bush. He's responsible for so many disasters, might as well pin these on him too.

But seriously … this youa culpa isn't all that far-fetched. The climate, in Oregon and elsewhere, is changing due to global warming. That's having effects on plants and the insects that pollinate them.

In Europe global warming is being blamed for the spread of the Asian Hornet into France and potentially Great Britain. These are giant hornets renowned for their vicious stings.

I don't know what kind of hornet stung me. Both times it was on the top of my head while I was walking around our neighborhood lake. I'd been watching out for yellow jacket nests in the ground. They usually appear this time of year.

Laurel and I are expert at spotting and killing yellow jackets. Hornet nests, though, were uncharted territory. In the seventeen years we've lived in rural south Salem, I don't think we've ever been stung by a hornet. This summer, thrice (Laurel got stung once). Something has changed.

A neighbor with a bee suit took care of the first nest, which was hanging from an oak tree branch. We handled the second ourselves. It was in a fir tree close to the trail I was on when attacked.

Laurel bravely sprayed it, aiming at the nest's opening, while I not-so-bravely stood farther away, providing flashlight assistance (it's advisable to kill yellow jackets and hornets at night, when it's cooler and they're not very active).

Is it a coincidence that the wild bee hive disappeared just as the hornets thrived? Maybe. But it's also possible that climate change is messing with the balance of insect nature in ways that aren't well understood yet.

Last night I read a fascinating article in The New Yorker by Elizabeth Kolbert, "Stung. Where have all the bees gone?" She describes the worrying phenomenon of colony collapse disorder (C.C. D.), a serious but poorly understood problem in both Oregon and the rest of the world. (See "Bees Vanish and Scientists Race for Reasons")

Kolbert mentions a 2006 report titled The Status of Pollinators in North America.

Among the many possible contributing factors that the report cited are habitat loss, pesticide use, climate change, and introduced pathogens. May Berenbaum, a professor of entomology at the University of Illinois, chaired the National Research Council panel.; she recently characterized C.C.D. as "a crisis on top of a crisis."

"We can't count on wild pollinators because we've so altered the landscape that many are no longer viable," she said.

Well, I can testify that wild hornets still are viable. And that buying stock in whoever makes Benadryl could be a savvy investment ploy, because if hornets are increasing because of global warming lots more people are going to be chugging this antihistamine after getting stung, just like I did.

In my heart of hearts I know that blaming George Bush for my stings is a bit irrational. Yes, he's irritatingly clueless about the reality of global warming, just as he is about many other things. However, the decline of bees and the rise of hornets in our neighborhood surely is the result of numerous causes, climate change being only one possibility.

At the same time, there was something fitting about the way I slapped my head when I felt the hornets sting me. It's what I feel like doing much of the time when I hear about clueless George denying some evident scientific, political, or military fact.

So until the American voters get rid of his hornet's nest of incompetency by electing our next president in November 2008, I think I'll keep on viewing my stings as George Bush's fault.

My lip swelled up after the first attack. It felt and looked strange. The next day it was back to normal. That's the way I'm looking forward to feeling when a new Democratic president takes the oath of office.

Normal again, after eight years of getting stung by neoconservative blunders.

Qwest, I’m waiting for DSL…still waiting…

I'm seriously seeking DSL in our south Salem neighborhood, now that I've tasted the faster broadband life at our cabin in Camp Sherman. Yes, Camp Sherman, a hamlet of several hundred full-time residents in central Oregon that is as beautiful as it is isolated.

Five miles from Highway 20. Ten more miles to Sisters, the nearest town of consequence. Yet one of our cabin co-owners just arranged to have Qwest DSL installed.

So now when we're in Camp Sherman I can sit down with my laptop, facing Ponderosas and the Metolius River, out in the middle of nowhere, connecting to the Internet at about twice the speed of my WildBlue satellite service here in Salem at about half the cost.

What gives? I've written before about my frustrations with Qwest. Three years ago a supervisor told me they could get DSL to our area, but they weren't going to, even though we've just five miles from the Salem city limits and two miles from the nearest existing DSL "crossbox."

Wouldn't pencil out, I was told. "Well," I thought (and still think), "isn't Qwest a public utility? Doesn't this mean that it should serve the public? Or am I expecting too much?"

Recently I asked someone in Camp Sherman how they were able to get DSL. I was told that at first the Qwest attitude was "you will never see it." Sounds familiar. However, a flurry of calls were made to the "proper politicians" and some area businesses testified to how much they needed broadband.

After that, gosh, the technical problems that supposedly made DSL an impossibility in Camp Sherman went away. That gave me hope for our neighborhood, since we're a whole lot closer to DSL civilization than Camp Sherman was.

So a few days ago I optimistically dialed the number on one of the innumerable ads we get from Qwest inviting us to sign up for DSL.

It rings. I'm asked to press "1" for English. I do. Then the line goes dead. After a while a voice tells me, "If you want to make a call, please hang up and try again." Not an auspicious start to my communications with what's supposed to be a communications company.

Second time I reach an actual human being. But not the right one. She gives me another number to call. Now I get someone who seems concerned about our plight. I tell my tale about how I have DSL in Camp Sherman, but not in south Salem. I tell him that a couple of years ago I was informed that DSL was technically feasible to install in our area. The stumbling block was cost.

Yet somehow Camp Sherman got around that roadblock. "So," I said, "I'd like to plead our case to someone in Qwest who makes DSL decisions." I could easily get dozens of neighbors, including a bunch of home-based businesses, to send cards and letters to Qwest, since there are more people living nearby than in all of Camp Sherman.

I was put on hold. The guy needed to talk to a supervisor. After five minutes or so he came back on the line. "No way will you get DSL," he said. "It'd cost a million dollars to install." He told me that I should get my neighbors to go to the Qwest web site and request to be notified when DSL is available in our area.

Which would evidently be never. Since I'd already asked members of our neighborhood association to do that back in 2004, I figured that going through the exercise again would be as useless as it was then.

My next bright idea was to phone the Salem Center retail Qwest store. I couldn't find any other Salem number for Qwest, which clearly isn't big on letting customers talk to local employees. For when Brandi returned my voice mail message, she said that she'd have to talk with DSL-knowledgeable Sam in Vancouver, Washington.

I couldn't talk with Sam directly. But she'd ask him my questions about why we didn't have DSL and let me know Sam's answers. Those, in brief, turned out to be "too far away" and "load coils."

I'm still trying to talk with Sam, because this smells much more like a brush off than a definitive technical answer. Three years ago I was able to speak with a DSL installer and he told me it'd be simple to get DSL out to us. It'd just require some equipment upgrades.

Meaning, Qwest would have to spend some money to improve service in our neighborhood. Again, not an unreasonable thing to do for a public utility.

A little Googling confirmed my cynicism about Qwest's stonewalling. I learned that "load coils" is a common phone company explanation for why DSL isn't available in an area. These thingies improve voice quality at the expense of frequencies where DSL functions.

They have to be removed before DSL will work. OK, then remove them. If I ever get to talk with Sam, I'll ask him why this can't be done.

Apparently a modern switch can replace old load coils. However, an acquaintance who works for Comcast and seems to know what he's talking about told me that many Qwest phone lines are horribly outdated. He said this is why Qwest hasn't been a takeover target. They haven't invested in equipment upgrades, so no other company wants to buy this technological dinosaur.

I don't know if that's true. And I sure don't know much about load coils. Still, my good friend Google taught me that there's something called a Smart Coil which replaces load coils. A Smart Coil lets you have fine voice quality and DSL if you live quite a ways out, like we do.

My hope is that somebody will read this post who either (1) is a Qwest employee who can tell me how to break into the company's DSL installation decision-making loop, or (2) knows someone who has this information.

I don't think Brandi is high enough up in the Qwest management food chain. She's going to keep giving me the company party line: "too far away" and "load coils."

Qwest's CEO, Richard Notebaert, looks like a nice guy. Maybe he reads blog posts about his company. If so, I just want to say that I'm waiting for DSL, Richard. Still waiting. With my Lucy Liu Qwest fantasy intact.

Give me a call. I'd love to chat with you. You have my number.

Measure 49 truth and lies

It's strong words to call someone a liar. But I'll do just that. The Measure 37-loving Oregonians in Action folks are spreading lies about a carefully crafted effort to restore fairness and balance to Oregon's land use laws.

Measure 49, which will be voted on in November, doesn't bear much resemblance to OIA's misleading descriptions of it. This is reason enough to say "Yes on 49," because the group that misled Oregonians about Measure 37 is at it again with Measure 49.

People are fed up with the fiction that Measure 37 was meant to allow claimants to build a single home on land that pointy-headed bureaucrats had decreed, "This shalt be farmland, forever and ever."

The reality is much different, as a bunch of Measure 37 horror stories demonstrate. So I'm confident that voters won't fall for OIA dirty tricks again. After being fooled once, it's going to be a lot tougher for OIA to play the Poor Dorothy English game this time around.

For one thing, truth-tellers like Peter Bray over at Land Use Watch won't let OIA get away with their habitual disrespect for facts. Peter already has demolished the first pack of OIA lies here and here.

I note that Peter calls OIA's statements about Measure 49 "falsehoods" and "mistruths." True enough. But these guys aren't dummies, though the over-the-top screaming style of the OIA web site can leave that impression.

No, David Hunnicutt and his cronies know what they're doing. They realize they can't win on the issues, because 61% of Oregonians want Measure 37 to be either repealed or fixed. And that number is only going to go up as accurate information about the effects of Measure 37 is provided to voters.

I've been trying to do my part. Salem Monthly published my "Rural Wells Threatened by Measure 37" piece. Our neighborhood is fighting a proposed 42 home Measure 37 subdivision on groundwater limited farmland. It's precisely the sort of unneeded dangerous development that Measure 49 will limit.

Like I said in a letter to the editor, "Well users have property rights, too." Measure 37 allows a claimant to take away the right of people already living in an area to have water come out of their taps. Without water, a rural home is just about worthless. Measure 49 will help prevent this by allowing a maximum of three homes on groundwater limited land.

Lots of people who voted for Measure 37 are regretting that they did. Check out this YouTube video that features a neighbor of ours, Don Dean. He's a Republican who didn't know what he was getting when he checked "Yes" on the Measure 37 ballot. This November, he'll be remedying that by voting Yes on Measure 49.

Wow, the surge sure is working (badly)

Today's headline says it all: "Violence Rages in Iraq as Sunni Bloc Leaves Cabinet."

Um, wasn't the surge supposed to produce a quell in violence that would let the Iraqi government pursue national reconciliation?

We've got a fool for a commander-in-chief. Four US soldiers