Congressmen leery of state’s ‘Blueway’

Correction: The White River’s headwaters are in the Arkansas Ozarks. An incorrect location for the headwaters was given in this article.

Some Arkansas congressmen have become suspicious of the White River watershed’s designation as America’s second “National Blueway.”

U.S. Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., said there’s “great confusion among the populace” about what the Jan. 9 designation entails.

Federal officials said the Blueway designation helps local, state and federal agencies coordinate conservationefforts. But opponents concerned about property rights call it a “federal land grab.”

Boozman said he and the people of Arkansas need more information about the program. Until that information is made available, Arkansas may need to opt out of the program, he said.

“We’re in the process of deciding if the state needs to opt out, what that process is,” said Boozman. “When you look at the fine print, I thinkthere’s real concern for the potential of some property-rights issues. The public doesn’t understand it. I thinkmost state and federal officials don’t understand it.”

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar established the National Blueways System last year.

The designation “is intended to recognize and support existing local and regional conservation, recreation and restoration efforts by coordinating ongoing federal, state and local activities,” according to a news release from the U.S. Department of the Interior.

Federal authorities say the designation brings no regulatory authority and has no effect on property rights in the watershed, which includes about one-third of the land in Arkansas and onefifth of Missouri. The White River flows more than 700 miles from its headwaters in the Ozarks of Missouri to its mouth at the Mississippi River.

But Jeannie Burlsworth is skeptical. She’s founder of Secure Arkansas, a conservative organization that opposes the Blueway.

“We don’t believe the Department of the Interior when they say private property is not going to be impacted,” said Burlsworth. “To me, that’s just an asinine statement. If you’re a landowner, there’s reason to bite your nails about this, I’m telling you.”

Secure Arkansas provided standard resolution language to supporters across the state, encouraging them to get proposed resolutions to local justices of the peace so they could present them at quorum court.

Quorum courts in 12 Arkansas counties have passed resolutions opposing the Blueway. According to Secure Arkansas, those counties are Boone, Cleveland, Faulkner, Fulton, Lawrence, Marion, Perry, Searcy, Sebastian, Scott, Stone and White.

RESOLUTIONS CITE FAILURE

Besides those 12 counties, people are working on getting similar resolutions passed in 39 other counties, said Burlsworth. She’s been urging supporters to get quorum courts to pass resolutions before the end of June opposing the Blueway.

“A lot of quorum courts are passing this unanimously,” said Burlsworth. “So this is not a party thing. It’s about private-property rights.”

The quorum court resolutions claim that county officials weren’t notified of the nomination for National Blueway status. They didn’t find out until a news conference was held Jan. 9 in Little Rock to announce the designation.

Failure to notify county officials under Title 40, Section 1501.7(a)(1), in the Code of Federal Regulations “nullifies and voids” the Blueway designation, according to the resolution passed June 13 by the Stone County Quorum Court in Mountain View.

Forrest Wood, founder of Ranger Boats and a lifelongresident of the river area, said he’s against the Blueway designation.

“There’s been a lot of good things going on here without it being a Blueway,” said Wood. “ It’sjust more federal bureaucracy. … We have never known the federal government to do anything without regulating, penalizing and quite likely including a tax, and the Blueway is nothing other than a federal land grab.”

At the Jan. 9 event, U.S. Rep. Tim Griffin, R-Ark., describedthe Blueway initiative as “an example of the federal government being led by local folks.” But now, after hearing from opponents, he has reservations.

“I woulddescribe myself as very concerned that the implementation of this initiative doesn’t match the words and the spirit of the program that was initially represented to me, and we’re going to get to the bottom of it,” Griffin said.

Griffin said there’s no transparency in the Blueways program and no congressional oversight. The program calls for no public meetings before decisions are made, he said.

“They made it abundantly clear that all they were going to be doing is deferring to local stakeholders,” Griffin said of the Jan. 9 announcement. “Without open discussion, that’s not happening.”

Griffin said he’ll draft legislation to address the issue after more information is gathered.

“We just want to make sure there’s some guidance here,” Griffin said. “So far, it doesn’t look good. We’ve got to get some more facts.”

Griffin sent a letter March 13 to the Interior Department regarding his concerns. He received a reply from Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes saying Secretarial Order 3321, which established the Blueways program, “expressly states that designation does not authorize or affect the use of private property” and doesn’t interfere with water rights.

“It really doesn’t give us any comfort,” Griffin said of the letter.

U.S. Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., also expressed concerns.

“My staff and I have been asking questions to determinethe scope of this program and what, if any, value this designation would have,” he said by e-mail. “Thus far, the Interior Department has indicated that the Blueway designation would not have any material impact on the areas selected. If there is no material benefit and the local communities oppose it, then the question I have is why is the federal government proceeding.” BLUEWAYS SELECTION

The Blueways program is part of President Barack Obama’s America’s Great Outdoors Initiative to establish a community-driven conservation and recreation agenda for the 21st century, according to the news release from the Interior Department.

Rivers are named National Blueways after selection by a national interagency committee appointed by the secretary of the interior that includes representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hayes said during the Jan. 9 announcement in Little Rock.

Representatives from those groups announced new conservation efforts around the White River at that event, including $22 million from the Agriculture Department for soil and water conservation in counties along its watershed.

About $13 million of those funds will support pastureland affected heavily by the 2012 drought, Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Ann Mills said.

U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., was also on hand that day in Little Rock to applaud the Blueway designation.

Michael Teague, a spokesman for Pryor, said there has been a misinformation regarding the Blueway designation since January.

“Unlike some groups are claiming, this order will not impact Arkansans’ private property,” Teague said by e-mail. “… This program is entirely voluntary and private landowners are free to participate/or not participate in any assistance programs and initiatives of the stakeholder partnership.”

It’s the “voluntary” part that got Boozman thinking Arkansas might want to opt out of the program until more is known about it.

“If it’s strictly voluntary, it’s going to be an option,” Boozman said of Arkansas opting out. “If they come back to me and say, ‘You can’t get out of this thing,’ I think that’s the biggest red flag we’ve seen up until now.”

Last month, the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee received a letter from several groups requesting $3.3 million for the Blueways program in general. Boozman said noneof those groups were from Arkansas.

“That’s a concern that you have outside groups from all over the country except Arkansas,” said Boozman.

Since the program is new, there’s the potential for “mission creep,” Boozman said, meaning the stated mission of the program could change.

Last year, when the program was announced, the 410-mile Connecticut River watershed was named as the first National Blueway. The White River watershed is much larger, though, encompassing 17.8 million acres, compared with 7.2 million acres of the Connecticut River watershed in Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Connecticut.

There’s also concern in Missouri over the White River Blueway designation.

U.S. Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., sent a letter on June 13 to Sally Jewell, Salazar’s successor as secretary of the interior, saying he was disturbed by the “ open-endedguidelines and no congressional oversight” in Secretarial Order 3321. Smith wants Jewell to rescind the order.

The White River was selected as a National Blueway on the basis of an application submitted by 26 groups, including the Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, the Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission, the cities of Augusta and Clarendon, and the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture.