My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item D: Options to Address Field Burning
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 02/20/08 Work Session
>
Item D: Options to Address Field Burning
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 10:25:43 AM
Creation date
2/15/2008 11:12:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
2/20/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />1. Request reconsideration of the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission’s decision not to issue a <br /> moratorium on field burning for the 2007 and 2008 burn seasons. <br /> On September 20, 2007, a group of field burning opponents met to discuss the DEQ’s decision and <br /> possible next steps, including a lawsuit. In attendance were Rep. Holvey, Rep. Barnhart, Mayor <br /> Piercy, Councilor Bettman, the IGR Manager for Lane County, the IGR Manager for the City of <br /> Eugene, WELC staff members, the Director of the Oregon Toxics Alliance, and Dr. Robert Carolan. <br /> <br /> The groups discussed the option of submitting a Request for Reconsideration to the EQC, asking it to <br /> reconsider its decision. Although this was an option at the time, it is now too late to make this <br /> request. The consensus of the group who met in September felt the EQC would not change their <br /> decision upon a Request for Reconsideration. <br /> <br />2. Wait for the results of the study proposed by Oregon State University (OSU) to study the health effects <br /> of field burning. <br /> In August, in response to Lane County and the City’s request to issue a moratorium on field burning, <br /> the EQC directed Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) staff to request $94,000 from the <br /> legislature to conduct a study of the effects of field burning on humans and possible alternatives to <br /> field burning. <br /> <br /> OSU stepped forward offering to conduct the studies with the funds coming from the burn fees paid <br /> by the seed farmers. OSU has proposed to use existing data on smoke concentrations and health <br /> effects to assess the risk that field burning poses to people. It proposed to calculate the odds for <br /> cancer and non-cancerous health problems such as lung irritation and illness. <br /> <br />3. Work with the seed growers to develop alternatives to voluntarily reduce or eliminate field burning. <br /> Over the summer, Commissioners Fleenor and Sorenson went on a field trip to two grass seed farms, <br /> one from Lane County and one from Linn County. The Lane County farmer stated he is the only <br /> grass seed grower to burn in Lane County. Both he and the Linn County farmer claimed they only <br /> burn on Class 4 soil. After this trip, it appears that the Board of Commissioners’ interest in pursuing a <br /> lawsuit waned. <br /> <br /> In late fall, the Oregon Seed Growers Association (OSGA) contacted Lane County and City of Eugene <br /> staff to relay the Seed Growers’ interest in pursuing the use of grass straw for renewable energy <br /> production. The OSGA has been discussing market-driven options, and believe that using grass straw <br /> as a value-added product for renewable energy production would provide an economically viable <br /> outlet for annual ryegrass straw and would allow the seed growers to reduce the amount of actual field <br /> burning in our region by as much as 50%. <br /> <br /> Lane County has formed a biomass work group to identify economic uses for local biomass, including <br /> grass straw, as a value added product for renewable energy production. <br /> <br />4. Participate in a lawsuit. <br /> WELC has asked that Lane County and the City of Eugene join as plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the <br /> seed growers, asking for an injunction against field burning, with a possibility of naming the State as a <br /> defendant. WELC believes that a lawsuit would provide the greatest opportunity to resolve this issue, <br /> either through providing the “hammer” necessary to get the seed growers to negotiate a significant <br /> reduction of field burning, or by obtaining a permanent injunction. <br /> <br /> L:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080220\S080220D.doc <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.