Part 2--Thoughts about the Council Work Session of August 29, 3013

[Edited previous post and split it into two parts, added material about the 2004 forced resignation of Public Works Director Dick Fleming to the end of this part, 8/31/13. Again, if the YouTube videos don't play, just click on the link above them. Updated 9/2/13 & 9/3/13]

Councilor Dorrah did a good job of getting the Council to focus momentarily on need to keep cows out of the watershed in order to protect our drinking water and exemption from filtration, but here's the problem. A few Councilors called the meeting, not to address the problem of cows in the watershed, not to solve how we got into a crisis that has caused Baker City to endure hundreds of illnesses and serious financial pain, not to talk about how staff has kept information about so many relevant and pressing problems from us, not to talk about the apparent lack of qualifications held by any staff member, or their incompetence in protecting our watershed over the last several years, but apparently only to talk about how some Councilors are uncomfortable about how other Councilors refer to staff when speaking or writing about the problem.

This video contains the gist of that self-righteous discussion, which took up an almost unendurable portion of the meeting:

Baker City Council Avoids issues--Button Lectures Council on Their Behavior082913 

After the meeting, I told Council that my opinion was:

Anyway, I  appreciated Dennis' reporting to the Council what he found and did about it , otherwise the meeting WOULD HAVE BEEN A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME!

Guess what--Council etiquette on intra-Council emails ISN'T THE PROBLEM. Don't make yourselves the issue! YOU'RE NOT! hate to watch Councilors of equal station lecture each other on their values and tell others how to act, while completely ignoring a major problem--The staff doesn't tell you what you need to know and they are not taking care of business. If everyone just keeps on being polite to each other, after a three year record of incompetence, the citizens are going to get screwed again!   The problem is not Council etiquette on email, the problem is that Public Works is not communicating with upper staff and Council, the Public works Director should still be a secretary and be replaced by an engineer, and that specifically, PW didn't tell Council twice about major problems in the watershed.  ENOUGH ALREADY!

BIG PS
The Council is elected by the people to take care of the problem for the people, not to serve the sensibilities of staff and sensitive Councilors.
Yes, I'm frustrated, and I think others are too.

[More background: Section X(B) of the Baker City Watershed Management Plan states:

B) Personnel Education/Experience:

(1) Minimum education of key personnel in Watershed Management:

(a) Director of Public Works minimum qualifications: Graduation from a four year college or university with specialization in civil engineering and three years of progressive responsible professional experience in public works administration including supervisory capacity; or any combination of experience and education that demonstrates provision of the knowledge, skills, and abilities listed above.

Additionally, please view this YouTube video which shows Mayor Langrell discussing the need to keep cattle out of the watershed and the fact that he had just learned that morning that Public Works was supposed to build a new fence back in the spring of 2012 to keep the cattle out and was wondering if they might want to move that up in their priorities. Here's the link:

8:27:13 Baker City Council Meeting--Mayor Langrell on cattle fence that was not not built ]

                  Michelle Owen responding to Mayor on unbuilt cattle fence

Now Back to Councilor Button's response:

What you missed, Chris, was that we asked for the meeting to discuss council activities that were happening behind the screen of privacy.  At various times, individual councilors (who were most likely communicating among themselves) have been conducting policy without the consent or approval of a majority.  We either have representative democracy or we don't.  Looking out for the "people" includes preserving our form of government.  If an individual or a minority can inflict major change on the administration of government without the knowledge of the public, then we would be accused of dishonesty or being asleep at the wheel.  Minority rule is not acceptable. 

Some of us believe that the affect of losing our city manager and some primary staff right now would be a serious setback to the progress of what we can accomplish in the next year.  It would be a huge diversion from focus on solving our immediate crisis, and could spark another year or two of community conflict.   Worse, it would be a setback to the proper function and rule of government. We are trying to get beyond political manipulation to an era of cooperation between reasonable and honest council members who put the community above personal animosities and power politics.  It is not just about feelings, but about your rights as a citizen to expect all members of government to respect the law and process of representative democracy. 

I think the cryptosporidium crisis is being used for political purposes, and the process of minority rule was kicked into gear months ago. What you saw was a polite attempt to speak reason to all parties without being part of the polarization and factionalism that is growing once again.    Some times you have to fight two or more battles at once when that is forced upon you. The interconnections are not always clear, but it is debilitating and distracting from unity of purpose. Some times, the right thing to do is to fight with one hand tied behind your back to set the example you want others to follow.  The bottom line holds. Minority rule is not acceptable.  We are not a dictatorship, and all parties owe it to the public to be open and honest about what they are doing.  Others can pretend they do not know why we called the meeting.  They can continue to hide what they have been doing.  If they succeed, we all bear the consequences. 

My opinion in response was:

Clair, I appreciate that you have responded, but without any specifics, it is impossible for me to evaluate your argument. 

How are individuals or a small minority "conducting policy without the consent or approval of a majority?"  What minority rule?  Nothing has changed, there has been no open discussion of the role of staff in helping to create the crisis and current predicament, let alone holding anyone accountable. If anything has been consistently hidden, it is accountability. 

What "major change on the administration of government" has been afflicted?  You won't even address the incredible communication problems that have kept Council and the public they are supposed to represent in the dark for three years. Again, Nothing has changed. 

I for one would not call for a change in City Manager, but it seems clear that the Public Works Director and one of her staff members bear a good deal of responsibility for our incredibly serious crypto crisis due to their failure to communicate known problems to the City Manager (either that, or Kee is a liar), Council and public for three years and for a negligently lackadaisical attitude. You, the rest of the Council, and Mike should have also known that the Public Works Director was unqualified [by the standards of the Watershed Management Plan when she was put in that position] to serve in that position and she has overseen  three years of incompetent response to a serious threat. Would you like to characterize my concerns as political?  Look at the facts.  Not only that, why don't you start talking about the facts instead of diverting attention to some conspiracy of political manipulation?

No one is indispensable and there are backup certified personnel in the water department as well as an engineer on staff. This problem started when Gilham got rid of a good engineer and put Tim "Scenic Vista" Collins in charge and then Gilham's secretary, Owen, replaced Collins.  For the Council not to rectify the situation by suggesting changes in staff, after the damage that has been done to our community, would be akin to criminal negligence. Mike Kee wasn't elected, Council was, and they can replace him if he doesn't correct a situation that led to the Crypto Crisis.

I haven't received a response from Councilor Button, but Councilor Dorrah noted that:

not only are we not supposed to voice negative opinions publicly or by email, we are not to voice them directly either. 

Sounds like the classic dysfunctional family to me.

OK, so I'll never get a response from a Councilor again. Well, they don't normally respond anyway, and I thought it would provide a needed window into what was  going on.  Their votes, and statements at Council meetings are quite revealing enough in any event. If one becomes a Councilor, they should know that their views should properly be open to all their constituents. After all, as Councilor Button might say, we wouldn't want anything to occur "behind the screen of privacy."

__

All the handwringing about a possible shakeup in Public Works seems a little odd when you contrast it with the forced resignation (more like a summary execution) of Public Works Director Dick Fleming back in April of 2004.

The April 5, 2004 Baker City Herald article quotes Fleming as saying "I did not receive any explanation" I really don't know" when asked why City Manager Gilham asked him to resign. 

In addition to cutting the city's payroll, Gilham told the Baker City Herald at the time that:

"Gillham said he sought Fleming's resignation "not so much for performance reasons as work style:
"I like to move at a more aggressive pace, to see more action in certain areas"

Gilham said he was comfortable moving Collins into the public works job because he believes the job requires management skills, but not necessarily technical ones.

 Say what? So he gets rid of an engineer as Public Works Director, which is what the Watershed Plan asks for, and puts then City Attorney Tim Collins in charge? About two years later, Michelle Owen, who I am told had worked for the city in secretarial positions for three years, lastly as City Recorder, was appointed Director of Public Works. I was also told that prior to that she was a checker at Albertsons.  Unfortunately, Ms. Owen's professional and educational qualifications pertaining to civil engineering, and any certifications, do not turn up in any of the annual watershed reports, as required. 

While Mr. Gilham gave some rather odd reasons for his summary execution of Dick Fleming, I have heard that it may have had something to do with a letter he sent to Scenic Vista developer Steven Jones almost a year earlier.

In the April 21, 2003 letter from then Baker City Public Works Director Dick Flaming to Scenic Vista developer Steven Jones, Fleming detailed problems he had with the construction of the Scenic Vista water tanks and other aspects of agreements between the developer and the city.

The City Attorney at the time, Tim Collins, went ahead and accepted the improvements in the subdivision, including the water tanks, a little over three months later, on July 31, 2003. This act made Baker City responsible for the tanks that the state and Mr. Fleming had problems with.

Mr. Fleming was asked to resign less that a year later, April 2004, by then City Manager Jerry Gilham.

Mr. Tim Collins has had a home in the very small (7 homes?) subdivision for about 6 years, and in 2012, the city was forced to pay to replace and upgrade the faulty tanks to the tune of nearly $200,000.

One last item.

In the 2010 Watershed Management Report, dated September 29, 2010, Water Supervisor Larry McBroom wrote that:

In accordance with EPA and DHS, the City is currently sampling raw surface water for Cryptosporidium and Giardia for the long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Treatment Rule. As of this date, lab reports are all negative for Crypto and Giardia. 

We learned later that crypto had been found in the Baker City Water supply as early as April of 2010. If he didn't know about the positive test, who did?

_____

Part 1--Thoughts about the Council Work Session of August 29, 3013

[Edited and split into two parts, added material about the 2004 forced resignation of Public Works Director Dick Fleming to Part 2, 8/31/13. Again, if the YouTube videos don't play, just click on the link above them.]

Councilor Dorrah says he found more cows in the watershed yesterday, a day after Thursday's Council Work Session where he informed staff and Council that cows were still getting in, but hey, who cares. . . . . After all, Don Foster, the relevant rancher/permittee, assured us in a letter to the editor in the Baker City Herald on August 28, 2013 that:

"These are three-wire drift fences designed so game can jump then, but good enough to turn cattle. Maintenance is not the responsibility of the city or the Forest Service. It is the responsibility of the permittee — yours truly — who grazes the cattle. Being responsible for the fence maintenance, as well as the cattle grazing, I can tell you this: The fencing was done. The cattle, during the time of this crypto outbreak, were in the California Gulch pasture. They are now in the Blue Canyon/Auburn area with some that have drifted north to Elk Creek. While three pair did briefly enter the watershed last week below the diversion they were removed quickly since when I got the call I was nearby and horseback. The fence where they entered was fixed immediately. I have what I consider a good relationship with the city water folks. If they see cattle, or signs of cattle, I respond as soon as possible.  . . . .My family takes our ranch duties and work seriously."

Too bad the city rarely informs the Forest Service of cattle trespass on the watershed, with whom we are told they also have a "good relationship."

The Council work session agenda of August 29, 2013 states under item 3, that the sole purpose was a "Discussion of Council/Staff Relations. I was under the impression that the subject might have something to do with the fact that city staff has seemingly, according to council videos, minutes and personal emails, repeatedly, over a three year period, not reported important facts to the Council, the City Manager, or the public.  I thought that their lack of communication within that apparent relationship, including not informing Council and the public for over a year (March 2010 to November 2011) about the fact that crypto had been found in our water, that they had known since at least 2011 that cows were gaining entry into our watershed, that we were supposed to have a fence installed in in the watershed by the spring of 2012, and that City Manager Kee said he didn't know on August 15, 2013 whether cows had been in our watershed, might be a matter of discussion.  How wrong I was!

Thankfully, Councilor Dennid Dorrah stepped up at the beginning of the meeting to tell Council that during his visits to the watershed over the last week, cows were still in the watershed, in the pasture they were not scheduled to be in, and that the fence to keep them out was in deplorable condition. He actually went up there with his own materials and labor to try to repair the fence during that time to try and keep them out. This after city staff, the Forest Service, and the permittee were informed of the problem!

Here is his presentation, part one:
Councilor Dorrah on Cows He Found In & next to the Watershed 083013

In the video above, Councilor Dennis Dorrah shares information with Council about trips he took this last week to the Elk Creek area of the Baker City Watershed. He relates that even after recent events showing that cows were getting into the watershed that cows are STILL getting in through a poorly maintained fence, are still in the pasture adjacent to the watershed where they are not supposed to be, and that he counted 19 cows in the wrong pasture next to the watershed. On his own initiative, he took fencing materials up to repair a section of leaky fence that runs for about a hundred yards east of the allotment fence gate. His investigation revealed a calf in the allotment (calves are more likely to carry Cryptosporidium parvum which can cause human disease when it gets into the water supply) and then asked for immediate action to put in a good fence in place to keep cows out of the watershed so that we do not face the possibility of another drinking water crisis next spring or summer. He reminded everyone that keeping our water filtration exemption depends upon us making every effort to keep cattle out of the watershed.

He also provided Council with photographs of the fence where he says cows could and did gain access, a photo of two cow/calf pairs just outside the watershed after a calf came back out, and a photo of the repairs he had made:

This is the place where Councilor Dorrah said the calf got in and got out. He noted the lower wire is anywhere from 26 to 36 inches above the ground, and will raise higher when an animal goes underneath. Note bent lower wires.

                    Cows near watershed fence.
There are two cows and two calves outside the watershed fence in this grainy closeup picture. Councilor Dorrah reported that one of the calves was inside the watershed originally, but when he went down to run him out, he charged back to mama who was outside the watershed fence. 

A portion of fence that Councilor Dorrah repaired with new fence posts and wire:

Councilor Dorrah described this as "an area where cattle WERE crossing. The top wire WAS twenty-six inches above the ground. I, with a helper, put in four posts and ran two new strands of barbed wire above the existing fence (which I was able to raise some on the new posts). It held pretty good.....bent but not broken when cattle tried to cross there at their favorite spot."

The Council then responded to Councilor Dorrah's concerns in the following video (description just below video):

Councilor Dorrah on Cows in Watershed Part 2 with Council & Staff Response 082913

Council responds to Councilor Dennis Dorrah's request for quick action on building a new fence to protect watershed from trespass cattle.  City Manager Kee informs Council that most recent results were received and that they are negative for crypto. My questions from an earlier blog are: 

Why weren't City Manager Kee, the Councilors, and the citizens of Baker City more aware of the fact  that Public Works Department personnel have known about cows getting into the watershed for over two years? Why didn't we know that the Department of Public works told the state Drinking Water Program on November 18, 2011, less than two weeks after we were told about the crypto in our water supply, that:"In order to better protect the Elk Creek Diversion Intake we will be constructing new fence next spring [Spring of 2012--over a year ago] along the boundaries of the city owned 40 acre parcel. The new fencing will prevent any livestock from entering into the city property. 

Similarly, why weren't we all, including City Manager Mike Kee, informed early on that the Watershed Management report from March 4, 2013 stated: "Also the City has purchased materials to construct a barb wire fence around 40 acres of City owned land surrounding the Elk Creek Diversion. This fence will provide a barrier for cattle ranging in the close proximity. Currently there is a meandering range allotment fence that extends for miles. This fence protects the Elk Creek Watershed and is in good repair most of the time, but there have been incidents where cattle have found their way to the wrong side of the fence. The new fence will protect the diversion and approximately 1/4 mile ofthe Elk Creek riparian zone from stray cattle." The promised fence was never built. So, given that safe drinking water is of fundamental importance to the healthy functioning and economic prosperity of a city, and given that Public Works knew that cows were regularly trespassing on the watershed around Elk Creek, why wasn't the plan to build that fence in the spring of 2012 followed?  I was told by a person at the state level that "the fencing project was not undertaken due to time/manpower limitations." Well, during that time, our resources in time and manpower were being spent on expanding the irrigation pond at the golf course and on Resort Street under-grounding of utilities. (See the Weekly Reports for the period in question.) 

To continue the description of the discussion in the above video: During this Council session, City Manager Mike Kee tells Council that: "We had a meeting with the Forest Service yesterday and talked about allotments, uh, to see what we can do, and it's not that cattle can't be in there now, it's that the Ranger has the discretion to put cattle on any of the allotments--it's all up to the Ranger--and the Ranger doesn't have any concern that those cattle are on the allotment [that is not the impression I got from talking to Wallowa-Whitman range supervisors, maybe he/she didn't have concerns about cattle being on the allotment, but he/she did have concerns about them being in the wrong pasture.] . . . . and [garbled] I don't think it is as immediate as ah Councilor Dorrah--. . . but, so uh I didn't answer the question. . . . uh, if it's thousands of dollars to build a new fence . . . we'll just divert the money to build a new fence."  After more talk, Councilor Dorrah says "Well, again, my issue is, we've gotta get the cattle out of there now . . . period.  And I think there is something to be said for having some fence in place, . . . ." Mike Kee says there has been talk with the epidemiologists of picking up some of the cow pies along the creek.  It goes on, and on, but Councilor Button says about the fence that there is no "ironclad guarantee that cattle won't get through it." Couldn't agree more, but we need to try.

It is worth noting that when Councilor Dorrah went down to repair fence again the day after this discussion, that he heard several cows bellowing inside the watershed down near the Elk Creek diversion, which, thankfully, is not currently being used. He patched three more sections of fence (three posts, one each between existing posts), but believes it is "an exercise in futility." "The worst WAS the fifty feet between posts and he could lift the bottom wire four feet above the ground and push top wire down to two feet above the ground." "Definitely need a little more than some maintenance up there."
[See part 2 here. Part 2--Thoughts about the Council Work Session of August 29, 3013]

_____

Baker City Council Moving Forward with UV Treatment Plan

[Edited & Updated 8/28/13]

The Baker City Council is Moving Forward with a UV treatment Plan.

Despite objections from Roger Coles and Mike Downing, the Baker City Council, after hearing a presentation from Dave Leland, Interim Administrator, Center for Health Protection, of the Oregon Health Authority, decided to move forward with plans to install UV treatment of our water supply in order to deal with the Cryptosporidium problem.

Mr. Leland explained that UV treatment was acceptable as long as we implement improved measures to protect the watershed, especially from the number one threat: cows. "Sure, UV is still an option" as long as we meet the federal criteria, but that a more "robust" watershed control program would be needed. He noted that cattle are "implicated over and over again" in studies that have been conducted. He also said that cattle are around our watershed, but that is not the case in the other three Oregon cities that have been allowed to pursue options other than filtration. The easy access by cattle to our watershed is the difference, and he asked Council "How do we reduce the opportunities for cattle" to get into our watershed. If those opportunities can be significantly reduced, he noted "UV is still an option." He later stated that "Robust watershed protection will have to be in place with UV protection."

Councilor Mosier was tentatively in favor of UV but wanted more information with adequate time for study. Councilor Button was cautious, but more or less in favor of UV due to cost advantages. Mayor Langrell and Councilor Dorrah were clearly in favor for cost effectiveness reasons as long as wells could be found for backup to cover any problems that develop in the watershed. Councilor Johnson reminded all of the need for assurances and City Manager Mike Kee stated that if we manage the watershed correctly that we will be in compliance.

There was much more discussion, but in the end, the "consensus" was that  we should continue to pursue proven UV treatment due to the cost advantages, while also actively finding more wells to backup the ASR well and a rehabilitated second backup well at the golf course, in case of catastrophic fire or other problems in the watershed.

More to follow, but for now, we are good with the affordable UV option as long as we show that we can protect our relatively clean watershed from intrusion by cattle or other serious threats.

My letter to Council:

Councilor's:

I appreciate the caution of some because it is a big decision and the future is not known. I expect that with global climate change that we might expect a major fire in the watershed at some point in the future. However, if we utilize the ASR well, the "golf course well," and one or two more good producing wells, as Mike and others have proposed, we can live through such an event with safe, clean water. I believe the critical point to be understood from the information provided by Mr. Leland, and apparently understood by you, is that we need to take protection of the watershed seriously, and keep cows out, as envisioned by the original plan. As I believe Mike noted, it is a good time to revisit and create a new, effective, Watershed Management Plan.

With an effective enforceable plan, proceeding with UV and wells should provide safe, affordable drinking water well into the future for our small, sustainable town. 

I might add that my understanding is that the Forest Service was not notified of the most recent cattle trespass, so, if true, and I believe it is, there is plenty of room for improved communication--both to upper city management, Council, and the Forest Service.

Also, the new engineer was impressive as a knowledgeable communicator when given his small chance. 

Hope I'm not being overbearing and out of place--just an opinion from a citizen who has tried to be informed. 

Thank you all for your efforts to understand and find solutions.

Chris

On the issue of the city water specialist communicating with the Forest Service when cows get in the watershed, I was told that the Forest Service had not received a single call from the city about cattle trespass during the last three summers. They do receive some calls from the grazing permittee or Forest Service employees when cows have gotten in, but did not receive a call from the permittee or the city concerning the most recent trespass.

_____

Some Cryptic Aspects of the Crypto Outbreak, Part 2: The best laid schemes of mice and men often go awry

[Updated & edited, YouTube links added, 8/27/13]

Plans?  What plans?

At the August 13, 2013 Council meeting, Baker City Public Works Director Michelle Owen mentioned that "regaining public trust" was one of the thoughts guiding the city's plan to restore safe water service. You may recall that some of that public trust was lost back in November 2011, when the Baker City Council and city residents discovered that Cryptosporidium had first been found in the water supply over a year before, but somehow they were not informed of that fact. The plan to notify the Council of pathogens in our water didn't work out too well and the City has never completely explained what happened. Neither are we aware of any consequences for any city employees involved. Once lost, public trust can be hard to regain, but especially so when that trust is tested repeatedly.

                           Elk Creek Diversion

Last Friday's Baker City Herald article (Experts help determine cause of outbreak 8/23/13) seemed to provide some assurance that the city had a handle on things, with it's two large photos of government scientists and our water specialist in action to help solve the cause of our crypto crisis. Don't worry, everything is under control--look at all that expertise at work! They are doing everything they can to get to the bottom of how such a well managed and protected city watershed could be hit with one of the larger US Cryptosporidium outbreaks in recent years--years in which we focused on the remarkable technological improvements in Cryptosporidium detection while stalling on making decisions about which wonderful water treatment technology we would use to provide us with solutions. Years, I might add, when some didn't always follow, or follow up on the plans.

While we long to look on the bright side, there are reasons to question the rosy picture of effective action and competence presented by the Herald and city staff. Here are some questions they could ask for example:

Why did it take a citizen, me, to get two Councilors interested in going out to see if cattle had been getting into the watershed, if, as we found out later, cattle had been getting into the watershed for at least a few years? Why did City Manager Kee, after I had asked him in an August 11, 2013 email if he would like to go with me to look for cattle sign, tell me on the 13th that "We have walked the drainage a couple of times and have no immediate plans to go back out." Why, after I asked him "Has the city ever found cows in the watershed near Elk Creek?" did he tell me on August 15th that "I don’t know if cows have ever been seen in Elk Creek."? The state and Centers for Disease Control employees took cattle fecal samples on Thursday, August 22, even though the newer ones had apparently been there for a week or more on the 19th, and many others for weeks or years. When were state epidemiologists and Centers for Disease Control employees informed of cattle fecal material from this and previous years being present inside the watershed near the Elk Creek diversion and on upstream? Public Works Director Owen told Councilors at the August 13, 2013 meeting that the state had collected elk fecal samples at Elk Creek, but made no mention of cows or of them collecting fecal material from cattle.

      Relatively recent "cow pies"seen strewn along road near Elk Creek diversion on 8/19/13

Why weren't City Manager Kee, the Councilors, and the citizens of Baker City more aware of the fact  that Public Works Department personnel have known about cows getting into the watershed for over two years? Why didn't we know that the Department of Public works told the state Drinking Water Program on November 18, 2011, less than two weeks after we were told about the crypto in our water supply, that:

In order to better protect the Elk Creek Diversion Intake we will be constructing new fence next spring [Spring of 2012--over a year ago] along the boundaries of the city owned 40 acre parcel. The new fencing will prevent any livestock from entering into the city property. [Emphasis added]

Similarly, why weren't we all, including City Manager Mike Kee, informed early on that the Watershed Management report from March 4, 2013 stated:

Also the City has purchased materials to construct a barb wire fence around 40 acres of City owned land surrounding the Elk Creek Diversion. This fence will provide a barrier for cattle ranging in the close proximity. Currently there is a meandering range allotment fence that extends for miles. This fence protects the Elk Creek Watershed and is in good repair most of the time, but there have been incidents where cattle have found their way to the wrong side of the fence. The new fence will protect the diversion and approximately 1/4 mile ofthe Elk Creek riparian zone from stray cattle. [Emphasis added]

The promised fence was never built. So, given that safe drinking water is of fundamental importance to the healthy functioning and economic prosperity of a city, and given that Public Works knew that cows were regularly trespassing on the watershed around Elk Creek, why wasn't the plan to build that fence in the spring of 2012 followed?  I was told by a person at the state level that "the fencing project was not undertaken due to time/manpower limitations." Well, during that time, our resources in time and manpower were being spent on expanding the irrigation pond at the golf course and on Resort Street under-grounding of utilities. (See the Weekly Reports for the period in question.) Like Marshall McComb, a local resident told me recently: "Holy Cow!"

Sacred cows still near watershed and in wrong pasture a week or more after cows were discovered in watershed.

                 Baker City's well watered golf course

The March 27, 2012 Council meeting discussed a perceived need to change the work on the golf course connection from the $3500 back flow valve agreed upon a year earlier to a $50,000 expansion and sealing of the irrigation pond with associated delivery pipe and other infrastructure. At the meeting, Finance Director Jeanie Dexter reminds the Council that the golf course fund is in a deficit situation to the tune of $52,000 already (assuming $20,000 was going to be spent on a backflow device and $80,000 to be transferred from LAMP fund)), and that even with the $80,000 that the Council could make available to the golf course, there would only be $28,000 in additional funding left from the $80,000 to use for the project.

Why, at that March 27, 2012 Council meeting, after Councilor Roger Coles asked about the backup drinking water well at the golf course, was he told that it had been inoperable for a year? 

Why did much of the Council initially ignore that fact, waiting for the golf course operator to twice insist that he needed it for backup before even thinking about it?  

Given that Public Works Director Owen then told Council that "the well issue can be worked out through the water fund . . . as opposed to the golf course fund . . . .," Why is that well still inoperable one year and five months later, in the middle of a crisis during which we are discussing trying to find additional clean water sources? (See August 13, 2013 video clip here)

       Water Level Gauge for Inoperable Backup Well at Golf Course

The 2012 Watershed Management Report states:

Diversions used for collection of surface water are monitored by City Personnel on a regular basis throughout the year (weather pennitting) as part of our operations. Several observations were made ofunauthorized entry in the Watershed using trail cameras. This information was then given to the USFS law enforcement officials.

Watershed security remains a high priority and the City may continue to monitor points of entry to identify unauthorized entry by using trail cameras.

Apparently they have the trail camera photos, what do they show?  

We often look to technology to save us while forgetting that the human element plays at least as large a part in how well our systems function as technology. Humans have to follow plans that have been developed to make our technologically enhanced systems function properly, and supervisors, as well as others in the regulatory framework, need to make sure those plans are being followed. In our case, if the plans were followed up on, we might not even be talking about the need for a technologically complex and expensive filtration system for the watershed. 

So here's the plan--it's an old one but has important sections that have not been taken seriously.

In trying to understand this recent, destructive and debilitating crypto problem within our watershed I asked the city for our Watershed Management Plan which is required by state law. I asked for it last week and after I received it I was told by the city that they then had posted it on the city website. I could not easily find it, but I'm sure it is there somewhere. In addition to having requirements, it has interesting historical documents within it, one of which is a 1904 Presidential proclamation establishing our "protected" watershed.

Among other things, the Watershed Management Plan states or requires the following (Emphasis Added):

*The goal of the Baker City Watershed Management Plan is to maintain or improve the present quantity and quality of the raw water of the Watershed, and to ensure the water quality is maintained at or above the level set by the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWIR) to avoid filtration.

*The City was notified by the Oregon Health Division by a letter dated July 26, 1991, that the City can meet all the criteria for exemption to filtration.

*Big game management will be directed toward maintaining proper herd levels of deer and elk which are compatible with water quality criteria. Animal population will be controlled to not degrade the water quality in the Watershed.

*Livestock: Livestock will not be allowed within the boundaries of the Watershed. Preventative measures will be used if needed to prevent animals from trespassing into the Watershed. 

*No grazing of livestock in the Watershed is permitted.

*If the turbidity is a wide spread or long lasting problem, the system will be switched from surface water to ground water by using one or both of the City's two deep wells which have a combined capacity of approximately 2,800 GPM, which exceeds the water demand in the spring of the year .. the time when the turbidity is most likely to occur. Even during periods of high demand, it is adequate with some rationing. [These two wells are the ASR well, (presently functioning), and the well in the golf course parking lot (hasn't functioned for years).]

*Annual Report   

B) Personnel Education/Experience:(1) Minimum education of key personnel in Watershed Management: 

 (a) Director of Public Works minimum qualifications: Graduation from a four year college or university with specialization in civil engineering and three years of progressive responsible professional experience in public works administration including supervisory capacity; or any combination of experience and education that demonstrates provision of the knowledge, skills, and abilities listed above.   

(b) Water Supervisor minimum qualifications: Five years experience in water maintenance and water and sewer construction work, with one year in a supervisory capacity; certified to Class Two as water treatment operator, water distribution operator, within two years of appointment as supervisor; or any combination of experience and educational training that demonstrates provision of the knowledge, skill, and abilities listed above. 

(c) Water Specialist minimum qualifications: Three years experience in the operation and maintenance of water treatment plant; supplemented by special coursework in water treatment operation; or any combination of education and experience which demonstrates provision of the knowledge, skill, and ability listed above; Water Treatment II Classification or successful certification within one year from date of appointment or within next State of Oregon certification testing cycle.

*An annual written report will be made and submitted to the State of Oregon Health Department with a copy to Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, headquarters, no later than January 15th of each year [Now October 10 per OAR 333-061-0040(1)(E)(B)(i).]. At minimum the report will include the following:

. . . . 

B) Key Individuals & Qualifications: A list of all key individuals responsible for theWatershed. The list will include their education, experience and training relating to theirability to operate the Watershed. 

*[August 1991] MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING between WALLOWA-WHITMAN NATIONAL FOREST and CITY OF BAKER CITY, OREGON

 Zones of Influence: This includes lands adjacent to the Watershed which will affect or be affected by management of the Watershed. Zones of Influence mayor may not drain into the Watershed, but management of the resources and activities in these zones will be done in such a manner as to reflect the standards of management desired within the Watershed.  . . . .

Zones of Influence: A Zone of Influence exists outside the boundaries of the Watershed which could have a substantial impact on the water quality produced within the boundaries of the Watershed. 

The areas designated as Zones of Influence lying within the National Forest boundaries will be managed with Best Management Practices (BMP) and as prescribed in the Watershed Management Plan. No activities will be allowed in the Zones of Influence which will have an adverse impact on the water quality or quantity. Special attention will be given to the use of any herbicides, pesticides, or other chemicals to assure no contamination is allowed to occur which would affect the water quality within the boundary of the Watershed. Also, special attention will be given to any grazing permits given within the Zones of Influence to ensure that livestock will not stray into the Watershed.   . . . .

Nothing in this MOD shall be construed as obligatory of either party to expend funds, nor involve the United States or the City in any contracts or other obligation for future payment of monies in excess of appropriations authorized by law.

Here are some of the Baker City Watershed Management Reports that I have been able to obtain. Note that all appear to be late, most do not include the qualifications of the Director of Public Works and some do not include the qualifications the Water Supervisor, as required by the Baker City Water Management Plan. The 2012 and 2011 reports show that the Public works staff were aware of cattle getting into the watershed and of their unmet plans to build a fence to keep them out. My emails and interactions with the City Manager and Councilors indicate that that they too did not know that cattle were getting into the watershed around the times when testing and Cryptosporidium disease outbreaks showed that cryptosporidium was in the watershed. I do not know whether they knew or didn't know, I only know that they did not indicate to me that they knew. I also do not know whether cattle are the cause of our Cryptosporidium outbreak, and because of the way things were handled, we may never know exactly what the cause was. If the state had known ASAP that fresh cattle fecal material was found in the watershed, they might have been able to get better samples to genotype. Perhaps if the state had returned my call prior to their trip on August 22, they would have asked myself and Councilor Dorrah to show them where the freshest samples were located. Instead, they asked the Herald to tag along to provide PR.

Baker City 2012 Watershed Management Report

Baker City 2011 Watershed Management Report

Baker City 2007 Watershed Management Report

Baker City 2006 Watershed Management Report

I'll add more reports if I can get them, but the last Public Works Director who may have met the requirements for pubic works director laid down in the Watershed Management Plan was probably Dick Fleming, who was asked to resign by City Manager Jerry Gilham in April of 2004. He was after all a professional engineer.

So, the best laid schemes of mice and men will often go awry,
And I know for sure, that there is too, more than meets the eye.
People may pose and politics will play,
But it's often education that saves the day.

"the best laid schemes of mice and men will often go awry" is from To a Mouse, a poem by Robert Burns, 1786, the rest from yours truly.

Perhaps if the city would have published their plans and Annual Watershed Reports on the website earlier and explained them at City Council meetings, some of us would have had a clearer picture of the dangers we faced, and would have asked some relevant questions when they could have made a difference.

I might add that Council priorities play a big part in how things turn out.  We needed attention to basic infrastructure for fundamental priorities, like watershed management, water quality and water treatment for all citizens, but we got Council attention and scarce resources spent on the needs of relatively few golfers and the owners of property around the golf course, as well as to the needs of businesses on Resort Street, and their fans inside and outside of local government, who wanted underground utilities there. They also approved paying off $25,000 of a $61,000, 2002 airport facilities project debt while using $36,256 on "loan" from the equipment and vehicle fund to refinance the rest. The golf course has generally received significant subsidies from the city since the ill-advised creation of the "back nine" about a decade ago, and both the golf course and the under-grounding of utilities on Resort Street have soaked up funding, as well as city worker time and equipment, when we should have been expending those resources on protecting against known threats in the watershed.

Baker City's well watered, and not very well used, golf course as seen in reflection from clubhouse window

Beyond what I've posted previously, above are some of the documents, circumstances, and facts, surrounding the history leading up to our crypto crisis, and it currently is the best I can do. You can use these findings as you will. I have already forgotten some important points, but will add them and the two relevant YouTube Council videos as I can (done).

There is a Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday night at 7 PM (8/27/13), and two state representatives will be there to discuss our options. 

Forgot to add that the state epidemiologist, Emelio De Bess, confirmed late Friday, when I was finally able to talk with him,  that the species of Cryptosporidium found in the human fecal samples was Cryptosporidium parvum, and they were all of the same genotype. They will compare that species and genotype to the species and genotype found in the other fecal samples they have collected so far from water and animals. Hopefully, the cattle fecal samples he collected will be from the younger animals and be in good enough condition for molecular analysis. He wasn't sure if the sample they have from the 913 crypto collected in the water sample from Elk Creek earlier will be in good enough condition to genotype for comparison to the human fecal samples already genotyped because the staining of the slide may have made that impossible. He is hopeful, and did not say what happened to the rest of the sample, if there was any left.
____

Some Cryptic Aspects of the Crypto Outbreak, Part 1

[Edited and updated  8/23/13]
This blog may contain more information about Cryptosporidium than some people want.  If so, skip down to the YouTube videos at the end.  One from Wally Sykes in Wallowa County about a Wolverine, and the other about the activities of the Sheriff in Malheur County.  As usual, if they don't play, click on the title above the video, and it will take you directly to the YouTube video. The previous blog on this subject has also been updated.
__

One of the interesting problems associated with the 1993 Milwaukee, WI, Cryptosporidum outbreak, which affected some 400,000 people directly, was that the actual cause was never determined. Those that studied the epidemic could not come to a definitive conclusion as to whether it was caused by dairy cattle or a sewage issue.

Most of us would like to know the primary cause of disease outbreaks that create such damaging effects to people's health and financial well being, so that we can prevent them from happening in the future. This is certainly here in Baker City, where we face large expenditures necessitated by the state and federal drinking water rules, and where economic losses due to sickness and curtailment of business activity have been large. When the cause remains obscure, correcting such a problem efficiently becomes extremely difficult. If we knew for certain that the problem was caused by mountain goats, elk, cows, (and yes, I've heard "sabotage" offered up) or some other specific agent or event, we could zero in on effective solutions that might save us millions of dollars that would otherwise be directed at prevention associated with unknown causes and for unknown reasons.

As of now, given the available information, the cause of our Crypto outbreak remains a mystery.

I have tried this week to get information from the County Health Department and the Oregon Health Authority about what kinds of tests have been performed on what types of samples in order to help people understand more about the actual cause of our waterborne Cryptosporidium outbreak. Information is hard to come by, at least for me, although it appears that mountain goats are no longer a suspect. Yesterday morning, Alicia Hills from our County Public Health Department, was able to reveal that the tests on mountain goat scat were negative for Cryptosporidium. That, coupled with few crypto oocysts in Goodrich Reservoir, tends to count them out as a significant contributor to any crypto load in the watershed.

Here is the crux of my problem as a citizen blogger trying to get current relevant information: On July 16, 2013, I asked the Oregon Health authority (OHA) for information about a different potential health problem. As of today, they have not answered my questions.

Yesterday I left a message to an OHA person concerning our crypto outbreak, and what kinds of tests have been performed on what types of samples, because the intermediate contact allowed me to leave them a message. I had asked them the same questions on Tuesday. I have not received a return call. I was not able to talk to a person even remotely connected to the Crypto outbreak study until today, and he promised to try to find answers to the questions I asked from some unknown person who is supposed to have some idea about what is going on. Additionally, the state drinking authority contact that used to respond to my questions has gone silent [Seems to be back today! 8/23/13]. Apparently, I'm not a preferred provider of information to the public. If history is a guide. . . .

The city though, has in some cases been responsive (I'm grateful), but trying to get information on the current costs of UV treatment vs filtration remains frustrating, even though people are forming opinions on the choice we should make without adequate information about the current costs to be borne in the long term. Once people commit to an opinion, positions tend to harden, and some will try to defend their opinion regardless of new information. That is why Herald editorials and Herald opinion polls in the middle of a crisis, before adequate information is provided, do not serve the public well. It can though be an effective strategy for advancing a position without regard to the financial welfare of the community.

For review, here are the figures for treatment options from November 22, 2009 (Capital is essentially the cost of the plant, "$M" stands for MILLIONS of dollars, O and M stands for yearly Operation and Maintenance [multiply by $1,000 so 332 means $332,000 yearly O and M costs]):

Table 2. Cost Opinion for LT2ESWTR Compliance Options

Compliance Option          Capital ($M)        O and M ($1,000/yr)            Present Worth ($M)

UV                                         2.3                       13                                           2.5

Ozone                                   4.8                         89                                          5.8

Chlorine Dioxide                    12.7                       74                                          13.6

Membrane Filtration              17.7                       332                                         21.5

Notes:

1. Capital Cost includes Engineering and Services During Construction

2. Oxone and Chlorine Dioxide costs from Formation and Control of DBPs in Drinking

Water, AWWA 1999. Chlorine Dioxide costs include 12-MG contact tank.

3. UV Costs from UV Disinfection Costs for Inactivating Cryptosporidium, JAWWA June

2001

4. Costs updated to June 2009 dollars using ENR 20-city average construction cost index

Assumptions:

Average Annual Flow = 4 mgd

Plant Capacity = 12 mgd

Discount (interest) rate = 6%

Amortization Period = 20 yrs

Engineering and Services During Construction = 25%

Contingency on Capital Costs = 30%

The information available from 2009, as well as the information provided below, would indicate that committing to filtration at this point is ill advised.

Getting back to the cryptic aspects of the crypto outbreak: what kinds of tests have been performed on what types of fecal material and water samples, so that we can understand more about the actual cause of our waterborne Cryptosporidium outbreak? Alicia Hills said that the only test result she had was the negative test for Cryptosporidium in mountain goat scat, and that she did not know what all the samples taken consisted of. She did not know whether the cattle fecal material found near the Elk Creek water supply intake had been tested. After all, no one was aware, or at least admitting, that cattle had been in the watershed until after I asked first Mike Kee, and then Clair Button, to go with me to investigate on August 12--a request that resulted in our August 19th trip to Elk Creek. Given the washed out condition of some of the more recent cattle fecal material found on that date, it is conceivable that some of it was present prior to the August 1 rain event. No one I've talked to thus far has been able to answer the question of whether they have tested the more recent fecal material from cattle in the watershed, and those who should know have not returned my calls.

Without that information, it all remains a mystery.

So I get to poke around the edges in the dark because the state is not responsive. I hate to resort to public records requests, but may have to.

Two Cow Pies up on trail to the east of the water supply diversion at Elk Creek.  They look older than a week, but less than two months old. If modern science can radiocarbon date a dinosaur bone that is millions of years old, one might expect that they can date a cow pie of recent origin?  Maybe it isn't sensitive enough for that.

One can though, do research on the published scientific findings from studies published on the internet. Reading through the findings may be challenging for some, but I encourage everyone to do so. It is not entertainment unless you have a fondness for facts, but it can be enlightening. Here are some of those findings (Direct quotations are in italics with underlining added, all misunderstandings obviously my own):

1)  From Genotyping Cryptosporidium from water to source track fecal contaminationin agricultural watersheds from a Thesis by Norma Jean Ruecker, UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY, JANUARY, 2013. (I rely on this first because it is recent and incorporates information from many previous studies.)

• Species originating from wildlife represented a low risk to human health. 
• Molecular tools exist for effective molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium oocysts in water so as to identify host sources and individual species or genotypes (paraphrased). It is ... important that the molecular tools used for characterizing human isolates are capable of detecting all known species/genotypes of Cryptosporidium. In other words, the ability exists to make decisions about the probable cause of a crypto outbreak, and to differentiate between pathogenic and non pathogenic species and genotypes of Cryptosporidium in your water supply and in fecal samples tested.
• Ultimately, these approaches can be used to characterize sources of fecal pollution in the environment and aid in the development of mitigation strategies focused on reducing the burden of Cryptosporidium in drinking water sources in an effort to protect public health.
• A thorough review of the published surveys of Cryptosporidium in cattle reported prevalence ranges from 0 to 100% with typically higher rates in younger animals compared to older ones.
• With C. parvum being the only cattle-associated species which has been demonstrated to be a significant zoonotic risk to humans [a human pathogen--cause of disease in humans], the knowledge of age dependent prevalence challenges the current understanding of the risk that cattle associated Cryptosporidium spp. pose to public health.
• As C. parvum has been detected in all the major livestock species, it poses the greatest risk for zoonotic transmission to humans. Pre-weaned calves are considered the major animal host for C. parvum and the most likely source of zoonotic cryptosporidiosis. [Although Cryptosporidium parvum does exist in weaned calves. Chris]
• recently as many as 25 species and close to 50 genotypes [of Cryptosporidium] have been described. This information provides a solid framework for assessing public health risks and also allows tracking of the host sources associated with Cryptosporidium contamination in the
  environment.
• The species of high risk to human health were present in only 1.2% of the samples analyzed. This knowledge challenges the LT2ESWTR regulation in the US by providing evidence that the regulation may be overprotective, leading, in some cases, to unnecessary capital expenditures for water utilities. Of the 25 species and ~50 genotypes of Cryptosporidium described, only 2 species, C. hominis and C. parvum, account for 95% of human clinical infections. Only a few other Cryptosporidium species and genotypes account for all other clinical infections in humans. This study demonstrates that although 45% of all the water samples analyzed had Cryptosporidium oocysts detected, only 17% of the samples had species or genotypes detected which have been associated with human infections. Species of Cryptosporidium that are considered to be of high risk to humans: C. hominis and C. parvum. Two others are medium risk and three are low risk. The rest are considered no risk.
• sustained viability [of crypto oocysts] is dependent upon the environmental conditions they are exposed to (i.e., solar UV inactivation, dessication, fermentation). [I would add freezing--see later citation]
• It is a conclusion of this thesis that until improved and more accurate models can be developed, Cryptosporidium monitoring including genotyping is the only reliable way to assess parasite loading in surface water. 
• Hazard identification is considered the central element, or foundational basis, of the risk assessment framework from which the other components are derived. . . . .Simply put, not all Cryptosporidium parasites observed in water are infectious to humans. Even when considering those that are hazardous to humans, a relative level of risk exists (i.e., high, medium, low).
• detection and subsequent molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium oocysts in water can be used to infer potential host sources of fecal pollution impacting water quality within a watershed, an extremely important part of the risk mitigation element of the risk assessment framework. Identifying the sources of pollution contributing to the Cryptosporidium burden allows for the development of watershed protection strategies designed to reduce or mitigate these environmental burdens.
  
• data presented in this thesis suggests that wildlife appear to represent little risk to public health in the development of cryptosporidiosis in humans. In this context, management of wildlife may not be necessary or worthwhile in terms of risk mitigation for some drinking water systems.
• the Water Research Foundation (financially supported by water utility subscribers) initiated a request for proposals entitled: “Selecting and Standardizing the Most Appropriate Cryptosporidium Genotyping Tool for Regulatory Compliance Monitoring”, in 2009, with the intent of developing a validated Cryptosporidium genotyping tool suitable for inclusion into the regulatory water quality monitoring frameworks of the USEPA (LT2ESWTR)
• Regulators of the water industry are likely to remain risk adverse and therefore moving forward, municipal water utilities will continue to challenge regulation through the use of applied science. This will be driven by the need for municipalities to balance fiscal responsibility with public health safety.

2) Giardia Cyst and Cryptosporidium Oocyst Survival in Water, Soil, and Cattle Feces

• Cryptosporidium oocysts were more environmentally resistant. At −4 and 4°C, the oocysts could survive in water and soil for 12 wk but degradation was accelerated at 25°C. Cryptosporidium oocysts also were degraded more rapidly in feces and in soil containing natural microorganisms. [Crypto oocysts survive for over three months in water at 24.8 and 39.2 degrees fahrenheit, as might be expected in frozen and unfrozen water, and under a blanket of snow. Most microorganisms are not going to be very active at 24.8 degrees and so will not be degrading crypto oocysts.]

3) Effects of Low Temperatures on Viability of Cryptosporidium parvum Oocysts

• All mice that received oocysts frozen at -10 [degrees] C   [14 degrees fahrenheit] for 8, 24, and 168 h and those that received oocysts stored at 5 [degrees] C for 168 h had developmental-stage parasites. These findings  demonstrate for the first time that oocysts of C. parvum in water can retain viability and infectivity after freezing and that oocysts survive longer at higher freezing temperatures. [This implies that oocysts may survive at 14 degrees F for some time]
  
  
• In nature, survival of oocysts might be extended beyond the times observed in the present study when water containing minerals or organic material is frozen or when oocysts are frozen at temperatures above -10 [degrees]C  [14 degrees fahrenheit]. Such conditions might be found in areas where, after ground temperatures fall to just below freezing, a layer of snow insulates that surface from much colder air temperatures, enabling oocysts to survive perhaps for weeks or months.

4) Selection and Application of Microbial Source Tracking Tools For Water-Quality Investigations

Cryptosporidium oocysts: 

• Can remain viable for greater than 6 months at 20 degrees Celsius in water (Fayer and others, 2000. 
• In three environmental freshwaters, 0.1% survival over 10 weeks at 25 degrees and higher rates of survival at 4 degrees (Simmons and Sobsey, 2002). 
• Survival and infectivity in freshwater detected after more than 12 weeks (Olson and others 1999).

5) Surface Water Quality--Overland and Near-Surface Transport of Cryptosporidium parvum from Vegetated and Nonvegetated Surfaces

• Livestock, both open range and those in concentrated animal facilities, have been associated with high concentrations of C. parvum. . . . . Infected animals can pass as many as 10 billion oocysts per gram of feces, and a small number of infected animals can produce enough oocysts to potentially contaminate a large water source. [This goes a long way toward explaining how a small amount of infected fecal material from an infected calf in a water supply could contaminate the water around, say, a water supply intake in a small creek.]

6) Cryptosporidiosis of Livestock

• C. parvum, C. andersoni, C. canis, C. felis, C. hominis, and C. suis, have been reported in human infections. [The vast majority by C. parvum and C. hominis]
. . . in order to accurately assess the risk that livestock might pose to humans, molecular-based prevalence studies are necessary. Such studies could help to identify potential source of these organisms causing human infection, and lead to improved control strategies. Greater understanding of the species and genotypes present in animals and the patterns of transmission can improve our ability to control these infections will hopefully result in significant benefits to society in terms of both animal and human health.

7)  Concentrations of Pathogens and Indicators in Animal Feces in the Sydney Watershed

• Pathogen and fecal indicator concentrations were generally higher in domestic animal feces than in wildlife feces. Future studies to quantify potential pathogen risks in drinking-water watersheds should thus focus on quantifying pathogen loads from domestic animals and livestock rather than wildlife.

Lastly: On Cryptosporidium detection limits:

8)  Effects of Time and Watershed Characteristics on the Concentration of Cryptosporidium Oocysts in River Water

• . . .  the detection limit of the analytical method, about 0.1 oocysts per liter; . . . .  

_____

Wallowa Wolverine

__

Corrupt Cops Caught by Their Own Cruiser Camera!!!

AP Article on Incident:

Flight recorders found in deadly UPS plane crash

Sheriff says FBI to probe activist traffic stop

Published: August 14, 2013

By JEFF BARNARD — Associated Press

GRANTS PASS, Ore. —

. . . .

"We are sending all information and recordings that we have (to the FBI) and they will look at it," Sheriff

Brian E. Wolfe told The Associated Press in an email.

"I want to make sure nothing was done wrong," he said.

. . . .

Wolfe acknowledged that two deputies, acting on orders from a supervisor, pulled over Steve Hindi, . . . .

Wolfe said there was no traffic violation or evidence of any other crime.

Deputy Brian Belnap and Deputy Brian Beck were on duty and following orders from their supervisor, Lt. Rob Hunsucker, Wolfe said. There was no probable cause a crime or traffic violation had been committed.

No one has been disciplined or placed on leave, he said.

. . . .