Wise Use Movement?

==========
Posted to gonzobeats 3/4/04:
==========
Walker posted: "one thing i've never understood about the "wise use
movement" is that it advocates selling off big chunks of BLM and
other lands to private (rich, usually)parties who then can put up
fences and deny access to regular people who have been going there
for years. a few people benefit and everyone else loses."
==========
There's more to that story -- at least here in Idaho -- where logging
not so long ago was a major industry for this state and the lifeblood
of every small mountain town here. Now our logs get hauled (at great
and increasing expense) to Oregon -- the closest sawmill. Because
the Forest Service sells their trees well below cost of production,
it's a glaring example of corporate welfare . . . always has
been . . . and I predict . . . always will be. Once roads are
created, the Forest Service has a legal obligation to maintain those
roads because recreational access is supposed to be one of their
mandates -- admittedly a low-priority one. Due to rising labor
costs, this is expensive -- especially when one considers how long it
takes for tree farms to bear fruit again -- AND when one
factors in that those new trees -- too -- will be sold for a tiny
fraction of their value (production cost).
==========
So their grand solution -- aka the "wise use movement" -- is to sell
those "liabilities" (thousands of acres of recently logged and
replanted real estate) cheap to whomever can buy them. Of course,
there are restrictions to make sure these vast holdings remain in one
piece and aren't simply subdivided by some greedy glutton and sold
off to the highest bidder. This ensures that only individuals who
already have more money than humans should be allowed are able to buy
them. Curiously enough, the new private owner has NO obligation to
maintain any roads OR to allow any public recreational access. 20
years later -- when the trees are big enough to log again -- he can
sell the logging rights back to the Forest Service and they can sell
them again for much less to whichever logging outfit they're looking
to prop up at that time.
==========
These shell games are becoming more elaborate all the time but the
moral implications of their crime do not change. These are public
lands -- owned by each and every one of us -- roads already built
should be maintained -- regardless of cost. Those who make money
from these lands -- primarily loggers and lumber companies -- should
pay enough to cover the ACTUAL cost of producing the resource they
harvest. Otherwise, it's a false economy -- unable to EVER sustain
itself without a constant influx of cash from Uncle Sammy -- welfare
for corporations which already have way too much money and power and
control.
==========
States like Idaho are s-l-o-w-l-y learning that tourism is the
cleanest game in town and folks aren't coming here to gaze into our
mining tunnels or slosh through our feed lots or get sunburned in our
clear-cuts. They're coming here to float white water rushing down un-
damned rivers (typo intended) and to bike or hike or ride horses into
the Frank Church wilderness areas (where no motorized anything is
allowed). It costs relatively nothing to preserve these natural and
scenic resources which can earn this state monumental chunks of money
from now on -- indefinitely. We only have to exercise enough self-
restraint to keep from plundering what precious few native areas
remain.
==========
It's been said we can judge a civilization by how it treats the least
of its citizens. I think we'll also be judged on our ability -- or
the lack thereof -- to show restraint and NOT rape and plunder every
last stinkin' living thing for our own VERY short-term greed! Why
are so many of us so unforgiveably selfish that we just don't
friggin' care what life will be like on this earth for the children
of our children's children . . . 1,000 years from now . . . 10,000
years from now?
==========
sail4free
==========