forest voice spring 2006

8/9/2019 Forest Voice Spring 2006

1/16

Native Forest CouncilPO Box 2190Eugene, OR 97402

Forest Voice

Nonprofit Org.U.S. Postage PAIDEugene, ORPermit No 310

A Publication of the Native Forest Council since 1988 www.forestcouncil.org

Spring 2006 Volume 18Number 2


2/16

Forest Voice Spring 006

Speak Truth to Power Do the Right Thing Nothing Less! The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,so help me God. Theres a lot o talk about conservatives,religion and God these days, but nobody ever talks aboutthe plain truth, just doing the right thing even when itcomes to something as crucial as saving li e on Earth. All too many politicians are corporate-owned and operated,and do whatever their loudest constituents and richestcampaign contributors tell them to. All too ew show anygenuine outrage at the destructive immorality o a smallportion o corporate America the industries who rape andpillage Nature, the very lungs o our planet to make a

buck, regardless o what it costs the rest o us. The honest truth is that humanity needs trees to survive.Trees shade our ground, create topsoil, clean the air andhelp the land attract, hold and ilter water. The trees andtheir roots puri y the water as the rains all. Clean streamskeep millions o aquatic and other species alive. The cycleis per ect.

But theres another cycle thats killing them. Politicians makeit easy or industry to make ast money by strip-mining ournational orests. Corporations take that gi t and turn it intopro its or investors. Their pro its then go to their politicallackeys campaign co ers and the cycle continues. The only ones le t out o the cycle o corporate- undedpolitics are you and I and Nature. Nature was never meant to cope with this cycle o destruc-tion. Still, no matter what, Nature will heal itsel over time.The question is whether or not humanity will be able tosurvive.

Every day, our uture is sold o in pieces. Logging in ournational orests happens because the Forest Service givesaway our nations once-rich heritage. Big Business hasbecome expert at rigging the system, creating or indingthe loopholes that get them big pro its. They win youlose. We ight or an environmental law here, they chopdown thousands o native cathedral trees there. They take aprecious national orest, breathing and alive, and turn it intoa wasteland o slash, logs, wood chips and pulp.

You know this equation is wrong. All Americans want theirland, air and water healthy. Most people simply arent awareo the corrupt game that is stealing their uture rom them.

In the worst o corporate culture, morality takes a back seatto pro itability. For too long, big green groups across Americahave given up the moral high ground. Sadly, they ignore theloss o our once great Constitutional Democracy. Liberty& Justice have been replaced by abusive and malignantcorporate power, and too many o our allies continue tobet on loser parties and politicians no one really supportsin the irst place. While they are giving lip service to grandnotions o de ending the Earth, national orests are stripmined, polar ice caps are melting, rising water temperaturesare creating killer storms, greenhouse gas pollution iscontinuing to increase, and the specter o human extinctionlooms ever closer. They all in to a game o good cop / bad

cop, trading in our clean air, land, and water or quick,short-term wins. For an example o this, please take a lookat the green victories in the Great Bear Rain Forest shownon pages 8 and 9. Finally, more and more people are realizing that the timehas come to demand Zero Cut and end the capitulate andcompromise model. Not another tree removed or destroyed!Global warming is upon us and happening aster thananyone anticipated. Report a ter report, study a ter study,are sounding the alarm we, and others long be ore us, havebeen broadcasting or decades.

This land IS your land, not the corporations. Never orgetit. Act or whats right, even i they call it unreasonable.When it comes to survival, there is no such thing ascompromise. Either we work to preserve li e on this planet,or we are working to eradicate it.

There is no more middle ground to stand on (as so muchhas been logged, grazed, mined and drilled into oblivion!)We have neither the time, energy nor resources to waste.The time has come to take a stand. Its now or never: yourli e, land and liberty depend on it. Join the Native ForestCouncil, and help us hold the hard line!

In times o chaos lies great opportunity, and we certainlyhave the dire times and political chaos. Never orget that we

have the power that each o us has this power, this powero one and that when a ew o us act together that powercan magni y and impossible dreams come true.

Big dreams inspire our souls. Big ights get lots o excitementand attention. So lets dream big; ight hard or whats rightand nothing less.

Tim Hermach,President

Forest Voice 1988-2006ISSN 1069-2002Native Forest CouncilPO Box 2190Eugene, OR 97402541.688.2600Fax 541.461.2156in o@ orestcouncil.orgwww. orestcouncil.org

Forest Voice is sent ree tomembers o the Native

Forest Council. The costo U.S. membership is$35 annually. Bulk orderso the Forest Voice areavailable or $50 per 100.A complimentary copy isavailable on request.

All rights to publication o articles appearing in Forest Voice are reserved.

Publisher/Editor Tim Hermach

Managing Editor David Porter

Research Editor Josh Schlossberg

Proofreading and Edits Jim Flynn

Special ThanksBrett Cole

Jim FlynnFunk/Levis & Associates:

Chris Berner, David FunkMarriner OrumSarah WiltzMatt WuerkerCharlotte TalberthMarcia HanscomDeborah Ortuno

No ThanksAll those who eel its OKto cut deals that leave uswith less native orests andclean water.

Submission GuidelinesWe welcome unsolicitedsubmissions that addressissues relevant to publiclands protection andsupport the Native ForestCouncils mission. I youwould like us to return yourwork, please include a SASEor send an email to Tim@

orestcouncil.org.

Inspired? Incensed? Impressed?Please write:Native Forest CouncilPO Box 2190

Eugene, OR 97402

Cover PhotoBrett ColeWild NorthwestPhotography

This publication containscopyrighted material theuse o which has not alwaysbeen speci ically authorizedby the copyright owner. Weare making such materialavailable in our e orts toadvance understanding o environmental, political,

human rights, economic,democracy, scienti ic, andsocial justice issues, etc. Webelieve this constitutes a air use o any such copy-righted material as provided

or in section 107 o the USCopyright Law. In accor-dance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the materialin this publication is dis-tributed without pro it tothose who have expresseda prior interest in receivingthe included in ormation

or research and educationalpurposes. For more in orma-tion go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml .


3/16


BLM Seeks Increase in Herbicide Use

The BLM has proposed to triple the amount o land onwhich it uses herbicides in the Western United States.

The area sprayed in Western Oregon would increase to70,000 acres annually, up rom the current yearly rateo 21,000 acres, under the plan in a vegetation dra t

environmental impact statement.

Bush Suspends Environmental Rules onGasoline

In a misguided e ort to control rising gas prices, PresidentBush has ordered a temporary suspension o environmentalrules or gasoline production, and halted or the summerthe purchase o crude oil or the governments emergencyreserve.

A ter promising to investigate any possibilities o price- ix-ing or anticompetitive, anticonsumer conduct, the Bushadministration responded days later, saying it sees no directevidence o pro iteering by big U.S. oil companies.

More Trees and Jobs go to ChinaA new trade agreement between the U.S. and China willmake it easier or logs to be sold in China. The Alaskan De-partment o Natural Resources helped broker the trade agree-ment, which will allow Alaska logs to be umigated in FujianProvince in eastern China.

Alaska annually exports about $100 million worth o treesto Asia. Chinas demand or imported wood has grown sincethe country enacted de orestation measures that have curbedthe domestic timber supply.

Water Officials Authority Upheld

The Cali ornia Supreme Court upheld the authority o thestates water boards over that o Division o Forestry in re-ponse to the Division o Forestrys attempt to exempt Paci icLumber rom complying with rules requiring them to moni-tor the e ects o logging on streambeds.

Native ForestCouncil

The Native Forest Council isa nonpro it, tax-deductibleorganization ounded bybusiness and pro essionalpeople alarmed by thewanton destruction o ournational orests. We believe a

sound economy and a soundenvironment must not beincompatible and that currentpublic land managementpractices are probablycatastrophic to both.

The mission o the NativeForest Council is to protectand preserve every acre o publicly owned land in theUnited States.

Board of DirectorsAllan BranscombCalvin HecoctaTim Hermach

Advisory BoardEd Begley, Jr. Je DeBonisLarry DeckmanErika FinstadDavid FunkRev. James Parks MortonLewis SeilerFraser ShillingKaryn StricklerEd Dorsch

PresidentTimothy Hermach

Staff Josh Schlossberg

Volunteers John Borowski

David PorterLuke Pruen

Forester Roy Keene

Seattle OfficeSeattle, WA206.783.0728

seattlein o@ orestcouncil.org David DivelbissSuzanne Pardee

Josh KnappTim YoungAnanthaswami RajagopalMarc Church

Regional Representatives

Margaret Hays YoungBrooklyn, NY718.789.0038718.789.8157 ax

Wayne NortonGainesville, FL352.373.8733

Jason TamblynDuluth, GA678.969.7013

Kris MoormanAames, IA515.232.1316

News and Views

With less than 5% o our nations native orests remaining,countless species teetering on the brink o extinction, andthe increasingly devastating impacts o climate change, itsno surprise that many o us eel helpless

But we at the Native Forest Council want you to realize thatthere has never been a better time to wake the Americanpeople, draw a green line in the sand, and create widespreadand lasting change throughout our nation! The time hascome or a new consciousness that acknowledges the vitalimportance o protecting and preserving the natural systemswe depend on or our very survival.

The irst step is to do no more harm and protect and preservethe remaining intact ecosystems existing in our country: thereservoirs o li e ound on publicly owned lands.

Since these lands already belong to us, weve already wonmore than hal the battle. And the only thing we need toput us over the top is your help.

Heres just a ew o the things you can do to change the

world:

Become a volunteer or intern at Native Forest Council.There is an endless array o exciting and challenging projectsjust waiting or some resh energy to move them orward.This is a wonder ul opportunity to become a vital membero our team o passionate and dedicated people, committedto protecting what is every Americans birthright: our publiclands and water.

Help distribute Native Forest Councils quarterly, the Forest Voice . Be an active part o educating the public aboutenvironmental and political issues that no responsibleAmerican should be ignorant o .

Make sure everyone you know votes, even i its or none o

the above. With 60% not voting, its no wonder politiciansactions are not dictated by the public.

Make connections among teachers and pro essors, romkindergarten to college, to help disseminate Native ForestCouncils Google Earth DVD and powerpoint presentationNative Forests are Not Tree Farms . The powerpoint is the irststep in our process o developing The Honest EducationCampaign, which is an environmental science curriculumto be implemented into public schools nationwide. Ourgoal is to provide honest in ormation to counteract the lieso Project Learning Tree and other corporate educationalmaterials which are just industry propaganda disguisedas education and are currently polluting the minds o ourchildren.

Get out and witness irst hand the wonders o the naturalworld. There is no better inspiration to motivate someone to

ight or the survival o our planet than walking beneath thetowering trees, listening to the music o the clear runningstream and breathing in the sweet smells o the orest.

Write, call, ax, or email your elected o icials. Politiciansall too o ten complain that they dont get much publicinput. Dont let them hide behind idle excuses. Give theman ear ul! Remind them that public lands provide us withthe basic necessities o li e such as pure water, clean air, richtopsoil and a livable climate. Demand they stop treatingthese treasures as i they were only the eeding trough o dishonest and destructive extraction industries.

Raise or contribute money or the Native Forest Council.Donate a car, boat, plane, property, real estate or hard-earnedmoney to help us continue our long-term work to save whatsle t o our public lands and stop urther harm to our livingli e support system.

Leave a Legacy for Life!

Heres How You Can Help!

Printed on 0% RecycledPaper, 40% PostConsumer, with Soy-based Ink

1 6th annualHeartwood Forest Council

and6th annual

Summit for the Mountains

Memorial Day WeekendMay 26-29, 2006

Cedar Lakes Conference Center, Ripley, WV(38 miles north of Charleston, WV)

We invite you to co-sponsor or attend thisimportant event, which will focus on ending thedevastation of mountaintop removal coal mining.

Healing

Mountains

D r a w i n

g b y J u l i e F l e t c h e r

For more information on OVEC and Heartwoods HealingMountains Conference, please go to www.heartwood.org


4/16

4 Forest Voice Spring 006

A book reviewby Jurriaan KampOde Magazinewww.odemagazine.com

Looking a hal -century into the uture, a maverickbusinessman warns that America may all apart asa nation. He believes the U.S. can avoid this ate but that it will require some radical steps now.

In 1950 the United Nations had 50 members. To-day there are 191. The vast majority o these newcountries came rom A rica, Asia and Europe. Onlythree countries (Surinam, Guyana and Belize) outo the 141 new ones came rom the North andSouth American continents. These are interesting acts to Juan Enriquez, anAmerican businessman, bestselling author and

ormer Harvard academic. In his new book, TheUntied States o America (Crown, 2005), Enriquezwarns o the coming disintegration o the UnitedStates and explores how that will a ect the na-tions status as the unparalleled superpower. This is a challenging, controversial subject at atime in history when American power around theworld appears supreme. The Soviet Union no lon-ger stands as a military, political or economic rival

now that capitalism has triumphed over commu-nism. While America is increasingly a ected bythe ast economic rise o China, this challengedoesnt appear to threaten Americas leadershipin global politics. Americans dominate the worldcommunity today in the same way as the Britishdid a century ago. But that comparison also con-tains a warning.

In the beginning o his book, Enriquez presentsreaders with an experiment. Imagine youre amember o the British cabinet in 1905. A worldmap hangs on the wall o the elegant con erenceroom in Number 10 Downing Street delineatingthe greatest empire that has ever existed: an areaencompassing nearly 30 million square kilome-ters (11.5 million square miles), 20 percent o the

worlds land and nearly one-quarter o the totalhuman population. The question is: How will theworld look in 50 yearsin 1955? What would you have thought? Would Britainsterritory expand? Stay the same size? Would therehave been someone who could have conceivedthat the British Empire would completely allapart between 1905 and 1955? That British terri-tory would only comprise some 250,000 squarekilometers (97,000 square miles) in 1955? Imagine asking George W. Bush the same questionnow, in 2006. How will the United States look in50 years? How many stars will the American aghave? Still 50? The chances o fnding a promi-nent politician in Washington today who couldimagine the disintegration o the United Statesseem miniscule. But readers o Enriquezs book re-alize it is in act quite probable that America in2056 will not be the same power ul country it istoday. Based on a great deal o historical, fnancial,political and cultural data, Enriquez convincinglydemonstrates that the uture does not bode well

or the unity o the United States.

While the title and the subject o his new bookdont immediately indicate it, Enriquez is drivenby his love o science. Enriquez set up the Li eSciences Project at the Harvard Business School,is chairman o Biotechonomy, a venture-capital

und specializing in biotechnology, and author o an earlier book on the same general subject, AsThe Future Catches You .

That short biography explains why Enriquez wasin attendance at the con erence, Celebrating a

Decade o Genome Sequencing. This internation-al summit on DNA research, genetics, biochem-istry and biology took place in December at theUniversity o Cali ornia, San Diego, which headsglobal research in this feld. Even the casual visi-tor quickly becomes aware that this is where the

uture o energy, ood, health and computer sci-ence, and there ore o society itsel , is generated,largely separate rom politics, the media and ordi-nary citizens. The con erence illustrates the cru-cial role prominent scientifc research plays in acountrys uture success and its economic wealth.In the numerous PowerPoint presentations givenby authorities in many felds, it becomes clear thattechnology o ers enormous opportunities or the

uture, and that it is easy or some societies to missthe boat.

Enriquez knows that countries that emphasizethe importance o science will be the uture lead-ers. And he sees that the United Statesdespite,

or example, the leading position o the Univer-sity o Cali ornia, San Diegois increasingly los-ing ground. He believes this is a sign o Americaswaning strength. The uture depends on howyou treat people today, he says, noting that theper ormance o the U.S. in this regard is not par-ticularly great.

The U.S. national debt, topping $8 trillion, is a

troubling illustration o the act that the U.S. issquandering its uture. From time immemori-al, the last thing a government does is drive thecountry to bankruptcy, Enriquez observes. Youcannot spend fve to six percent more than thecountry earns every year without serious conse-quences. It is not inconceivable that the U.S. willbe running out o money. It can be said that the U.S. per capita debt level,at around $27,500, is acceptable relative to thato other leading industrial nations in the Organi-zation or Economic Cooperation and Develop-ment (OECD). But the U.S. appears ar di erentthan other Western OECD nations when you lookat other economic and social statistics. Enriquezmentions a ew: The minimum wage has allen by

The Disunited States o America

by David Divelbiss

Native Forest Council is happy to welcome TimYoung, our newest grassroots organizer, to the Se-attle Chapter.

In addition to his many years o experience in so-cial and environmental issues, Tims wisdom anddedication have given much needed guidance andmotivation to all o us at Native Forest CouncilsSeattle Chapter.

At age 83, Tim has seen more o the world thenthe average person would see in two li etimes. Hewas born to British parents on November 6, 1922in Bombay, India, where Tims ather worked orthe Bombay Steam Company. Nearly immediate-ly, Tims travels began.

Tims ather retired rom the Bombay Steam Com-pany and moved to Florence, Italy, where he in-vested in a real estate company in 1927, be oremoving back to England or a job in the FalklandIslands in 1929.

At age 10, Tim enrolled in a school on the Isle o

Wight, where his emphasis was on art and carpen-try without examinations. While enrolled, Timvacationed in the Lake District and the New For-est which wetted his taste or the orests and in-spired his love o nature.

In 1939, as a graduation present, Tims ather senthim on a trip to New oundland, where he washiking when World War II broke out. Upon his

return, Tim had planned to study agriculture, butwith the onset o war, agricultural colleges exclu-sively enrolled women to work the arms o Eng-land. So plans changed and later he shipped o toSouth A rica where he spent a ull year on a arm.At this arm, Tim discovered a library o psychol-ogy books and became ascinated with the humanmind and body.

By 1942 he would have pre erred to study at a uni-versity; however, recognizing the need to de eatHitler and the Third Reich, but having an aversionto guns and armies, Tim joined the South A ricanMedical Corps to care or the wounded.

Tims travels throughout the war took himthroughout the middle east to Syria, Egypt, Israel,and Iraq. He saw the war come to a close whileserving as an ambulance attendant in Italy.

Following World War II, Tim moved home to Brit-ain, where he began to study medicine or a careerin psychiatry. He graduated rom St. ThomasesHospital in London 1953. While completing hisinternships, Tim met his frst wi e, Diana. Short-ly a ter marriage, they had their frst daughter,Sarah.

In 1956, Tim and Diana moved to New oundlandwhere Tim worked in a cottage hospital, and they

had their second daughter, Lynn, be ore movingto Omaha, Nebraska in 1958, where Tim complet-ed a psychiatric residency. There, Tim and Dianahad their son, Tim W.H., and youngest daughter,April.

Finally, in 1962, they moved to Washington State,where, until 1992, Tim worked mainly in the pri-vate practice o psychiatry be ore becoming more

active in social and environmental justice.

Tims love o the environment is evident in thehobbies which he so enjoys: hiking, skiing, swim-ming, sailing, and kayaking, and spending timewith his children and grandchildren. Currently,Tim lives on the very sailboat which he navigatedall the way around Vancouver Island in 1999.

A ter so many experiences, it would seem easy tojust relax and enjoy these hobbies. Tim realizes,however, that the world is ri e with unjust warand inequality, that so many o our wild places atrisk or logging, mining, drilling, and that the re-ality o increasing global climate change may verywell kill o our uture generations.

According to Tim, What I dislike the most aboutthe current administration is George Bushs arro-gant sense o entitlement despite his lack o quali-fcation to lead the United States. Its easy to seewhy, because Tim is the exact opposite. At 83, Timis fghting to preserve our public lands or uturegenerations.

Id love to spend li e sailing, but knowing whatis happening, its impossible to just indulge mysel and not fght back.

Amen, Were glad Tims fghting on our side.

Spotlight: Tim Young

The U.S. national debt,topping $8 trillion, is a

troubling illustration of thefact that the United States issquandering its future.


5/16


37 percent since 1968 in terms o real dollars; 11percent o Americans dont have enough to eat;in 2000 the ederal government spent $2,106 oneach American child while spending $21,122 oneach person over age 65. Enriquez cites researchindicating that i the U.S. government maintainsits current policies, nearly hal the budget will bespent on senior citizens by 2016. Hence his ques-tion: Do you invest in the uture or in the past? Within two generations, 40 percent o the Ameri-can population will be comprised o A rican-Americans and Hispanics. Both groups continue

to lag ar behind whites and Asian-Americans inthe educational system. Few graduate rom col-lege and even ewer get advanced degrees or be-come scientists. Countries like Finland, Iceland,

Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Singaporeare already surpassing the U.S. when it comes toscientifc research. This causes Enriquez to say thatwithout making signifcant investments in educa-tion or A rican-Americans and Hispanics whowill make up almost hal the population by mid-century America cannot maintain its currentprominence in the sciences. Not only is the U.S. ailing to make vital nationalinvestments, it is allowing the national debt to in-crease as the Bush administration believes it canlower taxes at the same time as spending $200million a day on the wars in Iraq and in A ghani-stan. Enriquez warns: They spend everything try-ing to protect what they have today.

Enriquez is also seriously concerned about theconceit that characterizes current American poli-tics. A lot o what the government does, he says,speaks o its conviction that our way is the onlyway. This attitude goes hand in hand with anunhealthy blending o science and religion. Re-ligious belie s are being manipulated to win elec-tions, he observes.

A sound balance between science, religion and eth-ics orms an essential oundation or the healthydevelopment o any society, Enriquez believes. He

is convinced that within this balance, attentionto science determines a countrys uture level o wealth. He mentions that the British discoveredDNA back in the 1950s and that British scientistslaid the oundation or cloning. But they ailedto translate that science into business. They con-sidered it inappropriate, unethical, to earn money

on science. Just look where British science is now.Societies that make their ootball stars rich andtheir scientists poor are doomed.

A lot o large companies have broken into smallerunits since the 1960s because they could no lon-ger prove to their shareholders that the whole wasworth more than the independent parts. Juan En-riquez predicts minorities will soon be asking na-tions the same questions. What is the beneft o this structure? Does this country represent our in-terests in the best way? And those are questionsthat are hard to answer.

Borders are extremely abstract. You cant see themrom space. Only islands have clear geographical

boundaries. Countries are not natural structuresand they are there ore kept together by ags andnational anthems. Orin Enriquezs viewbymyths. And the power o those myths goes as aras the next generation wants to believe in them.In other words: I the American dream comes true

or ever- ewer Americans, the unity o the UnitedStates will come under increasing pressure. This isthe point at which questions will naturally ariseabout whether there are other possible confgura-tions that would give citizens a better shot at ul-flling their dreams. But isnt America a stable country? Wasnt it

ounded based on one language and a clear set o principles? Enriquez delicately points out that thesame was true or the United Kingdom, which isincreasingly devolving into the separate nationso England, Scotland and Wales; and or Spain,where Basques and Catalans are hacking away at

national unity. And, pointing to the history o theUnited States, he adds: I the parents can split,the kids can split.

The early signs o American disintegration are al-ready apparent, according to Enriquez. In the stateo Vermont there is a small but serious separat-

ist movement and a declaration o independence is being drawn up.States in the northeastern U.S. have

ormed an alliance to carry out theKyoto climate agreement, whichthe Bush administration re uses tosign. And guess whats been themotto on Texas license plates since2004? Its like a whole other coun-try. Texas earlier announced thatall the states schoolchildren wouldnot only be saying their pledge o allegiance to the American ag, butto the ag o Texas. Finally, in anopinion poll, 42 percent o Texanscame out in avour o more politi-cal autonomy or Texas as long as itcould be arranged within the con-

ederation o the United States. Then theres Cali ornia, the sev-enth-largest economy in the world,where a large part o the popula-tionincluding many Republicansupporters o Governor ArnoldSchwarzeneggerare extremely

displeased with Washingtons cur-rent conservative politics. Cali or-nias independence is the subject o

requent jokes at parties and gath-erings o the intelligentsia. Native Americans are also step-ping up demands or attention tothe historical injustice that causedthem to lose their land. Several cur-rent court cases are ongoing, orexample, involving native peoplesclaim to one-third o the land inthe state o New York. Over the past20 years, Australia, New Zealandand Canada have seen discussionsabout returning seized lands to na-

tive peoples as well as adjustments o the Terranullius principle (that European pioneers appro-priated no mans land). Its hard to imagine theUnited States will be spared a revisit o its historyregarding Indian peoples. During his presidency,Bill Clinton already made excuses or the illegaloccupation o Hawaii. Enriquez adds another ticking time bomb in aP.S. to his book: I slaves per ormed $40 millionworth o unpaid labour between 1790 and 1860,reparations would be around $1.4 trillion.

In support o his thesis about American disinte-gration, Enriquez points to the example o theEuropean Union. The economic umbrella o theEU makes it much easier or smaller entities tobe independent. Broader trends o globalizationalso o er small countries advantages they didnthave. Despite their diminutive sizes, Singaporeand Hong Kong, as well as Luxembourg and Swit-zerland, have been able to develop into extremelysuccess ul economic entities.

A ter making this sharp and when it comesto the United States, gloomy analysis, it is re-markable that Juan Enriquez writes at the end o his book that he doesnt want to be a preacher o doom. My desire is simply that citizens... realizewhat they have, what they are doing and whatthey might do di erently i they wish to avoidwhat so many have already gone through. Throughout The Untied States o America, En-riquez o ers suggestions or policy re orms whichcontinually emphasize ocusing on science andeducation or minorities as well as special-needsgroups. Why should the Netherlands, or instance,be a leading global ower grower and trader whenthe climate is more suitable in other parts o theworld? Dutch success stems rom knowledge

rom specifc, constant attention to science, andresearch and development. Enriquez points toFinland, which grew to become a digital super-power in the space o a single generation. AndIceland, which has expanded into a leading tech-

nological power thanks to massive investments ineducation. You can build a great country whenyou change education and sur the waves o tech-nology. You can make and unmake countries inmonths.

His most creativeand most politically un ea-siblesolution or the United States involves achange in voting rights. In order to recti y theimbalance between the older and younger gen-erations, Enriquez suggests giving parents votingrights on behal o their underage children. Thiswould mean that a amily with our children andtwo adults would have six votes. The change wouldput an end to current policies that appropriate themost money to older people because they havethe most votes. I the votes o underage childrencounted, it would lead to investments in their in-terests. In good schools. The question is how muchsupport there would be or going to war when thechildren would be sent o as soldiers. That last suggestion embodies the bold message o The Untied States o America. The uture successo a country begins by paying attention to how we

ulfll the long-term wishes and interests o its citi-zens today. These citizens o today determine theeconomic power o tomorrow. Economic powerlies at the roots o the current superpower statuso the U.S. Juan Enriquez points out that this eco-nomic superiority is swi tly being consumed witha policy o arrogant international politics and dec-adent consumerism. Such a policy has destroyedsuperpowers throughout history, Enriquez warnsas the proverbial voice crying in the wilderness.But the in ormation and ideas he outlines heredo o er a pragmatic alternative to the DisunitedStates o the uture.

Juan Enriquez: The Untied States o America: Polar-ization, Fracturing, and Our FutureCrown Publishers

The Bush administrationbelieves it can lower taxes at

the same time as spending $200million a day on the wars in

Iraq and in Afghanistan

If the American dream comestrue for ever-fewer Americans, the

unity of the United States willcome under increasing pressure


6/16


Big Greens and Beltway Politics

by Joshua Frank

As business and environmental groups attempt toin uence government environmental decisions,only one side consistently comes out on top. Youdont have to dig too deep into campaign con-

tributions to see who hands over more moneyto candidates and both major political parties.Oil and gas companies hand over millions moredollars to special interest groups and presidentialcampaigns than do environmental organizations.And their investments pay o quite well. Rarely isthere an environmental victory that comes out o Washington. On contrary, big oil companies wintime and again. Certainly there are not many pol-icy wonks that keep an eye on Washington whowould deny that campaign contributions in u-ence public policy.

This may well be the ill ate o the environmen-tal movement attempting to play ball with thebig boys in Washington. Will they ever be on parwith the likes o Enron or others who virtuallywrite our environmental and energy legislationyear a ter year? It has long been my belie thatthe Sierra Club and rest o the big environmentalgroups, along with the Democratic Party itsel , dothe most harm to environmentalism. Its not theRepublicans. I anything, the Republicans havebeen the best mobilizers o environmentalists byrallying people against their policies, even though

many o the same policies were present duringDemocratic administrations.

As these groups consistently pander to the Demo-cratic Party, they simultaneously re use to hold theDems eet to the fre despite their gross inadequa-cies (and betrayals). During the 1990s, PresidentClinton signed the bill containing the SalvageRider as well as the North American Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA), both o which blatantly un-dermined environmental policies in the U.S. andset the stage or Bushs own orest plan and trade

plat orm. Nary a word was said byenvironmental groups about suchegregious legislation that was pro-posed during Clinton-time, but allwere up in arms over Bushs plans.And why is that? As the Democratshave let the Sierra Club and oth-ers through their ront doors, theyhave e ectively closed their idealsbehind them, holding these groupshostage inside a corrupt politicalsystem. Environmentalism has con-sequently become less about actionand more about DC power plays.Could you ever imagine any big en-viro group turning their back on aDemocratic candidate, despite thecandidates actually (horrible) envi-ronmental record?

Lesser-evil politics prevail.

And this is why the Republican anti-environmen-tal policy initiatives are most success ul. Not onlyare they pampered (along with the Democrats) by

big industry; they also ace little in the way o op-position rom their Democratic counterparts. Andit is not just about big money. Certainly the biggas and oil companies can hand out more lootthan environmentalists thats not even an issue but they can also play the political game bet-ter and always have. Environmentalists fnd ew,i any, allies in Washington. This isnt just becausethey arent donating enough cash or endorsingthe right candidates all the candidates are thewrong candidates. Period. Environmental politicsshould be about principle. It should be about whocan bring about the greatest change. Politics inWashington is so utterly corrupt that environmen-talists would do better by turning their backs onthe parties and sleaze that consistently go againsttheir interests.

That is why public participation in drawing up en-vironmental legislation ails so dramatically andso o ten. It isnt the public that the two big par-ties have in mind; its the industries that attentheir campaign co ers. In Oregon 22,000 publiccomments were submitted to the US Forest Ser-vice about the proposed logging o Biscuit na-tional orest last year. Even though the anti-log-ging comments ar outnumbered the pro-loggingcomments, you know who won outright. It wasntthe public. And who is going to hold these olks

accountable? Surely not the Democrats who sup-ported the legislation, two o whom (Sen. Wydenand Feinstein) actually rewrote it or PresidentBush, along with Mark Rey who wrote Clintonsbrutal Salvage Rider. The Sierra Club, who so gal-lantly and emphatically endorse candidates everyelection season, will still prop up the Democrats as

the least worst o the two parties in Washington.And until they break down the stodgy gates thatentrap them in Washington, environmental policywill continue to be manipulated by big business.

When will Democratic leaders begin to heed theadvice o environmentalists, i environmentalistssupport them sans specifc demands? When willthey listen i environmentalists support them justbecause they arent Republicans? As long as the bigenvironmental groups in Washington go along asthey have or the past two decades, nothing willever really be accomplished environmentally inWashington, no matter how much money any o enviros hand over to the Democratic machine.

Joshua Frank edits the radical news blog www. BrickBurner.org and is the author o Le t Out! How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush , publishedby Common Courage Press (2005). Josh can bereached at [email protected].

Betting on Losers

If anything, the Republicanshave been the best mobilizers

of environmentalists by rallying people against their policies

When will they listen if environmentalists support

them just because they arentRepublicans?


7/16


by Judith LewisLA Weekly

Does the radical environmental group really ex-ist? When the American Civil Liberties Union thisweek released a new batch o documents obtained

rom the FBI veri ying that the ederal agency hasbeen monitoring domestic environmental- and an-imal-rights groups, it was only the latest evidenceo government working on behal o the anti-en-vironmentalist industry and property-rights advo-cates to, as one o those advocates put it in 1992,destroy the environmental movement. Its ane ort thats been under way since the 1980s, us-ing various tactics rom intimidation to slander.Only recently have the anti-environmentalists hitupon their most promising idea yet: Linking envi-ronmentalism to terrorism.

One o the FBI documents contains a complaintrom the People or the Ethical Treatment o Ani-

mals about a speech given by FBI agents at a meat-packers convention claiming it is commonlybelieved that PETA unneled money to the EarthLiberation Front; another contains an FBI memoinstructing its agents not to use phrases like itis commonly believed in that context. Anothermemo seems to accuse Greenpeace o SuspiciousActivity with a Nexus to International Terrorism,but nearly everything else in the document hasbeen blacked out.

This peculiar new brand o anti-environmentalistpropaganda dates back several years, but it got asignifcant media boost on May 18, 2005, when

John Lewis, FBI deputy assistant director or coun-terterrorism, told the Senate Committee on theEnvironment and Public Works about environ-mentalists working in underground cells whosevandalism has caused more than $100 million inproperty damage since a Vail ski resort went up in

ames in 1998. There is nothing else going on inthis country... that is racking up the high numbero violent crimes and terrorist actions, Lewis as-serted.

A little more insight into Lewis comments can begained by looking closely at who invited him to

testi y the chair o that Senate committee, JamesInho e, the Oklahoma Republican who coastedinto o fce more than a decade ago on petroleum,real estate and agribusiness largesse. A year earlier,Inho e had submitted to Congress a 30-page reporton the incestuous political operations o groupslike the League o Conservation Voters. This time,he asked his ellow legislators to investigate even

urther: Isnt it likely that these groups, the Ani-mal Liberation Front, the Earth Liberation Frontand Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, have beenbankrolled by more prominent organizations,many o them enjoying tax-exempt status?

Just like al Qaeda or any other terrorist organiza-tion, Inho e said, ELF and ALF cannot accom-plish their goals without money, membership andthe media.

But be ore anyone can donate money to an or-ganization, that organization has to in act exist.When it comes to the ELF, thats a hard case tomake. Inho e is getting a lot o help making it,though: Since Lewis gave his speech, several re-porters, including Ed Bradley o CBS 60 Minutes,have come orward to warn us that Earth First!like radicals, lumped in with the animal-rights ac-tivists who ree minks rom arms and monkeys

rom labs, have become the No. 1 domestic terrorthreat the nation aces today.

For context, some journalists have relied on ques-tionable sources such as Ron Arnold, the sel -

published author o several books on the envi-

ronmentalist threat, including the 1997Ecoterror: The Violent Agenda To SaveNature the World o the Unabomber,a book written just a year be ore the no-torious Vail fre.

Arnold is widely known or oundingthe Wise Use movement, which seeks

to open all public lands to grazing, drill-ing and mining. He has been envirobait-ing or nearly 20 years. In 1992, he toldNightline that Wise Users intend to de-stroy the environmental movement onceand or all; the same year, he declared toBill Lambrecht o the St. Louis Post-Dis-patch that, I people believe that thereare endangered species, or, i it matters i there are, then they should put up theirown money to save them.

Arnold also runs an organization calledthe Center or the De ense o Free Enter-prise with a pro-gun activist named AlanGottleib who once declared environmen-talists the ultimate bogeyman in his PRcampaign on behal o Wise Use. Togeth-er, they have worked hard to build thecase that the thing theyve dubbed eco-terror is sweeping the country. Recently,with newly toned-down rhetoric, Arnoldtold the Portland Press Heralds John Richardson,reporting on a gra fti incident at the Plum CreekTimber Co., Youre a little late [getting hit withecoterrorism] in Maine. Arnold will also label in-cidents ecoterror without so much as an incrimi-nating phone call. In an interview with Fox News,Arnold gave his defnition: The frst thing youlook out or is, is there some protection-o -naturemotive behind it? In other words, i theres a wildarea or a scenic area or something thats not ar

rom it, that gives you the frst clue.

And fnally, the campaign to link environmental-ism to terrorism has been aided by an ever-shi t-ing cast o sel -appointed ELF spokespeople suchas Leslie James Pickering and Craig Rosebraugh,who claim to have had connections to the group(only anonymous and one-way, Pickering toldme). Im not going to ucking argue with youabout whether ELF exists, spat Pickering, whonow runs a community organizing group calledArissa, with a hal -built website advertising Pick-erings sel -published book on the ELF. Im notinterested. My politics have changed and I dontcomment. Why dont you ask the Sierra Club i [the El ] exists?

When I answer that the Sierra Club has only com-mented on acts o arson and violence to distancethemselves rom those acts, Pickering said, Fuckthe Sierra Club, and hung up.

In December, six people in three states were arrest-ed in connection with ecoterrorist and animal-

rights crimes. Pickering says theyre all ELF ac-tions, but the court-appointed lawyer or one o the suspects, Chelsea Gerlach o Portland, Oregon,said shes never had anything to do with the ELF.A ter reviewing his clients charges, he remarkedthat he was waiting to hear whether shed also belinked to the disappearance o Jimmy Ho a.

In August 2003, FBI agents harassed Pomona resi-dent Joshua Connole in connection with the van-dalism o a West Covina Hummer dealership onno evidence at all and against Justice Departmentorders Last month, he was awarded $100,000 indamages. The man who was later convicted o thecrime, William Cottrell, denied any associationwith the ELF, although media roundups o ELFattacks still include him.

Many incidents tied to the mysterious ELF ulti-mately unravel to be nothing o the kind. Law en-

orcement quickly attributed a Maryland fre lastDecember that destroyed a housing developmentnear a sensitive wetland to the ELF, but it turnedout to be the work o a disgruntled security guardgrieving the loss o one o his twin sons. Threehigh schoolers in Virginia, described in news ac-counts as sel -identifed ELF members, were re-cently convicted o conspiring to burn some cars.Their a fliation with the ELF? One o them readabout it on the website www.earthliberation ront.

com a blatant ront or advertising, owned byAndrew Riegle o eMailmachine.net (Real People.Real Deals.) with click-through ads or Viagra andrepossessed cars. No one pretends it has anythingto do with any real-li e organization except In-ho e, who re ers to the site in his Senate speechesas evidence that advertisers contribute to ELFs ac-tivities.

And no wonder: Inho e has been well served bythe myth o ELF, as has Arnold, whose Wise Useagenda has long been rustrated by success ulcourt battles and public-relations campaigns runby traditional environmental and animal-rightsgroups. I acts o property damage in the name o environmentalism and animal rights didnt exist,they would have been wise to invent them.

The documents the FBI has released so ar, most o them heavily edited accounts o monitoring activ-ities directed at Greenpeace and PETA, may be justthe tip o the surveillance iceberg. The reason wehave the documents on PETA and Greenpeace isbecause we asked or them, says Ben Wizner, anattorney with the ACLU. There have also been re-quests by local environmental groups around thecountry. Theyre trickling out. And I expect thatbecause o these revelations there will be moregroups that want to see their FBI fles, he said.

You could call the FBI surveillance a colossal wasteo public resources, but Wizner thinks its worsethan that: Also in the documents obtained by theACLU is a memo about a source planted withinGreenpeace in orming the agency that recent law-en orcement e orts have already damaged mo-rale.

I people think that i they attend a protest againstlogging or the war theyll have their name in a flelabeled terrorist, that could sti e expression anddissent in this country, said Wizner. And that

would be tragic.

Earth to ELF: Come In, Please

If acts of property damage inthe name of environmentalismand animal rights didnt exist,they would have been wise to

invent them.

before anyone can donatemoney to an organization, that

organization has to in fact exist.When it comes to the ELF, thats a

hard case to make

You could call the FBIsurveillance a colossal waste of

public resources


8/16


9/16

Victory?

Forest Voice Spring 006 9

to make only trivial concessions on lands contain-ing merchantable timber. In e ect, industry willnow get subsidies or giving up next to nothing,and will also receive the blessings o Greenpeaceet al as it carries on with its removal o old-growth

species.

The success by industry and government in gettingthe environmentalists to sign on is all the more re-markable in light o what seemed to be impossible-to-ignore benchmarks. The Great Bear Rain orestis the name o the Canadian portion o the WestCoast temperate rain orest. In the more northerlyU.S. portion, a region in the Alaskan Panhandlethat is topographically and ecologically similar,the United States Forest Service in 1999 protected rather than opened up approximately 80%o the rain orest rom development.

The Canadian timber industry also needed to con-vince environmentalists to overlook one other de-tail: the fndings o the independent scientifc pan-el they themselves had helped establish. Knownas the Coast In ormation Team, this multi-year,multi-million-dollar government- unded study

concluded that as much as 70% o the Great BearRain orest needed to be protected to conserve thehabitat o its large mammals. Yet the environmen-talists accepted a proportion o protected land solow they can have no assurance that importanthabitats will be protected.

In a way, the environmental outcome is hardlysurprising, In other attempts by environmental-ist to negotiate agreements with governmentand industry, environmentalists have invariablycome up short. In this case, the environmental-ists have not only been worn out by the endlessnegotiations, they also aced enormous pressure

rom backers mostly U.S. oundations thatput up an astonishing $60 million to seal a dealand wanted to see results.

A Suzuki Foundation report last year on the emerg-ing agreement, which has not materially changedin the interim, lists the results:

The proposed land-use agreement or the areawould leave:

- 80% o critical Kermode [spirit bear] habitat un-protected [ rom logging and other orms o devel-opment]

- 65% o the most-intact and highest conservationvalue ecosystems unprotected

- 86% o the timber harvesting land base unpro-tected

- 77% o cedar old-growth orests unprotected

- 65% o the most productive salmon rivers un-protected.

In effect, industry will nowget subsidies for giving upnext to nothing, and will

also receive the blessings of Greenpeace et al as it carrieson with its removal of old-

growth species.

Clearcutting in the Great Bear Rain orest. Brett Cole, Wild Northwest Photography

Excerpt rom Greenpeace website, declaring the Great BearRain orest saved.

Perhaps NotThe Great Bear Rain orest made internationalnews when the B.C. government, along withFirst Nations, environmental groups and the or-est industry, have dra ted a plan to protect a por-tion o it. Thats good news or science and goodnews or the people who depend on the healtho this ecosystem or their livelihoods.

The story is only partially complete, however, asdiscussions are still underway as to what kind o logging will take place in the parts o the GreatBear outside the protected areas. This is criticalbecause unprotected areas make up more than70 per cent o the land base and contain the ma-jority o salmon streams and much o the bestwildli e habitat.

- David Suzukiexcerpted rom Two Lost Worlds Give us HopeScience Matters


10/16


Betting on Biscuitby Matthew Koehler

Its rare to fnd two diametrically opposed sides us-ing the same exact poster child to support theirviews. However, thats essentially whats devel-oped over the past ew years as the logging indus-try have locked horns with conservation groupsand scientists in a battle over so-called healthy

orests policy and the uture o Americas publiclands ollowing wildfres.

That same exact poster child is the 2002 BiscuitFire that burned nearly 500,000 acres in the Sis-kiyou Wild Rivers Area o southwestern OregonsSiskiyou National Forest. The Forest Services sub-sequent Biscuit Fire Recovery Project approvedcutting down 19,000 acres o ancient orest re-serves and roadless wildlands in a orest o globalecological signifcance.

Charred Moonscape? On Biscuit, Reality Takes Backseat to Rhetoric

Natural fres have been an important part o theSiskiyou Wild Rivers area or hundreds o thou-sands o years. The fre-enriched Siskiyou regionhas more coni er species than any other temper-ate-zone orest in the world, and has been iden-tifed by scientists as one o the most importantecosystems on planet. In other words, not exactlythe ideal place or industrial logging o ancient

orest reserves and roadless wildlands.

Un ortunately, listening to some people, youd beled to believe that the 2002 Biscuit Fire laid wasteto everything in its path. While re erred to repeat-edly by the logging industry and their supportersas catastrophic, devastating and unnatural, thereality is that 84% o the Biscuit Fire area was ei-ther unburned, or burned at low to moderate in-tensity.

Yet, this reality hasnt prevented Senator Gor-don Smith (R-OR), who incidentally has received$643,363 in campaign contributions rom the log-

ging industry during his senate career and was oneo the major supporters o the so-called HealthyForest Restoration Act, rom declaring in a recentopinion piece that Today, nearly hal the SiskiyouNational Forest remains a charred moonscape.

In act, since Senator Smith apparently believesthat he gets a ree pass rom reality, he has enoughconfdence to boldly use the Biscuit Fire and thebotched Biscuit Fire Recovery Project as theposter child or his Orwellian-inspired Forests orFuture Generations Act.

This bill has a companion in the House, the so-called Forest Emergency Recovery and ResearchAct rom ellow Oregon Republican CongressmanGreg Walden ($165,646 in logging industry cam-paign contributions since the 2004 election cycle).These bills would essentially ulfll the loggingindustrys wish list by providing all the bells andwhistles or more industrial logging in our nationspublic orests that werent initially provided in theBush administrations Healthy Forest Initiative orprevious laws passed by the GOP-controlled Con-gress such as the Healthy Forest Restoration Act.

Specifcally, these bills use natural and essentialecosystem unctions such as wildfre, insect anddisease outbreaks, and windstorms to put old-growth orests and roadless areas at risk rom log-ging and roadbuilding. They create an expeditedprocess or logging a ter fres which scientistsconclude is the worst kind o logging, polluting

streams and hindering orest recovery; allow the

Forest Service to divert unds rom fre pro-tection programs to pay or logging proj-ects. They also eliminate meaning ul publicparticipation or post fre logging projectsand remove protection or imperiled wild-li e by waiving requirements o the Endan-gered Species Act.

A Hard Look at the Biscuit Fire Recov-ery Project

The Forest Service, logging industry andsome politicians have used buzz-wordssuch as orest restoration, uel reductionand community protection to justi y theBiscuit Fire Recovery Project, one o thelargest public lands logging projects in U.S.history.

During the summer o 2004, SiskiyouNational Forest Supervisor Scott Conroysigned a record o decision or the Biscuit

recovery plan which called or logging 370million board eet o trees rom 30 squaremiles o the Siskiyou National Forest. Thatsenough trees to fll 74,000 log trucks linedup or over 600 miles. Thats over 20 times morethan the annual logging levels on the Siskiyou Na-tional Forest during the past decade.

To make matters worse, 90% o all acres proposedor logging are within the watershed o the spec-

tacular National Wild and Scenic Illinois River asource o clean water or wild salmon and prideand tourism dollars or local residences and busi-nesses.

A number o conservation groups fled suit to stopthe misguided industrial logging in the SiskiyouWild Rivers Area, but ederal District Court JudgeMichael Hogan a longtime supporter o loggingold-growth orests in the Northwest has, notsurprisingly, sided with the Forest Service and log-ging industry at every turn.

Local resistance to the Biscuit logging plan in-tensifed in October 2004 when logging o fcial-ly started, and reached a evered pitch in earlyMarch 2005 when over 60 citizens were arrested

or peace ully blocking the road to Fiddler, one o the Biscuit sales.

Local scientists and activists have also done an ex-cellent job o monitoring the negative impacts o the Biscuit logging and providing the public andthe media with graphic photos o the destructioncaused by industrial logging, which, to even a ca-sual observer, clearly demonstrates that post-freindustrial logging has absolutely nothing to dowith orest restoration or recovery.

More problems with the Biscuit Logging Plan sur-aced in August 2005 when it was reported that

an error by the Forest Service resulted in loggersmistakenly cutting over 300 trees in the pristineBaby oot Lake Botanical Area.

Jack Williams, who was actually supervisor o theSiskiyou National Forest rom 1999 to 2001, toldthe Eugene Register-Guard that it wasnt just anintrusion by loggers that troubled him. It was anespecially poor orm o logging. When you startat the trailhead or the botanical area, youre inthe middle o what looks like a clearcut rom the1970s.

Thats really an amazing statement i you stop andthink about it. Here we have the previous ForestService Supervisor or the Siskiyou National Forestsaying that this kindler, gentler industrial log-ging, which Senator Smith, Congressman Waldenand the logging industry repeatedly claim is need-ed to restore our public orests, actually looks likea clearcut rom the 1970s.

New Year, New Information

The the New Year has certainly been ushered in

by a series o developments concerning the Bis-

cuit logging project and the larger issue o post-fre logging and restoration.

A new study by researchers at Oregon State Uni-versity in the area burned in the Biscuit Fire oundthat post-fre logging may actually hinder orestregeneration and increase fre risk, something thatconservation groups have argued or years.

In ar reaching Associated Press article about thenew study, Jerry Franklin, pro essor o orestry atthe University o Washington and one o the au-thors o the Northwest Forest Plan, stated, This[study] is very consistent with my testimony [onWaldens salvage logging bill last year], which isthat salvage almost never makes a positive contri-bution to ecological recovery.

Then, on January 12, more bad news or support-ers o industrial logging ollowing wildfres rolledin when it was reported that the Forest Service lostmore than $9 million in taxpayer unds loggingtrees burned by the Biscuit Fire.

Can We Get Some Censorship Please?

To make matters even more interesting, it was re-vealed that some o the more outspoken pro-log-ging pro essors at Oregon State Universitys Col-lege o Forestry (which receives about 10% o its

unding directly rom a tax on logging) wantedthe nations top scientifc journal to withholdpublishing an Oregon State study critical o post-fre logging.

Donald Kennedy, Sciences top editor and a or-mer president o Stan ord University, said there isno chance the research will be suppressed.

Theyre trying to rewind history, Kennedy toldthe Oregonian. Kennedy also said the OSU pro es-sors, who contend the research is misleading, canrespond to the study once its published. Thatsthe way scientists handle disputes, not by censor-ship.

I shared this new in ormation contained in theOregonian article with some colleagues who arethemselves pro essors at a school o orestry at apublic university in the West. Upon reading thearticle, and having been ollowing the situationat OSU, one o the pro essors wrote back withthis response, We all need to be aware that our

reedom as scientists to publish our fndings canbe threatened at any time, especially as more and

more unding or Universities come rom private

Does Post-Fire Logging Make Ecologicalor Economic Sense?

...the reality is that 84% of theBiscuit Fire area was either

unburned, or burned at low tomoderate intensity

the U.S. Forest Service lost morethan $9 million in taxpayer

funds logging the Biscuit Fire


11/16


sources. We need to be ever vigilant and support-ive o one another when it looks like censorshipmay occur.

Yet the Biscuit Bluff Continues

With Congress back in session, you can bet thatSenator Smith and Congressman Walden will behard at work making sure that the millions o dol-lars that the logging industry have provided themand other members o Congress in campaign con-tributions dont go unrewarded.

In act, undeterred by the graphic visual realitieso the Biscuit logging project and new scientifcstudies, Congressman Waldens o fce sent out aglowing press release announcing that WaldensForest Recovery Legislation, has earned broad

support rom local governments, conservationgroups, orestry pro essionals, educators and morethan 140 members o Congress rom throughoutthe nation and that the Forest Emergency Re-covery and Research Act aims to dramatically im-prove the environmental health o ederal orestsa ter [wildfre].

Hmmm... Strange that Congressman Waldenspress release didnt mention a word about the newstudies about the Biscuit logging or express con-

cern about attempts at censorship coming romthe Dean o the Oregon State University School o Forestry. That ree pass rom reality must be nice.

Matthew Koehler writes rom Missoula, Mon-tana, where he is the director o the Native ForestNetwork, which currently has a lawsuit pendingagainst the Forest Services Biscuit Fire RecoveryPlan. He enjoys spending time hiking and cross-country skiing through the charred moonscape

orests o the Northern Rockies. He can be con-tacted at www.native orest.org .

by Cat Lazaro Policy Press SecretaryEarthjustice

Over the last couple o weeks, a re reshing amounto attention has been paid to an o ten misunder-stood issue: that logging a ter a wildfre does moreharm than good. In act, most natural disturbanc-es that damage or destroy trees such as fres are normally ollowed by an equally natural re-surgence in a ected areas. New vegetation springsup in the wake o the old, and wildli e takes ad-vantage o new habitat and ood sources createdby downed trees. The recovery o Yellowstone Na-tional Park a ter the severe fres in 1988 has beenwell studied and is a per ect example o how adap-tive nature really is.

Yet a bill now be ore Congress would rush throughdestructive logging projects in the wake o fre,

ood, hurricane, insect in estation, and a wide va-riety o other natural disturbances. The bill (H.R.

4200), introduced by Oregon Republican Con-gressman Greg Walden, assumes that the only ap-propriate use or a damaged tree is to chop it downand turn it into lumber. Yet study a ter study hasshown that in act, removing downed trees inter-

eres with natural, healthy orest regrowth andthreatens clean drinking water.

Most recently, a team o scientists and graduatestudents rom Oregon State University and theInstitute o Pacifc Islands Forestry in Hawaii pub-lished a study in the prestigious scientifc journalScience fnding that allowing trees to regeneratenaturally works as well or better than logging andreplanting, and that leaving burned areas undis-turbed may reduce the risk o uture fres. The Sci-ence study was based on an examination o log-ging in the area burned by the catastrophic BiscuitFire in southwestern Oregon in 2002, the very frethat Walden tries to use as a poster child or hislegislative e orts.

The researchers ound that while hundreds o newseedlings per acre took root in the frst two years

ollowing the fre, subsequent salvage loggingprojects killed more than 70 percent o the tinytrees. The logging project also le t behind piles o highly ammable debris, increasing the chancesthat fre would sweep through the orest again.

While providing valuable in ormation or propo-nents o natural orest recovery, the new studywould likely have landed with barely a ripple, wereit not or the astonishing actions by pro essors atOSUs College o Forestry, who sought to block ordelay the studys publication. As frst reported bythe Oregonian, nine pro essors rom OSU and theForest Service contacted the editorial board o Sci-ence and asked that the post-fre logging study bewithheld until it could be revised to address theirconcerns about purported aws.

We believe that the peer review process ailed asa quality control measure in this case, the criticswrote. But the Science editors disagreed, havingalready put the study through their own stringentreview.

Given that OSUs College o Forestry gets about 10percent o its unding via a tax on logging its notsurprising that the critics opposition raised somesuspicion. A variety o news stories and editorialslambasted the orestry college or its perceived at-tempt to sti e inconvenient scientifc fndings.The Dean o Forestry wrote an open letter to thecolleges students and sta , apologizing or the ac-tions o the studys critics.

Perhaps the controversy would have died there.But a week later, the Bureau o Land Managementpulled its unding or the fnal year o OSUs three-year study o post-fre logging, claiming that pub-lication o the article in Science had violated cer-tain protocols governing research programs. Theresearchers demonstrated that they had, in act,

ollowed the rules, and BLM was accused o mak-ing a political decision about scientifc research.OSUs provost and the president o the universitys

aculty senate called on BLM to restore the und-ing, and to support the researchers reedom toexpress themselves without eat o censorship.

But the fnal nail in the co fn o BLMs decision

came when Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) called on the

inspector general at the Interior Department toinvestigate BLMs motivations in reezing unding

or the OSU study. Inslee, a member o the HouseSubcommittee on Forests and Forest Health,warned that, theres no such thing as a democ-racy that silences scientifc research. BLM capitu-lated on February 7 and restored the unding.

The senior Democrat on the subcommittee, Rep.Tom Udall (D-NM) urged Rep. Walden not tomove his logging bill orward until subcommit-tee members had a chance to ully review the newevidence raised by the OSU study. Walden capitu-lated, announcing that he will hold a feld hearingto review the study. You can expect Walden to tryto use the hearing to change the spin on theOSU study and rein orce the log frst, ask ques-tions later approach that underlies his own ill-conceived legislation.

Earthjustice is a non-proft public interest law frmdedicated to protecting the environment.www.earthjustice.org

Leave Forests Alone After FiresThe March 28 ull-page ad in The Register-Guard

rom the timber industrys Project Protect sup-porting Greg Waldens logging bill, House Reso-lution 4200, used two photos labeled healthy

orests. As a fre ecologist, it is clear to me thatboth photos eature natural orests that hadburned in the past and recovered without log-ging.

Nearly all orests in the Pacifc Northwest regen-erate a ter fre. Not surprisingly, the ads did not

eature clearcuts with roads and stumps - whichwould have presented an accurate picture o what Project Protect promotes.

Contrary to what the timber industry and in-dustry shills such as Walden would have youimagine, logging a ter a burn is analogous toripping o the scabs o a burn victim. It hin-ders orest regeneration. Fire per orms impor-tant ecological unctions that human loggingdoes not emulate.

Fires recycle nutrients, and the smoke kills someorest pathogens, increasing the health o un-

burned trees. The snags created by fres continueto play an important role in orest ecosystems.Snags rom fres provide a long-term source o nutrients. When they all to the ground, theycreate natural sediment traps.

Snags are home to the more than one-third o bird species that are cavity-nesters. When they

all into streams, snags provide stream channelstability and create habitat or fsh.

The best way to create healthy orests is to leaveburns alone to regenerate naturally. Waldensbill is nothing more than another attempt bythe timber industry to turn our public heritage

orests into private timber arms or industry.

GEORGE WUERTHNEREugene, OR

Originally published in Eugene Register-GuardApril 6, 2006

Logging Study Prompts Political Two-Step

Photo: Joe Fontaine National Geographic

salvage almost never makesa positive contribution to

ecological recovery.


12/16


by Karen Coulter and POCLADPIELC Presentation 2006

What do progress and victory mean today inactivist struggles? Progress in any real sense is cer-tainly hard to detect. The question is, why are allmajor decisions out o our hands? Who is decid-ing to start and continue a utile and imperialist

bloodbath in Iraq and give the contracts or re-building what the U.S. conquerors have destroyedto U.S. corporations like Halliburton, rather thanto Iraqi workers? Who is deciding to privatize na-tional parks and sell o parts o our national or-ests? Did you see some big public ervor to priva-tize social security? No, but it was on the agendao the Business Roundtable, an institution leverag-ing the power o 200 leading U.S. corporations.

In whose name was the so-called USA PATRIOTAct authorized to eliminate our civil rights andwho created the fction o the War on Terror tojusti y it? And what is our response to all this?More marches and rallies with too ew people?Lobbing a bought-o Congress, jumping throughregulatory hoops distracting us rom the real per-petrators, staging yet another tree sit without no-ticing that the vast majority o tree sits are notstopping the orest rom being cut down. All de-

ensive maneuvers to protect what little we stillhave, but its worse than running a treadmill goingin circles and never moving orward because werecontinually losing groundlosing rights, the com-mons, peoples lives, species ability to exist.

And who defnes progress and victory? I read thenewsletter o a peace group that declared victorybecause a certain number o people showed up ortheir demonstration and some got arrested andhauled away. However, this group has held manysuch demonstrations and nothing has changed;the Oakridge Nuclear weapons laboratory thetarget o their protest continues to operate asusual.

Other alse victories include getting access to anelected representative, getting the Forest Serviceto write an Environmental Impact Statement in-stead o an Environmental Assessment, getting acorporation to agree to a voluntary code o con-duct. Whats wrong with this picture? At the endo the day, corporations, tools o the wealthy mi-nority, are still governing us. Our minds are stillcolonized so that we accept the walls o our prisonand cant even conceive o what lies beyond theregulatory system, the corporate system, the elec-toral antasy.

We in the Program on Corporations, Law and De-mocracy (POCLAD) have been thinking out onthis since at least 1998. As we wrote back then,Perhaps you remember thinking this about yourpast campaigns: I only we had gotten a thousandmore letters in the mail, more experts at the hear-ings, better press coverage, more people at thedemo we remember. But now we see that evenwith these i onlys, corporations would still bein charge. This is because the political and legal

culture has been diverting activists rom political

arenas where people can defne issues and makethe rules; where win or lose, it is clear that thestruggle is about whos in chargecorporations orpeople.

As we have pointed out, at the beginning o thiscountry, it wasnt like this. Corporations wereclearly subservient to the people, chartered toserve the public wel are, with strict limits on whatthey could and couldnt do. Corporations couldnot lobby public o fcials or have any voice inpolitics; they couldnt merge with other corpora-tions to amass greater wealth and power. Theyhad a narrowly defned mission such as build-ing a bridge, a limited time to accomplish theirpublicly defned mission, and then they were dis-solved and their assets re-distributed. Thats howsel -governing people defne and control the in-stitutions they create to serve them.However, a ter the Civil War, corpo-rate CEOs and lawyers met with judgesbehind closed doors through the judi-cial review process, without a shred o Democracy involved, and gave corpo-rations the rights intended or peopleunder the Constitutions Bill o Rights.When the legal brie s had settled, asRichard Grossman puts it, the ederalcourts were persuaded to take jurisdic-tion over corporations away rom statecourts that were closer to the corpo-rate harms caused and those injuredby them; reinterpret the commerceclause to undermine state authority;apply the 14th amendment meant toprotect the rights o reed slaves tocorporations giving them due processo law, the privileges o citizens andprotection against takings o property;broaden the defnition o property tostrengthen corporations governingpowers; create the judicial injunctionagainst worker strikes; and restrict cor-porate law to internal relationshipswithin the corporate entity instead o keeping accountable the relationshipbetween corporations and the people.As Richard points out, corporationshad also: shaped law school philosophy and

curriculum rewritten legal history set the stage or creation o ederal agencies de-

signed not to challenge corporate constitutionalauthority, but to serve as barriers against citizenanger and regulate public protest. (RichardGrossman, p. 153 Seattle Journal or Social Jus-tice, Wresting Governing Authority rom theCorporate Class: Driving People Into the Consti-tution)

Grossman also wrote, Today, it is considered le-gal, and culturally acceptable, or corporations toendow chairs and special programs in universi-ties, create and und think tanks, give charitablecontributions to secure the silence or the supporto civic groups, assist the two dominant political

parties to maintain control over candidates,and generally limit political debate.

Institutions like the Business Roundtable,the Heritage Foundation, the Trilateral Com-mission, and the Council on Foreign Rela-tions are used to leverage corporate power,uni y and implement the corporate consen-sus and govern us. The current tighteningo the noose around our necks by the Bushadministration is simply a logical extensiono this process. Such collusion o a nationalgovernment and corporations is known as

ascism. The longer we let corporate powerdictate our laws, policies, wars and internalsurveillance, the less liberty and political

rights we will have, the less ability to resist

what is now becoming every bit as bad as a sciencefction Orwellian Big Brother state. The WorldTrade Organization, International Monetary Fundand World Bank take this model and impose it onthe rest o the Earth, bringing us all down with adoomed prescription or ecological disaster, pov-erty, war, dictatorships and loss o cultural diver-sity and sel -governance. It is our responsibility ascitizens o the host country o this cancer to fnd a

real cure, not eel good placebos.

So how do we fnd our way out o this mess? First,it helps to investigate the root causes, the histo-ry, and ask meaning ul questions, like: What isproperty? Who decides i its public or private?How did other generations (and cultures) decide?How did corporate leaders get their decisions oninvestment, production and jobs to be regarded asprivate? (Engage US, pp. 2-3)

Lets ask sane visionary questions, too, such as:What i , tomorrow, the law o the land advan-taged human, community, and place rights overcorporate elites? What i the Constitution em-powered people to defne corporate institutions assubordinate?

How do we get there? Jane Anne Morris, anothero my colleagues rom POCLAD, clearly shows thatthe way orward is or us to rewrite Defning Law.As she explains: Corporations are artifcial cre-ations that are set up by state corporation codes.These state laws, plus a bunch o court cases, ormthe basis or the notion that corporations havepowers and rights. This law is Defning Law.Regulatory agencies ail to protect the public be-cause we have allowed corporate lawyers to writethe Defning Law o corporations. This law be-stows upon corporations powers and rights thatexceed those o human persons and sometimes o government as well as long as we stick with Reg-ulatory law and leave Defning Law to corporatelawyers, well have corporate government. (JaneAnne Morris, Help! Ive Been Colonized and ICant Get Up, DCDD, p. 11)

So what are some o her ideas or rewriting the De-fning Law o corporations? In keeping with pastlaws controlling corporations in the U.S. we shouldat least do the ollowing: prohibit corporations

rom owning stock in other corporations;prohibitcorporations rom being able to choose when togo out o business; make stockholders liable or acorporations debts, prohibit corporations partici-pation in the democratic process; make sure cor-porations have no Constitutional rights; and pro-hibit corporations rom making civic, charitableor educational donations. That would be prog-ressat least back to limits that were imposed at

the time o the ounding o this country.

Redefning Progress and Victory

We need to realize what power and authority we posses, and how

we can use it.

What if the Constitutionempowered people to define

corporate institutions assubordinate?


13/16


Our economic system is unsustainableby its very nature. The only responseto climate chaos and peak oil is major social change

by Robert Newman The Guardian

There is no meaning ul response to climate changewithout massive social change. A cap on this and aquota on the other wont do it. Tinker at the edgesas we may, we cannot sustain Earths li e-supportsystems within the present economic system.

Capitalism is not sustainable by its very nature.

It is predicated on infnitely expanding markets,aster consumption and bigger production in a f-nite planet. Yet this ideological model remains thecentral organizing principle o our lives, and aslong as it continues to be so it will automaticallyundo (with its invisible hand) every single greeninitiative anybody cares to come up with.

Much discussion o energy, with never a wordabout power, leads to the allacy o a low-impact,green capitalism somehow put at the service o environmentalism. In reality, power concentratesaround wealth. Private ownership o trade and in-dustry means that the decisive political orce inthe world is private power. The corporation willout ank every puny law and regulation that seeksto constrain its proftability. It there ore stands inthe way o the unctioning democracy needed totackle climate change. Only by breaking up cor-porate power and bringing it under social controlwill we be able to overcome the global environ-mental crisis.

On these pages we have been called on to admirecapitals ability to take robust action while gov-ernments dither. All hail Wal-Mart or imposinga 20% reduction in its own carbon emissions. But

the point is that supermarkets are over. We cannothave such long supply lines between us and ourood. Not any more. The very model o the su-

permarket is unsustainable, what with the packag-ing, ood miles and destruction o British arming.Small, independent suppliers, processors and re-tailers or community-owned shops selling locallyproduced ood provide a social glue and reducecarbon emissions. The same is true o ood co-opssuch as Manchesters bulk-distribution schemeserving ormer ood deserts.

All hail BP and Shell or having got beyond pe-troleum to become non-proft eco-networks sup-plying green energy, but ail to cheer the Fortune500 corporations that will save us all and ecolo-gists are denounced as anti-business. Many career

environmentalists ear that an anti-capitalistposition is whats alienating the mainstream

rom their irresistible arguments. However,is it not more likely that people are stunnedinto inaction by the bizarre discrepancy be-tween how extreme the crisis described andhow insipid the solutions proposed? Go ona march to the House o Commons. Writea letter to your MP. And what system doesyour MP hold with? Name one that isnt pro-capitalist. Oh, all right then, smartarse. Butname fve.

We are caught between the Scylla and Cha-rybdis o climate change and peak oil. Oncewe pass the planetary oil production spike(when oil begins rapidly to deplete and de-mand outstrips supply), there will be lessand less net energy available to humankind.Petroleum geologists reckon we will passthe world oil spike sometime between 2006and 2010. It will take, argues peak-oil expertRichard Heinberg, a second world war e orti many o us are to come through this ep-och. Not least because modern agribusinessputs hundreds o calories o ossil- uel en-ergy into the felds or each calorie o oodenergy produced.

Catch-22, o course, is that the very worst atethat could be all our species is the discovery o huge new reserves o oil, or even the burning intothe sky o all the oil thats already known about,because the climate chaos that would unleashwould make the mere collapse o industrial soci-ety a sideshow bagatelle. There ore, since wevegot to make the switch rom oil anyway, why notdo it now?

Solutions need to come rom people themselves.But once set up, local autonomous groups need tobe supported by technology trans ers rom state tocommunity level. Otherwise its too expensive toget solar panels on your roo , let alone set up a lo-cal energy grid. Far rom utopian, this has a prec-edent: back in the 1920s the London boroughs o Wandsworth and Battersea had their own electric-ity-generating grid or their residents. So long asenergy corporations exist, however, they will fght

tooth and nail to stop whole postal districts seced-ing rom the national grid. Nor will the banks andthe CBI be neutral bystanders, happy to observethe inroads participatory democracy makes in re-ducing carbon emissions, or a trade union striking

or carbon quotas.

There are many organizational projects we canlearn rom. The Just Transition Alliance, or exam-ple, was set up by black and Latino groups in theUS working with labour unions to negotiate alli-ances between rontline workers and encelinecommunities, that is to say between union mem-bers who work in polluting industries and stand tolose their jobs i the plant is shut down, and thosewho live next to the same plant and stand to losetheir health i its not.

We have to start planning seriously not just a sys-tem o personal carbon rationing but at what limitto set our national carbon ration. Given a fxed

UK carbon allowance, what do we spend it on?What kinds o in rastructure do we wish to build,retool or demolish? What kinds o organization-al structures will work as climate change makespretty much all communities more or less ence-line and almost all jobs more or less rontline?(Most o our carbon emissions come when wereat work).

To get rom here to there we must talk about cli-mate chaos in terms o what needs to be done orthe survival o the species rather than where thedebate is at now or what people are likely to coun-tenance tomorrow morning.

I we are all still in denial about the radical chang-es coming and all o us still are there aresound geological reasons or our denial. We havelived in an era o cheap, abundant energy. Therenever has and never will again be consumptionlike we have known. The petroleum interval, thisone-o historical blip, this reakish bonanza, hasled us to believe that the impossible is possible,that people in northern industrial cities can havesuntans in winter and eat apples in summer. Butmuch as the petroleum bubble has got us out o the habit o accepting the existence o zero-sumphysical realities, its wise to remember that theynever went away. You can either have capitalismor a habitable planet. One or the other, not both.

[email protected]

Its Capitalism Or A Habitable PlanetYou Cant Have Both

There is no meaningful responseto climate change without

massive social change.

As Grossman points out, We need to realize whatpower and authority we posses, and how we canuse it to defne the nature o corporations, so thatwe do not have to mobilize around each and ev-ery corporate decision that a ects our communi-ties, our lives, the planet. (Richard Grossman,Can Corporations Be Accountable? Part II, Ra-chels #10, p.1, 8/6/98)

Along the way, we need to expose and dismantlethe system o corporate governancethe net-

work o institutions leveraging corporate power,directly running the U.S. government and impos-ing global corporatization. George Dra an wrotea guidebook to these institutions called The EliteConsensus which gives you all you need to knowto start the process o exposure, discrediting anddismantling. Global protest has made a goodstart by discrediting and maiming the WTO andthe Free Trade o Americas trade negotiations.

We need to build on this gain by disabling all theU.S. based institutions acting as arms o corporategovernance, such as the Business Roundtable.

We are not being socially responsible or civicallyaccountable when we play in corporate arenasby corporate rules. Sovereign people do not bego , or negotiate with, subordinate entities whichwe created. Sovereign people defne all entitieswe create. And when a subordinate entity vio-lates the terms o its creation, and underminesour ability to govern ourselves, we are required to

move in swi tly and accountably to cut this can-cer out o the body politic. (Richard Grossman,Rachelss Can Corporations be Accountable, PartII, p. 2)

Communities need to reject the idea that businesscorporations are private; municipalities shouldenact local ordinances defning corporations andcorporate behavior within their jurisdictions and

people must organize to act like sel -governingcitizens and instruct any elected representativesto cease aiding and abetting corporate rule. Wemust abolish corporate personhood. We need toban things that harm the Earth, like geneticallyengineered organisms, not just label them or in-sist on the right to know what is killing us. Weneed to protect the Commons rom privatization,not attach monetary value to it. We need to stepdown rom our white privilege, learn rom othermovements internationally like the Argentineanpopular assemblies and worker-owned actories

and the Venezuelan Bolivarian Misiones that di-vert oil money toward meeting the peoples needsor education, housing and ood. We need to do

the basic grassroots organizing in this country thatit takes to build a real mass movement that cutsacross issue, class and race lines and learn whatit means to exercise real international solidarity.Then, maybe well see some real victories.


14/16


An attempt to unravel some peculiar facts regarding the Booth Fire.

by Russ Taylor

I have to be per ectly honest about this. Were itnot or my experiences during a fve-day llamatrip into the Eight Lakes Basin o the Mt. Je erson

Wilderness in August o 2002, I might not havebeen motivated to investigate events o August03, events attendant to the visit that George W.Bush made to the state o Oregon in that peak-o -summer month.

The 02 llama trip involved my three brothers, twoo whom live back east and had little experienceo Oregon wilderness. In addition, there were sixve

forest voice spring 2006

Documents