Poll finds strong support Clinton's forest-protection
plan
By Dan Gallagher of the Associated Press
BOISE - A statewide poll concludes that 57 percent of
Idaho citizens with a majority in support of conservative
politicians also back the Clinton administration's proposal
to preserve up to 60 million acres of roadless forest
nationwide.
The mark jumps to almost two-thirds, 64 percent, when
they were asked if they support protection of the remaining
8 million acres of roadless tracts in Idaho's national
forests, said John McCarthy, Idaho Conservation League
conservation director.
64 percent of Idaho
citizens support protection of the remaining 8 million acres
of roadless tracts in Idaho's national
forests.
And in an unusual turn, the poll found two-thirds had a
favorable rating for Republican U.S. Sen. Larry Craig, who
has opposed such set-asides of federal ground. Presidential
candidate George W. Bush was a two-to-one favorite among
them.
"The level of support is solid and real, and contrary to
what roadless area opponents have been saying, it's the
majority view in Idaho," McCarthy said.
Polls about roadless views were conducted in 11 states
with a good deal of wildlands within their borders. Montana
had the lowest percentage of approval for the Clinton
initiative, with 53 percent either strongly or somewhat
supporting it. Idaho was second with 57 percent. The highest
was Wisconsin with 83 per cent.
Some 500 Idaho people were contacted last week by the
Ridder/Braden Inc. polling firm of Denver. The margin of
error was plus or minus 4.3 percent.
"The level of
support is solid and real, and contrary to what roadless
area opponents have been saying, it's the majority view in
Idaho,"
- John McCarthy, Idaho Conservation
League
In the first question, the pollsters said half of the
nation's national forests had been logged, mined or
otherwise open to some commercial development. Eighteen
percent of the land is permanently protected and 31 percent
roadless but lacking that designation.
It goes on to say the roadless rating would allow
recreation like camping and hunting or fishing, but ban
development and off-road vehicles.
In Idaho, the level of support was highest among young
people ages 18 to 34, with 79 percent in favor, and for
women, 66 percent backed it.
Family camping and hiking is the primary use of Idaho's
national forests for recreation at 43 percent, while another
26 percent said hunting and fishing are their primary
uses.
The poll found
two-thirds had a favorable rating for Republican U.S. Sen.
Larry Craig, who has opposed such set-asides of federal
ground. Presidential candidate George W. Bush was a
two-to-one favorite among them.
More than three-quarters of the respondents said they did
not participate in any motorized, off-road recreation such
as all-terrain vehicle or snowmobiling on a regular basis,
while 21 percent reported they do.
Craig spokesman Mike Tracy said he was not surprised
about Idaho's approval of the senator or Bush, but
questioned whether the questions about the forest use were
leading.
Tracy said forest supervisors have told him they are
concerned that some non-motorized recreation may, in fact,
be banned in certain roadless areas.
"We all agree some areas are outstanding for protection.
It really comes down to how much and the process getting
there," he said.
Idaho officials have conflicted with the roadless
initiative from the start. U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge
in February sided with the Forest Service's motion to
dismiss the lawsuit brought by Idaho Attorney General Al
Lance, who sought access to federal documents and the
extension of a public comment period which had expired.
Valley and Boise counties, the Boise Cascade Corp.
wood-products company and Emmett rancher Brad Little on
March 17 filed suit in federal court against the
administration's program, saying Idaho is being kept in the
dark about which areas would be roped off from resource
use.
The Friends of the Clearwater group in Moscow praised the
Idaho polling, and said Ridder/Braden was the firm Gov. Dirk
Kempthorne has used for his counts.
The battle over
roads
Strong opinion develops over
Forest Service's building ban
By Sherry Devlin of the Missoulian
This is not the revolution, by Dale Bosworth's
telling.
This the Forest Service's proposal to prohibit road
building in 43 million acres of national forest is the
logical next step in 30 years of evolutionary change, said
Bosworth, who heads the agency's Northern Region.
The Forest Service has built 386,000 miles of roads in
the national forests, mostly since World War II, mostly to
provide access for logging trucks. Of 192 million acres of
national forests, 51 million acres remain unroaded of which
8.5 million acres are in Alaska's Tongass National
Forest.
It makes sense to
stop and decide as a nation whether or not to build roads
into the last remaining roadless places. The national public
has a legitimate voice in that
decision.
"When you look across the whole United States, our entire
land mass, there aren't that many places that don't have
roads in them," Bosworth said. "Something like 2 percent of
the total land area."
It makes sense, to Bosworth, to stop and decide - as a
nation - whether or not to build roads into the last
remaining roadless places. "The national public has a
legitimate voice in that decision," he said.
The Forest Service has tried to resolve the roadless
issue for 30 years, Bosworth said. First came RARE I the
Roadless Area Review and Evaluation. "I was a timber planner
on the Lolo Forest." he said, "It was a big issue, and we
weren't very successful at resolving it."
RARE I begat RARE II, which produced a lawsuit that
derailed the effort. Then came the development and adoption
of management plans for each of the national forests, "and
one of the biggest issues that we dealt with was the
management of roadless areas and whether they should be
recommended for wilderness or be managed for roaded kinds of
activities," Bosworth said. "It was hugely
controversial."
It remains so today.
President Clinton's call in a speech last October for
"appropriate long-term protection for most or all of the
currently inventoried roadless areas" provoked a wave of
protests that only intensified in May when the Forest
Service released its draft roadless area conservation
proposal.
The Forest Service
has built 386,000 miles of roads in the national forests,
mostly since World War II, mostly to provide access for
logging trucks.
"A lot of people view this proposal as just one more nail
in their coffin," Bosworth said "Their view is now you're
going to cut us out of the roadless areas, next you're not
going to allow us in the roadless areas, and then we won't
be allowed to participate in the active management of the
national forests at all.
"And though I don't agree, even though I think the
potential impacts are often overstated, I can understand the
concerns. There are no guarantees, and that doesn't make
people feel very good."
This week, as the Forest Service opens its doors to
public comment on the proposed roadbuilding ban, the outcry
will reach its peak. The timber industry is organizing
convoys of protesters to converge on Missoula late Wednesday
afternoon, just before a four-hour, two-venue public
hearing. Sawmills are closing so their workers can ride
buses to the pre-hearing rally. Country singers will sing.
There'll be barbecue enough for 3,000.
"What I can see is, we'll eventually be pushed out of the
national forests," said Loren Rose, the comptroller at
Pyramid Mountain Lumber Co. in Seeley Lake. "Then all the
pressure will be on private land, and it won't be
sustainable. Then we'll go to other countries and cut and
cut, until they finally say, 'You Americans are consumptive
pigs and hypocrites. We are not going to rape our forests
for your benefit anymore.' Who's in the driver's seat
then?"
The Forest Service
is already $8.4 billion behind in maintaining its existing
386,000 miles of roads.
"People have had it with these ridiculous mandates from
Washington, D.C.," said Cary Hegreberg, executive director
of the Montana Wood Products Association. "We intend, this
week in Missoula, to make a large visible statement that the
Forest Service cannot ignore. That enough is enough. That we
stand ready to defend our rural values and traditional way
of life.
"It's starting to feel like a revolution."
This is the Forest Service's proposal: To, prohibit road
construction and reconstruction including temporary roads in
43 million acres of inventoried roadless areas.
All the standard exceptions would apply: If a road were
needed to protect the public during a flood, fire or other
catastrophe. If a road were needed as part of a Superfund
cleanup, or to fulfill Indian tribe's treaty rights. Or if
reconstruction were needed to prevent irreparable resource
damage caused by the failure of an existing road.
The prohibition would be nationwide, excluding only the
Tongass National Forest.
However, decisions about the management of roadless areas
would be made at the 1ocal level as each national forest
revised its management plan. Timber cutting could continue
in roadless areas, as long as it did not require new roads.
Snowmobiling could continue. So could the use of all-terrain
vehicles.
As, proposed, "local managers would evaluate whether and
how to protect roadless characteristics, in the context of
multiple-use management, during forest and grassland plan
revisions."
Bosworth, who oversees 13 national forests in Montana and
north Idaho, believes the roadbuilding ban is needed. "It's
a question of land use, really," he said. "To me, it's a
pretty straightforward question of whether or not roads
should be built in the last pieces of unroaded land. Should
we have roads in these areas?"
Roadless land has value, he said. It is a source of clean
soil, water and air. It sustains a diversity of plant and
animal communities, and provides habitat for threatened and
endangered species, and for those species that need big
undisturbed places.
Roadless areas, Bosworth said, are "reference landscapes"
needed for research, study or interpretation. They are
Indian sacred sites and places for primitive dispersed
recreation. They give the forested landscape character and
scenic integrity.
Bosworth does not, however, believe that roadless areas
are essential sources of raw material for the wood products
industry. "The future of the timber industry in this part of
the country is not going to depend on these roadless areas,"
he said. "In fact, the reason that a lot of these areas are
roadless is because the timber values weren't high. We have
roaded a lot of the areas that are the best timber-growing
country."
"There's a reason why these areas are roadless," he said.
"They are difficult to build roads into. They're expensive
to build roads into. In a lot of cases, the timber growth
potential isn't high. They are the more marginal sites."
Between 1993 and 1999, national forests in Montana relied
on roadless areas for 4 million board feet of timber or
about 2 percent of the total federal cut. Between 2000 and
2004, those same forests planned to take about 3 million
board feet of timber from roadless areas.
"We haven't been roading and logging these areas in a
real aggressive way," Bosworth said. "We never intended
to."
When the Montana national forests adopted their
management plans in the 1980s, most expected roaded areas to
supply the bulk of their timber program. The Bitterroot
National Forest's 334-million-board-foot allowable sale
quantity was predicated on a 294-million-board-foot cut in
roaded areas. The Lolo National Forest's 1.07
billion-board-foot ASQ took 705 million board feet from
roaded areas. The Flathead National Forest expected 933
million board feet of its 1-billion-board-foot ASQ to come
from roaded areas.
"When you look
across the whole United States, our entire land mass, there
aren't that many places that don't have roads in them.
Something like 2 percent of the total land area." Dale
Bosworth,
U.S. Forest Service, SupervisorNorthern
Region
The future of the timber industry also is in roaded areas
albeit in watershed restoration, fire management and
ecosystem repair, Bosworth said .
"They'll be cutting a different type of material than
they cut in the past," he said, "but they'll be working in
the woods. Common sense tells me the only way that we can
have healthy forests is through active management, which is
going to include cutting some trees."
"It just doesn't make sense for the federal government to
build new roads into these wild backcountry areas of
Montana," said John Gatchell, whose Montana Wilderness
Association supports the roadbuilding ban. "They have done
that and done that and done that for 40 years."
In the last 50 years, the Forest Service built 32,900
miles of engineered roads on public land in Montana, he
said. "Where would we build more roads? Into the top of the
Swan Range to despoil one of the most beautiful mountain
ranges in the world? Into Blodgett Canyon? On Lolo Peak
facing Missoula? Into the Great Burn?"
But where will the prohibitions stop? asked Rose, at
Pyramid Mountain Lumber. "Yes, a lot of these roadless lands
deserve wilderness protection. That's beyond question. But
to have one policy developed by a handful of people in
Washington, D.C., to cover every situation isn't right. You
can't come up with something that big. It's not fair to the
American people, and it's not fair to the land."
More than 96 percent
of the inventoried roadless acreage is located in 12 Western
states. Alaska is No. 1, with 12 million acres. Idaho is
second, with 9.23 million acres. Montana is third, with 5.8
million acres of roadless national forest. Together, Montana
and Idaho account for 27.7 percent of the inventoried
roadless acreage in the nation.
Bosworth knew his region would be at the center of the
storm when the roadless initiative was announced. More than
96 percent of the inventoried roadless acreage is located in
12 Western states. Alaska is No. 1, with 12 million acres.
Idaho is second, with 9.23 million acres. Montana is third,
with 5.8 million acres of roadless national forest.
Together, Montana and Idaho account for 27.7 percent of the
inventoried roadless acreage in the nation.
"That's why these places are attractive to people,
because they are more wild," he said. "Every time I go back
East, I understand why people there would feel like these
roadless areas out West are pretty important. They don't
have anything like this. The decisions have already been
made, and they are in most cases irretrievable."
Nationally, the roadless initiative drew considerable
support during a preliminary round of comment-taking late
last year. The Forest Service received 471,830 comments in
support of a prohibition on roadbuilding in roadless areas,
87 percent of the total.
"You couldn't get nine out of 10 people to agree on which
topping to put on a pizza, but you have them agreeing to
protection of our national forests," said Matthew Koehler,
whose Native Forest Network wants to end all commercial use
of public land.
"Should these be national policies?" he asked.
"Definitely. Policies governing the management of the Statue
of Liberty shouldn't be left to people in New York. That's
the whole concept of being a nation."
Roadless land has
value, Bosworth said. It is a source of clean soil, water
and air. It sustains a diversity of plant and animal
communities, and provides habitat for threatened and
endangered species, and for those species that need big
undisturbed places.
Bosworth believes a national policy is needed so
individual forests can move beyond the roadbuilding issue as
forest management plans are revised in the decade ahead.
"To me, it makes a lot of sense," he said. "Our proposal
says no new road construction, but it allows those other
uses to be determined at the local planning level. There may
be one area where you don 't want to allow ATVs, and another
where you do. The same with snowmobiles or timber
harvesting. Those decisions should be made at the local
level, with the involvement of local people.
"But from my perspective, it makes sense that the issue
of whether or not to build roads into roadless areas is a
matter of public policy as opposed to a forest planning
question. For us to try to grind through forest plans once
again with the roadless overshadowing everything else
doesn't make sense. If we resolve the question of whether to
build roads in these areas, then the question of how you're
going to manage a roadless area can be dealt with at the
local level."
"We'll eventually be
pushed out of the national forests. Then all the pressure
will be on private land, and it won't be sustainable. Then
we'll go to other countries and cut and cut, until they
finally say, 'You Americans are consumptive pigs and
hypocrites. We are not going to rape our forests for your
benefit anymore.' Who's in the driver's seat then?" Loren
Rose, comptroller at Pyramid Mountain Lumber Co. in Seeley
Lake.
No decision leaves a more lasting imprint on the land
than does the decision to build a road, Bosworth said.
"That's why it is so controversial. Roads fragment habitat.
They increase erosion. They scar the land. People don't like
the way they look or the way they feel. You can do things to
minimize the effects , but there will still be effects."
And the Forest Service is already $8.4 billion behind in
maintaining its existing 386,000 miles of roads.
Rose and Hegreberg, though, use many of the same words
when they talk about the continued decline of timber cutting
on the national forests. "Five, six, seven years ago, 80
percent of the timber we processed at Pyramid came from
public land and 20 percent from private," Rose said. "Now
it's about 20 percent public and 80 percent from private
land. The drop has been tremendous."
On national forests in western Montana timber harvests
have decreased by 75 percent to 90 percent the past decade.
"We've been crying wolf for a long time," Hegreberg said.
"But now people are really starting to understand the
gravity of the issue. They're putting it all together. There
is always a reason not to do something. There is always a
reason not to harvest timber."
Rose doesn't buy "not for a minute" the contention that
the roadbuilding ban is a Forest Service proposal. "I don't
believe it's the agency," he said. "Ibelieve it's Clinton's
hand-picked people in Washington, D.C."
And those people don't know what it is like to live and
work in Seeley Lake, he said. "We bid on a timber sale on
the Salmon National Forest last year. The land had burned,
and every tree was dead. It was a helicopter sale. No roads.
No equipment on the ground. Ponderosa pine of a high
quality."
"There's a reason
why these areas are roadless. They are difficult to build
roads into. They're expensive to build roads into. In a lot
of cases, the timber growth potential isn't high. They are
the more marginal sites." Dale Bosworth,
U.S. Forest Service
Pyramid Mountain was the high bidder.
"Then four wilderness advocate groups from Montana
appealed," Rose said. "The local Forest Service people in
Salmon hadn't encountered anything like that before, so they
asked their people in Ogden (Utah) for help. And the people
in Ogden said, don't award the sale. And that was the
decision."
The prohibition on roadbuilding in roadless areas isn't
the problem, he said. Bosworth is correct in saying the
short-term effects would be minimal.
"But this isn't the first 43 million acres, and it won't
be the last," Rose said.
"The future of the
timber industry in this part of the country is not going to
depend on these roadless areas. In fact, the reason that a
lot of these areas are roadless is because the timber values
weren't high. We have roaded a lot of the areas that are the
best timber-growing country."
Dale Bosworth
Rose bristles at the contention, in the Forest Service's
draft environmental impact statement, that national forests
are "used, enjoyed and valued by people everywhere,
including those who live in nearby communities; those who
visit them from cities, states and countries farther may;
and those who never visit, but who benefit from the
ecosystem services and passive values they provide."
"First of all, I don't know what ecosystem services
means," he said. "And I don't agree with the implication
that people in New York City who never leave the city
benefit from some passive use. I don't know what values
those are, and I wonder how much do they need. How much is
enough? They don't even know how much they already
have."
Reporter Sherry Devlin can be reached at 523-5268 or by
e-mail at sdevlin@missoulian.com.
Missoulian, Missoula, Montana, June 18, 2000
Clinton's roadless plan may
allow logging
· Plan may also make
allowance for motorized access
By Eric Barker of the Tribune
President Clinton's roadless initiative will prohibit
road building in roadless areas but continue to allow
logging and motorized access, according to sources familiar
with a leaked version of a forthcoming document.
The Forest Service's Draft Environmental Impact Statement
dealing with road building in roadless areas will be
released today, a high-ranking agency official said.
The official, who declined to be named and refused to
comment directly on the agency's preferred alternative, said
the draft document addresses some of the big issues
associated with roadless areas, but leaves others to be
decided at the forest level.
"What we are proposing is a moderate and measured
approach to address, at the national level, what we think
are the most significant national issues and proposing to
leave to local planning issues that are better resolved at
that level."
For example, the official said the document does not
propose sweeping regulations regarding access to road
areas.
"What we are doing won't close a single mile of road and
it won't block any existing access. I think this ought to go
a long way toward quieting the din in terms of blocking
public access to public lands."
President Clinton's roadless
initiative will prohibit road building in roadless areas but
continue to allow logging and motorized
access.
However, the official would not confirm reports that
while the document's preferred alternative prohibits road
building in roadless areas, it does not prohibit logging in
those areas.
The official did stress the document is in draft form and
could be quite different when it becomes final later this
fall.
"This proposal will change based on public input and
participation."
Sources familiar with portions of the draft document
leaked Monday confirmed they expect the preferred
alternative to prohibit road building in inventoried
roadless areas, without prohibiting logging.
They also said one alternative in the document, not
chosen as the agency's preferred option, forbids logging.
Another, aimed at restoring ecosystem health, allows logging
only as a stewardship project.
Timber companies often use helicopters to get into areas
where roads cannot be built, but it's a much more expensive
method of timber harvest.
However, the helicopter logging is merely a smokescreen
to cover what is essentially a reduction in logging, said
Stefany Bales of the Intermountain Forestry Association.
Such methods of timber harvest are often prohibitively
expensive.
"It's the Forest Service hiding the ball," she said. "You
can theoretically say you can log but the reality of where
you will be able to is a huge question.""It's starting to
feel like a revolution." Cary Hegreberg, executive director,
Montana Wood Products Association.
She said prohibiting road building also eliminates an
effective tool in forest management. If that happen, she
worries thousands of acres will be lost to wild fires,
threatening the rest of the forest.
She cited forest fires in New Mexico, started as
prescribe burns in land managed by the National Park
Service, that now rage out of control and threaten private
homes and the Los Alamos National Laboratory, a nuclear
weapons facility.
"That is what we have to look forward to if we continue
to disallow professional foresters from doing their job,"
said Bales. "The idea that keeping the foresters out of the
forest will protect the forest is pure fantasy."
John McCarthy of the Idaho Conservation League said he is
disappointed if reports are accurate and logging in roadless
areas will still be allowed. But he is pleased at the
overall direction the Forest Service is taking.
"It's really a step forward in the right direction where
people want to go, but it's not all the way there," he said.
"It's very encouraging they are doing something big."
McCarthy is worried helicopter logging in roadless areas
could target old-growth trees to offset the high costs.
Lewiston Tribune, Lewiston, Idaho, May 9, 2000
1988
Forest Service halts roadless
timber sales
Associated Press
COEUR D'ALENE The U.S. Forest Service on Thursday
announced it is halting all timber sales in roadless lands
in the Panhandle National Forests, pending resolution of
appeals launched by a coalition of environmental groups.
As much as 54 million board feet of timber per year could
be dropped from the Panhandle timber sale program because of
the decision this week by Dale Robertson, Forest Service
chief at Washington, D.C., the Panhandle Forests said in a
news release.
Last fall, a coalition of 19 national, regional and local
environmental groups, plus one individual, appealed the new
long-term management plan, issued in September, for the
Idaho Panhandle National Forests.
The 2.5-million-acre Panhandle forest are comprised of
most of the St. Joe, Coeur d'Alene and Kaniksu forests.
The coalition requested that all timber sales planned for
roadless portions of the forest be postponed at least until
the appeals are resolved.
Under Robertson's decision, timber sale activities in
roadless lands will be halted, except those now under
contract; currently stayed as part of a prior appeal; or
proposed but no final decision yet made.
"We are reviewing the chief's decision, but don't yet
have all of the details," said Bill Morden, Panhandle
supervisor. "We do know that we cannot proceed with any
timber sales in unroaded areas until the appeal is
resolved."
Morden said the forest is immediately removing from the
market five timber sales, totaling13.3 million board feet,
that had been scheduled for fiscal year 1988.
The Forest Service's master plan for the Panhandle
forests called for an average 280 million board feet to be
offered for sale in each of the next 10 years.
Lewiston Tribune, Lewiston, Idaho, April 15,
1988
Clearcuts across the Coeur d'Alene National Forest, one of
the three Idaho Panhandle National Forests.
© Trygve Steen
Sabotage, contention in Idaho's
Panhandle
U.S. Forest Service chief Dale
Robertson
encourages timber workers
at a Solidarity Celebration at Farragut State Park.
Associated Press, Lewiston Tribune, August 21,
1988
The pot keeps boiling on the Panhandle National Forests
in northern Idaho.
On Aug. 15, Forest Service associate chief George Leonard
denied part of an appeal 19 conservation groups had filed
against the Panhandle's management plan. That lifted a stay
on timber sales in roadless areas that the groups had
earlier won. Leonard said the forest's roadless area
analysis and its allocation of those areas to mostly
nonwilderness management was legally sufficient.
The decision did not surprise the appellants, but the
grounds did that the detailed analysis of roadless choices
required by law and the courts will occur at the project
(timber sale) level rather than in the forest plan.
"Apparently the Panhandle Plan is not a decision document
for roadless areas, just for every other resource," said the
groups' spokesman John Osborn. Jim Riley, a timber industry
lobbyist, essentially agreed: "The decision just lengthens
the dispute; avoids the issue."
Since Leonard's decision explicitly applies to the
national forest system, not just these forests, conservation
attorneys around the country are reviewing it.
"The chief of the
Forest Service has no business keynoting a media event
designed to bash conservationists. Especially after all the
political interference we've had in forest decisions here."
The interferers Osborn has in mind are Idaho's Republican
members of Congress - Steve Symms, Larry Craig, and
especially Jim McClure all of whom spoke at the
rally.
On Aug. 20, Montana logger Bruce Vincent held his third
pro-timber "solidarity celebration" of the summer, at a
state park north of Coeur d'Alene. Rain and the fire
situation kept the crowd to 500, half that predicted. But
the big news was the keynote speaker Forest Service Chief
Dale Robertson, who appeared in a logging contractor's cap
and encouraged the crowd to continue its efforts.
Conservationists were angry. "It's appropriate that he
comes out to talk with all users," Osborn says. "But the
chief of the Forest Service has no business keynoting a
media event designed to bash conservationists. Especially
after all the political interference we've had in forest
decisions here." The interferers Osborn has in mind are
Idaho's Republican members of Congress - Steve Symms, Larry
Craig, and especially Jim McClure all of whom spoke at the
rally. Robertson did hold a private meeting with
conservationists, and another with timber interests, before
the rally.
Finally, that same week, $10,000 worth of sabotage was
discovered at three logging operations in the Selkirk
Mountains near the Idaho/Canada border. Two bulldozers, a
yarder, a log loader, and a grader had windows and lights
broken, tires slashed, fuel lines cut, gearshifts damaged,
and fuel tanks filled with dirt. A radio receiver was also
taken. A note bearing a black cat symbol was found: "Beware.
We never sleep. We never forget. SABOTAGE."
The Forest Service
decided that the detailed analysis of roadless choices
required by law and the courts will occur at the project
(timber sale) level rather than in the forest
plan.
Bruce Vincent quickly blamed "radical environmentalists,"
and a Boundary County sheriff's deputy said the
investigation would focus on such people. Since the black
cat is an old Wobbly symbol (the early 20th-century radical
union), and there has been much labor/management conflict in
the Northwest timber industry this summer, others
conjectured a labor link.
The equipment's owner, Lee Smith, was more judicious: "I
don't know who did it. It's just disturbed people as far as
I'm concerned. I wish they'd written me a letter instead.
We're just wondering from day to day if we're going to make
it anyway."
There has been next to no such activity on the Panhandle
Forests to date; both Osborn and the Forest Service consider
it an isolated event.
"It's a criminal act, irrelevant to the overall
discussion of the forest's future," Osborn says. "We've
worked very hard to avoid any glamorizing of such senseless
behavior."
High Country News , Paonia, Colorado, September 26,
1988
|
