FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Collaboration on the Clearwater

Collaboration is touted as the latest solution to pubic land conflicts.  Senator Crapo (R-ID) recently announced a new “collaborative” had been formed to address public land issues in Idaho’s Clearwater Basin.  Ironically, this public announcement came a few months after the collaborative group had formed, largely out of the public eye.

The public lands in the Clearwater Basin–centered mainly on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests–form the northern half of the largest intact wildland ecosystem left in the lower 48.  Salmon and steelhead spawn in the Selway and Lochsa Rivers.  Lower elevation habitat with ancient cedar groves and other mesic plants makes the area a unique blend of the Rockies and coastal forests.  Wolves, fishers, wolverines, and a few grizz call this area home.  A study done for World Wildlife Fund Canada by three prominent biologists found that the Clearwater Basin was the most important area in the entire Rockies for large carnivores.

Serious questions surround collaboratives. They may effectively replace the legitimate public process.  For example, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires that federal agencies objectively evaluate a range of options and seek public input on those options before making a decision.  Collaborative processes make decisions couched as “recommendations” before this analysis occurs.  As such, NEPA becomes a pro forma exercise.  An excerpt from an article about Crapo’s new Clearwater collaborative, written by The Lewiston Morning Tribune’s  Eric Barker on May 30 2008, makes this clear:

Tom Tidwell, regional forester in charge of national forests in northern Idaho and western Montana, pledged to work to implement whatever the groups come up with. He said anything done on Forest Service land will still have to go through the agency’s public process. But he said having broad agreement up front will make the process smoother. “What ever comes out of this effort we are going to be supportive of it,” he said.

This is a tacit admission there won’t be an objective analysis of alternatives before a decision is made as required by NEPA.

It also isn’t clear whether this process is currently open to citizens or closed with no more room.  While someone from Rhode Island can participate in the normal public processes, it is almost certain such a person couldn’t participate in a series of meetings in Idaho to decide the fate of land that belong to all Americans.

There seem to be preconditions as well.  The Lewiston Morning Tribune quoted Senator Crapo as saying, “Each participant must be as committed to helping others reach their goals and objectives as that participant is committed to advancing their own interests.”  At best, this is a vague and meaningless statement, at worst it could be used as a club to bully participants who hold a minority view to acquiesce by accusing them of operating in bad faith.

It also isn’t clear whether this group will limit itself to “recommendations” for the Forest Service. Conservation groups involved in the collaborative, including the Idaho Conservation League and the Wilderness Society,  want to push for wilderness legislation.  The problem is other interests could ask the environmentalists to agree to weaken and amend existing environmental laws in exchange for an agreement to designate some wilderness.  Indeed, “quid pro quo” legislation is a recent trend.  Public land disposal, weakening amendments to the Wilderness Act, and other precedential efforts reneging on past commitments have been folded into so-called wilderness legislation in the past few years.

Collaboratives are often proposed to circumvent compliance with environmental laws.  Special interests and the government want to overturn court decisions where citizens prevailed in convincing the judiciary to force the federal agencies to follow environmental laws governing how or whether commercial logging, mining,  livestock grazing, or developed recreation takes place.

The Clearwater collaborative may be related to a past effort to wrest control of public land from US citizens. The State of Idaho formed a federal land task force a few years ago which produced a recomemdnation for a local collaborative to make decisions on the Nez Perce and Clearwater National Forests.  This dove-tailed with Bush’s plan to turn over national forests to local entities on a pilot basis, the first step to privatization. Environmental groups and other citizens successfully opposed this effort, a fact apparently forgotten by the environmental groups who are now backing Crapo’s collaborative.

Furthermore, some time ago special interests came up with a ploy to increase logging and log roadless areas ostensibly to create more forage for elk herds which had declined in the Clearwater after the severe winter of 95-96.  Two separate “elk” collaborative efforts ensued; the second came from Senator Crapo.  Interestingly, this second collaborative resulted in a general agreement to focus logging on roaded areas and mainly use fire in roadless areas.  Whether this current collaborative will reverse this recommendation is not known.

The Clearwater collaborative could pose problems for the integrity of Clearwater wildlands.  Groups like the local Friends of the Clearwater have led the charge for keeping the public lands in the Clearwater Basin wild.  That organization has also pushed the visionary Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act, the science-based ecosystem bill developed by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.  This bill has been moving through the House and is the best way to ensure long-term viability of rare species in the region.  The Clearwater collaborative could undercut congressional support for that legislation.

The dilemma is those who can’t or won’t participate may have their concerns ignored.   Those who do participate risk undercutting the public interest and existing legitimate processes.  Collaborative processes are touted as democratic and open yet only a few can participate. They are also bare-knuckle political affairs with winners and losers which have more to do with coercion and less with real consensus.  Though touted to end controversy, they are controversial themselves and deserve much more scrutiny.

Gary Macfarlane is the Ecosystem Defense Director for Friends of the Clearwater and board president for the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

 

Your Ad Here
 

 

 

 

 

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
August 17, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Daniel Wolff
The Aretha Dialogue
Nick Pemberton
Donald Trump and the Rise of Patriotism 
Joseph Natoli
First Amendment Rights and the Court of Popular Opinion
Andrew Levine
Midterms 2018: What’s There to Hope For?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Running Out of Fools
Ajamu Baraka
Opposing Bipartisan Warmongering is Defending Human Rights of the Poor and Working Class
Paul Street
Corporate Media: the Enemy of the People
David Macaray
Trump and the Sex Tape
CJ Hopkins
Where Have All the Nazis Gone?
Daniel Falcone
The Future of NATO: an Interview With Richard Falk
Robert Hunziker
Hothouse Earth
Cesar Chelala
The Historic Responsibility of the Catholic Church
Ron Jacobs
The Barbarism of US Immigration Policy
Kenneth Surin
In Shanghai
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
The Military Option Against Venezuela in the “Year of the Americas”
Nancy Kurshan
The Whole World Was Watching: Chicago ’68, Revisited
Robert Fantina
Yemeni and Palestinian Children
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Orcas and Other-Than-Human Grief
Shoshana Fine – Thomas Lindemann
Migrants Deaths: European Democracies and the Right to Not Protect?
Paul Edwards
Totally Irrusianal
Thomas Knapp
Murphy’s Law: Big Tech Must Serve as Censorship Subcontractors
Mark Ashwill
More Demons Unleashed After Fulbright University Vietnam Official Drops Rhetorical Bombshells
Ralph Nader
Going Fundamental Eludes Congressional Progressives
Hans-Armin Ohlmann
My Longest Day: How World War II Ended for My Family
Matthew Funke
The Nordic Countries Aren’t Socialist
Daniel Warner
Tiger Woods, Donald Trump and Crime and Punishment
Dave Lindorff
Mainstream Media Hypocrisy on Display
Jeff Cohen
Democrats Gather in Chicago: Elite Party or Party of the People?
Victor Grossman
Stand Up With New Hope in Germany?
Christopher Brauchli
A Family Affair
Jill Richardson
Profiting From Poison
Patrick Bobilin
Moving the Margins
Alison Barros
Dear White American
Celia Bottger
If Ireland Can Reject Fossil Fuels, Your Town Can Too
Ian Scott Horst
Less Voting, More Revolution
Peter Certo
Trump Snubbed McCain, Then the Media Snubbed the Rest of Us
Dan Ritzman
Drilling ANWR: One of Our Last Links to the Wild World is in Danger
Brandon Do
The World and Palestine, Palestine and the World
Chris Wright
An Updated and Improved Marxism
Daryan Rezazad
Iran and the Doomsday Machine
Patrick Bond
Africa’s Pioneering Marxist Political Economist, Samir Amin (1931-2018)
Louis Proyect
Memoir From the Underground
Binoy Kampmark
Meaningless Titles and Liveable Cities: Melbourne Loses to Vienna
Andrew Stewart
Blackkklansman: Spike Lee Delivers a Masterpiece
Elizabeth Lennard
Alan Chadwick in the Budding Grove: Story Summary for a Documentary Film
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail