A few days ago I’d heard from somebody in the Darcy Burner camp that Dave Reichert was preparing to introduce legislation this coming week, adding 26,000 acres along the Pratt River to the Alpine Wilderness Area. Sounds like a pretty good idea to me, but it also sounds pretty damn cynical considering Reichert’s poor record on environmental issues, and his lockstep support of President Bush’s anti-wilderness policies. I’d meant to post preemptively, but Reichert’s staff beat me to it, feeding the story to the Seattle P-I’s Joel Connelly.
The curmudgeonly Connelly was the perfect choice: a nature enthusiast and wilderness advocate who longs for the days when the Republican notion of doing the “right” thing spoke more to rectitude of judgment than ideological correctness, Connelly holds an almost messianic faith in the second coming of moderate bipartisanship. Connelly also has a history of rewarding even the most reprobate Republicans for small steps toward the middle, and Reichert’s folks guessed right that their outreach to him might generate a little positive press. Which makes my failure to preempt Reichert’s announcement, putting it in its appropriate context, all the more disappointing.
For at the same time Reichert makes hay over his move to designate these 26,000 acres as protected wilderness, he refuses to oppose Bush administration rules that would open all two million acres of Washington’s remaining roadless national forest land — and 58.5 million acres nationwide — to road-building, logging, mining and other commercial development.
Rep. Jay Inslee and Sen. Maria Cantwell have introduced bipartisan legislation that would do exactly that, reinstating by law the Clinton-era “roadless rule” that the Bush administration summarily revoked. The House version of the National Forest Roadless Area Conservation Act has already secured 140 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle. But noticeably absent from this list of supporters is the suddenly “green” Dave Reichert.
Connelly kvelled that Reichert “took a bold step to embrace a Republican tradition that has lately been sinking out of sight.” Oy. So after rinsing the vomit out of my mouth, I asked Burner for comment. In response, the campaign sent the following statement:
“My family and I live in modest home outside of Carnation because we enjoy being close to the land. I grew up in rural areas, so a connection to open country is something I feel deep in my bones. Growing up, my dad spent several summers as a park ranger at Mt. Rainier National Park. We lived near the park while he worked to protect those areas so visitors from across the state could come and appreciate the great outdoors.
“I remain committed to conservation and to protecting our environment. Our pristine open spaces are disappearing before our eyes as the Bush administration guts the strong wilderness conservation protections established during the Clinton years. If we do not act now to reverse this situation, much of our wilderness will be lost forever.
“That is why I strongly support HR 2516, Senator Maria Cantwell’s and Rep. Jay Inslee’s Roadless Area Protection Act. Fifty-nine million acres of wilderness across the country are at risk – including 2 million acres in Washington State (accounting for more than a fifth of our National Forests here) – because of rule changes imposed by the Bush administration that amount to a giveaway of public lands to loggers, oil companies and the mining industry. Unfortunately, these are changes that Congressman Reichert seems to support, since he is notably absent as one of the 144 co-sponsors – including a number of Republicans – of this important legislation.
“Now I hear that Congressman Reichert, who is not even sure yet that global warming exists, intends to begin portraying himself as going ‘green.’ He is telling the press that he would like to consider designating 26,000 acres of federal land of the Pratt River Valley a wilderness area. Many in the environmental community would like to see this area conserved and so would I. So I applaud Congressman Reichert for taking a small step in the direction of wilderness conservation.
“But I would also hope that he would join so many of his colleagues in co-sponsoring the bipartisan Cantwell-Inslee legislation. Otherwise, his willingness to consider protecting one small area while threatening 2 million acres elsewhere in the state is the equivalent of focusing on a tree while losing sight of the fact that the forest is being chopped down around you.
“Moreover, I believe strongly that we can not forget to take care of what we already have. Congress must adequately fund the Parks Service so the horrible damage the winter storms did to Mt Rainier National Park can be put on a fast track for repair and restoration. When I am elected, the voters of the 8th District can be sure that conserving our untouched public lands, not just in one location but all across the state, will be one of my top priorities. I will move quickly to ensure that the environmental health of our entire region is preserved and enhanced.”
So before other reporters, columnists and editorialists gush over a minority congressman’s attempt to immunize himself on environmental issues by announcing plans to protect 26,000 acres (a bill he is powerless to push through on his own,) I hope they ask Reichert the hard question of whether he will or will not join Inslee and Cantwell in opposing President Bush, and reinstating roadless rules that would protect 58.5 million acres of pristine forest from commercial development.
PROGRAMMING NOTE:
Joel Connelly will be my guest tonight in the 8PM hour on “The David Goldstein Show.”
Great quote!
Well I hope this passes, and you burb hikers don’t need a road to save your sorry asses when you get lost.
Designating areas as roadless puts the area off limits to any motorized unit. When a big fire happens, let er burn. Don’t send any fire equipment in, just let er burn. Then you nature loving pavement dwellers can hike in soot.
The forest service will be broke (almost is now) , and you won’t have to worry about trails anymore.
Go ahead….. make em roadless. You can experience them from the pavement off I-90.
re 2: While you hike heartily through the wilderness in your underwear with only a pinecone to wipe your wilderness savvy ass.
What a man!
Walking Talking Point @2,
From the Natural Resources Defense Council:
Sorry to interrupt your fantasy with, you know, facts.
“second coming of moderate bipartisanship”
Maybe after the current crop of Republicans dies off, or the Rapture takes them. I can’t wait for the Rapture to get here! A flash and a bang — and 144,000 Republicans vanish! It’s not enough, but it’s a start.
Goldy
I don’t want to interrupt your Fantasy, but could you cite another source other than Earth’s First sister station????
#3
Don’t worry, your won’t be able to afford asswipe, lucy lips.
@2 I can go anywhere I want, and I don’t need a road to get there! Get off your concrete derrier and grow a pair of legs, man! If I can do it, you can do it. http://tinyurl.com/ya8knz
@6 There’s nothing wrong with Goldy’s source. The only problem here is the vacuum between your ears.
@9 I’m simply not going to play this “I-don’t-believe-anything-that-isn’t-from-a-wingnut-source” game with them anymore.
@7
We don’t need more asswipe as long as you’re here….
The media should rethink their policy of giving crackpots equal space. Why should people who claim space flight is a hoax get equal time with NASA? The only “news” story there is that loonies are on the loose! The editor should put that item in the police blotter.
Newsweek magazine finally “got” it. Instead of giving equal space to global warming deniers, their editors decided that global warming deniers ARE the story. In a crime reporting sense. For an example of how objective journalism SHOULD work see http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20.....ek/page/0/
Are you paying attention, Joel?
At this point in time, with 99% of the world’s reputable scientists in agreement, global warming deniers should be consigned to the “crackpot” basket on news editors’ desks.
We’re still undoing the environmental damage wreaked by former Rep. Pombo of California, gone but neither missed nor forgotten. He abused the “roads” designation to prevent conservation efforts in regions which had historically been protected. Propaganda such as #2, above, were Pombo’s schtick in trade. Luckily, his friends and neighbors finally had enough of him last year, and fired him in November.
Reichert’s next, all of the “bipartisanship” and “moderate” propaganda notwithstanding…
And that, it seems, makes the 8th District’s congressman a crackpot. Of course, there’s no law against that; you can elect anyone to represent you in Congress who is at least 25 years old, resides in the state, and has been a citizen for at least 7 years. (U.S. Const. Art. I, Sec. 2.) But next year, 8th District voters might reconsider whether they wish to be represented in Congress by a crackpot.
@14 Pombo, who represented a district in California, blocked the Wild Sky Wilderness in the Washington Cascades for years. Why didn’t this meddler mind his own state, and let us run ours? Because he’s a Republican, that’s why. Knowing someone is a Republican explains everything they do.
Republican = jerk
Pombo came from a family in the dairy and cattle business, and apparently was only a part-time congressman, even though he collected a full-time salary:
“Even after being elected to Congress, he continued to own a 500-acre ranch near Tracy and returned to it every week.”
The New York Times called him “an outspoken product of the extreme property rights movement.” That’s not surprising, given that the Pombo family is his district’s largest landowner.
While in Congress, Pombo proposed:
1. Giving mining companies a right to buy public lands to which they have staked claims even if there are no minerals present;
2. Selling 1/4th of the lands administered by the National Park Service;
3. Weakening the Endangered Species Act;
4. Pushed for building a freeway through an uninhabited area where his family owns land;
5. Sought suspension of environmental restrictions on wind farms (his family collects hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual royalties from wind turbines);
6. Opposed restrictions on snowmobiling in national parks;
7. Charged the government $4,935 for rental of an RV he used for a family vacation;
8. Interfered with an investigation by banking regulators of a Tom DeLay pal;
9. Has links to the company involved in the Alaska influence-peddling probe;
10. Paid salaries to family members from campaign funds.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan watchgroup, called Pombo “one of the … most corrupt members of the House of Representatives.” Among other things, he has been linked to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff … and … “Pombo’s staff has attempted to excise critical information regarding his ties to Abramoff from Wikipedia.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pombo
What a scumbag. In 2006, Pombo was the #1 target of national environmental groups. The Sierra Club alone sent 300 volunteers into the district to campaign for his opponent, who won by 6.2 points.
Pombo is a typical Republican asshole, born to wealth and privilege, who used his family’s position in the community to get into a position of public trust which he then exploited for personal gain, while inflicting lasting damage on the entire nation. Some of his activities may have crossed the criminal line, and he may yet decorate an orange jumpsuit and a concrete cell. I hope so.
3.
Darcy lives in a rural area near Carnation? You mean, um, in urban sprawl? “Living close to the land” is generally just an excuse Microsofties use to import urban lives into areas that should remain either farm or forest. I know this website is an extension of Darcy’s campaign, but please – we’d all do better if you took a hard look at her shtick occasionally.
@2 Goldy’s source in fine.
Road building also silts up stream beds (ruining spawning beds of trout and salmon), increases trash dumping and poaching of wildlife, and introduces non-native and invasive plant species, like Scotch Broom (carried in by cars).
@2 Good enough for you yet?
http://roadless.fs.fed.us/docu.....nergy.html
Senate testimony of MIKE DOMBECK, CHIEF FOREST SERVICe DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Roadless areas are controversial, in part, because of their important social and ecological values. Roadless areas provide clean water, habitat for wildlife, food for hunters, and amazing recreational opportunities. They act as a barrier against noxious invasive plant and animal species and as strongholds for native fish populations. Roadless areas serve as reference areas for research and often provide vital habitat and migration routes for numerous wildlife species and are particularly important for those requiring large home ranges. Many roadless areas also act as ecological anchors allowing nearby federal, state, and private lands to be developed for economic purposes. Indeed, roadless areas are critically important for the long-term ecological sustainability of the nation’s forests.
In recent years, the public has rightfully questioned whether the Forest Service should build new roads into controversial roadless areas when the agency has difficulty maintaining its existing road system. The current national forest road system includes 380,000 miles of roads, enough to circle the globe more than 15 times. The agency currently has a road reconstruction and maintenance backlog of approximately $8.4 billion and it receives only about 20 percent of the annual funding needed to maintain the safety and environmental condition of its road system.
The two words “bold step” and Hairdo don’t belong in the same paragraph.
Designating areas as roadless puts the area off limits to any motorized unit. When a big fire happens, let er burn. Don’t send any fire equipment in, just let er burn. Then you nature loving pavement dwellers can hike in soot.
God damn! I never thought of that! How on earth did the forests manage before the forest service put roads in? I’m surprised that Lewis and Clark, the Denny Party, Overton and Lovejoy, or any of the other pioneers who settled this part of the world found a single tree when they came out here! It should have all been ‘burned to soot’ by forest fires over the years.
“My failure to preempt”, etc. What conceit, David: The story is about the Pratt River, wilderness protection in the Cascade Front Range, and Rep. Reichert> It is NOT about you.