Dear HCN,
As a former intern and
longtime friend of the paper, I have often defended HCN’s
journalistic integrity, even when your views didn’t happen to
support my own. Paul Larmer’s recent article, “Idaho grizzly plan
shifts into low gear” (HCN, 11/9/98), leaves me feeling painfully
bereft of much defensible.
Larmer focuses on the
“ROOTS Alternative” for grizzly bear reintroduction in the
Selway-Bitterroot Ecosystem as if this were an option worth
rallying behind. While a consensus approach to problem-solving is
surely tempting, we must still judge the product of collaborative
efforts for their merits and not just pat ourselves on the back for
creating a feel-good process.
Supporters (the few
that can be found) for the ROOTS Alternative like to bill it as a
“Win-Win,” but the sad truth is that prospective winners from this
option do not include the dozen or so grizzly bears that would be
tagged and collared, reclassified “experimental, nonessential,”
offered scant designated habitat and no protections from extractive
industry, and dropped into the Selway-Bitterroot. When the
designers of the ROOTS Alternative sat down to plan, they neglected
to invite any bears – or, for that matter, anyone willing to try to
speak on behalf of the bears.
Larmer somehow
fails even to mention that the Draft EIS includes a Conservation
Biology Alternative for griz reintroduction. Crafted by the
Alliance for the Wild Rockies – one of the ostensibly “silent”
local environmental groups – this alternative not only provides for
the full protection of Selway-Bitterroot grizzlies and their
habitat, but also includes provisions for road removal and habitat
restoration that would generate hundreds of high-paying local jobs.
At hearings last year, the overwhelming majority of individual
testimony received by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service criticized
the ROOTS Alternative and favored the stronger protections offered
in the Conservation Biology Alternative.
If I
didn’t have such deep faith in your journalism, I would have to
question the editorial influence wielded by certain board members.
Say it ain’t so! We have not been silent, we just continue to speak
out for a better plan than that offered by
ROOTS.
David
Havlick
Missoula,
Montana
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline ROOTS enjoyed shallow support.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
