Dear HCN,
I want to thank writer
Lynne Bama for her story on land trades, and particularly for
showing the connection between 19th-century land grabs and the
present-day subsidization of corporations through exchanges (HCN,
3/29/99).
Lynne called me a “one-woman truth
squad,” which I took as a compliment, but which belies the efforts
of scores of other citizens around the West working their tails off
to bring reform to the land exchange
process.
Letter-writer Andy Wiessner makes much
of “pragmatic” environmentalists’ support for the Huckleberry Land
Exchange, but this says far more about the pitfalls of pragmatism
than it does about land swaps. As long as enviros support trading
away what they judge to be less important public lands for the sake
of their special places, the timber, mining and development
corporations have them exactly where they want them, duped by the
“win-win” scenario.
The assumption that all lands
should be consolidated is also overdue for re-examination. Yes, the
checkerboard is a land-management nightmare. But if the fragmented
state of some public land is used to justify the trade of any and
all forested checkerboards, we are in a heap of trouble – in many
areas of the Northwest, the only intact forest the public owns is
in these square-mile or smaller sections. Over much of the
landscape these are the last refugia for native species, yet they
are being bartered for corporate
clear-cuts.
Wiessner’s statement that all
exchanges are processed in public is inaccurate. Many are
implemented through legislation that waives public review and
environmental laws. In fact, the Plum Creek exchange of which he is
so proud was enacted as an appropriations rider – engineered in a
backroom deal between Plum Creek, Sens. Gorton and Murray, and
“pragmatic” enviros who waived the democratic process for the sake
of their special
places.
Janine
Blaeloch
Seattle,
Washington
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Always question land trades.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
