Dear HCN,
Ed Marston writes that
the war between extractive interests and the environmental movement
is drawing to a close and the enviro movement won (HCN, 4/10/00:
Beyond the Revolution). Like the person who reads about his death
in the paper, reports of the demise of extractive interests are
greatly exaggerated. We will always have extractive industries in
the West because our survival depends on them. The only question
is, what balance will be struck between extractive uses and
preservation interests? This is a pendulum thing. At times the
pendulum swings toward extraction and at other times toward
preservation. Since Clinton took office, the pendulum has swung
back toward preservation. We are presently in a holding pattern
because, while Congress can easily summon a majority against
Clinton’s War on the West, they do not have enough votes to
override a veto. And the president does not have the votes to push
his agenda through.
The president does have the
advantage because of the Antiquities Act, but that can change. And
a new president can undo the executive orders of a previous
president, so the illusion of a win may be short-lived. I do agree
with Mr. Marston on one point. There are strong arguments for local
control over public-land policies. Therein lies the rub for
environmentalists because they do not have grassroot support in
local communities. Enviros are mostly intruders paid by wealthy
foundations. They are good at filing lawsuits, but have failed to
win the hearts and souls of Westerners. When the time comes to make
decisions at the local/regional level, environmentalists will be on
the outside looking in, having put themselves there by their own
words and deeds. We will see then which way the pendulum
swings.
Jim
Gerber
Anthony,
Idaho
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Extractive industries are not dead yet.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
