Applegater., May 01, 2012, Page 21, Image 21

Applegater Spring 2012 21
MY OPINION FROM BEHIND THE GREEN DOOR
Safekeeping the lands we share in common
BY chriS BrAtt
First, do no harm
I’m lucky to be a recipient of Medicare
(it’s even better than Obamacare) and
social security. I earned these great benefits
through a lifetime of hard work and paying
in to these marvelous programs. I’m also
thankful for all the people and policy
makers in the past who worked so hard
to give older Americans the health and
financial security we share today. I hope it
remains a safe bet for everyone.
I feel like I have an added benefit
when I go to see my doctors, knowing they
have taken a pledge with their Hippocratic
Oath that promises “First, do no harm.”
It’s an admirable basic goal that has saved
many lives for centuries and led to better
results for patients and for improved health
care in general. The idea of first doing no
harm cannot only improve our bodies and
spirits, it can also open new doors to the
way we address our total environment. It
can create new habits and ways of thinking
about how we interact with nature.
I’ve been thinking for awhile about
this pledge the doctors take and have
concluded that all of us, whatever work
we do, should be taking the same oath.
There is so much fear and uncertainty
about the ecological and financial health
of our planet that everyone needs to
be helping to lower the risk of ongoing
unacceptable damage to our surroundings.
Most importantly, a promise of “First, do
no harm” is especially necessary for people
who manage or use natural resources
on our public lands, oceans and forests.
These decision makers and users of the
public domain can’t continue the risky,
contentious and damaging management
practices of the past. There is popular
support and scientific evidence for less
destructive treatment of our environment.
There is also a universal calling for
assurance that the planet’s resources will
be protected and maintained into the
future. Isn’t it time we end the decline
and corruption of our natural world by and unnecessary legal problems.
I believe the main problems in public
following the doctors’ advice?
forest management stem from law and
The third time is the charm
It’s always seemed to me (at least policy makers always looking at BLM’s
for 35 years) that the Bureau of Land Oregon forests as geese that are continually
Management’s (BLM’s) public forest laying golden eggs. Their decisions have
management actions are in a continuous always rested on the mistaken theory that
state of change and wavering in the shifting cutting more trees will somehow solve all
political winds. Every time a new president of Oregon’s economic and social problems.
Their theory doesn’t
(some with old
heir decisions have always
recognize that
ideas) is elected to
rested on the mistaken
there are many
office, they embark
more essential
o n a n e w B L M theory that cutting more trees will
resource values
Forest Management somehow solve all of oregon’s
to be considered.
Plan for Oregon. economic and social problems.
These values reach
So, a new BLM plan
revision was just announced by the Obama far beyond just timber production and
administration in March, and will be resource extraction for industry well-being.
number three, one for each of the last three Change of tune
As a consequence of having to start
presidents. The last one, a George Bush
plan to cut a lot more trees, had a very another BLM Forest Plan Revision,
long planning period and a very short life. coupled with an uncertain future of
In promoting this new Plan Revision, federal payments to many struggling rural
BLM spokespeople are saying, “There is counties, additional proposals for managing
a bunch of new information out now.” these public lands are now being circulated.
And, “It seems like a good time to get Some of these recommendations will
the planning started.” I think the new attempt to solve the timber counties
information they’re speaking about was financial problems as well.
A new forest management submission
already available, they just didn’t use it.
Hopefully, the new revision plans will be by the much-respected forestry professors
more environmentally friendly than the Jerry Franklin and Norm Johnson is already
last Bush plan, which the March 3, 2012, being tested on BLM lands in the Middle
Medford Mail Tribune reported to “have Applegate drainage “Pilot” projects.
been through more court cases than a Their plan uses a restoration forestry
approach emphasizing thinning. They
habitual criminal.”
For me, the stated reason (“new designate certain areas as critical habitat for
information”) for starting another wildlife species and protect
new Forest Plan Revision is a smoke old-growth trees 150 years
screen. Legal action disqualified the and older. My considerable
Bush administration’s Western Oregon involvement with these
Plan Revision (WOPR) that illegally “Pilot” projects so far shows
ignored the federal Endangered Species them to be a very positive
Act requirements. If the BLM (in the Bush m a n a g e m e n t p r o g r a m
WOPR) had looked forward to returning with some real community
to a new balanced approach in managing participation in the planning.
public lands to protect fish and wildlife, The “Pilot” model could end
they could have saved lots of time, money up as a preferred alternative in
T
the new Forest
Plan Revision.
Another
more radical
Chris Bratt
proposal is
being put forward by Congressman Peter
DeFazio called the O & C (Oregon and
California) Trust, Conservation and Jobs
Act. If this proposed law is enacted, it
would place 1.5-million acres of BLM
lands in Oregon into a logging trust to
be managed by an appointed board solely
to generate revenue for the counties.
This logging trust would be managed
much like private industry lands (okay to
clear-cut and spray herbicides). It would
operate under the laws and guidelines of
the Oregon Department of Forestry. The
remaining BLM lands (approximately one
million acres) are slated to be transferred
and managed by the U.S. Forest Service
under their laws and guidelines. To me,
this is a scary, bad bill that is advocating
more intense management and a giveaway
of our public lands. More information
next time when more of the potential
impacts and details are known.
In the meantime, let’s recognize the
wonders of Oregon’s land, forests and
communities and our obligation as citizens
to preserve and revitalize them for future
generations. “First, do no harm” is a great
doctrine to live by. Can I sign you up?
Let me know.
Chris Bratt
541-846-6988