A4
East Oregonian
Wednesday, May 22, 2019
CHRISTOPHER RUSH
Publisher
KATHRYN B. BROWN
Owner
ANDREW CUTLER
Editor
WYATT HAUPT JR.
News Editor
JADE McDOWELL
Hermiston Editor
Founded October 16, 1875
OUR VIEW
States are capable of managing gray wolves
O
regon Gov. Kate Brown last
week wrote a puzzling letter.
It was addressed to Secretary
of the Interior David Bernhardt.
In it, she tries to appease all sides
of the issue of managing gray wolves
in Oregon — ranchers, environmen-
talists, hunters and others.
“The success of wolf recovery in
Oregon is unquestioned,” she wrote.
So far, so good. More than 137
wolves live in the state. They have
been turning up in much of Oregon,
from the northeastern corner to the
southwestern corner. There’s no rea-
son to believe they won’t keep thriv-
ing as they continue to spread across
the rest of the state.
But then she said something we
found to be, well, a bit odd.
“I appreciate the documentation of
the significant successes our fish and
wildlife agency has described in its
letter,” she wrote. Earlier in the week,
the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife had supported taking the
gray wolf off the list of wildlife pro-
tected under the federal Endangered
Capital Press File Photo
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown.
Species Act. Brown was writing to
“clarify and correct” that letter.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
an agency of the Interior Department,
has proposed taking the gray wolf off
that list. It cites the rapid growth of
the wolf population in the Lower 48
states — from 66 to more than 6,000
in about 25 years. That’s more than
the combined recovery goals for the
Northern Rocky Mountains and the
Western Great Lakes populations,
according to the agency.
Like Brown, the federal Fish and
Wildlife Service describes the wolf’s
comeback as a “success.”
But the governor frets that, even
though wolves are doing well in Ore-
gon, some other states may not be up
to the task of managing them.
“Our collaborative work and its
success cannot protect imperiled
wildlife beyond our borders in other
states,” she wrote. “(W)olves are on
the path to recovery and do not war-
rant a listing within Oregon, but their
listing under the federal Endangered
Species Act affords them some pro-
tection across their range.”
Then Brown sums up her positions.
“Oregon supports the current fed-
eral listing status for gray wolves, and
opposes delisting,” she wrote. “Our
state investments should be mirrored
by other states that can help lead to
recovery of the species across a sig-
nificant portion of its historic range.”
So, according to the governor, the
wolf doesn’t need to be federally pro-
tected in Oregon. We agree.
But we’re also sure those other
states will do just fine in managing
gray wolves in spite of the governor’s
concerns.
OTHER VIEWS
S
YOUR VIEW
Global warming scare
tactics will bankrupt
America
If Winston Churchill was alive
today he would caution the youth of
Morrow County planning a climate
strike, “The farther backward you
look, the farther forward you see.”
In 1975 the national press and
media were issuing dire warnings that
fossil fuels and capitalism were caus-
ing catastrophic damage to the envi-
ronment. Newsweek proposed a solu-
tion in the April 28, 1975, edition that
included outlawing fossil fuel engines
to save the planet from the coming ice
age.
Fast forward 25 years to the dawn
of the 21st century and Al Gore’s “An
inconvenient Truth” provided graphic
images of apocalyptic consequences
if fossil fuels were allowed to con-
tinue warming the planet. The national
press and media and school curricu-
lum deluged our youth with pictures
of “global warming” — melting gla-
ciers, dying polar bears, coastal cit-
ies inundated by massive floods, cities
wiped out by hurricanes and torna-
does, and food supplies exterminated
by drought.
“Global cooling” and “global
warming” have lost their luster so the
new mantra of “climate change” has
frightened the present generation of
our youth to take action against the
catastrophic consequences carbon
Unsigned editorials are the opinion of
the East Oregonian editorial board. Other
columns, letters and cartoons on this page
express the opinions of the authors and not
necessarily that of the East Oregonian.
dioxide emissions and fossil fuels.
The New Green Deal proposed by
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez would
replace fossil fuels with “renewable
energy” to save America from the
approaching climate catastrophe.
The cost of this socialist Marxist
social engineering proposal to save
America from fossil fuels and CO2
emissions: $66 to $100 trillion over
ten years, or $350,000 to $650,000 per
family. Print more money, raise higher
taxes, get rid of the Constitution and
everything else that restricts the fed-
eral government from controlling
Americans from birth to the grave
under the guise of saving the planet.
Here are the facts young citizens of
Morrow County preparing to “Fight
for our future” May 24, 2019: The
U.S.A. could cut carbon dioxide emis-
sions by 100% and it would have no
impact on “global cooling,” “global
warming,” or “global climate change.”
What will impact your lives is the $20-
plus trillion dollar U.S.A. debt plus the
accruing interest your generation will
required to pay. This debt could well
devastate your future and end your
hope for the lifestyle you now enjoy.
I exhort the youth of Morrow
County to study history; do not be
manipulated by Democrat socialist
scare tactics and indoctrination that
will bankrupt America, destroy your
future, and have zero impact on saving
the planet.
Stuart Dick
Irrigon
Don’t fight Iran
ometimes it’s important to write a col-
one, imagining the Iranian regime suddenly
umn about something you’re pretty
buckling like the Soviet Union in 1991.
sure isn’t going to happen. In this case,
But whatever the core assumption, the
that thing is war with Iran, which Donald
maximalist approach inevitably increases
Trump clearly doesn’t want, and which he
the risk of war. If the White House is wrong
will therefore probably avoid. But since the
about the Iranian regime’s willingness to
president’s current foreign policy is mak-
make more concessions, then they’re turn-
ing a dial that can produce only two pol-
ing war more likely, it’s still worth saying
icy responses: endurance or armed reaction.
clearly that it would be a terrible idea for the
And if they’re right that regime change is a
United States to enter into a serious armed
possibility, then the regime they’re trying to
conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
change will become more likely to lash out
In the past I have argued that there is a
the closer it gets to its own breaking
certain coherence to the Trump for-
eign policy, even if it’s just an acci-
point.
dental synthesis of a chaotic White
Either way, there is nothing about
House’s competing impulses.
the current situation in the Mid-
dle East, or globally, that makes the
According to that synthesis, recent
chance of war with Iran worth taking
American presidents have been
— as hawks as well as doves concede.
overly optimistic about demo-
cratic transformation, embracing
For instance: National Review’s
naively utopian hopes in the Islamic
David French, generally far more
R oss
world and naively accommodat-
hawkish than I am, describes a poten-
D outhat
tial conflict with Iran as possibly
ing the rise of China. So what is
COMMENT
worse than any of our wars since 9/11,
needed instead is a retrenchment in
and a terrible idea “absent the most
the greater Middle East, an aban-
donment of occupations and nation-build-
serious, urgent and compelling need.” David
ing efforts and a return to kill-your-enemies,
Frum, once a notable Iraq War supporter,
back-your-friends realpolitik, which in turn
writes that war with Iran would recapitulate
will make it easier for the United States to
our Iraq blunders on “a much bigger scale,
pivot to a more confrontational approach with
without allies, without justification, and with-
out any plan at all for what comes next.”
Beijing.
There is no explicitly pro-war rejoin-
In practice, this retrenchment has included
der to these points; there’s only the sort of
backing out (or trying to) from the Bush-era
half-hawkish argument offered by Eli Lake
military commitment to Afghanistan and jet-
tisoning the Obama-era effort to woo Iran
of Bloomberg, who writes that of course
into détente. Spun in realpolitik terms, the
nobody wants war, and the recent flurry
Trump White House’s hard line toward Teh-
of U.S. moves is just all about establishing
ran reflects a belief that the mullahs’ enmity
deterrence.
is an ineradicable fact, that deals with them
But even Lake acknowledges that “this
in one area inevitably just enable aggression
strategy is fraught,” and “as tensions rise,
elsewhere, and that it’s better to just back our
so does the risk of miscalculation.” Which
Sunni and Israeli allies rather than reaching
brings us back to the question of whether the
larger context in which tensions are rising —
for an unlikely realignment and just reaping
the broad “maximum pressure” approach by
more mischief in return.
the U.S. — makes clear strategic sense.
But the (arguable) coherence of this
I think that it does not. The United States
approach has been breaking down as the
can treat Iran as an enemy without going all
Trump administration has moved into its
in for brinkmanship; it can leave the nuclear
“maximum pressure” phase of sanctions
deal without taking steps that make a conven-
against Tehran. Because if you impose max-
imum pressure on a regional power you are,
tional war more immediately likely.
by definition, no longer trying to maintain a
Trump’s 2016 campaign rhetoric made a
Middle Eastern status quo while pivoting to
case against a hawkish Republican foreign
Asia. Instead, you’re effectively returning to
policy consensus that seemingly wanted to
the last two administration’s more dramatic
confront all our enemies, at once, every-
where. The president is now in the middle of
Middle East ambitions: You are assuming
a trade war with China that by his own logic
either that some great diplomatic coup awaits
is far more important to long-term U.S. inter-
(so Barack Obama was right to seek détente,
ests than some immediate breakthrough or
just wrong to settle) or that your pressure will
regime breakdown in Tehran. So he should
lead to regime change and democratization
return to that campaign-season wisdom, and
(so George W. Bush was right about the free-
dom agenda after all).
to the maxim it suggested: Whenever possi-
ble, one war a time.
I suspect that Trump is making the first
——
assumption, imagining all this pressure as a
Russ Douthat is a columnist for the New
prelude to a dramatic deal, while John Bolton
York Times
and Mike Pompeo are making the second
The East Oregonian welcomes original letters of 400 words or less on public issues and public policies
for publication in the newspaper and on our website. The newspaper reserves the right to withhold
letters that address concerns about individual services and products or letters that infringe on the rights
of private citizens. Letters must be signed by the author and include the city of residence and a daytime
phone number. The phone number will not be published. Unsigned letters will not be published.
Send letters to the editor to
editor@eastoregonian.com,
or via mail to Andrew Cutler,
211 S.E. Byers Ave.
Pendleton, OR 97801