If there was one thing from my 30 years in the logging woods as a faller that prepared me for natural resource policy in Siskiyou County, it would be the ability to function in a perilously chaotic environment. Next would be the capacity to tolerate inordinate levels of pain. In other words, natural resource policy is not for the timid.
It hasn’t always been this way. From our agrarian founding, Americans have inherently been aware that there is a relationship between use and care of the environment. It is only relatively recently that the balance point has been the source of a cultural divisiveness reminiscent of the passions of the Civil War era.
Instead of a singular Mason-Dixon geographical demarcation, however, this time multiple lines are drawn throughout the United States around our most densely populated regions. It is these crowded areas, where human respect for the environment is least apparent, that have primarily cultivated and empowered a modern “abolitionist” movement aimed at America’s natural resource infrastructure. Standing in the crosshairs are rural counties such as Siskiyou.
Those of us rooted in rural America are cognizant of our role as a primary source of America’s wealth and security. Despite widespread opinion, we are also well aware not only of our historical evolution, but our burden on behalf of society’s future.
Early on, America’s vastness and sparse population accommodated a short-term exploitative mentality. Hard lessons were acquired on that portion of the learning curve such as identifying and refining agricultural practices that contributed to the Dust Bowl. This and other experiences have long since instilled in rural communities a sense of the finite as well as a need to understand the complexities of the natural systems upon which we are inextricably dependent.
This is why my younger son got a forest engineering degree and why the kids of my farming and ranching neighbors aspire to and attend prestigious forestry and ag universities. The idea that the knowledge dearly bought by these future stewards of the land is devoid of a deep commitment to environmental responsibility is absurd.
Unfortunately, the scientific, legal, economic, political and social intricacies of these disciplines don’t lend themselves to the short attention spans and quick-fix expectations that dominate the populous political power centers of America. Couple this with our city cousins’ isolation from nature and their almost unrelenting exposure to the downsides of human interaction with Mother Earth, and it is easy to see how our livelihoods and ways of life are enormously misunderstood.
Yet we somehow must dispel the fiction of environmental mismanagement if communities like ours are to survive and provide for the future well being of America. This is where the woods-acquired traits I mentioned earlier come in most handy.
Amidst the chaos rampant amongst the belligerents and exponentially aggravated by conflicting Executive, Legislative and Judicial victories “won” by opposing sides on the ever-shifting political landscape, it is easy to feel one is in Fallujah without, thankfully, the bullets and bombs. It is easy to feel, Alice, that we’ve fallen down the Rabbit Hole and the Red Queen is on her way to lop off our heads.
Unfortunately, you can’t dumb this stuff down to a Cliff Notes version. What you can do, though, is to find starting points that everyone can agree on. Currently these seem universally to be “clean air, clean water and a healthy environment.” With justification, we have charged full tilt in this direction. In a common failure of American policy, however, this tactical assault was begun with insufficient strategic analysis.
Running up against an escalating groundswell of public outrage, agencies are being confronted with their disregard of the most elemental ingredient of our national identity: individual liberty. Having resorted to the expediency of increasingly complex, costly and onerous regulation, federal and state agencies are prompting a modern first-hand lesson as to why our Founding forebears saw government as the greatest threat to freedom.
It is this fundamental principle that is the key to our natural resource policies. It is the lens through which we must view every proposal and action. When an environmental need is perceived, it must be discussed and pursued with freedom foremost. But this precious commodity not only confers rights, it also demands responsibilities. As examples, whether it is understanding and conserving salmon or respecting the rights of private property, these simply test whether we possess the intellectual and moral commitment worthy of our American legacy. I am determined that Siskiyou County shall pass muster.
All:
Those of you who don't know me, I am the Natural Resource Policy Specialist for Siskiyou County. I am not a Forest Service retiree, but I am of the absolute conviction that the folks in NAFSR and their influence on the USFS are crucial to the vital reform needed to move the agency back in the direction of its proper mission. I fully appreciate and understand the abject discouragement at the current state of things. We are indeed again at a time that "tries men's souls." I am not one to plaster my personal rantings around for personal gratification, but the following that I wrote for my column in the Siskiyou Daily News is an essential component of our message if we are to secure sufficient public support to effect change. If our conversation with the public is left at the scientific and administrative level, we will get lost in the complexity of the issues. The article is timely as well for Memorial Day.
Ric Costales
No comments:
Post a Comment