THE LAST WORD -- SCOTT SILVER
One of the irritating, but necessary components of a free society is the Gadfly.
The Gadfly serves two very important purposes in a Democracy.
First, the Gadfly alerts the community to the presence of evil and evil-doers, and positively urges the community on to civic and environmental Virtue.
Second, the Gadfly simply exists. Like the proverbial canary in the coal mine, the continued presence of Gadflies in a society is one of the best indicators of the health of its Democracy. In a totalitarian society, the Gadfly is co-opted, locked up, exiled, shot, or otherwise given an offer he/she can't refuse.
Then the Gadfly has the love and gratitude of his/her community?
Well, no. Gadflies, after all, are irritating. That is their job description. Many in the community, even those who benefit from the actions of the Gadfly, will regard them as meddling party poopers.
Also, being a Gadfly does not pay well and we Americans are notoriously impressed by money.
So, how does one get to be a Gadfly? The answer is that they are self appointed and self trained. After all there is no position description for a GS-11 Gadfly in the Federal Government ("Incumbent will point out the mistakes of his/her supervisors in a timely manner; Incumbent will obstruct any action not in the best interest of the environment and/or the public. Incumbent will assure that the actions of his/her supervisors are totally transparent and aboveboard etc etc)
So how did Silver get to be an environmental Gadfly? Sort of by osmosis. He was a typical successful biochemist with some 5 patents under his belt and an avocation for wilderness travel. While on such a trip with a cross country skiing buddy, they were sitting around the campfire and came to the conclusion that the wilderness they loved was being nibbled to death by bureaucrats and developers. They returned to civilization (You always have to return) and co-founded Wild Wilderness; a no-compromise electronic defender of America's last wild places.
Michael Frome, Dean of American environmentalists, said of Silver:
Scott Silver exemplifies the concerned citizen conservationist at his best. He is wholly committed, diligent, determined, and perceptive. Thorough in his research and eloquent in his writing. He is a true guardian of the public estate, an incredible watchdog who has developed a network reaching deep inside our public agencies as well as into citizen groups everywhere in the country. He does more than virtually any national organization to alert us to the real threats to our cherished land treasures.
Another admirer remarked Although a high power career in science was available to him, he took the path of "voluntary simplicity" before it became trendy. As an activist, extensive research, along with a healthy dose of skepticism and cynicism, led him to discover the motives and strategies behind politics, whether in the environmental community or the federal government. His dedication reflects his desire to leave a reasonable world for future generations.
Dale Neubauer, Co-founder of Wild Wilderness, said:
Scott Silver has been an uncompromising champion in the battle to ensure that Wilderness remains Wild.
Contrary to those who believe that EVERYTHING should be commercialized, the value of wild lands CANNOT be measured in monetary germs. Instead , the true value of Wilderness is what we, as human beings experience when entering into these lands untrammeled by modern society. I would say my friend Scott has essentially been fighting for the human spirit -- and for the enrichment of soul that Wilderness provides."
Your editor, The Christian Bureaucrat and devout Bull Moose Republican, does not always agree with what Scott says, but agrees with Voltaire that the Commonwealth is the better for having a Gadfly like Silver around to say these things.
So, let's ask him a few questions;
 WHERE DID YOU GROW UP? I was born into America's first suburban tract-home development, Levittown, Long Island, just as it was getting built. Shortly thereafter my father invented paint-by-number sets and our financial situation improved significantly. When I was six, we moved to Manhattan's West Side. From my bedroom window I watched the construction of Lincoln Center. From our living room I looked out over all of Central Park and much of the city. A few years later, my father lost every penny and moved abroad. I went to live in California. WERE YOU A MEMBER OF THE BOY SCOUTS? THAT IS, WHAT INTRODUCED YOU TO NATURE? While still in New York, I was a cub scout. Meetings were held directly across the park from where I lived. It was there in Central Park where I got my introduction to nature, more or less. I spent summer vacations at nature-based kids-camps in New England and holidays with my father at a dude-ranch in Eastern New Jersey. YOU TOOK YOUR BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE DEGREE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER. HOW DID YOU END UP IN ENGLAND? In 1969 I met up with my father for the first time since we'd gone our separate ways. He was living in London and I came for a two week visit. I can't say what, exactly, convinced me to stay and continue my education abroad. It might have had been the English school girls who, as a 17 year old, I found charming. Or perhaps there was something appealing about the idea of observing the Nixon-Vietnam era from afar. I spent three years working and studying in London before getting accepted into the biochemistry program at the University of Manchester. There I got the training needed to get in on the ground floor of the biotech industry, which I did upon my return to the States. LIKE MANY YOUNG PEOPLE, YOU TRAVELED AROUND THE WORLD AS A BACKPACKER. WHERE DID YOU GO AND WHAT DID YOU LEARN? When in my teens and 20s, travel was cheap and easy. I got around by train, boat, plane, bus and thumb with equal faculty. If I had wheels, I was quick to pick up hitch-hikers. I knew that what goes around comes around. I explored Europe and places beyond. Sometimes I'd set off with a destination in mind. Other times, I'd get myself to the nearest motorway onramp, stick out my thumb and see where it would take me. I wandered for weeks or months getting by on the proverbial $5 a day. In those days I carried a canvas duffle. I didn't purchase my first backpack until after returning to the States. Thirty years later it's a bit worse for wear, but is still very functional. WHAT ATTRACTED YOU TO THE CONCEPT OF WILDERNESS? I knew nothing about Wilderness until I found myself living two hours from the High Sierras. I instantly fell in love with exposed granite in general and the Desolation Wilderness in particular. On Friday afternoons, fifteen or twenty times each year, I'd drive from work to a trailhead and hike until after dark. Sometimes I'd walk out on Sunday. Sometimes I'd get up early on Monday and head directly to the lab where I worked. A great trip was one when I didn't see a soul from the time I hit the trail until I hit the highway. By that definition, I had many great trips in the 70s. By the mid 80s, Desolation Wilderness had become anything but desolate and solitude was becoming hard to find. WHAT BROUGHT YOU TO BEND, OREGON? In the mid 80s I had a portable job and a burning desire to live closer to nature and to do so on the cheap. Central Oregon was known as "poverty with a view" and Bend itself was a depressed town located a few short miles from wonderful and largely undiscovered Wilderness. The area offered some of the best cross country skiing anywhere and backcountry skiing was my passion. In the eighteen years that I've lived here, Bend's population increased from 17,000 to over 70,000. The cost of housing jumped 5 -10 fold and the amount of traffic, a hundred fold --- or so it seems. As for that undiscovered Wilderness; it's gone. Same thing with the once great backcountry skiing. The snow's still here, but the minor plague of snowmobiles that existed in the 80s, has become insufferable today. THE AMERICAN WILDERNESS IS THEORETICALLY PROTECTED BY THE WILDERNESS ACT. HOW DID YOU DISCOVER THAT WILDERNESS IS ACTUALLY AN ENDANGERED SPECIES? When the Wilderness Act was enacted in 1964, people knew what they were protecting and why. Ed Abbey was absolutely correct when he wrote in The Journey Home (1977): "The idea of wilderness needs no defense. It only needs more defenders." Today, the idea of Wilderness needs intensive defense. It needs defense from those who hate the idea of there being such places as Wilderness. It needs defense from those who would exploit Wilderness for its marketable resources. It needs defense from recreationists who have come to look upon Wilderness as a playground and gadget testing facility. Most recently, Wilderness has come to need defense from conservationists who look upon the Wilderness Act as a tool for saving an area from some specific threat and would force the Act to do things it was never intended to do. Congressionally designated Wilderness is protected only to the extent that laws are followed and the interpretation of those laws remains faithful to their original intent. The intent of those who created the Act was to protect the enduring resource of Wilderness. In just a single generation, we have moved far from that original intent. In 1990, I read Michael Frome's The Battle for the Wilderness (1974), and then summed up what I saw as the main threats to wildness in the following way. I wrote, "Little wilderness will be the battle ground upon which the future of big Wilderness will eventually be determined. When we treat big Wilderness like little wilderness, and little wilderness like parks, and parks like playgrounds, the battle for the wild will have been lost." A few months later, I co-founded Wild Wilderness and have defended the ideal of Wilderness as I understand it, ever since. WHY DIDN'T YOU JOIN ONE OF THE "BIG GREEN" ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY OR THE SIERRA CLUB IF YOU WANTED TO PRESERVE WILDERNESS? To answer that I'll offer a short quote from my now good friend, Michael Frome. In 2004, speaking at the Utah Environmental Congress' annual conference in Salt Lake City, Michael gave a keynote address titled "Remaining True to the Intent of Wilderness " (http://www.wildwilderness.org/wi/fromeut.htm). In it, Michael said: "(Many) national environmental organizations, I fear, have grown away from the grassroots to mirror the foxes they had been chasing. They seem to me to have turned tame, corporate and compromising, into raging moderates replacing activism with pragmatic politics, and a willingness to settle for paper victories." In 2005, I gave a keynote address at that Utah conference. Without Michael's eloquence, but with years of first hand experience, I spoke of the growing schism between local and/or regional grassroots activists and the Washington DC based environmental organizations. Simply stated, the big-green groups have not remained true to the intent of Wilderness. Most now work toward different objectives than do those smaller organizations which have not succumbed to the practice of pragmatic politics in pursuit of paper victories. I'm a member of the Sierra Club, but I am not a Sierra Club activist. A decade ago I was a member of the National Parks and Conservation Association. Today I am amongst NPCA's harshest critics. I support other big-green organizations to the extent that they deserve it. DO YOU BELIEVE THERE IS AN ATTEMPT TO PRIVATIZE THE WILDERNESS AS WELL AS OTHER PUBLIC LANDS? Absolutely! Though it is important to understand that privatization takes on many forms and that the privatization threats to Wilderness rarely involve land sales. When it comes to Wilderness, privatization will come by stretching the words of the Wilderness Act. It will come in the form of conferring special access to outfitters, volunteers or friends groups. It will come from building water guzzlers in Wilderness for grazers or hunters, permitting dams for irrigators and granting motorized access for inholders. Privatization may also come in the form of rights-of-way for utilities, oil and gas drilling and still other transgressions that are currently illegal. To sell Wilderness would require an Act of Congress. The quasi-privatization of Wilderness by degrees is easily done by misguided land managers working toward what they believe are the wishes of the Bush Administration and their private-sector partners. MIGHT THIS BE PRIVATIZATION OF ACCESS, ALLOWING THE TAXPAYER TO RETAIN OWNERSHIP (AND COSTS), BUT DENYING HIM/HER READY ACCESS? Privatization of access is where the major action is happening. As a general statement, those who would privatize the world have little desire to own it: they intend to become richer and more powerful by profiting from resources owned by others. Consider the words of John D. Rockefeller, founder of Standard Oil and one of the great robber-barons who, more than a century ago, said: "I want to own nothing and control everything." Decades later, John D.'s grandson, Governor Nelson Rockefeller, reiterated the dynasty's philosophy saying: "The secret to success is to own nothing, but control everything." No one looking to maximize his or her return wants to tie up capital owning a resource if that resource can be exploited just as easily without ownership. No one wants to pay property taxes if it is possible to control public lands as if they were private. The recreation and tourism industries want to run the revenue generating attractions located upon public lands. They want to control the campgrounds, the mountain resorts and the recreational use of lakes, rivers and fishing streams. They want to own the reservation system that will sell the permits which are required for recreational use of the American commons. They want to own the marketing system which connects paying customers directly with the wilderness experiences they've purchased. They want to be assured that there will be places where ATVs, snowmobiles and dirt bikes can be ridden, but they have no interest in owning those places. Likewise, they need paved forest roads to facilitate the sales of more, and bigger, recreation vehicles, but they do not want to pave or own, those roads. They want the federal government to pave roads at taxpayer expense. They want to own nothing and control everything. They want quasi-public lands that they can control. What we're dealing with is the Corporate Takeover of Everything and, as Nelson Rockefeller's brother David said in 1999 "...somebody has to take governments' place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it." HOW IS THIS PRIVATIZATION BEING ACCOMPLISHED? There exists a step by step privatization agenda. It has been in development for the past four decades and it is being implemented on the ground. The leading guardians of the agenda are think-tanks with names like; "Property and Environment Research Center" (www.perc.org), Reason Public Policy Institute (www.reason.org), Hoover Institute (www.hoover.org), Cato Institute (www.cato.org), Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (www.free-eco.org), Mackinac Center for Public Policy (www.mackinac.org), The Heritage Foundation (www.heritage.org) and many others. The primary funders of these think tanks are elite families and their foundations having names such as Rockefeller, Coors, Scaife, Mellon, Olin, Bradley and Koch. These think tanks write public policy for elected officials. They train foot soldiers who become key political appointees. Interior Secretary Gale Norton was a fellow with both the Hoover Institute and PERC. Deputy Interior Secretary Lynn Scarlett was the Executive Director of the Reason Institute. David Rockefeller serves on the Reason Institute's Board of Directors. A complete answer to this question would be encyclopedic. For a quick, and quite good answer, I suggest the website www.privatization.org. This resource was created by Lynn Scarlett's old outfit. It provides a privatization database including how-to privatization instructions and real-world nuts-and-bolts examples. DO YOU BELIEVE VIP'S (VOLUNTEERS IN THE PARKS) PLAY INTO THE HANDS OF THE PRIVATIZERS? Few people appreciate the fundamental role created for, and now occupied by, volunteerism in the privatization agenda. Twenty five years ago, James P. Beckwith Jr., writing for the Cato Institute, produced a ground-breaking privatization manual titled: "Parks, Property Rights, and the Possibilities of The Private Law" (www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj1n2-6.html). Here's a short quote from its introduction:
A comprehensive listing of privatization techniques can be found at the privatization.org website (www.privatization.org/database/whatisprivatization/privatization_techniques.html). Volunteerism, as a privatization tool, appears on the list between "Self-Help" and "Corporatization." The first step in bringing about the privatization of everything -- from our National Park system to our public education system -- involves making government fail. Defunding our National Parks makes park management fail. The Leave No Child Behind program provides both yardsticks for measuring failure and privatized solutions, such as vouchers and quasi-public 'charter' schools. The name of the game is to replace public systems with the privatized solutions described by Beckwith, www.privatization.org and the think-tanks. Volunteerism, by nature, is wonderful. It is as wholesome and American as apple pie. Unfortunately the concept of 'volunteerism', much like the concept of 'family values', has been perverted by the political perverts who would, if they could, destroy our democracy republic and turn America into a neo-Feudal State. As understood by the privatizers, volunteerism is just another privatization tool, one that permits budgets to be cut while giving the appearance that the system is thriving even without tax support. Volunteerism has the added advantage of conferring privileges for those who are willing to donate labor while denying similar privileges to the public at large. Volunteerism shrinks government. When sufficiently reduced in size, governmental hating ideologues will drag what's left into the bathtub and drown it. HOW ABOUT THE VARIOUS FRIENDS GROUPS? Much the same thing can be said about friends groups as I've said about volunteerism. Friends groups come in many flavors. Some serve a watch-dog function and are friends of some particular resource, be it a park, a forest, a river or some other defined place. These groups protect the resource from all threats, including the threats posed by political ideologues, corporate raiders and the lapdog bureaucrats that support them. Some are friends of a governmental agency such as the National Park Service or friends of the managers of a particular park. National Parks Conservation Association, National Parks Foundation and Friends of Crater Lake are examples of such friends. And then there are the innumerable Friends of politicians groups. Jack Abramoff, before he got busted, might have been looked upon as an example of a politician's best friend. Ignoring the watch-dog groups which serve an important function and ignoring the political friends groups which are destroying democracy, we can focus upon the institutional friends groups. They are generally well meaning, pragmatic, receive funding from corporate interests, wear their blinders narrowly adjusted and tend to be willing to help advance the privatization agenda so long as they see some benefit within their narrowly focused field of view. The damage they do is similar to the damage done unwittingly by well-meaning volunteers. When "friends" groups plug the gaps created by the manipulative defunding, they show that tax-based funding is unnecessary. When private philanthropy becomes a replacement for congressionally allocated funding, these groups provide proof that taxes can be cut without doing harm to whatever these groups are friends of. Never does anyone consider the harm that will be done to those resources that do not have friends groups of their own! So long as the blinders are adjusted correctly, these friends groups can go on believing that they are doing good work. But as they are being manipulated today, many friends groups do great harm by advancing a larger privatization agenda and facilitating the quasi-privatization of responsibility for public resources. WHERE DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION, WILD WILDERNESS, STAND ON MOUNTAIN BIKING? Just as friends groups come in many flavors, so do mountain bikers and the advocacy groups that represent them. Some mountain bikers are granola eating hikers or Wilderness lovers when they've not pedaling. Some are as radically anti-environmental as are their motorized brethren. Some mountain biking zealots have openly joined with the dirt biking, snowmobiling, community in opposing new Wilderness designation and in trying to open Wilderness to wreckreational pursuits. Some mountain bikers are motor heads who happen to occasionally get their kicks sans motor. Wild Wilderness does not take a stand on mountain biking per se. We are an advocacy group that represents a specific constituency while remaining true to certain ideals. Our supporters tend to enjoy low impact, undeveloped, traditional and generally primitive forms of recreation. The lower the impact and the more organic the activity, the better it fits with our mission statement (www.wildwilderness.org/docs/mission.htm) High impact, developed, motorized or technology dependent activities are represented by other organizations. These activities and the people who engage in them are often directly competitive with the interests of the people we represent and are antithetical to the ideals we defend. DO YOU BELIEVE THE US FOREST SERVICE HAS A BETTER RECORD ON WILDERNESS PRESERVATION THAN THE NPS? The US Forest Service has a significantly better record on Wilderness preservation than the NPS. The Forest Service more or less understands the Wilderness Act and acknowledges its primacy in law. The National Park Service views the Wilderness Act as subservient to the Organic Act and the mission of the NPS. National Park Wilderness is usually managed to be consistent with the goals of the park in which it is located. But there is no such thing as "National Park Wilderness." There is only one kind of Wilderness. Once an area is designated it must be managed as Wilderness for the purposes of Wilderness. The NPS do not see it that way and NPS attitudes are pulling the entire Wilderness Preservation System down. USFS managers can point to National Park Wilderness and say, "Look at how the NPS managing its Wilderness. They use chainsaws to clear trails. They use helicopters and motorized vehicles for the convenience of park managers. They replace decayed buildings with newly built imitations. They build bridges and install toilets for the comfort of visitors. If they can do those things, then why can't we?" That said, NPS Wilderness areas are frequently in better physical condition than USFS-managed Wilderness areas where cattle roam wild and outfitters are given free rein. NPS managers are frequently better at minimizing on the ground impacts than are other agencies, but they are not better at managing the Wilderness resource itself. My most disappointing Wilderness experience took place in Mt. Rainier NP walking the 100 mile Wonderland Trail around the mountain. Before setting off I was required to decide how far I would travel each day and where I'd sleep each night. I would be allowed to pitch my tent only in backcountry campgrounds and only on those nights for which I'd reserved, and paid for, the use of a designated, gravel-filled, wooden-framed, tent pad. I could not speed up or slow down my pace nor could I stop to smell the roses or race ahead to avoid the mosquitoes. I was told to walk only within the established track (rut) and was asked to remove my boots whenever I needed to step off the trail. I was explicitly discouraged from venturing from the trail and told to remove my boots if ever I did so in order to prevent resource damage. With the exception of a river crossing where the normally present bridge had just washed out and having to negotiate a steeply pitched snowfield that had not yet melted out, my experience was barely distinguishable from what I might have had on any theme park ride. It was more physically taxing, but the tightly regulated trip bore little resemblance to real Wilderness travel. What was denied me by well-intentioned NPS managers was the opportunity to experience the freedom of the Wild or to know the emotions of Wilderness. If the NPS denies Wilderness visitors the opportunity to know Wilderness, they are not being good Wilderness managers. ALTHOUGH YOU DEPLORE THE "DISNEYFICATION" OF THE NATIONAL PARKS, DIDN'T THEY START OUT AS THEME PARKS UNDER PUBLICITY SAVVEY STEVE MATHER AND HORACE ALBRIGHT, COMPLETE WITH BEAR FEEDINGS, FIRE FALLS, FANCY HOTELS ETC. ISN'T IT A BIT LATE TO OBJECT? The accepted vision for the National Parks has wandered for as long as these parks have existed. Competing interests have always argued over how, and for what purposes, the National Park System should be managed. At this moment, motorized recreation and commercial tourism interests are waging a particularly intensive fight to radically redefine the park service mission. Originally the few parks which existed were managed for the pleasuring of a small, wealthy, leisure class. Early park access and facilities were developed through partnerships with railroad corporations. The early park system was not particularly democratic. In the 50s and 60s improved road transportation facilitated access to the great outdoors by the general public and the National Parks became appreciated as being our nation's Crown Jewels, belonging to each and every one of us. This transformation led Wallace Stegner to write in 1983 "National parks are the best idea we ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they reflect us at our best rather than our worst." The democratic nature of our parks evolved from elitist stock, reached a plateau twenty years ago and is now in steep decline. To what degree Stegner's words will be applicable in another decade will depend upon how strongly the American People object to the powerful forces that are, once again, changing the accepted concept of why, and for whom, parks exist. EDWARD ABBEY WISHED AUTOMOBILES BANNED FROM THE NATIONAL PARKS. DO YOU AGREE? To look at the question of automobile access in isolation would be a mistake. Abbey wanted much more than to remove automobiles. He wanted the parks (specifically the big natural parks such as Yosemite and Yellowstone) to be free from not merely automobiles, but from commercial intrusions as well. He wanted people to have the chance to explore parks on foot or on bicycle and proposed in Desert Solitaire (1968) that large parking lots be constructed at park boundaries. He proposed that visitors could use bicycles which would be freely provided and, if necessary, could transport their camping gear and supplies into the park using push-carts provided, for free, by the Park Service. In Abbey's vision, the parks would not be Wilderness, nor would they be the drive-in commercial tourist traps they are today. They'd be places of a minimally developed, and well protected, nature. Today there are various proposals to ban personal vehicles from specific parks. Most involve picking up tourists from somewhere outside of the park and delivering them directly to the shops and attractions operated by the park concessionaire, much like the Disneyland monorail. If the political will existed to implement Abbey's vision, I'd be amongst the strongest supporters. I will just as vigorously oppose any proposal that seeks to separate park visitors from their ice-chests in order to force them into a concessionaire's snack bar and gift shop. THE ANTI-WILDERNESS PEOPLE HAVE DONE A REMARKABLE JOB TURNING AROUND THE MEANING OF THE WORD "ELITIST" AS SOME KIND OF PERVERSE SNOB WHO INSISTS ON WALKING. DO YOU HAVE AN ANTIDOTE? I walk quietly in the woods carrying food and water in a backpack purchased 30 years ago and wearing gardening boots. I'm not an elitist and would not accept that label. If I spent $100,000 to have a team of guides drag me up Mt. Everest, then I might deserve that label. If I spent a half-million bucks on a luxury recreation vehicle and expected land mangers to cater to my hyper-inflated needs, I would undoubtedly deserve to be called "elitist". If I outbid all competition paying tens of thousands of dollars for the chance to kill a trophy animal and if trackers then led me to the beast and set up the shot for me to take, then call me what you will. And if I had myself filmed as I free-climbed the iconic Delicate Arch in Arches National Park, I ask that you please call me an elitist, then call me an asshole and then let Ed Abbey's ghost haunt me for eternity. Wilderness, per se, has nothing to do with elitism. The anti-wilderness people have done a remarkable job of framing the Wilderness issue as an elitist thing. The label is a lie, but lies frequently make the best propaganda, especially the really big lies. THERE IS A STRANGE PARADOX IN FOREST LAND VALUES. AT PRESENT, THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF PRIVATE INDUSTRIAL FORESTS PARTICULARLY IN MAINE, BUT ALSO IN THE SOUTH AND NORTHWEST ARE BEING OFFERED FOR SALE. DO YOU SEE AN OPPRTUNITY FOR DE-PRIVATISATION? The Forest Service has long been trading parcels of virgin public forests for somewhat larger parcels of deforested clear cuts, so there already is a history for de-privatization, as you've called it. Wherever you look, The Nature Conservancy and other land trusts have been acquiring private lands and converting them into quasi-private lands which are sometimes made accessible to the general public. There are also a few very ambitious de-privatization projects in the works such as one proposed by RESTORE the North Woods. Their long held dream involves purchasing vast private timberlands within rural Maine and creating a 3.2 million acre public/private park-like "Yellowstone of the East". In today's political climate, I see limited opportunity for genuine de-privatization. I see more opportunities for quasi de-privatization and look upon most of those projects as vehicles for advancing the privatization agenda by legitimizing the concept of quasi-publicness. RECENTLY, HAWAII VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK NEARLY DOUBLED IN SIZE DUE TO THE ACQUISITION OF A PRIVATE RANCH PURCHASED LARGELY BY THE NATURE CONSERVANCY. DO YOU FORESEE PRIVATISERS TRYING TO STOP SUCH FUTURE ACQUISTIONS? The privatizers would prefer that all land be privately owned. To their way of thinking, whoever is willing to pay the most for Yellowstone should own it, whether that is The Nature Conservancy, Ted Turner or the YXZ Geothermal Company. If the lands acquired by land trusts remain in the hands of land trusts or are covered with deed restrictions and resold to private investors, the privatizers will be supportive. It is not until land trusts negotiate with the federal government to sell them those lands that the privatizers complain. Land privatization ideologues are generally very satisfied with the work done by organizations such as The Nature Conservancy. Where there once were only public and private lands, now there are also quasi-public lands. Someday quasi-public lands and private lands may dominate. Ultimately there may only be private lands. WOULD YOU COMMENT ON THE VALLE GRANDE OR BACA RANCH IN NEW MEXICO WHICH THE US TAXPAYERS PURCHASED FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, BUT ARE ALLOWED ONLY LIMITED ACCESS. The Federal Government purchased the Baca Ranch for 101 million dollars and stipulated that the newly renamed "Valles Caldera" would, after a short transition period, receive no taxpayer support. The Valles Caldera will soon be required to pay its own way from revenues generated from recreation and other uses of the land. This experiment in quasi-public land management thrills the privatizers. (See, for example, "Vales Caldera National Preserve - A New Paradigm for Federal Lands?" http://www.perc.org/perc.php?id=521) Today the Valles Caldera is used primarily for pay-to-play recreation, for grazing 2000 head of privately owned cattle (suspended in 2006 because of extreme drought) and for the taking of a limited number trophy game animals by well-heeled hunters. It's not public property as you or I understand the term. If you go to the ranch's website http://www.vallescaldera.gov, you are invited to visit the "Reservations" webpage. There you discover that: "The Preserve is open to the public but we guarantee you'll find the visit unlike any other you've had in a park or national forest. We keep the numbers of visitors small for any activity so you'll feel like you have the place to yourself." On that webpage you are then presented with a list of products and services from which you can select, reserve, and purchase the adventures of your choice. Hayrides and sleigh-rides are available for $25, walking tours cost $30. You may, if you wish, 'Run the Caldera'; the rates are $40/ marathon, $30 /10 miles and $20/ 5 miles. You can ride your own mountain bike for as little as $20. Fishing is available at $25 per person per day, but first you have to win the lottery -- literally. Fishing Lottery tickets cost $5 and applicants are encouraged to purchase multiple tickets to increase their chances of having one drawn. In winter, cross country skiing is available; the cost is $10 for a Day Pass, $15 for a Moon Light Pass and $15 for a Dark Night Pass. On January 16th and on again on February 20th from 9am to 4 pm only, free skiing is offered. If you want to know what I think of the Valles Caldera as a model for public lands ownership, I'd say it is the worst, least democratic, model possible. It is elitist and represents the antithesis of what Stegner said of the National Parks. Unfortunately, Valles Caldera is the modern application of the model that the privatizers have been promoting for decades. On the Wild Wilderness website I have documented what I call the "Corporate Takeover of Nature and the Disneyfication of the Wild." In the years ahead, we will either have truly public lands, quasi public lands or perhaps no public lands at all. Likewise, some years into the future we may still have wild Wilderness, or wilderness-lite, or perhaps nothing more than wildlessness. These are the choices before us. SCOTT, YOU ONCE REMARKED "THIS ADMINISTRATION IS DISPOSING OF YOUR COUNTRY, DISPOSING OF YOUR NATIONAL PARKS AND FORESTS, DISPOSING OF YOUR CONSTITUTION. THEY ARE DISPOSING OF YOUR RETIREMENT BENEFITS, YOUR RIGHT TO PUBLIC EDUCATION, YOUR FREE ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS AND ROADS, AND YOUR PUBLIC BROADCASTING SYSTEM. THEY ARE PARTING-OUT AND UNLOADING EVERYTHING... WHAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN IS WHETHER THE PEOPLE OF THIS NATION WILL RISE UP AND FIGHT IN DEFENSE OF WHAT IS BEING STOLEN FROM THEM" WHAT, EXACTLY, DO YOU SUGGEST WE DO? My remark, which you quote here, is a simple statement of reality. It is what is happening on the ground today. After many years of monitoring trends and extrapolating them into prognostications, I've found that it is much easier to foresee the future than to change it. I have also found that the ability of people to accept abuses from their government is almost infinite. I had not predicted that. You want to know exactly what I suggest we do and of necessity I'm going to leave out all of the intermediate steps and jump to the bottom line. If we want to reclaim our democracy, regain our freedom and increase the probability of having for ourselves and our children a future worth living, WE RISE UP. We open our ears and eyes. We learn what is happening in the world around us. We ask questions. We talk to others. We challenge authority. We teach what we've learned and then encourage others to open their ears and their eyes. We remember that "we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionaries and rebels -- men and women who dared to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." Then we appreciate those as being the words of President and General, Dwight D. Eisenhower. We remember, and see to it that those in power are reminded that "If we make peaceful revolution impossible, we make violent revolution inevitable." Then we appreciate those as the words of President John F. Kennedy --- the last truly decent President America has had. When we're ready, we go to our windows and shout "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more." Then we vote the bastards out and replace them with people who will represent our interests. I ran for Congress this year and was defeated in the primary election. Perhaps the timing will be better in 2008 SCOTT, THANKS FOR SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS WITH US AND BETTER LUCK IN YOUR NEXT ELECTION TRY! Thank you and you're welcome. |
(Scott Silver may be reached at SSILVER@WILDWILDERNESS.ORG).
COLONIAL PARKWAY
The East Coast or at least the Mid-Atlantic East Coast has two months that are sort of chocolate syrup on your sundae; two months that make the other months sort of worthwhile. The two months are roughly April 15 to June 15, before the bugs are out in force and the famed wet heat wrings all the ambition out of you.
This is the time when everything that does chlorophyll for a living makes its appearance in various shades of green that would put Ireland to shame. Then there are the flowers by the hundreds of thousands, all silently shouting "LOOK AT US! WE ARE NAKEDLY REPRODUCING WITH WANTON EROTIC ABANDON BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES!"
Yup! An Eastern spring is worth your participation
Joan and I decided to drive down to Jamestown and take a look at the new museum, The Archaearium, which explored the origins of the nation via archeology, and I was told, breaks new ground in museology.and also kayak the coastal marshes and swamps before they got too hot and buggy.
Jamestown National Historical Park is located at the East end of the 23 mile Colonial National Parkway with the Yorktown Battlefield Park anchoring the west end of the parkway.
Now you don't have to be Arnold Toynbee to catch the symbolism here neighbors; Colonial America began with John Smith in Jamestown in 1607 and ended 174 years later and 20 miles away, with George Washington and the surrender of General Cornwallis at Yorktown.in 1781
Had George Washington planned it this way? Did the Father of Our Country, with his usual prescience, foresee the needs of modern tourism and the necessity of concentrating historical attractions in compact, easily accessible groups, such as Jamestown, Colonial Williamsburg, and Yorktown? Did he point out to his generals that defeating Cornwallis at Yorktown would simplify future NPS park administration?
Actually, this does not seem to be the case. General Washington really preferred to defeat the British at New York City.
Why?
According to one historian, it was a matter of bruised ego. Washington had been badly defeated at New York (Three times, actually!) And wanted to get even. (Much the same reason General Douglas Macarthur wished to erase an earlier defeat in the Philippines by reconquering that archipelago that had no strategic but considerable emotional value.)
In the case of Washington, a cooler head in the form of the French General Rochambeau prevailed.
General Rochchambeau realized that the American Revolution was no slam dunk; that the British had an excellent chance of pulling this one out of the fire, and he was a long way from home across an ocean owned by the Royal Navy.
Rochambeau also realized that he was partnered with a charismatic amateur with not a very good track record (Only two wins in 8 years! Had Washington been a Texas high school football coach, he would have been looking for another job.) However, that amazing charisma had kept Washington's little army in the field Rochambeau realized that also.
In dealing with Washington, Rochambeau applied French logic. He agreed that the capture of New York City would be a splendid coup, "but, mon general, my engineers tell me that it will take 20,000 men to breach the defenses of New York, and, pardon, mon ami, we do not have 20,000 men."
Washington was thus convinced of the wisdom of a hurried march down to Yorktown to engage a more vulnerable British army. The march was in a race against the British fleet and a gamble that the French Navy, which usually lost to the Sovereigns of the Seas, would this time come out on top.
The rest as they say is history. Technically, Yorktown was a French victory as they supplied the siege know-how and the bulk of the soldiers, sailors, marines and material.
However, when British General O'Hara offered his sword in surrender to General Rochambeau, the French General waved him over to General Washington. The Frenchman understood who had won the war, if not the battle.
We motored along the faux gravel parkway which was designed to give the feeling of tidewater Virginia at post contact time. The vegetation and vistas were mostly historically accurate.
John Smith and Pocahontas would recognize the place, particularly if they both had John Deere riding lawnmowers. (The Eastern National Park Service has a positive mania for mowing the grass and otherwise manicuring the Green Scene; The late Boyd Evison, a Western trained superintendent of Great Smoky National Park, once told me that one of his little trials in the park was stopping the maintenance people from mowing the "shoulders" of even the park hiking trails. He would forbid them and they would sneak out and do it anyway!)
The various parkways, Colonial, Blue Ridge, Natchez and so on, are a sort of trompe l'oeil, Potemkin Forest that provide the illusion that you are looking at the Forest Primeval, stretching for hundreds of miles on both sides of your car. You understand that it is an illusion, but it a very pleasant illusion, and certainly beats the strip malls, billboards and slaphazard development that characterize uncontrolled touriania. (Out West, the US. Forest Service has a particularly nasty form of "parkways" they call "beauty strips" -- hundred yard wide stands of Old Growth trees on the sides of the highway to mask the effects of highly subsidized clearcuts, the sight of which might outrage otherwise docile taxpayers.
The Parkway has numerous scenic pullouts with interpretive signs, often with views of the majestic York River or the quiet beauty of a marsh. We were getting hungry and so, as we drove along, we started looking for a picnic area or at least a picnic table.
Odd, there didn't seem to be any about.
"When in doubt, ask a ranger!" But in these times of budgetary restrictions, they seem to be rare as a Mormon missionary in Mecca. I did the next best thing and asked one of the local folks as to why Colonial didn't seem to have a picnic tables
"They used to have picnic tables, but they had so much trouble with Gays that they decided to take them out", said the old timer.
Now that was an interesting answer! I must admit I couldn't see what picnic tables had to do with sodomy as those two sheepherders in that movie "Brokeback Mountain" seemed to manage without one.
However, I did recall various rumors in the Service that Colonial was one park that for some reason had quite a "problem" with those of the Gay persuasion.
The NPS being a middle class rural organization largely reflected the values of rural Middle America when it came to sexual matters. That is, sex must be exclusively heterosexual and then performed only in either the Missionary or Canadian Positions.
A number of other parks, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Cape Cod National Seashore, Fire Island National Seashore and Hot Springs National Park also had "problems" with Gays.
The attraction of Golden Gate NRA for Gays is self explanatory, being located next to that Sodom by the Sea, San Francisco. Cape Cod and Fire Island are beach parks with historically gay communities and are also located near large metro areas. Hot Springs National Park had at one time a collection of active bathhouses which attracted gays as a way of unobtrusively meeting others gays from around the nation..
But why was Colonial Historic Park attractive to Gays? Well, I don't know. Was there something about Colonial history or the Revolutionary War that intrigued Gays?
Probably not.
The more mundane answer may be that Colonial NHP is located near several large military bases and that some (but not all) Gays are attracted to young folks in uniform and that the various byways, pull outs and nooks and crannies provide opportunities for rendezvous; situations that could lead to embarrassing incidents for non participants.
In the past, the NPS took a rather punitive and hostile attitude toward Gays.
I recall that the duty station for one Hot Springs ranger was the crawl space in the ceiling above the Men's room. There he would lie in wait, watching restroom activities through a peep hole. When he witnessed a compromising situation, he would open a trap door in the ceiling, photograph the miscreants with his Polaroid camera and then parachute through the trap door in full Smokey Bear regalia and slap the cuffs on the culprits!
It must have been an incredible sight!
One of my ranger colleagues stationed at Cape Cod remarked as how one of his "undercover" assignments was to sunbathe at one of the beaches with a "make up" box at his side. When someone grabbed his ankle (apparently a gay courting move) the ranger would open his make up box, which held his badge, gun and handcuffs and proceed from there.
However, as time passed, middle class America, and thus the NPS grew more conciliatory and understanding toward our Gay brethren (and taxpayers).
The NPS began to adopt the sensible attitude of the 19th century actress, Mrs. Patrick Campbell, who when asked her opinion of homosexuals, famously replied "I don't care what they do, as long as they don't do it in the streets and frighten the horses!"
So, as long as "The horses are not frightened," that is, the public, particularly children, are not involved, NPS officials pretty much left the Gay park visitor alone.
Still, for whatever reason, sexual or budgetary, there were no picnic tables.
We decided to pull into a parking area next to a beach and tailgate.
This we did, dropping the tailgate on the Tacoma and proceeded to make smoked turkey and cheese sandwiches from the contents of the cooler. Even without a picnic table, life was not bad, neighbors!
About half way through my Jarlsburg and smoked turkey, Joan gave me a sidelong glance, raised an eyebrow and said "Looks like we be in a heap a' trouble, boy!"
I turned to see the Dodge Sheriff in the form of a large US Park Ranger making for us with that determined law enforcement stride that marks a ranger on a mission.
He was Ranger Smith. (Yup that was his real name, which was sort of eerie, as Jamestown was founded by John Smith and the park superintendent's name was also Smith. Coincidence? Yes, but I half expected Rod Serling to step out of the cattails and say "Mr. Ryan thinks he is going to have a "park experience, but in reality he is entering the "Twilight Zone!")
Ranger Smith was courteous, concise and got right to the point.
"I see you have a kayak, Sir!" (Red tandem Old Town Kayak lashed to the top of the Tacoma camper shell. Pretty hard to miss. Really handy if you mislay your vehicle in a mall parking lot as I often do; always travel with a red kayak on your car; urban wilderness tip, neighbors!)
I agreed that I did have a kayak.
"Did you plan to launch your kayak in Colonial National Historical Park?"
Ranger Smith was very polite, but I could tell this was a declarative question best answered in the negative or one was in deep doo-doo.
Now as we were parked on a narrow peninsula with the York River on one side and a sandy beach with about 200 swimmers on the other, I could readily see that one might consider launching a kayak.
Ranger Smith read my mind "The superintendent has directed that no watercraft be launched from Colonial National Historic Park as the theme of the park is history and not recreation".
Now neighbors, is this a wise and fair decision on the part of Superintendent Smith, considering we had come so far?
Well yes, it was a wise directive, and a rather gutsy one, considering the crass opportunism of the political appointees who are running and ruining the present day national parks in the name of "Recreation"... Just because someone has carried or dragged some toy into a national park does not give one the automatic right to use that toy, be it snow machine, jet ski, ATV, or even an innocuous kayak.
What possible damage could a kayak do, you ask? Perhaps nothing physical, but aesthetically, quite a bit. It is difficult for a visitor to contemplate the story of a 300 year old mill pond in the early mists of dawn if your most obedient servant, The Christian Bureaucrat, is sitting in the middle of it in a red kayak.
Every year Yellowstone National Park must beat back an avalanche of would be kayakers who want to turn the wilderness streams of that park into a "paradise" of Tupperware torpedoes whooping through the rapids. They too have "come so far", but there are historic and aesthetic reasons they can't kayak in most of Yellowstone, and it is good that they can't.
The present administration is using "increased recreation opportunities" to commodify, market, and possibly privatize the park experience. Bravo for Superintendent Smith for drawing the line.
I asked Ranger Smith where we could kayak and he suggested nearby Powhatan Creek County Park where one could enjoy a primeval bald cypress swamp if one paddled upstream or increasing urbanity if one went downstream.
I thanked the helpful ranger and made a mental note to write Superintendent Smith commending his principled stand for History against such Cultural quislings as Mainella Norton and Hoffman.
But hark! Is this superintendent Smith any relation to the Dan Smith that flunked Environment 101 up at the C & O Canal National Park last year?
The same, neighbors!
You will remember that everyone's favorite Rich Guy, Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, also owns a multi-million dollar mansion overlooking the C & O Canal and the Potomac River. Problem was, the mansion was not sufficiently "overlooking" a copse of trees that were blocking Mr. Snyder's view of the Potomac. He wanted them cut.
In all fairness, Mr. Snyder owned the trees; they were on his property, but alas! There was an environmental covenant forbidding tree removal that was in the property deed when Snyder bought the property. (Always read the fine print, neighbors.)
However, where there is Power there is Possibility.
Snyder began asking around. He did not have to ask far. Everyone wants to be friends with the owner of a major league football team.
Snyder allowed as how he had a problem with the NPS.
Now we all have problems with the NPS, neighbors; lack of staff, no picnic tables, poorly marked trails, whatever. However, when a Rich Guy has a problem, he gets action. (You and I get Form Letter 13B from the Superintendent stating they hope to rectify the Situation before the Second Coming.)
Mr. Snyder did not get a form letter. He got a "facilitator" in the form of a WASO staff member by the name of Dan Smith.
Dan Smith's job was to cut through the nasty ol' bureaucracy thicket, legally of course. and get Mr. Snyder what he wanted. Rich People do not like to wait.
We should emphasize the legality of the action. Dan Smith said "He had done nothing tawdry" Well, let's say he had done nothing actionably criminal.
You see, when it comes to money & power, there is a vast difference between an elected member of Congress and a federal bureaucrat.
Congressmen can be bought off with cold cash (quite literally, in the case of Congressman Jefferson of Louisiana who allegedly hid his $90,000 bribe in his freezer. Vice President Spiro Agnew could be bought for as little as $2500. Congressman "Duke" Cunningham had a bit higher price tag. I recall kayaking past his palatial house boat, courtesy of a grateful defense contractor. Indeed, Congressmen insist on being bought off with money
Federal bureaucrats are a different matter. We do not want to be bribed. We want to be loved. That is, we really do not want to be thought of as a bureaucrat. We want to be thought of as fast moving problem solvers; we want to be thought of as, well, "facilitators"
Above all, we want to bethought of as a "team player". "Team players" get promoted, get on neat task force assignments, and so on. Stubborn "obstructionists" even in the service of the Environment or Park resource, often do not fare as well.
For whatever reason, the previous superintendent of the C & O Canal, Doug Feris was not a team player. (At least not in the Quisling sense of the Secretary of Interior's "Four C's [Communication, Consultation and Cooperation, all in the service of Conservation"] which one former superintendent, Bill Wade, has correctly translated the "Four C's" to mean "Conspiracy, Compromise, and Concealment, all in the service of Commercialization.")
Feris was apparently totally unimpressed with Snyder, his wealth, his football team or his "problem".
In November, 2001 Feris denied Snyder's request to cut "diseased" trees on the easement on the basis the trees provided critical wildlife habitat. He also refused to permit Snyder to build a pool and deck on the easement, according to the WASHINGTON POST.
Snyder, persistent as a deer tick, offered to "gift" the C & O Canal with $25,000 "mitigation" if Feris would see things his way. (Rich Guys don't care if you spend the money on blonde doxies or saving the Piping Plover as long as they get their way -- Ed)
Unfortunately for himself, his family, and the Park, Superintendent Feris died in 2004.
His replacement, the present C & O superintendent, Kevin Brandt, desperately wanted to be thought of as a "Team Player" as he was a new superintendent and wanted to make a good impression.
Dan Snyder still desperately wanted to see the Potomac River. (One wonders, considering his wealth, why Mr. Snyder did not simply purchase a captive hot air balloon, install it in his back yard and hoist himself up above tree line every time he got an urge to look at the Potomac; as things turned out, it would have been much cheaper!).
Anyway, Snyder was now in contact with Dan Smith who was "special assistant" to Director Fran Mainella. Mr. Snyder was getting impatient. Understandably, Smith wanted to do everything legally possible to help Mr. Snyder achieve his vision of the Potomac, which by this time, was beginning to approach the desire of Moses to see the Promised Land in its intensity.
"Special Assistant" Smith began to council Superintendent Brandt on ways to make Snyder's dream come true. Brandt was still dubious; after all, the park's horticulturalist was against the cutting. Smith persisted. Unfortunately, the scenic easement agreement had more holes than my slice of Jarlsburg cheese; holes big enough to drive a lawyer through and Snyder had plenty of lawyers. It was after all, his land, his trees, pressure was beginning to mount.
Finally, after a certain amount of pressure (folks differ on this point neighbors) Brandt gave permission to remove some of the "exotic species" from the easement.
Funny thing! There was not a John Muir or Gifford Pinchot among all the guys running the chains saws, so (dang nab it!) all the trees came down!
No problem. Snyder would replace every single one of them with a native species that while buggy whip size today, would be majestic woodland sentinels 20 years after Jesus called Snyder home to Glory.
It was at this point that the wheels came off.
A clear cut is pretty hard to hide in an urban area. Snyder's neighbors who abided by their easements were outraged. Montgomery County, which had not been involved in the permitting, was outraged, THE WASHINGTON POST was tickled pink because they could be outraged and the NPS was deeply embarrassed and contrite.
The two NPS chaps, Smith and particularly Supt Brandt, who was made the fall guy, were deeply chagrined, but not particularly punished, as the Inspector General seemed to think it would be difficult to prove a case.
Dan Smith was spirited out of Washington to become the Superintendent of Colonial, where, with the eyes of Congress and the environmental community upon him, he is, we are sure, straight as a laser in assuring that every environmental reg is enforced, NEPA is not violated and the letter and spirit of the enabling legislation is maintained, (including of course forbidding the launching of kayaks in a historic setting).
Superintendent Brandt says he would have done things differently if he knew all the things there were to know. Excellent! He will now be a born again NEPA enforcer! We can count on him in the future!
As for Snyder, it is impossible to embarrass a Rich Guy, but he did incur fines and had the value of his property reduced by having easements attached to the rest of his property. He did, however, finally get his view (huzzah!)
Now neighbors, how would YOU have handled the situation? Remember, we are "team players", solvers of problems, able to make things happen for our supervisors. We're also bureaucrats and really don't want any trouble!
Well now, what if your boss wanted you to do something that was wrong? Suppose he was boss of all bosses, like the Director of the NPS? Now this is not Catechism class or Sunday school, let us say this is the real thing.
Here is a real life scenario from a real life ranger facing a real life moral decision.
Clay Cunningham was the Stehekin district ranger in North Cascades National Park. The little settlement of Stehekin nestles at the north end of 55 mile long Lake Chelan. Stehekin is accessible only by boat, foot, horse or plane. Three are no roads. It is one of the most isolated and eccentric communities in the lower 48.
Its remoteness made it a good location for an LSD lab or so rumor said. Ranger Cunningham arranged for a "health inspector" to examine some of the concessions. The "health inspector" turned up some suspicious circumstantial evidence of a lab. Cunningham wanted to know who was doing what now that the existence of the lab had been verified.
He arranged to get the loan of an undercover narcotics officer from the LAPD, a raffish looking character, who took employment on the park maintenance crew and "hung around".
In a few weeks the undercover cop had acquired both suspects and evidence.
A number of seasonal employees were implicated in the LSD operation, including the son of U.S. Congressman and the son of an Associate Regional Director.
Cunningham decided to review the case with a US Park Police major before issuing the arrest warrants.
Bad tactical move, Clay.
The US Park Police, primarily based in Washington DC was often in competition with NPS rangers over jurisdiction and more importantly, over Law Enforcement appropriation. As the Park Police were often first on the scene when a congressman was found in an embarrassing condition late at night in DC, they were in a position to be "considerate" and "helpful" and in return, hoped that the Congressman would be considerate and helpful during appropriations hearing. The Park Police also leaked salacious tidbits to the newspaper columnists such as Jack Anderson, who could be counted upon to back the Park Police over the NPS rangers.
With that background, your editor, (but not necessarily Cunningham ) comes to the regretful conclusion that the Park Police Major betrayed the operation to the US Congressman.
The Congressman apparently contacted the Director of the National Park Service.
The Director in turn contacted Cunningham's boss, George Wagner, and ordered that the arrest warrants be quashed.
"What do you want me to do?" Cunningham asked Wagner.
"Serve the warrants as quickly as possible. We don't know who has been talking to whom and the bad guys may scatter before we can make the arrests." Wagner replied.
"It may mean our jobs, George!" Cunningham said, playing Devil's advocate.
"I don't care. We can't operate that way. How do you feel about it?" Wagner said, stoutly.
Cunningham agreed and said that speed was of the essence, as the Congressman would try to find a way to warn his son and allow him to escape.
Cunningham's fear was well founded. He discovered that two mysterious gentlemen, dressed in business attire, rather than hiking clothes, had shown up in Stehekin and asked about the whereabouts of the trail crew of the Congressman's son and the Associate Regional Director's son. The mysterious gentlemen were already on the trail.
Cunningham knew there was a chance of getting to the trail crew before the mysterious strangers. There was a shortcut, but a dangerous one. A cable for a proposed bridge had been stretched across the roaring Stehekin River. If Wagner could belay him, Cunningham felt he could shinny across the cable, steal a march on the mysterious strangers and make the arrest before they could intervene.
Cunningham crossed on the cable without incident and managed to catch up to the trail crew and arrest the congressman's son without incident.
On the way down the trail with his handcuffed prisoner, Cunningham encountered the two ominous men in black.
"We want to talk to you" said one of the men in black.
Cunningham pushed his prisoner pass them and kept his gun hand free. Cunningham told them he could not talk to them as he was escorting a prisoner.
It is not known what the men in black wanted to talk about, but it probably was not wildflower identification.
At any rate, the mysterious couple followed Cunningham and his prisoner for a short distance and then disappeared.
The other members of the LSD ring, including the ARD's son, were arrested by sheriff deputies working with Cunningham in a concurrent jurisdiction situation.
Now were there any reprisals from WASO?
Yes and no. Cunningham was clever enough to involve a popular local sheriff in the operation, so WASO understood it would be bad local and national PR to support Congressional wickedness.
George Wagner was transferred and for whatever reason felt that his career was stagnating, so he resigned from the NPS. Cunningham's career perked right along and he later became superintendent of Denali, where he had the pleasure of rehiring George Wagner as his Chief Naturalist. So everything eventually turned out well.
The lesson is that Yes, if you are in the right, and keep on coming you can prevail against wealth and power as long as you don't take that first step on the Slippery Slope of Accommodation as occurred in the case of Brandt and Dan Smith, but not in the cases of Cunningham, Wagner and the late Doug Ferris.
But like we say, the experience has, we are sure, been an education for Smith and Brandt.
(Editor's note: A full report on the rousing ranger adventures of Robert Clay Cunningham can be found in his autobiography YELLOWSTONE TO DENALI, Clay Cunningham, Outskirts Press, Denver, Colorado, 2005)
THE FRIENDS OF SIR CLOUDSLEY SHOVELL
Now neighbors, if you think you can malign the integrity of someone who has been dead for 300 years with impunity, well, you just better think again! The dead have friends!
You will remember THUNDERBEAR (issue # 256) retelling of the classic whistleblower story of the stubborn and arrogant Admiral Sir Cloudsley Shovell who sailed his entire fleet into the fog bound rocks, but not before taking time out to hang a frantic whistleblowing sailor who claimed that the Admiral was way off course and leading them to destruction.
Naturally, we had to repeat the oft told tale of Sir Cloudsley and the whistleblower as it is so reminiscent and pertinent to the Bush Administration.
The story is such a classic tale of arrogance and incompetence that it may not be true, at least not all of it.
We recently received an e mail from a chap by the name of Colin Stretch:
"Having read THUNDERBEAR # 256 and being highly amused-and supportive of your stance (I shall read more) I cannot, as an Englishman, support your story of Cloudily Shovell.Admirals of the Red did not sort out the ship's position -- that was the Master's job. Sailors were not hanged summarily but after Court Martial and definitely not in high seas. The Quarterdeck was the Officers' accommodation (i.e. their quarters) not their position at sea. All on HMS Association were killed, so who told the story?
The incident you report was first mentioned "As a legend" in proceedings of the Royal Institution of Cornwall, October 1864 -- a full 157 years after the wreck. No mention is made of such in contemporary accounts, even newspapers. I refer you to www.hmssurprise.org/Resources/SirCloudeleyshovell.
Regards,
Colin Stretch"
The references, apparently authoritative, cited by Mr. Stretch, make no mention of a heroic whistleblower that was hanged for his impertinence.
Another reader, Frank Reed, referred me to Dava Sobel's excellent book "Longitude", the story of man's search for a way of determining longitude and thus one's exact position on the featureless ocean. Ms Sobel also buys into the idea of Admiral Shovell as the arrogant martinet too proud to take advice from a seaman. In Ms Sobel's version of events rather than sniffing the smoke of burning sea kelp, as THUNDERBEAR had it, our enterprising whistleblower had been doing a Dead Reckoning navigation project of his own; something that was strictly forbidden to common seamen, and determined they were going onto the scilly rocks. He brought this information to Admiral Shovell, who, a bear when contradicted, had him hanged on the spot.
In order to help keep the whistleblower story plausible, Ms Sobell's version of the truth has one survivor of the wreck of the flagship who was thus able to relate one of the greatest failed whisleblower tales of all time.
So what is true? Well, in 1707 Admiral Shovell's fleet went on the Scilly rocks with the loss of four ships and over 2,000 men, a tragedy that eventually lead to a way of accurately calculating a ship's position at sea.
The whistleblower legend? Probably just a good story, something that is so good it ought to be true, like the story of Chief Seattle, and has taken on a life of its own.
The moral is that if a story reinforces and confirms your beliefs and prejudices, it probably isn't true.
THE SAFETY MESSAGE
Here it is! You've finally found it! What you were REALLY looking for! The Safety Message!
As you can patiently explain to your boss, THUNDERBEAR, a trove of Safety Information, does not have a table of contents. THEREFORE, you as Safety Officer, or simply as a staff member concerned about Safety (can there be any other kind, neighbors) was simply scrolling down through the extraneous copy looking for the Safety Message. You certainly were not wasting government time and equipment reading the intervening rot and poppycock! Nosiree!
One hapless Safety Officer had THUNDERBEAR on the screen, when the park superintendent, paranoid as Judas Iscariot (which those who have taken an oath of allegiance to the present administration tend to be) burst into his office and saw the image of the Great Bear on the computer screen.
"WHAT'S THAT?" The superintendent exclaimed.
"THAT'S THE SAFETY BEAR!" The quick witted ranger deadpanned "I need the logo for my monthly safety talk."
Like a vampire facing a ring of garlic, the superintendent was forced to grunt and retreat. Safety is sacred, neighbors.
This was not always the case.
Safety, at least as a formal discipline, came surprisingly late to the National Park Service and for the usual reasons.
Safety is born of disasters. Not what MIGHT happen, but what did happen. (Often a number of times, for slow learners.)
"Gee, Captain, should we be sailing at top speed through this ice field at night?"
"Is that storage tank empty? Anybody got a match?"
"It's not loaded. I cleaned it the other day."
These and other famous last words go to make up the Safety Lexicon, the great body of Safety Literature.
Like we say, however, formal structure was slow in coming to the NPS.
Like everything else in the NPS, Safety started in Yellowstone National Park (It is entirely possible that the NPS would never have discovered paper clips, carbon paper, or computers had not Yellowstone started using them first).
Formal Safety began at Yellowstone not due to any particular brilliance on the part of the staff, but for the usual reason, a disaster.
A family from "back East" was making their first visit to one of the Yellowstone geyser basin. Reports differ on what happened. It seems likely that their excited little boy ran into a cloud of geyser vapor on the boardwalk, believing that the boardwalk continued straight ahead. It didn't, the unfortunate boy ran into a hot spring and was scalded to death.
Like other parents who have suffered a loss, the grieving parents decided to make their child's death both a monument and a mission.
The family discovered that the NPS did not have a coordinated safety program and no regional safety officers as well as a number of other institutional safety deficiencies. The family contacted others who had relatives killed or injured in the parks to ask them to petition their congressperson for more accident prevention and safety education in the parks.
By and large, these actions have made the parks safer for the taxpayers and staff.
One requirement was that each park had to list its safety hazards in the park brochure or insert and advise the taxpayers not to become statistics. In many parks, particularly historical ones, the warnings were just common sense reminders; don't fall down the stairs, don't hit your head on low doorways etc.
A few parks had problems that were not immediately obvious. For example, the cute feral ponies at Assateague National Seashore can be as destructive as Yosemite bears when it comes to food quest; tearing apart tents to get at coolers stored inside. The enterprising Assateague ponies even came up with a rather remarkable strategy for food acquisition; the cavalry charge.
At dinner time, when campers had laid out food and coolers on the tables, a band of ponies, on coordinated signal might charge through the campground, clearing food from tables and overturning coolers in the resulting confusion. It was certainly more productive than chewing on cord grass and certainly deserved a safety warning to visitors.
But most NPS safety reminders are pretty much common sense; the resulting accidents being some violation of the Law of Gravity (Either you land on something or something lands on you) Too much water or no water at all will do you in. Most people understand this and plan accordingly. Due to lack of planning on God's part, we humans do not come equipped with a full length water repellant fur coat. Couple this deficiency with an extravagantly sensitive thermostat that sends us into a coma and death if we deviate much from the norm, well, you have a recipe for disaster.
However, when you think about it, if you use a little common sense about gravity, and manage your relationship with water correctly and avoid hyperthermia, you can avoid 90-95% of the stuff that hurts or kills you in a national park.
True, there is the 5-10% weird stuff that is so unusual that you will make the NY TIMES if you choose to die of it: lightning, large animal attacks (including other tourists) snakebite, spider and scorpion venom, killer bee swarms and so on
And then there is Hawaii Volcanoes National Park
According to the Park Service, your common sense will not save you in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. You are definitely in the 5-10% Land of weird ways to die.
At least in that part of the park where the molten lava meets the sea.
The NPS teamed up with the US Geological Survey to produce a fascinating safety leaflet (Now neighbors when was the last time you were fascinated by a safety brochure?)
The document is quite sobering. It is entitled "COMMON SENSE IS NOT ENOUGH" and you are asked to" Please read carefully: Your life may depend on it"
Now there are those who estimate that volcano chasers have little or no common sense to begin with. Normally, when you see a volcanic eruption on television, you see the terrified locals streaming down the road, carrying their chickens, goats and pigs, trying to get away.
American visitors, however, stream TOWARD the eruption. The fact that the molten lava is dumping into the ocean is an even greater attraction;
The taxpayer knows that Kilauea is a government volcano and therefore is safe as it must obey the rules That is true, but the rules that Kilauea follows are geophysical, not Park Service
Thus the park visitor can face all manner of exotic ways to die or be otherwise inconvenienced.
These include shoreline collapse, explosions, molten lava, boiling seawater, steam plumes, flying rocks, poisonous air, whiteouts, Tsunamis, sudden darkness, and dehydration.
Shoreline collapse is perhaps the most spectacular way to meet Jesus. There is an element of surprise as the flat "bench" extended out to the ocean looks "solid as a rock". It is rock, but not solid, as it often rests on recent volcanic rubble that can slide down hill taking the bench and you with it. The remedy is to resist the temptation to walk out to the water's edge (or even close!).
Explosions occur when molten rock encounters sea water in a confined space such as a lava tube. This fires live steam and rock shrapnel in all direction.
In 1994 two visitors were severely scalded by an ocean wave that came ashore near a lava vent. In 2000, two visitors were found scalded to death by steam laced with acid.
Steam plumes (or LAZE) from the contact of sea and lava contain hydrochloric acid derived from the salt and hydrogen in the sea water (about the corrosive power of battery acid). In addition, the steam plumes contain tiny glass fragments that can irritate eyes and lungs.. The steam plumes occasionally are dense enough to result in a "whiteout" that is completely disorienting and leads to falls.
Then there is Vog or poisonous air. Vog is volcanic smog that forms when sulfur dioxide and other volcanic gases combine and interact chemically with oxygen, moisture, dust, and sunlight. Kilauea volcano currently emits about 2,000 tons of sulfur dioxide a day. The trade winds normally disperse it, but if they stop blowing, you might be in trouble
Sudden darkness is a uniquely Hawaiian safety problem for visitors from northern latitudes such as mainland Americans, Europeans and Japanese.
Hawaii seems to have perpetual summer even in winter This is misleading. Folks from Seattle or Minneapolis are used to long summer days which are extended in twilight for several hours after the sun officially goes down.
However, Hawaii is relatively close to the equator. This means that when the sun goes down, it gets dark real fast. There is no grace period as in summer Minnesota. The visitor can find himself in total darkness in an unmarked black lunar landscape -- unless he/she has heeded the "strange" NPS advice of always carrying a flashlight into the lava fields even when the noonday sun is blazing...
"But it's only 3 miles to where the lava enters the sea. Why do we have to carry all that extra stuff like a gallon of water, flashlight, a first aid kit, gloves, and wear dorky long pants and boots?"
Well, pilgrim, you DO have to come back (unless you have a deal with the Goddess Pele) that makes it 6 miles and then you must double that in time and difficulty as the" trail" is sharp, odd shaped clinkers bisected by cracks and crevices. This makes it 12 miles. You will also fall a number of times on very unforgiving surfaces, hence the need for gloves, long pants and boots. You will also be working hard in what is essentially a desert. The sun will be beating down and the ambient temperatures will be over 120 degrees near the lava flow. Yup, you will need that gallon of water.
Charles Lindburg once remarked "It's the small, unexpected things that get you".
The small, unexpected things that go beyond "common sense" or the visitor's experience.
So, Park Safety Officer, if your park has any "small unexpected things, those 5-10%, it might be well to warn the pilgrims.