Is benefiting the majority the way to go?

To the Editor:

In the past 25 years or so, the environmentalist movement under the aegis of the Endangered Species Act has managed to shut down or impede large segments of industry. In the lumber industry alone, over 400 mills in the Northwest have closed as a direct result of the efforts of these so called environmentalists. It would be difficult to assess the economic cost of the mill closures as well as the cost to businesses that support those mills, but it is certainly in the tens of billions. This does not even consider the social chaos that results from the loss of thousands of jobs. The environmentalists tell us this is a small price to pay for the animals saved from extinction by their efforts, but there is no real evidence to support their contention that species were at risk.

The poorly written language of the Endangered Species Act allows draconian measures to be mandated with dubious evidence of specie endangerment. It allows lawsuits to be filed against any project by anyone at any time if there is any hint of endangerment to any specie, but allows no recourse by the defendant. In our legal system the defendant pays his own legal expense win or lose. It is not hard to see how this can lead to frivolous lawsuits. Environmental activists are using this ploy to tie up resource development in endless litigation. The lawyers profit, the enviros get their way and the forest goes to waste.

Before the enviros brought an end to forest management on our national forests, we had a system that benefited everyone. Valuable wood products were harvested from the forests. A vibrant lumber industry provided jobs for thousands.

The risk of forest fire was reduced by the proper thinning of the forest and removal of dead and dying trees. This management also improved the overall health of the forest by thinning dense stands which accelerated the growth of the remaining trees.

And so the grand tragedy plays out. The lawmakers pander to those segments of our population with lots of votes and, as a consequence, those few involved in resource development like loggers and miners get the privilege of paying taxes, but have little say in what impacts their own welfare.

For many years we have tried to educate the urban majority with the fact that with responsible management, resource development can proceed without any injury to the environment and, in fact, can improve it. But you know what? The urban majority doesn't care and the few votes we command count for nothing in the scheme of things.

When Madison, Munroe, Jefferson and the other framers of our constitution sat down to design this document, they relied heavily on ideas set forth by the French philosopher, Montesquieu. Montesquieu believed a democracy would work only for a country isolated from other countries with natural boundaries like mountains or oceans, had a small population and had people with common interests. Our democracy fit these criteria to some extent for quite some time and our nation prospered like no other in history. I believe, however, that we can no longer be considered a nation of common interests.

When our nation consisted almost entirely of yeoman farmers, what benefited the majority worked fairly well for all. With the diversity we have today, though, what benefits the majority may be anathema for the minority. The ramifications of the Endangered Species Act is an excellent example of this. For the multitudes living in an exban environment, the idea of saving endangered species sounds like a noble idea. It costs them nothing and the only real cost is the loss of livelihood for a few loggers out in the western wilderness.

The majority rules, right? Who cares if a few thousand lose their jobs? This is merely collateral damage for the greater good. Instead of cutting trees and hurting the animals these people could do other things like going to law school and becoming lawyers for example.

I would like to end this dissertation with an optimistic note, but at this moment I can't think of one. Perhaps the message told to the American Indian during the Western expansion applies now to those of us who depend on resource development: “You must endeavor to persevere.”

William Payne

Libby