How much is the Willamette National Forest worth to you? The question has gained importance recently because the U.S. Forest Service has begun designating recreation sites such as campgrounds and trailheads for closure, and President Bush is betting you won’t care much.
The move should strike a nerve in Oregon, home to thousands of campers, hikers and nature lovers. Many of Oregon’s greatest treasures, including Mt. Hood and the Eagle Cap Wilderness Area, reside in land owned by the Forest Service.
Under Bush’s plan, forest managers must rate their recreation sites by cost, popularity and what type of recreation they provide, according to The Oregonian. Some sites that score low will probably be closed because of inadequate funding.
Of course, sites run by commercial contractors will not be affected. That would be anti-business.
Bush doesn’t much like public lands. How else to explain his 2006 budget proposal, which calls for a
46 percent drop in maintenance funding for Forest Service facilities? If the Forest Service can’t afford to maintain its facilities, it will close them.
The review smacks of other Bush administration initiatives, the most telling of those being the No Child Left Behind Act. Like the landmark education reform, the Forest Service review seeks to quantify the unquantifiable. Just as Bush thinks scores on a standardized test indicate the measure of learning, he thinks the value of a place like Mount Hood can be discerned by tallying its visitors and fiscal-year income. Under Bush’s plan, computers will by 2007 decide the value of Forest Service recreation sites.
Throughout his administration, Bush has assaulted some of government’s greatest accomplishments because of an ideological preference for private institutions. No Child Left Behind, for example, shifts funds from public to private schools. His Social Security reform proposal seeks to take money from government accounts to create private accounts. Corporate contractors have come to do everything from fighting wildfires to feeding troops, a process dramatically accelerated under Bush.
Now the same ideology has resulted in not just neglect of public lands but an open attack on their merit. Some fear this will eventually result in privatization, with outdoor recreation offered by places such as the Six Flags Willamette National Forest.
Perhaps such speculation borders on hysterics, but keep this in mind: When our parents were kids, they didn’t have to pay to walk in the forest. We have trail fees. Also, the Forest Service has put up for sale public property such as housing for rangers, probably to be transformed into cabins for those who can afford them.
Bush’s plan also includes uncomfortable echoes of corporate marketing practices. Forest Service managers must choose a “recreation niche” that attracts the public and evaluate how well their sites reflect that theme. At Mount Hood, for example, sites that relate to skiing would likely take priority. Others could see cuts. The directive isn’t unlike a CEO telling his company’s marketing department to focus on a specific product. It might work for Nike, but corporate values don’t fit national forests.
Bush’s plan stems in part from an inability to see the value of public land. While many Oregonians grow up camping and hiking in national forests, Bush comes from a culture where public lands are scarce. His home state of Texas has four national forests, which total 636,872 acres, or 0.37 percent of the state.
Oregon, in contrast, has 13 national forests that total about 18 million acres, or almost 30 percent of the state.
But don’t feel bad. Texas also has 219 Wal-Mart Supercenters and a really big Army base.
Political clear-cutting
Daily Emerald
April 14, 2005
Taking issue
0
More to Discover