|
Hood River News Editorial
September 30, 2006
The bigger offer is not always the better one.
This axiom has unfortunately provided a point less sharp than the axe
that seems about to fall on the chances of any Mount Hood wilderness
expansion legislation being passed this fall.
The better offer in this case is the Mt. Hood Stewardship Legacy Act
championed by U.S. Representatives Greg Walden-Earl Blumenauer: 77,500
more acres of wilderness and other enhancements on and around Oregon’s
symbol and sentinel, Mount Hood.
The bigger offer is the one that essentially usurped the hard work of
Walden and Blumenauer: Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith’s Lewis and
Clark Mount Hood Wilderness Act, with its 128,000 additional acres.
This week comes news that the White House wants a more modest 55,000
acres of added wilderness. We haven’t seen the details of this idea,
but given the fact it has been 22 years since more wilderness has been
added, it falls short of reasonable expectations.
But Congress and the White House need to hear from the community that
it preserve the Legacy Act, and its elements. If it does not happen in
October before the Election recess, the Act is still the plan to
return to at a later date.
The Legacy Act needs to be seen as the compromise choice.
The Act received hearty support from conservation groups with long,
complicated and often conflicted relationships with the federal
government and private companies on the mountain. These parties helped
the Democrat Blumenauer and the Republican Walden create a
foresightful proposal.
*****
Walden and Blumenauer spent more than three years researching the
legislation, on the ground and in meeting rooms, in D.C., in Hood
River, Zig Zag, Portland, and on the Timberline Trail.
Look also at the paths taken so far by the House and Senate wilderness
proposals.
The Legacy Act received a unanimous yes vote in the House. Then, along
comes the Wyden-Smith bill, calling for nearly twice as much
wilderness.
But it had languished for three years since Wyden first proposed it,
and received minimal public input. Its revised submittal to the Senate
just weeks ago felt like an afterthought.
*****
No comment should be made on the Legacy Act and its merits without a
mention of the now-controversial land swap between the Forest Service
and Mountain Hood Meadows.
The exchange involves federally owned property at Government Camp in
exchange for many more acres, near Cooper Spur, now owned by Mt. Hood
Meadows. With the swap, the company gains room to grow in an
appropriate location. Meanwhile, the north side of the mountain, its
watersheds, forests, orchards, and scenic views, receives a greater
degree of protection.
The swap deserves support because it takes into consideration far more
than the dollars and cents of appraisal standards. It is a
near-certainty that if the swap falls through, Meadows will renew
pursuit of its development options on the north side of the mountain.
Ironically, the land swap amounted to a round-table acknowledgement of
the wisdom of avoiding development around Cooper Spur. It would be a
shame to see development after all when the parties have recognized,
and signed off on, the value of keeping more building off Cooper Spur.
*****
Walden and Blumenauer literally walked the walk in developing their
legislation: In 2005 they hiked for three days around the mountain and
talked to numerous stakeholders before, during and after the trek.
Approval of the Legacy Act would bring the bonus effect of rewarding
this kind of Sweat Equity by our law-makers and policy-creators. Given
the long hike that led to it, the Legacy Act ought to be nicknamed the
Blister Bill.
The mountain deserves more protection, and the Walden-Blumenauer plan
is a solid one that sets aside land and rivers for generations to
come. The Act remains the best and strongest offer for protecting our
mountain. |
