Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Idaho wilderness is about to be given away to develpers for free

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 12:44 AM
Original message
Idaho wilderness is about to be given away to develpers for free,0...

Idaho's Off-Road Uproar
A bill promises to preserve the wilderness -- for gearheads.
By Carole King, CAROLE KING is a singer, songwriter and longtime conservation activist.
August 14, 2006

WHILE OUR attention is on other parts of the world, an insidious movement is underway at home to privatize nationally owned land. Its proponents are using federal "quid pro quo" bills, which typically include just enough wilderness designation to get a buy-in from selected conservation groups. Roughly 250,000 acres have been privatized through such legislation since 2000.

One such bill is the proposed Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act, which has passed in the House and is pending in the Senate.

Why is a bill for Idaho of interest to Los Angeles residents or anyone else outside of Idaho? Because public lands in Idaho are owned by all Americans, including my mother in Florida, your father in Highland Park and the president's housekeeper in Texas.

This bill asks Americans to accept the outright giveaway of thousands of acres of public land in Idaho for private development. In return for their support, the handful of conservation groups backing it may claim its passage as a "win" because some land is designated as wilderness.

But this bill does not protect federal water rights, thus threatening salmon recovery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ninkasi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. This really distresses me
I have always wanted to travel, and see the magnificent scenery America has to offer. Now, in my sixties, and with physical problems which make it difficult for me to walk, I have made peace with the idea that travel for me is unlikely. It was enough for me, though, to know that public land was THERE, waiting for others to see and enjoy.

It was enough for me to know that my children, or grandchildren, or yours, would be able to take in the splendor of the American wilderness. I do not have to see these sights myself, in order to take comfort from the fact that whether I ever saw them or not, others most assuredly would,

Now, the grasping, greedy special interest groups, who have succeeded in shedding their fair share of taxes, sucked up corporate profits for themselves, rather than reward the workers who earn those profits, are poised to monopolize our last remaining natural wilderness for themselves. Of all of the things they have done, this is surely one of the worst.

Even those among us who could never afford mansions, or 2nd or 3rd homes, or lavish lifestyles, still had one thing we could count on, and that was the right to see and enjoy public land. How much more will they take from us before it's enough? Our children are fighting and dying in their wars, we are working longer hours, for less money, and doing without health coverage, and they still want more. Class warfare? Oh, yes, it is...but we didn't fire the first shot. We have retreated further and further back, perhaps thinking that they would become sated at last, but that's not going to happen.

Let's start this November by taking control of our Congress back, by taking every elective office we can back, and by demanding accountability from the ones who are supposed to be public servants. We pay their salaries, and we pay far more than their wealthy cronies do. We need to have some respect from the ones we elect to office, and it needs to start now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. well said. we are from the same school of
thought. I have seen thses beautiful lands in Idaho( husband is from there and he made sure we saw the beautiful rivers. This very thing was fought in California(Pombo) and I think it was stopped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ninkasi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 02:50 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Indeed
Then you and I are among the ones who wish to keep our public land untouched by developers. If I'm not ever able to go myself, then I want to know that the same gorgeous vistas are there for my fellow Americans, when they are able to go there.

This fight is not about me, and what I want. It's about all of us, and the greedy special interests who will cheapen anything in order to turn a profit to themselves. May our side prevail, and at least some of our wilderness remain pristine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 04:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. Maybe some rich man will buy it and save it.
My guess is that since 'any thing goes'is Bush style of business that it will go .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
5. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
6. link ::

The actual House bill. It does a lot. Much more than she says, and not always quite what she says.

LA has all kinds of sprawl and many cities have increased their size; to the north the urban area skips a national forest and continues. She doesn't like this. In Idaho, many cities are bound by BLM land. You skip the federal land, and it's like "skipping" from Mandeville Canyon "over to" Vacaville. This bill transfers BLM land to counties and cities; they probably will sell it to developers. It doesn't transfer land directly to developers for free; what the cities and counties do, that's their business.

Moreover, there are lots of bikers and ATV users. Currently they use BLM land. Conservationists hate it; they want them banned. Concentrate them in one area and forbid them in another, rather than let the entire area suffer low-grade damage ... which is the better choice? Or do we just say that public lands are just for part of the public, those that like wilderness? "Public use" is for a part of the public? I don't trust those that want to preserve things for "the people" unless they're clear that it's not *all* the people, but just some of the people.

Not going to take the time to read the rest of the bill. This seems like a compromise between those that just think people in small towns in Idaho should move to reasonable places like LA and leave the countryside for the sake of the few Angelenos that might get there, and people that love where they live but want to have more control over their surroundings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 22nd 2019, 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC