[Mb-civic] Bush's Dark Pages in Conservation History

[Michael Butler]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-udall26jul26.story

COMMENTARY

Bush's Dark Pages in Conservation History
 By Stewart L. Udall
 Stewart L. Udall has written, edited or contributed to dozens of books,
most recently "The Forgotten Founders: Rethinking the History of the Old
West" (Shearwater Books, 2002).

 July 26, 2004

 SANTA FE, N.M. ‹ A crucial struggle over land stewardship is taking place
south of my home on the Greater Otero Mesa, a 1.2-million-acre stretch of
grassland that looks pretty much the way it did when Coronado explored the
region almost 500 years ago. As much as half of Otero Mesa still qualifies
for protection under the landmark 1964 Wilderness Act, which was enacted
when I headed the Interior Department under presidents Kennedy and Johnson.
This law prevents industrial development on designated federal land
"retaining its primeval character and influence."

 But the Bush administration, determined to ransack public lands for the
last meager pockets of petroleum, has turned my old department into a
servile, single-minded adjunct of the Energy Department. It is intent on
opening Otero Mesa and other wild lands to oil and gas exploration under the
guise of reducing our ever-growing dependency on imported oil.

 Here in New Mexico, where citizens cherish sublime landscapes, the
administration's attack on the mesa is a heated issue. Gov. Bill Richardson
has been joined by lawmakers, environmental groups and thousands of citizens
in opposing drilling on Otero.

 This crusade is part of a wave of public resentment across the West over
the dark chapter that President Bush and his aides are writing in the
history of the American conservation movement. From California to Colorado,
Montana to Arizona, drill rigs pockmark the West's wild places, licensed by
a White House that views opening of the nation's last untrammeled country to
private development as a prime economic priority.

 For the last 50 years as a congressman, as Interior secretary, as a citizen
activist and a historian, I have been involved in the conservation cause.
Until the last few years Americans have taken pride in the fact that our
country has set the standard for innovative ideas about resource
stewardship, and has seen them emulated throughout the world.

 The word "conservation" ‹ and the concept of science-based management of
resources ‹ did not exist until Teddy Roosevelt became president. He
initiated the reforms and raised the banner, halting raids on the public's
resources and creating millions of acres of national forests, parks and
wildlife refuges. 

 Even during the Great Depression, the second President Roosevelt enlarged
his cousin's legacy. FDR put people to work replanting forests, bringing
electricity to rural areas and enlarging the nation's national parks.

 A third wave of conservation got underway in 1961 when Kennedy called for
the establishment of wilderness reserves and the addition of seashores to
the park system, inspiring conservationists to revive ideas that had been
shelved after Pearl Harbor.

 My office sorted through the results: Should I urge the New Jersey governor
to oppose the powerful New York Port Authority's plan for a super jetport in
order to preserve the Great Swamp? Should I travel to Maine to help Sen.
Edmund Muskie stop a dam that would flood the storied Allagash River? Could
I persuade the budget people to spend $30 million more to prevent
development inside the new Point Reyes National Seashore in California? We
did all that, and more.

 In those days, partisan lines were never drawn where conservation issues
were concerned. Kennedy's Wilderness bill passed the Senate by a vote of 78
to 12, with only six members of each party voting no. Republicans
overwhelmingly voted for the bill largely because of the leadership of a
farsighted Californian, Thomas Kuchel.

>From 1961 to 1981, every president ‹ Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and
Carter ‹ gave his unwavering support to environmental reforms. Richard Nixon
set a high goal by declaring that the 1970s should be the "environmental
decade." He created the Environmental Protection Agency and approved laws to
protect endangered species.

 As the country moved rightward with Reagan, the rhetoric may have been
negative, but in the end no effort was made to repeal important
environmental laws. George H.W. Bush had a positive record, and although
Bill Clinton was stymied by a hostile Congress, he used his executive powers
to achieve positive results.

 Overall, it's a record that bolsters my thesis that this administration is
rowing against the tide of American history. Otero Mesa symbolizes its
narrow focus. Bush and company have not put forward a single positive new
conservation concept. They have systematically lowered pollution regulations
to please favored industries. They have allowed park and forest maintenance
to be neglected and under-funded. I view these events and developments with
dismay. This is a time for straight talk, for those who love the land to
make their voices heard before more damage is done to the resources we all
own.


If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at
latimes.com/archives.

Article licensing and reprint options




 Copyright 2004 Los Angeles Times