The National Forest Service and Plum Creek Timber Company recently signed a land exchange in the area near Snoqualmie Pass that could involve 42,811 acres of forests claimed by the company. The public in turn would give up 38,192 acres. The lands in question currently are arranged in square mile sections alternating between public and private "ownership," creating a checkerboard pattern across the ecosystem. Presumably, the goal of land exchanges is to consolidate land ownership and thereby address the awkwardness of forest management goals that change mile by mile.

Until 1864, the nearly two million acres in the Northwest claimed today by Plum Creek were public (actually, Native American) lands. A land grant passed by Congress and President Lincoln in 1864 gave many of these lands to the now defunct Northern Pacific Railroad Company. This grant was intended as a subsidy to build a railroad from the Great Lakes to Puget Sound. Once the railroad was built, Congress stipulated that the lands be sold at local auction (for not more than $2.50 per acre) and opened to settlers. This never happened.

Much of Northern Pacific's grant lands passed to Burlington Northern, a company that resulted from the merger of Northern Pacific and Great Northern. Burlington Northern spun off Burlington Resources, which in turn spun off subsidiaries for various types of resources (natural gas, oil, precious metals, timber). Plum Creek Timber Company was spun off in 1989 to control the forested grant lands that hadn't yet been sold. This gave Plum Creek 1.5 million acres nationally, of which 355,000 acres are in the Washington Cascades and 96,000 acres are in eastern Washington.

Most of the corporations that benefited from this deal are owned and operated by a dozen families who have passed their controlling interests down through five generations since the original land grant. Through the generations, they've socialized together, gone to private schools together, lived near one another, intermarried, and enjoyed the benefits of wealth derived from the public's natural resources. While individual welfare benefits can be capped these days, corporate welfare lasts generations.

Congress reserved the right to give ownership of the grant lands back to the public if the 1864 contract were breached. A number of conditions of the contract definitely have been breached, including the opening of the lands to settlers within five years of the railroad's completion.

So why, in 1997, is the government considering trading away public lands for grant lands which should have reverted to public ownership? When stolen property is purchased, who does the property rightfully belong to?

The impact of Plum Creek's timber management is visible across the Cascade and Rocky Mountains. Its latest reorganization, into a limited partnership, has increased the incentive to liquidate the older forests rapidly, with predictable impacts to fish, wildlife and the environment.

Plum Creek continues to unsustainably cut Cascade timberlands--lands which should not belong to it to begin with. While mile-square clearcuts may no longer be the norm, Plum Creek continues to cut its forests in hundred acre units with roads punched across steep mountainsides. What's needed is not a swap for still more valuable public forests, but a return of all land grant lands to the public for the public good--not the good of the corporations.

--John Reese & Erica Kay

For more information or to get involved with the Plum Creek land swap/land grant issue, contact Pacific Crest Biodiversity Project (545-3734) or Seattle Earth First! (632-2954). See also Railroads and Clearcuts, a book by Derrick Jensen and George Draffan with John Osborn, MD.

In this issue...