| |
A Bedtime Story
by Geov Parrish
(Warning: may not be suitable for younger children or fuzzy wuzzy
liberals.)
Once upon a time, in a land that used to have a lot of trees, there was an
adorable new creature called a "land exchange."
The land exchange (of the family scamitorius winnus winnus) was much
beloved across the West by politicians, as well as timber companies, mining
corporations, and land developers, because it was so cute. But when it was
very young the land exchange learned a very bad habit. In the Pacific
Northwest, everywhere it went, trees would disappear. This is because land
exchanges foraged by having big corporations like Weyerhaeuser and Plum
Creek trade to the public land that had the hell logged out of it, for land
that had not had the hell logged out of it yet.
Now, to survive, this type of land exchange needed the permission of the
bureaucrats of the U.S. Forest Service. Fortunately, these bureaucrats,
long accustomed to doing whatever their puppet masters at Weyerhaeuser and
Plum Creek wanted, were only too happy to let land exchanges thrive.
But there was a catch. Certain other animals can't survive when the hell is
logged out of forests. As such--because in the last few decades a whole lot
of hell has been logged--these animals are now "endangered" and protected
by "the law," a bigger, predatory creature that, when it wants to, can eat
federal bureaucrats as well as corporations.
But the law is a lazy creature, and not inclined to help other creatures
unless it is forced to. The law should have stopped land exchanges long
ago, but because land exchanges are so cute and so beloved, the law didn't
bother to look around the land exchanges for animals that were in danger of
going extinct. In fact, a Forest Service supervisor--remember, children,
that the U.S. Forest Service is a division of the Department of
Agriculture, and its mission is not to protect trees, but to eat
them--wrote a memo suggesting that searches for endangered animals should
be "minimized to the extent possible." Why? Maybe he liked land exchanges.
Maybe he liked Weyerhaeuser and Plum Creek. Maybe he was a lazy bastard.
And, so, land exchanges romped through the forest land, happy because
searches for endangered species were being minimized. But other
industrious--some would say obsessed--animals known as environmentalists
(homo sapiens arborus huggus) found some of these rare animals. And
the land exchanges could not go forward, blocked by the law. This surprised
many of the politicians, who knew that, in theory, the law could be used to
protect endangered animals. And they knew that, in theory, the rare,
endangered animals existed. But they did not believe that arborus
huggus existed, let alone voted. It was embarrassing, though not
surprising, that those lazy tree huggers were in fact more industrious than
the people on the federal payroll. And the politicians were crestfallen
that their efforts to shoot, gut, and clean the Endangered Species Act had
not been entirely successful. Yet.
Now, children, I understand that this is a confusing story. But there are
several important lessons to be learned:
1) Land exchanges are very cute, but they are what is known as an
"indicator species". That is, they indicate the presence of
other, less desirable species, like Weyerhaeuser and Plum Creek, which will
eat all the trees so that no creatures can survive. Land exchanges are not
of themselves bad animals. But they must be watched very closely for the
presence of these other animals that are very destructive.
2) Weyerhaeuser and Plum Creek are very odd animals. They eat trees, but
like some Australian marsupials, they have pockets. This is where the
Forest Service is located. (These pockets are also where certain parasitic
"politicians" attach themselves, deriving essential nutrient campaign
contributions in exchange for their protection. In zoology this is known as
a "racket.")
3) "The law" is not randomly lazy. It is least inclined to be enforced when
big corporations are involved. Government bureaucracies are much more
inclined to use "the law" against, say, welfare mothers. When big animals
like Weyerhaeuser and Plum Creek are involved, "the law" can run with
surprising speed in the other direction.
4) We've had environmental laws on the books for three decades now, and
things are a little better in that endangered animals would never have even
slowed down, let alone stopped, a scam like winnus winnus before.
We've also had 30 years of activist groups and concerned rhetoric from
politicians about blah blah blah future generations blah blah our
children's children and this priceless heritage blah. And here in the
Pacific Northwest we are still losing our forests, and endangered species,
at a seemingly much faster rate than 30 years ago. Why is that?
Sleep tight.
|