save the trees! - headwaters forest pic
dhogaza at pacifier.com
Sun Nov 22 01:30:12 EST 1998
In article <36559EB4.664B at livingston.net>,
Don Staples <dstaples at livingston.net> wrote:
>But you see, conservatives understand operating within the law. Radical
>environmentalists have a problem with laws. )BG(
Then please explain why we environmentalists resort to the courts, while
conservatives who oppose us fight long and hard to avoid the courts? As,
for instance, is the case with the QLG where approval voids court review?
I am a conservationist. I love the law. Being a lover of the law, I love
the courts. And I love our track record in those courts.
The laws passed 25 years ago are the ENTIRE basis for our existence.
How DARE you suggest we have problems with laws? We have problems with
federal agencies that break these laws.
Hell, Staples, even the USFS admits they've systematically broken these
Why, oh why, would we have problems with these laws?
AFTER ALL, WE FORCED THEIR PASSAGE!
Do you really think it was the timber industry that forced passage
of the NFMA, NEPA, and ESA?????
Good fuckin' grief...
Again, standing on my "why should I educate those who oppose us based
on false beliefs", I should smile and say, "yeah, you're right, Staples!~
If I could convince everyone that conservationists don't care for the
law and operate outside the law, EVERYONE, that would deflate the movement
to end such laws.
So I guess you're really a friend, after all. Tell the world we operate
outside the law. And be sure to tell them the logical collorary to this
statement: since we operate outside the law, there is no need to weaken
the NFMA, NEPA or ESA.
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, at http://donb.photo.net
More information about the Ag-forst