portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting oregon & cascadia

environment | indigenous issues

BUSH LAND SALE PROPOSED TO SELL 50 MILES (34,000) IN KLAMATH NATIONAL FOREST

The Bush administration shocked Americans this week by proposing to sell of 200,000 acres of public lands to pay for rural schools in his budget. The Klamath National Forest would be the hardest hit in the national with about 50 square miles to be sold from the Klamath River. Under Bush's plan, the Forest Service would sell 200,000 acres of public lands, including 85,465 acres in California.
This tree is on the Scott River, a tributary to the Klamath that is for sale
This tree is on the Scott River, a tributary to the Klamath that is for sale
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED TO SELL OFF 200,000 ACRES OF PUBLIC LAND:
Shockingly, more than a third of California's acreage would come from the Klamath National Forest.

This plan calls for halving the amount of money going to rural communities under the County Payments program, and re-linking the money to logging on public lands. The Bush proposal calls for selling off approximately $800 million worth of America's forestlands-lands that were set aside as a legacy for our children and grandchildren.

TAKE ACTION:
Please take a few moments to write or email your Senators and tell them that you oppose the Bush administration's cynical plan which will destroy the County Payments program, create more conflict in rural communities over logging and sell off America's public lands. Also please write letters to the editors in your local area about this tragic selling of our National Heritage.

In Oregon and California, write to:
Senator Ron Wyden
230 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
 http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/

Senator Dianne Feinstein
One Post Street, Suite 2450
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 393-0707
 http://feinstein.senate.gov/

Senator Barbara Boxer
1700 Montgomery Street, Suite 240
San Francisco, CA 94111
(415) 403-0100
 http://boxer.senate.gov/

homepage: homepage: http://kswild.org
phone: phone: 541 951-0126


It's even more appalling when you consider what they're selling it for 18.Feb.2006 07:47

qrswave qrswave@yahoo.com

If you think the idea of selling off public lands is bad, you are going to be shocked and appalled to learn that for all intents and purposes this land is being sold for THIN AIR.


Looting the nation 18.Feb.2006 07:56

AmericanMan

A wise man said, that the last official act of a corrupt government is to loot the nation. We have allready seen the Pentagon lose 2 trillion or more as reported September 10, 2001, Billions of dollars for Iraq rebuilding is missing, Millions missing for Katrina or totally wasted, so the spare cash is mostly gone. Now they resort to our forest and ports and it won't stop there. None of us will know that this money is being pocketed by a bunch of criminals. If Americans don't stop bickering about being left or right or republican or democrat, we are going to lose our fine nation. It is time to pull together and say no.

Feudal system 18.Feb.2006 10:03

chabuka

selling our national forests to corporations, "privatizing"..in other words, we as a people will no longer have access, these lands will probably be fenced and locked to the general public, perhaps becoming game reserves to the uber rich. In the old feudal systems of the Kings, the forests belonged to the "King", any hapless starving peasant who was caught in the Kings forest, trying to snatch so much as a rabbit to feed himself or his starving family was immediately executed.

Line In The Sand 19.Feb.2006 09:33

John Muir

If there was ever a time and place to draw a line in the sand, and say "no more," this is it. Let these sales go through, and it's all lost. Letter writing, nonviolence, through any and all effective resistance. Unite to stop this theft. No tactic is too strong. No effort no matter how extreme should be condemned in stopping this looting. Nonviolence only works when the oppressor respects nonviolence.

"When peaceful revolution becomes impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable." -Oliver Tambo

To John Muir 25.Feb.2006 22:57

fireweed

You write: "Nonviolence only works when the oppressor respects nonviolence."

Okay, obviously you know something different than I've learned about how action - direct or otherwise - works. Would you mind explaining?

The model I've learned is that nonviolence is not about changing the oppressor, but about removing their source of power. In a pyramidal structure, those on top are pretty dependent on those on the bottom. They can't be watching everyone all the time.

On the other hand, it's pretty easy for them to pick off a small, suspicious, centralized few who run around doing deeds that are just on the edge of threatening others' lives, who use all-or-nothing, salvation-or-damnation rhetoric - and who, when hidden by cloak of internet, advocate for use of any tactic, no matter how strong.

I get that you'd rather see more people, not just a centralized few, participating in the kind of struggle you're advocating for. I think. What are you advocating for? And what role can people play in the future that would come of this guerilla action?

And, speaking of, how many guerilla actions have gained popular support outside of islands, and then resulted in equitable governing systems, with increased wellbeing and decreased killings, repressions, and disappearances? How can we, in the US, do revolution and armed action differently than Stalinist Russia or Maoist China? (death toll over 40 million between them).

The Zapatistas might be cited as one example, but aren't they consulting their communities about what they're going to do next, and acting only after listening to them and gaining their consent?

I'm not a careful student of history, and I'd welcome new information. My model of the world, I know, is incomplete. There is much to learn.

What is your vision? What would it take for the people to (successfully) rise?

Thank you. ***Fireweed

Apologies 25.Feb.2006 23:29

fireweed

Sorry for the snipey tone of "What are you advocating for?" In my experience of forest defense, people usually do have some kind of big vision...I just get frustrated at how little this vision is shared, and how people are asked to participate without knowing the meaning of it all, and then how, if people don't participate, that's then pegged only on their apathy rather than also on a communication gap that both sides are a part of...

What are the practical visions that can help other people's imaginations grow, seedling at first then tree, past the glaze of routine? That can show them how they might act and interact?

What can touch the people Callenbach hasn't reached? Or what can we do so that people can believe in the reality of an Ecotopia, enough to work towards it?

****F