This article is written in response to this guest opinion.
Ever notice when someone does not wish to have a dialogue of discussion and having the inability to truly and openly state their positions they resort to name calling and obfuscation of the facts being presented them. Such is the case of Brad Brooks of the Idaho Wilderness Society when he states the takeover of public lands is a state “scam”.
A scam is a fraudulent business scheme intended to swindle someone. It is based on the presumption of not presenting all the facts in an attempt to take from someone their property or personal possession. Placing doubt and fear into the mind of the mark is how a scammer is successful.
His assessment that those seeking the transfer of public lands to the states is a scam are not supported by any facts. On the contrary they are his subjective opinion and based solely in his ideas as an environmentalist.
In this case those who have supported the transfer of public lands have presented facts and made a case for state sovereignty and also the want to preserve these lands for future generations. Unfortunately for Mr. Brooks these arguments are making sense and citizens of Western states and our Eastern counterparts are recognizing the inequitable treatment we have been subject to under the rule of thumb of an over reaching federal bureaucracy and an overzealous environmental community hell bent on imposing their ideals of how these lands should be administered. Rather than facing ideas of possibilities they construct straw man arguments to raise doubt and instill fear into our citizenry.
The reality is that lawsuits supported by organization like the Idaho Wilderness Society, Idaho Conservation League, Friends of the Clearwater, and the so called environmental / conservation organizations are wreaking havoc on the very environment they claim to care so much about.
Millions upon millions of acres of public lands are being laid to waste. Through their policies immense damage is being perpetrated to the very water we drink and the air we breathe. Rural communities and their inability to fund education for children and for local governments to provide essential services pertaining to the health, safety, welfare and economic viability of its citizens are not even an afterthought for these organization. It is their greed and lust for control that drive them. They demonstrate no concern for the lives and communities their polices are destroying.
To refute the statistics Mr. Brooks states in his economic analysis would require more words than would be allowed here. Let me just say the analysis is a complete static study of the numbers. There is no dynamic scoring used and no assumptions are made as to how the outcome would be based if proper management were to take place. Again his subjective point of view. We are not being presented all the facts.
Just who is scamming who here?
If Mr. Brooks would like to have an open debate on the subject I would be glad to accommodate my time. He could bring Jonathan Oppenheimer and Rocky Barker to give himself a fair chance at making their case.
