Put a match to frivolous timber lawsuits

Print Article

Some people still donít understand that trees are a renewable resource.

They donít know ó†or refuse to believe clear scientific evidence ó†that†strategic timber harvests are actually good for long-term forest health, including wildlife.

You can find these people waving the banners of some of the most rabid environmental groups in America. Their desire to protect the planet is commendable. Their tactics, however, are sometimes misguided, verging on malicious.

As Sundayís front-page story by Steve Cameron pointed out, taxpayers foot the bill for millions of dollars in frivolous lawsuit expenses brought by just a few environmental groups. Itís not just taxpayers who suffer; a vital American industry is shackled by these lawsuits, depriving consumers of desirable products, the economy of one of its catalysts, and the forests of critically important management.

Going back decades, some environmental organizations have employed a playbook that effectively brings timber harvests to a screeching halt. The objective: Tie up potential harvests with lawsuits. That way, the environmentalists hope to outlast the viability of those harvests.

The madness might be nearing its end, however. Under the Trump Administration, many longstanding but questionable practices are being scrutinized. Itís the hope of this newspaperís editorial board that frivolous lawsuits become an endangered species.

The Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017 would use arbitration to chop down frivolous lawsuits. Taking an idea first proposed by the Western Governors Association ó unlike many Washington bureaucrats, a group of state leaders with intimate understanding of forest issues ó the Resilient Federal Forests Act would emulate baseball arbitration.

Understanding that the legislation is likely to undergo changes, binding arbitration is an indispensable element. In baseball salary arbitration cases, a player and his team submit their separate arguments for what they think the player should be paid. The player thinks heís worth more; the team, less. At that point thereís no more negotiating. The arbitrator studies the arguments and selects the one she or he determines is most fair.

In a timber-environmentalist disagreement, a qualified arbitrator can examine both sides and render a decision in a fraction of the time and at a fraction of the cost of some lawsuits.

A courtroom is no place to manage federal lands, nor is the American public properly served when its legal system is manipulated for delays, rather than decisions.

The answer? Play ball!

Print Article

Read More Editorial

Hereís what dads really want

June 17, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Editorís note: This editorial was originally published six years ago today. Itís still true. If you beard-stubbled, equal opportunity gender watchers are still waiting for a movie titled ďWhat Men ...

Comments

Read More

We could be looking at voter turnout wrong

June 15, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press The quest started out as most modern searches do: Going to Google. ďWays to get young people to voteĒ was entered in the search box. More than 94 million options popped up, and after reading throug...

Comments

Read More

Summerís coming: Letís put our fires out

June 13, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press North Idahoans hadnít even been able to tear June off their calendars last year before smoke made summer miserable. ďSmoke Alarm: Washington blaze dirties local skies,Ē The Press headline read on Ju...

Comments

Read More

Just ask

June 10, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Our kids are killing themselves. Thatís not a dramatic overstatement in the aftermath of two more Coeur díAlene students taking their lives in recent weeks, but a verifiable, statistically valid fac...

Comments

Read More

Contact Us

(208) 664-8176
215 N. Second St
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83814

©2018 The Coeur d'Alene Press Terms of Use Privacy Policy
X
X