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

Give them a reason to put phone down

December 12, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Those of us who have graduated to the head of the gray hair/no hair class have a couple options when it comes to younger generations. We can complain. Or we can connect. Steve Cameronís insightful...

Comments

Read More

Hey, cowboy: Long may you ride

December 09, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Thereís every reason to believe Brad Little will be an excellent governor when he takes office in less than a month. But thereís no question that Idahoís going to miss C.L. ďButchĒ Otter. Clement L...

Comments

Read More

Whatís enough, and what is too much

December 07, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Local taxpayers have shown unflinching support when school officials can justify additional spending through bond issues and levies. But even in these days of full employment and relative economic op...

Comments

Read More

One final, fantastic feat from 41

December 05, 2018 at 5:00 am | Coeur d'Alene Press Maybe a dead man can breathe life into a suffocating nation. Granted, this commentary is being fueled more by optimism than wisdom, but if expressions of hope, charity and goodwill have no place at ...

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