Regarding Saturday’s guest commentary on the Glacier Peak Wilderness, “New ‘lookout’ doesn’t belong there”:
I find Mr. Nickas rather disingenuous in defense of his lawsuit against the Forest Service for the reconstruction of the Green Mountain lookout. While Mr. Nickas is quick to point out that the Wilderness Act prohibits the construction of new structures, or the use of modern machinery, i.e., helicopters, in a designated wilderness area, I have not seen his organization file any lawsuits against the federal government for designating new wilderness areas that violate that part of the act that says wilderness shall be “without permanent improvements.”
At least two Washington wilderness areas, Wild Sky and Alpine Lakes, contain roads, a cement bridge, and previously logged areas. There are other such areas in the U.S. Apparently it’s OK to add illegal areas but not to maintain existing improvements.
In his last paragraph Mr. Nickas says he filed the lawsuit in “a commitment to both the spirit and the letter of the Wilderness Act.” I would submit he filed it for neither reason. Our, yours and my, federal government pays out millions of dollars every year to groups such as Wilderness Watch for legal fees for lawsuits such as this one. Many of the suits are without merit but the group filing the suit gets paid whether they win or lose. As an earlier letter to The Herald indicated, such suits are major fund raisers for these organizations. The taxpayer gets to pay for the attorneys on both sides. Sweet deal, huh?
Ron Smith
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
