|
|
|
Book Review
| Jack Ward Thomas: The Journals of a Forest Service Chief. Edited by Harold K. Steen. Durham, N.C.: Forest History Society, in association with the University of Washington Press, 2004. 417 pp. Illustrations, notes, index. $30.00.
|
| Jack Ward Thomas's journals came to hand as we watched the 2004 presidential election from Berlin. In a profound sense, these writings unfold the public-resource side of the Republican resurgence in the West that led, in part, to the outcome of the election. |
1
|
|
Unlike those journals whose authors simply report events, Thomas's writings are most valuable because they reveal his thoughts. His ruminations derive from the views of a scientist who believes that land managers should base their prescriptions on the best scientific investigations available. In this connection, the diaries reveal that he found himself constantly frustrated because of the Clinton administration's tendency to forget science in order to satisfy environmentalists, the tendency of aggressive and uninformed Republicans to advocate intensive commodity extraction, and the abdication of responsibility by Democratic legislators. |
2
|
|
In reflecting on these events, Thomas saw that the Republicans had succeeded in selling their agenda, especially after 1994. Their success, he said, quoting former House Speaker Tip O'Neill, occurred because they understood that "All things are political and all politics is local" (p. 265). |
3
|
|
A career Forest Service employee and world-renowned wildlife biologist, Thomas came to the attention of the Clinton administration because he led a team that produced groundbreaking research on the northern spotted owl habitat in the Pacific Northwest. Clearly, however, the administration misread Thomas's standpoint. They undoubtedly believed they had selected an aggressive environmentalist, when in fact, they had appointed a man who believed that resource managers should make their decisions on the best possible science regardless of political considerations. |
4
|
|
In part because of this misunderstanding and in part because of events, Thomas occupied the eye of a hurricane that circled from environmental to commodity interests throughout his tenure from 1993 through 1996. |
5
|
|
The journals reveal his concern for managing with good science and his constant frustration with the White House, with Agriculture Department officials, with environmentalists, with commodity interests, and with legislators, especially those from Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and Alaska. |
6
|
|
His frustration appeared in a number of cases. These included the attempt to implement the salvage provisions of the Recission Act of 1995, the unbudgeted expense of California's Quincy Library Group, Alaskan timber sales, the proposed New World Mine near Yellowstone Park, actions of environmental regulatory agencies, paying for fire management, fuel loading and consequent fires, and performance reviews of Forest Service employees. |
7
|
|
At times he felt himself co-opted by the system. In April 1995, as he prepared for hearings crafted by Senate staffer Mark Rey, he wrote: "I was suddenly filled with a tad of disgust for the corruption in my spirit that was taking place. We were not concerned with truth or solutions; we were concerned with our own power and the contest of outwitting the Subcommittee" (p. 178). |
8
|
|
I commend these journals to all those interested in public lands and resources, but especially to those who believe that we could easily solve such issues if only everyone else would accept their own point of view. |
9
|
|
Thomas G. Alexander is the Lemuel Hardison Redd, Jr. Professor Emeritus of Western American History at Brigham Young University. He currently is living with his wife in Berlin on assignment from the Church Education System of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. |
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|