Report Inappropriate Comments

I continue to strongly support the land exchange, much as I did in 1978. But for different reasons than the circus acts now taking place around the margins (and apparently being drawn into the central focus) and threaten to blow up the simple reason for the transfer. I am a simple man, the very reason I never ran for public office despite urgings. I see this as a simple exchange, to remedy the wrongs of the 78 Act, which took these lands out of production as logging was permanently banned in the BWCA. They also could not allow either outboard motor or snowmobile use because of language in the 78 law. The exchange was to free up national forest timberland for harvest, with the proceeds directed to the school trust fund in perpetuity. Granted, it is on a 60-70 year sustainable cycle, but the plan was that the lands would keep giving after all of us are long gone from the earth. Also, we felt we did not need the federal government gaining more control over the lands, since they were STATE school trust fund lands and allowed uses consistent with our culture in this area. Our feeling was the feds need not establish management practices for state lands and the only fair way to remedy the problem was an acre for acre swap. Simple as that. At now time was copper-nickel mining included in the discussion, even though we had companies like INCO and Kennecott sleeping in our woods at the time.

Now we have the Weeks Act and the copper-nickel, not to mention some convoluted funding mechanisms being forwarded by extreme environmentalists, being dragged into a simple discussion. Why didn't they advance these 34 years ago? I know why. They lie and cheat. They continue to grab, grab, and grab more and more to suit their own narrow interests. I know that. I was a party to a meeting in the Federal Building in Duluth to see where we had mutual interests that we could agree on, but the extreme environmentalists would not concede one point on outboard motors, snowmobiles and logging in the BWCA. In a nutshell...there was no compromise on their part. And our role, from their point of view, was to simply roll over and let them have all they wanted. I pointed out that was not an acceptable solution, they got mad, closed their files and left the meeting.

I don't share Marshall's view that we should allow the feds to use taxpayer money to purchase taxpayer owned state land from the state and not exchange an acre of land outside the BWCA. Marshall, upon moving up here from the big cities, found something he loved about our land and has proceeded to support banning activities on it that those of us that have lived up here all our lives and for generations before have come to form as part of our life. There comes a time to be uncompromising. If Marshall wants to take on the bully mining companies, he will find a lot of support among the people with which he lives and sells papers to. Have at it Marshall, I am and always will be, poor and a champion of the "underdog". But listen closely to your neighbors and the old timers. Rejecting the land exchange by adding "red herrings" to the debate is understandable, but after the "red herrings" are taken off the table, please do the manly thing and openly support the land exchange for the reasons I have stated previously.

About my friend Tom Rukavina. Tommy should have known about my background on this issue going back over 35 years ago. I was surprised at first, that I was not contacted to be a part of the discussion. After reading about what is coming out now about which lands to exchange and how many lands to exchange, how many to repurchase with taxpayer money and possible PolyMet monkey shining, I can see why I wasn't invited. I am an independent voice, I can't be controlled, I don't play inside baseball when I smell a rat. And I am not a Party Man, in other words do what we say for the good of the Party. Nobody can deny my driven due diligence on an issue, but sticking on principle is paramount to me. Even Marshall, when we worked on the school issue, had concerns about including me on strategy, but then he is about as equally "head strong" as I am. I think today, he realizes I offered a lot to the cause, only I refused to move in lock step on strategies I didn't agree with. And so with Tommy and Dave Dill, they had something up their sleeve on this land exchange, and the last thing they wanted to do is answer questions I might have posed on the current proposal. And so it goes.

Marshall, please direct your opposition to the powerful people, not us little people. Let us have the fair and equitable land exchange. As to what lands are transferred and the reasons why, work to clean up that and get as much disclosure as possible. And Franken...don't try to sneak around here in private and not invite the "locals" to attend your information gathering sessions! Just get Amy to join you and co-sponsor a Senate companion bill identical to the bill passed by the House an legislature, signed by the Governor and for the most part, written by the Range delegation. The BWCA is not in St. Louis Park or Hollywood, it is in rural northeastern Minnesota.