.htm_cmp_tabs010_vbtn.gif){kind=small}
Gloria Flora
". . .I'm glad I was criticized,
it meant I was doing my job."
___________________
Mike: You were criticized for using non-market values in your decision to ban oil and gas leasing in the Rocky Mountain Front. Reflect on the meaning of that criticism.
Gloria: My detractors did say it was inappropriate to use non-market values.
Well, I say, thank you very much. I was delighted to be accused of using non-market values because that told me I was doing my job. My job was not running a business. My job was leaving a legacy for future generations so they can benefit and enjoy the same kinds of resources and opportunities that we do now. And that’s exactly what I did.
I also thank them for criticizing me for listening too much to the public - another point they raised in their appeal.
Now, if I’m a public land manager, I’m responsible for the stewardship of land that is not only to be enjoyed and provide products for current generations, but I’m also supposed to look seven generations out - literally at the needs of the unborn. No one officially speaks for them except public land managers.
So, my role as a public land steward is not just to run around and tidy up, make sure that the wildlife is more-or-less happy, and that we’re not trashing streams too badly. No. It’s to think in much broader, deeper terms about why I’m really doing my work and the consequences of doing my job incorrectly. And the consequences are vast for future generations.
The manager’s temptation is to down-play the consequences of the current decision by saying, "Oh, that loss is a drop in the bucket. It was just a bad experiment. We won’t do that again. Well, what if I trivialize a management decision that removes 200 acres from productivity, say by allowing unsustainable grazing or too many roads. When you multiply these individual decisions over the thousands of land managers in the nation and over the 30 or so years that we’re all working, there are a lot of mistakes that add up to a real problem for future generations.
Natural resource agencies are not just producing goods and services; it’s goods, services, and experiences. And if you ask somebody at the end of their life, "What do you remember about public lands and what benefit did you gain from them?", they’re not going to say, "Well, I think some of the wood in my front porch came from a national forest and I think, let’s see, 5 percent of the meat that’s produced in the United States is raised on public land, so I guess maybe 5 percent of my meat came from public land. No. They’re going to say, "I remember going up to the Sun River with my dad and that is where he showed me how to fish. Now I take my grandson up there and we fish in the same places. That is the way people express the priceless legacy of the public’s special lands. It’s those memories and experiences that are so much more poignant than, "Jeez, some of the wood in my house might have come from a national forest.
Now, that puts a different spin on the criticism that I used non-market values and that I listened to the public. It means that I’m representing people today and those who aren’t alive yet. What a huge responsibility. It’s almost impossible to anticipate what people might need in the future; but just by virtue of being human you know they need clean air, clean water, and they need the opportunity to find beauty, meaning, and solitude in nature. And those are the things that are going to be in highest demand and in least supply as our population increases. Those are incredibly meaningful non-market values. So, I’m glad I was criticized. It meant I was doing my job.