Email this article

Letters to the Editor

EDWARD ABBEY WILL ALWAYS MATTER

Abbey will always matter if for no other reason that he managed to articulate clearly this one sentiment: "We need wilderness because we are wild animals." [Feb. 2009, "20 Years Gone: Why Abbey Still Matters"]

His point (increasingly lost as the world becomes more cyber) is that our species has evolved in wild places and that our societal and "civil" institutions are only a part - and perhaps the lesser part - of all that makes us human. Hardly any other contemporary writer addresses this point, and none does so as compellingly. Nice piece, Ken. - Michael, online comment

WHERE WORDS FALL SHORT

When I opened the January edition of Inside/Outside Magazine, it was the first time I had read one of Michael Wolcott's articles. I was impressed then with his talent for creatively combining words, and an apparent respect for the natural world.

But now, when I finished reading Wolcott's article in February's edition titled: "The Snow War," I found other words to describe his literary skills, and pondered his seeming lack of respect. Mr. Wolcott, while attempting to write a "balanced" article regarding the highly controversial proposal to make snow with treated sewage on the Arizona's San Francisco Peaks, only succeeded in offending many Native Americans and writing a dry summary emphasizing the Ski Resort's side of the story.

As someone who has been involved in this and other issues involving protection of the San Francisco Peaks for many years, I do not even attempt in my writings to describe the holiness and sanctity of this place. This story is best told by our Native American friends, and even they find it difficult to transpose their feelings into the limited vocabulary of our language. When taken out of context, as is the case with Mr. Wolcott's article, the writer is sure to offend those who have expressed these feelings, and the reader, who deserves a better explanation of this complex issue, is only confused.

Thank you, however, for also publishing Ken Wright's article about Edward Abbey and his significance in today's world in your February edition. I cannot help but wonder: "What would Abbey do?" if he were alive today. What would he say about the San Francisco Peaks controversy? I know what he did say that definitely applies here: "There is no force more potent in the modern world than stupidity fueled by greed." - Joanne Finch, Durango, Colo.

THE WRITER RESPONDS: Joanne Finch is right about ?The Snow War.' To my eye, the article is a failed attempt at that mythical beast, ?balanced' journalism. Because I happen to oppose the snowmaking plan for the reasons cited in the article - its disregard for Native Americans' objections; the many unanswered questions about micro-pollutants; and the absurdity of encouraging snow play in a semi-arid landscape - I tried especially hard to be ?fair' to Snowbowl. In so doing, I was unfair to its opponents, some of whom are my friends.

I apologize to those who were hurt or offended by the article, and would say so directly to anyone who wants to talk to me about it.

Anyone who knows my writing, or knows me, will be aware that I object not just to Snowbowl's plan, but to the very existence of a commercial ski center on the mountain - or on any mountain, for that matter. I don't like what industrial skiing operations do to landscapes and their inhabitants, period. That's why I don't spend money at ski resorts, which plenty of environmentalists (of many skin tones) do - despite the obvious disconnect between "values" and action. None of us is pure.

Snowbowl is in my backyard. Since 1997 I have published a half-dozen or more opinion pieces opposing the ski center's expansion. I have testified against snowmaking at Forest Service hearings, filed objections on EIS documents, given media interviews, and stood on Snowbowl Road holding signs that said "No to Yellow Snow." I have wished for a precise volcanic eruption.

So I was probably the wrong person to take a stab at being fair. I bent over too far. The article's main fault is that Snowbowl is given too much space, too high in the story. Given a second chance, I would bring the voice of the opposition in sooner and point out that the validity of ADEQ's assessment of the sewage effluent's safety has some credible questioners.

That said, Ms. Finch's letter is puzzling. She seems to criticize me, a white person, for attempting to describe the specialness and sacredness of the Peaks. Although my ethnicity hardly disqualifies me from joining in that discussion, the point is moot: I didn't try to do that. I simply did what straight journalists do: reported the history and quoted the players. I trusted readers to consider the related ethical issues for themselves.

- Michael Wolcott