OHS Inv. #2708
Chuck Williams
Columbia River Dissenters Series
January 22, 1999
Tape 1, Side 1
CW = Chuck Williams
CH = Clark Hansen
Clark Hansen: This is an interview
with Chuck Williams at his gallery in The Dalles, Oregon. The interviewer, for
the Oregon Historical Society, is Clark Hansen.
The date is 1/22/99. This is Tape
One, Side One.
So
I thought we’d first begin by exploring your own family’s background, and your ancestors, and what your
roots are in every direction you could mention...
Chuck Williams: Well, my father Clyde
Williams is Cascade Indian, and he was born in the back room of the Skamania
General Store, and his great grandfather was Tumove [sp?] - is that coming
through okay? - was Chief Tumove, who was the head chief of the western end of
the Gorge, and who signed the 1855 treaty, the Willamette Valley treaty that
the led to the establishment of the Grand Ronde Reservation. And a few months later, in the beginning of
fifty-six, some Yakama Indians, or Klickitats came down from Yakima and
attacked the blockhouse there at the Cascades. Then Lieutenant Phil Sheridan,
The-only-good-Indian-is-a-dead-Indian Sheridan, was the head of the dragoons at
Fort Vancouver, and some of the settlers got away, and came up and blew the
bugle, and the Klickitats took off, and the Cascades had just signed the peace
treaty, so they didn’t flee, and Sheridan needed a scapegoat, so my great great
grandfather was the chief, so he was hung on the spot. The trial consisted of Sheridan putting his
finger in my great great grandpa’s gun, [that] had been fired recently, so he
hung him on the spot. It was actually
one of the lost lyrics of Woodie Guthrie’s “Roll On Columbia,” that they found
in the fiftieth anniversary, that had disappeared, and they found the original
recording of it, and there was a line in there about Sheridan hung every Indian
with smoke in his gun or something [laughs] that was great great grandpa. And so...
CH: So
what year would that have been?
CW: Fifty-six. He signed the treaty in 1855, in Dayton,
which is where my mom was born. And most people don’t understand that the Grand
Ronde treaty goes all the way up to Cascade Locks, the crest of the Cascades is
the divider between the Grand Ronde and the Warm Springs treaty ceded areas.
So, since the Grand Rondes were terminated for about three decades, they
weren’t really ever allowed in the Gorge debate, and still don’t have a voice
in the Gorge, even though they have ceded lands, everything from Cascade Locks
on the Oregon side through the rest of the Gorge is Cascade territory, down to
the Portland Airport, basically.
CH: So,
if you were to branch back into your - going back in time to your parents, and your grandparents, and
your great grandparents, what are they all composed of? I mean, where did they come from?
CW: Well,
my dad’s family were Indians, like I say here, Cascade Indians from the Gorge.
[They] had been here since time immemorial.
We’re from the village that they built the second powerhouse of
Bonneville Dam on top of.
CH: What
were the - were these Chinook Indians?
CW: Yeah,
we’re Upper Chinook. We’re the same people, basically, as the Wascos and the
Wishrams. We lived the village there,
where the Bonneville Dam is still on top of.
It’s where three treaties come together, basically: the Willamette Valley’s, the Grand Ronde
Treaty, the Warm Springs, and the Yakama treaties come together. So my family and all the Cascades were split
up. About half of my family was sent to the Yakama Reservation, and that’s
where my family traditionally has been enrolled. A lot my
family, including Zane [sp?] Jackson, who was the longtime tribal
chairman of Warm Springs, his mom was my aunt, and was from our family. So a lot of the Wascos are people from our
family, and then Grand Ronde is where a lot of my family ended up now.
The
Grand Ronde Reservation was put out towards the coast, because the main purpose
was to try to get all the Indians out of the Willamette Valley, to open up the
farmlands. Since the reservation ended
up over by the coast, we ended up at the - most of us ended up at the Yakama
Warms Springs Reservation. It didn’t
really have to do with who you were, it was where you were when you were
rounded up by the army. So if you were,
say, a Wishram, that’s what kind - [indiscernible] are Wishrams - if you were
rounded up by the army in what’s now Dallesport, then you were sent to the
Yakama reservation, and you Wishram or a Cascade. If that person’s brother was over on The
Dalles side when they were rounded up, he was sent to Warm Springs and called a
Wasco. If you were down on Sauvie’s
Island where we used to get wapato, then you were sent to Grand Ronde and
called a Cascade or something. So we
were split into three different reservations and such, including my own families,
where the...
CH: So
your dad was, was he a one hundred percent Chinook?
CW: No,
his dad was white. He’s half, so -.
CH: And
where did his dad come from?
CW: He
came out - he was Welsh - and came out on the railroad, in the
eighteen-eighties, and then came down the Gorge. I’m not - I don’t remember why he came down, but he came down to homestead
in the Cape Horn [?] area, and met my grandma, who was full-blood Indian. They sort of were married, but at that time
it was illegal in the state of Washington for an Indian to marry a non-Indian,
clear into the nine - I think it was like 1906 or something...
CH: Really?
CW: ...at
that time, so it was a totally illegal marriage. Plus, it took two days to get
to Vancouver to get married. So, people
around there didn’t really formally get married anyway, that much
[laughs]. So, my great grandma, my
grandma - my Indian grandma’s mother is Kalliah. She’s very famous, known as Indian Mary, and
there’s creeks named after her, and roads and such. So she was five years old
when her father was hung by Phil Sheridan and the army. It was such an atrocity that the soldiers
took up a collection of gold, and gave it to my great grandma’s older
sister, Ray Zane [?] Jackson’s mom. She’s the woman in the famous Edward Curtis
photographs of the Indian woman at the mouth Willamette - at Wind River with
the big canoe. That’s my great grandma’s
older sister. The soldiers gave her some
gold, because they felt so guilty about what had been done to her dad. She hung on to that all of her life, and did
a tombstone for her husband in the Cascade cemetery there, when he died, or
some...
CH: And
she lived where?
CW: She
lived at the mouth, by where they now call Home Valley, there at the mouth of
the Wind River. But they were born down
on our family land that’s now part of Frenz Lake National Wildlife Refuge. So when my great great grandpa was hanged, he
was - even though he had signed the Grand Ronde treaty, his wife was Wishram,
so the family was sent to the Yakama reservation. Like one of my Yakama friends that is on
council says, “Indians are like homing pigeons: sooner or later you come back
to the reservation.” So, as soon as she
grew up - she was five when her dad was hanged
by Phil Sheridan - so when she grew up, she came back to the Gorge, and
traded some horses to get back land that’s where what’s now the Frenz Lake
there, just west of the community of Skamania.
Since she was an Indian, she couldn’t legally own land. So white people were filing homestead claims
on top of her land, and I actually have a copy of the bill. Actually, I think I have it in the drawer
there. She had got a contract with the government to take the mail around the
Cascades. When the mail boat would come
up from Portland, they couldn’t get around the Cascades. So she would meet the boat on her horse, and
take the mail around. She was a
government-contracted employee, and so when these whites were trying to steal
her land from her, she went - they had an Indian agency in Vancouver at the
time, that has been I guess there for years.
She went in and met with them. He
got a bill through Congress, signed by Grover Cleveland, that held her land in
trust. That’s been kept in the family,
and so when - and that’s the land that’s
now - that I was telling you about, that I wouldn’t let go to the Forest
Service. We had held it for decades,
waiting for the National Park Service to manage the Gorge, and sell it to the
Park Service. Then when it became
obvious [that it would be part of] the Forest Service, then I got a rider
through Congress, and made it a National Wildlife Refuge. There’s now over a thousand swans a day, on
the lake in the wintertime.
One
of the most exciting things is for - for Chinook people and all of the lower
Columbia native people, wapato was our main starch, was our potato. It’s the tuber that grows in shallow
wetlands, and it was an incredible source of starch. The Indian women would pick - would walk
through the wetlands, and pick it with their toes. [If] you pick it the same
time - the right time of year, it floats to the surface. They would have little, miniature canoes with
them, a few feet long, and then they just put it into that. Cattle grazing wipes it out. It’s really sensitive. When I came back to our land there, in the
mid seventies, there was only one patch of wapato left, and it was in Rooster
Rock State Park. Dave Talbot, who was
then head of the state parks, who is one of the main villains in my mind
[laughs] in the Gorge battle, leased Rooster Rock out to cattle, Rooster Rock
State Park, and wiped out the wapato there.
The biggest patches left had been in Sauvie’s Island. So the rest of
Frenz Lake - once we got our family land, and I got it authorized, then U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service bought the rest of the lake. The brothers that owned most of it had been
leasing it out for duck hunting, and for cattle grazing, to pay the taxes on
it. They were like me, they had ended up
living in California during a lot of their childhood, and came back the same
time I did, to the family land. We were
real close friends, until they tried to build an airport on my wetlands
[laughs], then ran for county commissioner.
But anyway, once we got it into wildlife refuge, we got the cattle off
there. And now the whole north shore of
the lake is solid wapato, a massive patch.
I assume it was probably brought in by the swans, coming up from - in
their poop or something [laughs]. I
assume, because the nearest patch was Rooster Rock, and that had been almost
wiped out. So, wapato, our main plant
now, has come back really great on Frenz Lake.
I was talking to the Wasco chief the other day about when they do a root
feast there, soon, for - it would be the first wapato root feast in probably a
century, or something. So it’s one of
those few success stories in the Gorge.
CH: Now
the wildlife refuge is called the Frenz Lake?
CW: Right,
F-R-E-N-Z. Frenz Lake National Wildlife
Refuge. And it’s the most protected part
of the Gorge. The national wildlife
refuge, we got three of them in the Gorge, and one that I can tell you later,
that was supposed to be - and that’s the most - that’s the best managed lands
now in the Columbia Gorge, are U.S. Fish and Wildlife lands.
CH: Okay,
now going back to your great grandmother, Indian Mary, her husband was who?
CW: Her
husband was - my grandmother’s father was Johnny Stooquin who was Wishram. He was a jockey. He’s actually the grandfather of Chief Johnny
Jackson, who lives at the mouth of the White Salmon River. And then her - my grandma’s younger sister’s
father is Calitz [sp?] in French, so it’s a different husband. She had a different husband for the younger
daughter, but my great grandpa is Johnny Stooquin, who is enrolled in Yakama.
CH: Stuplin?
CW: Stooquin.
S - actually I got our BIA file here [laughs].
CH: Do
you actually have a copy of your family tree?
Did you ever put that together?
CW: Yeah,
I do. Here’s...
CH: Because
I’d love to have that for our file.
CW: Here’s
- yeah, this is how you spell...
CH: Oh
how wonderful.
CW: That’s
how the Yakama BIA file is. We’re like
the Mormons, we have to keep track of everyone in our family for enrollment
[laughs].
CH: Oh,
I see, I see. So this is part of your...
CW: Official
Bureau of Indian Affairs. It’s my legitimacy [laughs].
CH: Okay,
Okay. Stooquin is S-T-O-O-Q-U-I-N.
CW: And
since we have verbal languages, there wasn’t any real spelling, but that’s the
way it’s kind of been spelled down the years.
This is a [Inaudible] that we might be doing things.
CH: [laughs]
So...
CW: Where’d
you go Watson [?] [laughs]?
CH: Right,
exactly. Yeah [laughs]. So, in other words, your - okay, your - this is on your
father’s side?
CW: Right.
CH: Now
- So your great grandmother was Indian Mary.
CW: Right.
CH: And
her husband was...
CW: Johnny
Stooquin.
CH: Johnny
Stooquin.
CW: Right.
CH: Then...
CW: When
my grandma was born. That’s my grandma’s
father. And then she had another
daughter later with her next - with her second husband.
CH: Right.
CW: Who
was Calitz, Henry Will Wyapy [sp?],
CH: And
then your other great great grandparents, on your father’s side?
CW: I
don’t know too much about him. He was -
ironically, my white grandpa - my grandpa that was married Indian grandma, was
born in Pipestone, Minnesota, which is where all the pipes come from, where the
red stone that all the peace pipes in the country come from that quarry. That’s where he was born, and he kind of left
the family. He came out in the
eighteen-eighties, to Tacoma, on the railroad, when they completed the
railroad. Then [he] ended up coming down
to homestead and logged and such in the Gorge, and met my grandma. Like I say, at that time they couldn’t be
married. They lived with my great
grandma, had a cabin there that’s - if you go down Indian Mary Road to the
National Wildlife Refuge, the road makes an S-turn through an orchard, and
that’s my great grandma’s orchard. Until
we sold it to Fish and Wildlife, my dad and I still harvested fruit there every
year. The trees from this was - my great
grandma died in 1906, and the orchard’s still producing. Like I say, until my dad and I made it a
national wildlife refuge, we still ate off the fruit off of those trees, clear
into the - until about ten years ago or so.
That’s were she lived. And then
my fam - my grandparents then homestead - lived with her, Indian Mary, Kalliah,
for a while, and then they homesteaded up in Cape Horn. There’s pictures in my book of that. Then, during the depression ran the Skamania
General Store. People think that’s the
old one that’s there now, but that’s actually the new one. The old one was just to the west of there, on
the land that I lived on when I wrote the book.
My dad was born in the back room of the Skamania General Store, in 1918,
when my parents were - operated the store there.
CH: So
your parents now - your grandparents - your grandfather was a Welshman.
CW: Right,
right.
CH: And
your grandmother was...
CW: Full-blood
Cascade.
CH: Full-blood
Cascade. And her name?
CW: Amanda.
CH: Amanda.
CW: Yeah.
CH: And...
CW: Williams,
of course.
CH: Amanda
Williams.
CW: Yeah,
she was known [?] by Tumove or Stooquin, either way, [?] [in her] pre-Mary
days.
CH: How
did she meet your Welsh grandfather?
CW: I’m
not really sure. She was incredibly
beautiful, as you can see, so I imagine
[laughs] he was probably struck immediately [inaudible]. I don’t really know. Our oral history is so thorough, but it’s one
of those things - I don’t really know other than he came down to the area to
probably log. You know, there’s a lot of
logging, and homesteaders. Like I say,
he came down to the Gorge for work, and met her.
CH: Right.
CW: And
got married, and they ended up having eleven children. It was a cold Gorge - and my dad is the
youngest of the eleven.
CH: So
you’re probably related to almost everybody that’s in there.
CW: Yeah,
exactly [laughs]. About a third of
Skamania County is related to me [laughs].
CH: [laughs]
Right. Okay, so going on your mother’s
side, why don’t you go back there to as far back as you can go.
CW: My
mom’s white, and she’s Scotch Irish, and some English mixture. Her grandmother, my great grandma, started
out on the Oregon Trail when she was five years old. They got off in Nebraska until my great
grandma grew up. Then they moved on, and
came on out to Oregon in the eighteen-eighties, and settled in Dayton, were one
of the early settlers in Dayton. That’s
where my mom was born, and her mom, my white grandma were born in Dayton. It was - kind of talk about a schizophrenic
childhood. Dayton’s where my dad’s great grandpa, Tumove signed the
treaty. That’s where the Grand Ronde was
signed, in Dayton, with Joel Palmer. So
my white great grandma used to live, when I was growing up, on the square in
Dayton, right across the street from Phil Sheridan’s blockhouse. So Phil Sheridan shot my white great great
grandpa [laughs] - or my Indian great great grandpa. So I would be with white great grandma,
playing in the blockhouse [laughs], Phil Sheridan’s blockhouse. I kind of had a schizophrenic childhood,
there.
CH: [laughs]
So, your - going back again, your great grandparents on your mother’s side were
- you had two sets of them.
CW: Right,
and they settled in Dayton, and lived up there.
My mom’s maternal grandmother started out on the Oregon Trail to Oregon,
got off for a little while in Nebraska, and came on out, and lived to see men
on the moon. She died at ninety-nine in
Dayton. Can you imagine, one mind trying
to comprehend wagon trains to spaceships in one lifetime? It’s just mind-boggling.
My
mom - my white grandma was born in Dayton.
Then my white grandpa is from Nebraska, from a farming family near
Hastings, Nebraska. He came out - he
grew up and was kind of the family rebel - and moved out to Oregon. My mom was born in 1921, so he came out in
the teens. Then he worked on the Old
Scenic Highway, here in the Gorge, as
one of the workers on the Old Scenic Highway.
Then he went down and lived in Dayton, working on the locks, the Yamhill
locks there, on the Yamhill River. That’s
where he met my grandma. Which is
ironic, because she wanted to get out of the little town, and get to the big
city, and have some excitement, and he wanted a farm girl [laughs]. That marriage didn’t last too long, [just]
long enough for my mom to get conceived.
Then actually they got divorced, my grandma remarried, and he got killed
in a car wreck. Then she remarried my
grandpa again for a while.
So
anyway my grandma moved into Portland.
My mom was born in Dayton, but my family had some land that my grandpa
bought when he was working on the Old Scenic Highway. It’s the land - my mom thinks it’s where the
high school is in Hood River, but I never checked it out. It’s not really that important. So they used to spend the summers a lot in
Hood River. Growing up, my mom spent a
lot of her summers in Hood River, and has a lot of stories about that. She was living - my mom - in Portland, during
her high - she went to high school in Portland.
It’s now the administrative center in Portland. As I said, my dad was born in the back of the
- and grew up in Skamania, and being a half-blood there, you were totally
between cultures. It was really a rough
time. It was so bad that a lot of his
generation kind of repress stuff. You
know, they forget the bad times, and actually a couple of the older ones just
moved into Portland, or one to San Francisco, and just kind of left their
Indian heritage behind. They were just harassed constantly. Even my dad, who was born in 1918, suffered a
lot of that when they went got to school.
Stevenson was, still is, a very racist place, which is about eleven
miles to the east. But that’s where he
had to go to high school and such. So
the Indian kids and the half breeds would go up there. They’d get rocks thrown at them. They could get Saiwash [sp?] yelled at them,
which was kind of the equivalent of nigger.
It was the Chinook jargon word for Indian. It became a slur towards Indians to
whites. Fortunately, it seems to have
disappeared from - unlike the N-word - it seemed to have disappeared from the
vocabulary here in the Northwest. They
would have rocks thrown at them and such, but they were educated and half
white, so they weren’t - they didn’t really fit in with the Indian community,
too. In fact, when Aunt - Widacreek
[sp?], Aunt Virginia - the woman photographed by Curtis - would come down to
visit my grandma, her niece, they would kind of be embarrassed, because she was
what they used to refer to as a blanket Indian.
She was a traditionalist, that made no attempt to assimilate into the
white world. So they were kind of
embarrassed , you know [laughs], that a blanket Indian - that they’re relatives. They were hung out between cultures. There was a whole community around Skamania
of half-breed people that didn’t really fit in, really, to each culture. The older ones really had it bad, I mean to
the point where the don’t even - won’t talk even. There’s two of my aunts left, still alive,
that wouldn’t even talk about [it]. But
the younger ones were very proud of them [?].
My dad and the next few were just - even though they got harassed - they
were Indian period, and made no bones about it, and were very proud of it. The older ones were - really had a lot of it
beaten out of them. It was a pretty
rough time there.
My
dad ended up - right before he went into the Navy - was working in the
shipyards in Portland. He actually - his
first job out of high school was working out at Bonneville Dam, which was built
on top of his village. It didn’t last -
that didn’t last long. It’s kind of one
of those little ironies of life. So, he
went into Portland and worked in the shipyards there, the iron works. My mom was - had just gotten out of high
school, and was babysitting for one of my aunts, who ended up marrying Jim
Walker who’s - I think they - the Oregon Historical Society, I understand, has
a whole section on him. He’s invented
model airplanes, remote control. He had
American Junior Aircraft Company. He was
the founder of that. He’s the only
person in my family that ever had money.
He’d do these inventions. He, for
instance - he had a lot of nerve problems - you know, a very hard-working
guy. The doctor told him he needed a
hobby like model trains. His business
was making model airplanes, so he filled up his whole basement with model
trains. His friends would come over and
they’d get drunk, and wreck his trains up.
So he invented this switch that would automatically align itself as the
train came, so they wouldn’t wreck it. [He] ended up selling it to Lionel for a
fortune. He became very wealthy, the
only people in our family that were wealthy [laughs].
CH: Really?
CW: They
had three daughters, my aunt and Jim Walker.
My mom was babysitting for them, to try to get enough money to get to
school. So my dad came over to visit his
older sister one day, and their youngest daughter is one of my favorite cousins
- dragged my dad in to meet my mom, and said, “this is your future wife here
[laughs], meet her.” So that’s how my
parents met.
CH: Was
it actually kind of arranged like that?
CW: No,
no. It was just - the young girl decided that her Uncle Clyde and my mom, her
babysitter, were a perfect couple [laughs], and informed them that they were
going to marry each other. So it was
arranged by like a five year old [laughs].
CH: Your
mother’s name was what?
CW: Betty.
CH: Betty.
CW: Betty
June Defanbaun [sp?]. That was her
father’s name, Defanbaun. He’s the one
that came out from Nebraska and worked on the Old Scenic Highway. Her maiden name was Rowley. My mom’s grandma, Ida Rowley, is the one that
settled in - one of the early families in Dayton. Rowley’s kind of the family name
there...
CH: And
your father...
CW: R-O-W-L-E-Y.
CH: L-E-Y.
CW: Yeah.
R-O-W-L-E-Y. It’s one of the early
families in Dayton.
CH: And
your father’s name was?
CW: A.
Clyde - Arthur Clyde Williams.
CH: Arthur
Clyde.
CW: He
goes by Clyde - went by Clyde. He past
away a few years ago. My mom’s still
alive.
CH: And
so, he was - his father was white...
CW: Yeah.
CH: And
his mother was...
CW: Was
full-blooded.
CH: Full-blooded
Indian.
CW: Yeah. His father’s Charles Otis Williams, the Welsh
man. That’s who I’m named after.
CH: Oh
I see, I see.
CW: But
Chuck - but he went by Charlie. Chuck is
a Chinook word for river. So that’s why
I’ve always gone by Chuck. A lot of the
rivers like the Klickitat and White Salmon, that are wild - they’re National
Wild and Scenic rivers, I was the impetus behind. So my nickname at Warm Springs - a lot of
Indian country - is Wild-And-Scenic Chuck - is my Indian nickname. Hell, I’m neither as wild nor as scenic as I
used to be [laughs]. Pollution over the
years, erosion, is something that [laughs} -.
CH: So
then your father then, he moved into Portland during the war years?
CW: Yeah,
to work in the shipyards, before he went into the Navy. That’s when he met my
mom. So I was born in Portland, because
of that, in a hospital that no longer exists.
I can’t even remember the name of it.
CH: Really? It’s...
CW: I
could find that out, but mom still remembers.
But it’s one that no longer exists.
CH: So
you were born when then?
CW: In
forty-three.
CH: 1943.
CW: July,
twenty, forty-three. War baby. My dad had just gone in the Navy. So then we - the first two years of my life,
we lived in, like twenty places. I think
that’s one reason I’m so nomadic [laughs], I’ve been so nomadic. I’ve moved to San Diego, San Francisco, and
all over the place, when my dad was in the Navy. And then, after he got out of the Navy, we
ended up in Springfield, there near Eugene.
That’s where I went to first and second grade, was in Springfield.
CH: I
see. Do you have brothers and sisters?
CW: I’ve
got a younger sister, whose three year - Em [????], who lives in Santa Rosa,
California.
So
when I was in third grade - my dad was able, after got out of the Navy - only
because of the GI bill - was able to got school. [He] was one of those people who probably
would never have been able to got to college, if it hadn’t been for the GI
bill. He started at Washington State,
and was going to take business classes.
He scored the highest score they had ever scored on a math test. The college says, “Hmm, you ought to think
about engineering.” So he ended up going
to Oregon State [inaudible]. So we lived
there - I guess the first two years of my life was when we traveled in the
Navy, so it would have been until I started first grade. We lived in Corvallis there, when I was like
three and four, in that - three, four, five, somewhere in that - while my dad
was going to school. Then we moved to Springfield.
Even
though my dad has an engineering degree - a mechanical and electrical
engineering degree - he, being Indian, it wasn’t real easy to get jobs. So we ended up moving to Petaluma,
California. It’s about an hour north of
San Francisco. So that’s where I grew -
from third grade through high school, that’s where I grew up. About the time I was getting out of high
school, my parents divorced. My dad
moved back to the Gorge, and I ended up back here later. My sister and my mom still live in Sonoma
County. So [it’s] kind of a second home.
CH: Well...
CW: My
mom’s one of those people that was born in Oregon and moved to California.
CH: [laughs]
The other way around.
CW: The
reverse migration, yeah.
CH: What
was your father’s occupation?
CW: He
was an engineer.
CH: Where?
CW: Well,
from third grade on, he primarily worked at a company called Crestview, and did
a lot of inventions. He helped the -
what do you call it? - the ion, negative ion generator. He was one of the co-inventors of that, and
invented these Christmas tree stands that went around and played music. We used to have all this stuff in the house,
testing all the time, growing up.
CH: And
-.
CW: But
like all Indians he came back home - so he came back to the Gorge. About the time I was getting out of high
school, they divorced. So he worked for
Tidlan [sp?] Machine Company in Washougal, when he came back.
CH: What
year would he have come back?
CW: I
graduated in sixty-one, so it was in - he actually - they divorced in
sixty-one, but he lived in San Rafael for about a year before he came back to
the Gorge. So he would have back in
sixty-three probably.
CH: And
he came back to - and lived in Washougal, then.
CW: Yeah. That’s where my wife - his parents moved to
Washougal at the end of their lives, so they’re buried. That’s where I remember my grandparents more,
is living in Washougal, right under the tower there. They’re buried along the Washougal River,
there. All the rest of my Indian family, at what was called the Cascade -.
[End of Tape 1, Side 1]
January 22, 1999
Tape 1, Side 2
CH: Okay,
go ahead. You were talking about your family was a - the rest of the family was
buried.
CW: Right.
So on my - when my dad’s parents retired, they moved into Washougal, and lived
there. My oldest - my dad’s oldest
sister worked in the mill there at Pendleton.
So we used to hang around there when we were kids, back when in the
seconds shop, you got really good deals, before the tourist buzz found it
[laughs]. We got most of our clothes
from the Pendleton Wool Mill seconds shop there in Washougal, that only locals
went to...
CH: But
that would have been after you got out of high school then, and came back?
CW: No,
my dad’s father died when I was real young, and my grandma died when I was nine
or ten. So that would have been - she
would have died in the early fifties.
They moved into their - I think in the forties. They still lived in Skamania County during
the thirties. So some time in the -
around forty probably - is when they moved into Washougal, basically their
retirement years - when they retired.
CH: But
you basically grew up in Petaluma.
CW: Right.
CH: I
mean, prior to your first couple of years of grade school, then you went back
down...
CW: Yeah,
I grew up from third grade through high school in Petaluma.
CH: And
did you come up here during that time?
CW: Oh
yeah. It was every summer. It was family - yeah. We spent a lot of time. We’d come up for Christmases and it was - we
were kind of like the hillbillies that moved to the North, Chicago and Detroit,
but we’re - I can’t remember what they call it, but that road that goes between
Chicago and Detroit to the - [to] Kentucky and Tennessee is just lined with
people commuting back. We were that way. We were just all - it was with both my families,
being from here, all the relatives were...
CH: So
you would go where? When you came back
up here during your summers, where were you...
CW: Well,
we’d go to Dayton to see my - we’d go to Portland to see my maternal grandma,
and Dayton to see my maternal great grandma, and then Washougal to see my
grandparent - my dad’s parents, and then we owned the land where the Skamania
General Store was, in Skamania. That was
always like - we always spent a lot of time there, in the huckleberry. You know, that was kind of the roots to my
life in a lot of ways. It was our home
that we always went back to - kind of our spiritual home or something, was the
land we owned there. So [I] spent a lot
of summertime there, chasing bears. It
was like a really fun time. Then we had
other aunts and uncles. My dad had
eleven older brothers and sisters. So
it spread from The Dalles to Portland, basically [laughs].
CH: At
that - during that period that you were growing up, say by the time you got through
with high school in Petaluma, where did you - I mean, do you feel there were
any major episodes that happened in your life, major events that somehow
affected the way you - decisions you made in terms of which way to go and all
that?
CW: Well,
my Indian heritage had a big thing, because even when I was young - my mom was
telling me when I was visiting her at Christmas. Well, I started in Petaluma, and they went to
a field trip, to the Sonoma Mission - this was when I was in third grade, my
first year there. They started to take
the class into the Phil Sheridan Room at the Sonoma Mission, and I refused to
go in. The teacher says, “how come?” and
I says, “because he was a jerk. He hung
my great great grandpa after - he was an Indian chief.” She thought, this kid - being light-skinned,
blue eyes - she thought this kid is probably a little bad [laughs]. So she - and she knew my mom, who was white,
but she didn’t - she never met my dad, so she didn’t realize he was
Indian. She calls up my mom that night
and says, “let me tell you the story your son’s told us.” And my mom said, “oh, that’s all true.” So I was - you know that’s always been my
identification. My Indian grandma even
said, even though I was light-skinned I was the most Indian mentally, of all
her grandkids. I was the one that was
Indian through and through. So, I don’t
what the - like an Indian that acts like a white we call apples. I don’t what the - what’s white on the
outside and red on the inside [laughs].
I don’t what there is to describe me, but I’ve always grown up Indian,
proud of it. That’s always been my
identification, ever since I can remember.
It’s just something where it’s just that’s the way that I was.
CH: So
what did you do when you got out of high school, then?
CW: Well,
we didn’t have enough money for me to go to college. So I went to junior college for a year, at
the college of Marin, near San Rafael. [I] was taking engineering. My dad was - I kind of have a unique family
anyway. I tell people, “it’s no wonder
I’m a mess. I was raised by a
conservative Indian father who was fascinated by technology and engineering,
and a radical left-wing WASP mother who loved art and nature. So my mom was always the one that took me
fishing and such [laughs]. It was bound
that I wouldn’t turn out too normal, I guess...
CH: You
were there for two years?
CW: Where
was -? Oh one year. One year, and was working at a gas station,
and was usually out drunk and partying most of the time. But my dad was an engineer, and so I think I
just - probably because of that, was doing engineering. I was really lucky, because he was having me
doing drafting, mechanical drawing by the time I could walk. [It was] just one
of those things I kind of picked up on.
When I was in high school, I would do my friends’ - and college - math for them. You know, I could go into a math class, and I
would be out drunk the night before, and I’d get a hundred percent. It was one of those things. And I always - when they give you the
aptitude test, I would always score a hundred percent on engineering and on
art. It was one of those dual brain -
you know I was kind of lucky that I have both sides - kind of max on both sides
of the brain. But I never - growing up
in the fifties like I did - I never had any concept that you could be an
artist. That that was - that that could
be your primary profession. That was
something you did on the weekend. Those
Eisenhower years - I don’t think I ever comprehended, probably until I was in
my early twenties, that art was something you could do as your life.
CH: Yet,
during that time, I think of the fifties and the early sixties as being - your
being so close to California. That was
really the center of The Beat culture, and the whole North Beach, San Francisco
scene...
CW: Right,
I was in the middle of all of that. And
I really - on the negative side of
growing up in California is I missed so much
of the - of my Indian culture. I
might get to a pow wow in the summer or something, but it wasn’t something that
was daily - part of my life that it would of been if I was up here. On the flip side, I am really glad that I
grew up in the Bay Area during my formative years. I was there during the beatnik thing. It was in the middle of that. Later, I was already really grown up and such, yet I was kind of a hippie, but I
didn’t know what I was until the hippies came along. It was one of those, “oh, okay. That’s what I [laughs] - that’s what I
am.”
CH: Would
you say you were more a part of the kind of beatnik thing that was happening?
CW: Yeah.
Yeah, very definitely.
CH: What
kind of attitudes do you have, or what kinds of things did you do, that would
reflect that beatnik part of your nature?
CW: Well,
really getting into art, going to Jazz clubs.
That’s what really got me interested in art. It was more, at that point, surrealism, and
that was - you know, to a young person, Dollence [sp?] and Dali, and such. I used to hang out in the coffee shops, and
hung out in Furlengetti’s bookstore, and I was - played pool Mike’s pool hall
half the night, and smoking stuff before other people were [laughs], and
stuff. So it was a very - I was graduating just when all the radical -
the be-ins and stuff were happening on - arrested at Berkeley. It just totally changed my life. As I said, I’m really glad I’m back home in
Oregon, but I’m really glad my formative years were in the Bay Area. So I’m very thankful for that.
So
I went to junior college for a year, taken eng - taking calculus and such, and
I didn’t really - was not enjoying it, and...
CH: Why? Why weren’t you enjoying it?
CW: Oh,
I just didn’t - I wasn’t into school. I
wanted to party and have a good time.
So, I got a job as a junior engineer -
so I decided to drop out - as I said I was just going to junior college,
because then it was ten dollars a semester, [unintelligible] back in California
schools where - in the Brown days. You
could go to college for ten dollars a year.
Like I say, I was having to work in a gas station to support
myself. That got real old, so I decided
to drop out for a year, and work for a year, and then go back to school.
CH: That
would have been sixty-three?
CW: Well,
I graduated in Petaluma High in sixty-one, so I went one year, so it would have
been sixty-two.
I
got a job in Sausalito for a big engineering firm, Johnson Controls, as kind of
a junior engineer. I was actually
somewhat trusted. I was the
least-qualified person to apply for this job.
The guy that hired me said he’d just had a feeling that I was the
person, and hired me. Within the end of
the year, I was a full-blown engineer, and people with degrees [were] working
for me. [I] ended up doing that for six years, and never went back to
school. So I worked three years for
Johnson Controls, and then three years Robert Shaw [sp?} Controls.
CH: And
what kind of work were they doing?
CW: Design,
and I was an instrumentation engineer. I
designed a lot of the early NASA computer systems, which is ironic because I
went - this is kind of future in light, but I spent seven years camping, once,
totally after I’d been an engineer, and totally deprogrammed my mind of all
technology. When my Gorge book came, my taxes got complicated enough, a had
to get a calculator. I couldn’t even
work it. My dad and I just - you know,
worked on early-ass [?] computers. I
just deprogrammed my mind so much I couldn’t even [laughs] - I could fix my old
Econoline van, and that was - and my cameras, and that was it. Now I’ve got about four computers, so I’ve
been corrupted again.
So
I got a job, like I say, in Sausalito with Johnson Controls. It turned out to be - in terms of Vietnam, it
turned out to be a lifesaver. I was
drafted six times, and I was doing NASA work.
I had a deferment that I was essential to the national defense. It was when they had just put Sput- you know,
the Russians had just sent up Sputnik, so they were on this big push. Since I did NASA - I was a contract worker,
doing contract work for NASA, so they couldn’t draft me. I got drafted six times, and worked three
years for Johnson Controls, and moved to San Francisco. Then I went to work for Robert Shaw. Then they - then I went to Houston for a
year, and worked on the manned spacecraft center in Houston. Then I went over - I hated Houston. In fact, they paid me hardships - the British
Embassy there paid people in Houston a hardship pay, and so I demanded and got
hardship pay [laughs]...
CH: Sure.
CW: ...For
being there. So they paid me back by
letting me live the next year in New Orleans.
I worked on the Mississippi test facility there. I don’t know if you
remember, in the Goldwater-Johnson years, there was the big campaign thing over
how Ladybird’s land had been turned into this NASA facility - so that’s where I
worked. About two weeks in Mississippi,
being a shaggy - not a longhair like I am now, but for the times, you know, the
Beatles. This is the Beatle Years. I had Beatle hair, which was unheard of, and
was in my early twenties. I decided that
wasn’t - Mississippi was not for me. I
was the boss. I had 150 people working
for me, and my boss was in Virginia, so I just moved into the French
Quarter. This was in sixty-four,
sixty-five. And in the South then, if
you were in the French Quarter, you could do anything you wanted. You could be a transvestite, whatever you
want, hippie, beatnik. You know, there
weren’t hippies yet then, quite, so most people called me a beatnik. But I was this high level engineer. So I lived in the French Quarter in New
Orleans for a year, and then commuted out a couple of days a week to the
project. I had 150 people working for
me, was running multi-million dollar projects, would be in negotiations with
the Army Corps of Engineers for massive contracts, and I was just this kid,
[unintelligible] just take them to the cleaners if they just let down their
guard. This was just some kid, clean
them out.
CH: What
were the projects - what kind of projects were you working on at the time?
CW: Well,
when I was in the Bay Area, it was mostly heating and air conditioning systems
and such. In NASA - you’ve seen, what’s
that, Alphaville, what’s the Gedart [sp?] film where the fascists take
over the world, and they have this control center with all the walls covered
with dials.
CH: Oh
yeah.
CW: So
that’s what I used to design, those [laughs], the walls covered with
instrumentation systems, and such. At
NASA, I was designing the instrumentation systems for the manned spacecraft
center, which is like a massive campus, just these buildings. It was one of those really political - where
Brown and Root [sp?] were buddies with Johnson, and they donated the land to
NASA, but they owned all the land around it.
They become quad - you know, billionaire, big massive rip-off - but
anyway that’s where I’d work. So I was
designing these instrumentation systems for the all the NASA building. I would take all the inputs and stuff, and
feed them into a central computer system, and bring those back - when printers
were IBM typewriters that were hooked into the computer, and the computer room
was about this size or something, with these massive computers. When I worked at the Mississippi Test
Facility, it was the instrumentation systems for the - it was the static tests
they did on the NASA rockets, before they sent them. Before they sent them to Cape Canaveral,
they’d send them there. They had these
massive towers that bolt them onto, and then test fire them, but they were
bolted down so they couldn’t raise up. I
designed those. Like one of them had a
junction box. It had a million wires
coming into it, and I had to design a system where electricians could just -
even electricians could go in and hook up a million wires in a junction box
about the size of this room, and have them come out right.
Then
I went from - so I got really tired of - New Orleans was fun for about six
months, and the food I still miss, but I was ready for the West Coast. So I said, “I’m going back to the West Coast
or I quit.” I ended up going up to
Seattle. It was when I was starting to
get really political. I was - I did a
lot of Boeing work, subcontracting, helped design a lot of the instrumentation
for the 747 assembly plant, which, along with the Cape Canaveral building, one
the two biggest buildings in, I think, the world, definitely the country.
CH: At
Boeing.
CW: Yeah,
up in Everett there, the big 747 facility. I did a lot of the design work on
that. But I was getting really political
at the time.
CH: This
would have been when?
CW: I
moved to Seattle in sixty - I lived there in sixty-six and sixty-seven. So I was like - went to Houston in
sixty-four, went to New Orleans in sixty-five, went to Seattle in sixty-six,
and was there for a year and a half. Then, I
was fighting the SST. I was the only
engineer in Seattle that was against the SST, and had become a real anti-war
activist, and was always in political trouble all the time. That was kind of when hippies came
along. There were people that were
running on the Seattle city council on the total - their only platform was
to go on the UW campus and beat the shit
out of all the hippies, and so [laughs] it was real, real polarized. That’s when I really got politicized. So I moved back to the Bay Area, about the
beginning of sixty-eight, and got my last draft deferment. When the first time I had been drafted, if
you refused induction, you got - you spent about twenty years in jail. By the time I got my sixth one over, people
were burning down draft centers and such.
I moved back to the Bay Area, San Francisco, working for Robert
Shaw. By then, I was working on sewage
treatment plants, because politically, there was almost nothing else - I was a
good enough engineer, I could have any job I wanted, but I wouldn’t work on
most things. So I was ending up working
on things like sewage, recycling plants, sewage and such [laughs]. When I got my last deferment, I called the
draft board, and they said, “we don’t even want to hear from you.” That was the one that carried me until I was
twenty-six and they wouldn’t draft me.
So I quit engineering, and went into the Peace Corps. I decided I’d serve - I’d gotten out of the
service. I figured I wasn’t going to go
to Vietnam, but I definitely felt like I should serve my country. So I spent a year in the Peace Corps, and
ended up in the Dominican Republic. Then
I quit once, and then got kicked out once, and then rejoined, and then got
kicked out the same time the head of the Peace Corps did. This is when Nixon came in and they fired -
about a third of the Peace Corps was - deselected was the term they used for
me, since I was still in the program.
Like I say, I quit once because I was in the Dominican Republic. They, both Johnson and the Dominican government
wanted the Peace Corps there for the political thing, but they didn’t want me
to do anything. I was in the worst
ghetto in Santo Domingo, a place that hated Americans. It was where the Marines were. If you went into the rural parts, they
idolized Americans, because their idea was these care packages that the U.S.
sent - and that was their idea of America.
The minute you went into the city ghettos, where the Marines had been,
they hated Americans, but they’d always say, “well, we love you, but we hate
Americans,” or something.
I
was supposed to be doing community organizing, and if I got caught speaking to
more than two people at once, the police would break it up for being a
communist cell block meeting. It was
kind of hard to do community organizing [laughs] when you couldn’t talk to more
than two people. I helped build a school
for the neighborhood, and stuff - and did some stuff, but I really wasn’t in a
position where I could really accomplish much.
I learned a lot. I mean it was
incredible personal growth. I got
dysentery, and weighed less than a hundred pounds when I got home, and was
really sick. But I learned a lot. Like almost everyone that goes in the Peace
Corps, you come home without any materialism.
You’re in a culture where people live in poverty you can’t even conceive
of, and they’re so much happier than most people in the United States. They’re people that have nothing, and they’re
so easy-going and happy, that it really - I came home really very
anti-materialistic.
CH: So
you were deselected from the Peace Corps then for what reason?
CW: Well,
I quit in the Dominican Republic, because I couldn’t get anything done. I was in training to go to Afghanistan, and
that’s when I was deselected. It was
just for being too radical. I was like a
threat - you know, I was probably a trouble maker. So I say, a third of the Peace Corps got
kicked out that week, including Jack Baum [sp?], the director. This is when Nixon came in.
So
the first time I quit, the Dominican Republic, and then I was supposed to go to
Afghanistan, and got kicked out the day before we went to Afghanistan. But in the process of that, I was hitchhiking
through El Paso, one time, and was eating down in the barrio there, in this
little Mexican Restaurant. Some young
Chicano guys came in that had long hair, and they had never seen anyone - this is sixty-eight or nine, in there - and
they had never seen anyone other than them that had long hair. They all had long hair, but they were the
only guys in west Texas. They were just
- couldn’t believe here was some guy - and so anyway I became buddies with -
you know, I was talking with them. They
seemed liked nice kids. They were like
fifteen to twenty. One of them invited
me to stay in the projects with his family.
So I stayed about a week with a family there in the projects. It turned out they had been - they were the
biggest, most notorious gang in west Texas [laughs]. They were just straight kids to me. So it turned out, they had - there had been a
Catholic priest - this is in the Segunda Barrio there in El Paso, right on the
border there. You don’t know which side
of the Mexican border - I mean there were conditions there that were just
appalling. (We probably want to get more
salad bar than where we were.)
CH: So
are we going?
CW: Yeah,
yeah. So I met these young Chicano guys
that turned out the biggest gang in west
Texas, and next to the Shamrocks, the most feared gang. There had been a Catholic priest there, in
the barrio there, this really poor part.
Say, this is poverty beyond anything someone in the West Coast had
been. They had these apartments there
called the Bisidios [sp?]. They’d be
about - there were massive rats and there were no indoor plumbing, no
electricity, and there’d be about two outhouses and a water faucet between
these rows of apartments. [It was] just poverty like I have never seen. All the slum lords were the mayor and the
county health inspector, and people.
They loved it when the kids were fighting each other, and not political.
So
this Catholic priest there had gotten all the other gangs, like, a big
brother. He was some local Mexican guy
who ran a grocery store, or something, that the kids would go to. And this gang was the biggest, most
notorious, and they weren’t about to have a big brother, but they kind of
missed it. So when I left El Paso, they
said, “well, if you want to come back and work with us, you know, you’re the
only person crazy enough to be our big brother.” [laughs]. So - and they were great kids - so when I got
kicked out of the Peace Corps - and I still wanted to do another year. I had kind of set aside two years to do
service to the country. So I joined
Vista on a condition that I went to El Paso and worked with them. I did, I spent a year with them, and ended
all the gang wars, and got them all GEDs, and jobs. It was just a - really a success. Unlike the Peace Corps, where I learned a
lot, I did a lot. I really did a
lot. I had another Mexican friend there,
that had a similar position with the other major gang, we ended all the gang
wars, and politicized them. They started
marching on the mayor’s house. I ended
up getting run out of there, because - it was incredible, because, being light
skinned, I could walk through that ghetto anytime, day or night, and nobody
would ever mess with me. They knew
they’d be face-down in the Rio Grande even if they [laughs]. So I had this incredible power on one level,
but I had all the city fathers after me.
I had stakeouts on my apartment.
They’d search people coming in and out of my house. It was really heavy duty and politici- we set
up a draft counseling center. El Paso is
fifty percent Mexican and white, and ninety-five percent of the casualties were
from the Chicanos. They were using the
machismo to - you know, even people that - because they were the sole supporter
of the mother or something, couldn’t be drafted. So we set up a draft counseling center in the
middle of the barrio. That went over
real big [laughs], and ended up having to skip town in the middle of the night.
[I] had a contract out on me by the John Birch Society.
CH: Contract? What kind of contract?
CW: To
kill me, so [laughs].
CH: How’d
you hear about that?
CW: It
was amazing, because we had moles. So
many people there - we knew everything the cops did. We knew who they were going to bust. I mean, we had people in positions, and we
knew everything going on. So people came
and told me who it was, and who the contract - you know, and everything on
me. It was really ironic because it was
- I had done all these really radical things, and I had about two months to go
on my year. I had accomplished -
amazingly had accomplished everything I wanted, and, been in a lot of trouble. So I said I’m gonna do - I think I’ll just set
up a medical clinic. It was kind of like
Watts, where if anyone got sick there, they’d have to take up two or three
hours on a bus to get to a hospital. So
I set up - it was when free clinics were a big thing - I’d set up a free clinic
there. That got me in more trouble than
anything else. The AMA turned out to be
synonymous with the John Birch Society.
I went to them to get their approval, and they said, “this is a commune. This is socialized medicine. Absolutely not.” So they got the county to block me getting a
permit. This is where I learned hardball
politics. One of our helpers was a
former hooker, and she - do you know what “smokers” [?] are? They’re big in the South. The politicians, they vote for blue laws and
all this, and then they go have these parties with hookers, and they’re just
big drunks with hookers. She had a
picture of her sitting naked at a smoker on the end of the county
commissioner’s lap [laughs]. So I went
into my meeting with them. “No, we’re
not going to allow this to happen.” “You
might want to reconsider,” and he rented me one of his buildings for a dollar
[laughs], and gave me my permit. So then
the AMA banned all their doctors, that they’d lose all their hospital
privileges if they helped out. We
couldn’t get any doctors, so when David Harris, Joan Baez’s husband, was up in
Latuna, which is just outside of El Paso.
So I went up there and met with them.
Some of the doctors, they didn’t have to have hospital privileges,
because they only worked in the prison.
So they broke the boycott and came down.
Then some of the Chicanos doctors started - but that’s when the AMA - or
the John Birch Society put a contract out on me [laughs].
CH: So
you just left, then.
CW: Yeah. I was living with a Mexican woman there, and
we went down to Big Bend ironically.
Nixon later - it’s an armed camp now, but at that time, it was the only
place in Texas [where] you could do anything you wanted. I mean, it was just a total free area. So we slipped out in the middle of the night,
and for two weeks went camping down there, then slipped back in, in the middle
of the night, and packed up our stuff, and headed out to my mom’s [laughs].
CH: Really? So then you went back to California, then.
CW: Yeah,
and then I went camping for - well, I had never gotten a degree, so this was -
I was what, about twenty-seven then.
This was seventy, so, yeah it would be about twenty-seven, and I had
never gotten a degree. So I had - well,
through Vista, they put away some money away for you. It’s not a lot, but for me, it was. I bought an old Econoline van for $500 in an
auction, that had been confiscated hauling pot across the Rio Grande. So, I applied to Berkeley and San Francisco
State. I decided to go back and get a
degree in art.
My
girlfriend and I took all our stuff, dropped it off at my mom’s and went
camping for a year. She had some savings
and I had my money from Vista, so we went camping in the National parks. [We]
went all the way around the country in the van, and had a great year, and came
back. Like I say, I applied to San
Francisco State and Berkeley, in their photo classes. So I went down to register, and was still
debating which one, and we got in the middle of the Golden Gate Bridge, and I
just - I had been in the woods for a year.
I said, “I can’t deal with this,” and made a U-turn and went up to
Sonoma State. “Will you let me in?” They said sure, but they had no photo - they
had motion picture, so I majored. But
they were just starting this kind of hippie school where you didn’t have
grades, and called “Expressive Art.” I
went to school and camping two years, and got a degree in art while I was
camping. [I] taught myself photography and worked on a book, that was kind of my
graduation project.
I
had bought a house in San Francisco when I was an engineer. I sold it and
bought one up in the woods, so...
CH: What
part of San Francisco was your house?
CW: Up
on Twin Peaks. It was a little
cabin. It was on twenty-sixth and - It was like there were all these houses
right under the park there, and it was a little cabin up there that would be
worth a fortune, and I sold it for like eighteen grand or something now
[laughs]. But it was like a little ca -
it had skunks and raccoons living in the yard, I mean it was just classic. Nature escaping before its time was not
appreciated by the mayor [laughs], because of the skunks and stuff.
So
I sold it and bought a place in Occidental.
I hadn’t worked for a year. [I] went camping that year, came back and
went to school, and ran out of money. So
I got a job as a carpenter. The third
day of that - I hadn’t been working for a year, so I just sold the house and
went camping for another six years with that money. So I lived in my van from seventy to
seventy-seven. I got my degree from
Sonoma State, in art. During the process
I was kind of concentrating on parks. I
was teaching myself - I was a painter. I
had always been a painter. So I was
backpacking - I was camping, during those seven years, at least eleven months a
year, and backpacking at least 200 days a year.
I was skinny, and had the most wonderful life you can ever imagine. It taught me - but you couldn’t paint while
you were backpacking really, I did oils.
So I took up photography. It was
a friend of mine, a woman I was living with when I was going into the Peace
Corps, and she got a job - the airlines that used to run the CIA stuff, I can’t
remember. It was a bogus airline that
was a front for the CIA. [Air America ?]
CH:
Was it Evergreen?
CW: No,
but it was a similar type of thing. It
was - I can’t remember the name - but it was basically, supposedly a legit
airline, but it was really a CIA front.
So she got a job as a stewardess for a couple of months and bought me
all my Nikon equipment in Japan, and got her stereo, and quit. So I got a good camera going into the Peace
Corps. You know, it wasn’t a Nikon, but
-. So, then when I went camping, I taught myself photography, and ended up
mostly in the parks. I kept finding - I
had gotten very political by that time, and I worked for the Sierra Club
actually one summer - I can’t remember -.
CH: So
you then you had finished your degree at Sonoma.
CW: Right.
CH: And
your degree was then - what is that?
CW: Art. It was a B.A. in art. It was called Expressive Arts.
CH: Expressive
Arts.
CW: Yeah. And I’d get a book on the national parks that
the transcript and the pictures were my graduation project and such. During the process of doing that - I was
really politically active at the time, and actually worked one summer there in
seventy-one for the Sierra Club, and got arrested in an anti-war
demonstration. [I] spent some time in
jail, and [had] a big long political trial.
[End of Tape 1, Side 2]
Tape 2, Side 1
CH: ...interview
with Chuck Williams at his gallery in The Dalles. The interviewer, for the Oregon Historical
Society, is Clark Hansen. The date is
1/22/99, and this is Tape 2, Side 1.
So,
go ahead.
CW: So,
I spent from 1970 to seventy-seven most of my time camping in parks, and did
get a college degree during that time. I
was really politically active, and so I was with Friends of the Earth. I was a big admirer of David Brower and
actually worked in the Sierra Club. Like
most of the lower-down employees, hated that he was kicked out of the Sierra
Club and admired him. So, Friends of the
Earth was my favorite group, before I was involved with them. When I was traveling along the parks, I’d
keep coming across all these problems going on, and I’d be feeding all the
information to Friends of the Earth.
Finally, I was there visiting - I think it was seventy-five, during my
camp - I was in seeing my mom, and I went in to see him. Dave Brower took me out to lunch. Classic David Brower, [he] says, “you know more
about the national parks than anyone we know of, let’s make you a job.” So they
created a new job at Friends of the Earth.
It was the national parks representative. So I did it half time, naively thinking I
could do political work half time, and be an artist half time. If you have a heart - a lot of these yuppy
professionals nowadays don’t have problems doing two careers. But if you really care about it within a
month you’re [doing it] every minute you’re alive. It ruined my photo - I had just had my first
Sierra Club covers, and autumn - I just made it as a photographer. [I]
basically lost that career.
I
was doing really good, and I was in really heady times. I was the national parks expert for Friends
of the Earth there until - from seventy-five until eighty, and left them in mid
eighty, in part because of what was being done to Brower, when he was being
forced out, and in part because I wanted to concentrate on the Gorge, not
knowing I was going to be forced out within months, out of my own fight. So, I ended up being the national parks
expert for Friends of the Earth, and for very little money. But the condition was that I pretty much got
to do whatever I wanted. I didn’t have a
direct bo- I worked directly for Brower, which made some of the structure
uncomfortable. So I’d spend about a
month a year lobbying in D.C., and the rest of the time, I was out in the parks
camping, and doing political work. It
was a really important situation because, even by then, a lot of the
environmental groups, and the people on both sides of issues with parks were
city people, that didn’t have much idea of what was going on the ground. Being a rural person, I was able to go into a
place, like Isle Royale National Park, the biggest island on Lake
Superior. There was a big controversy
there over the commercial fisherman. It
sounded horrible. They were going to
allow commercial fishing in a national park.
So all the environmentalists in D.C., that worked on these, were totally
against it. I went up there, and met
with them. It turned out there was about
a dozen of these neat old guys that were - had been fishing all their life
around there, and didn’t hardly catch anything.
It was just a way of life.
Basically, all it was doing was granddaddying them in [allowing ?] which
was that they weren’t hurting anything.
So I was able - by being there, working with them, I was able to work
out a compromise. I was doing that kind
of work all over the country.
Then,
when I was working on a book - my first involvement with David Brower was, I
working on a book on the political history of the national parks. It was going to be - there’s a famous book,
I.S.E., came out years ago - it came out in the forties. It was a real political history of the
national parks, of all the dirt and such.
But everything since then had been sanitized. Things like the fact that the only national
park that has cows grazing in them were the cows that belonged to Senator
Clifford Hansen, who was the head of the Park Subcommittee. So I was working on
a book, on the national parks, for Friends of the Earth, and was living in my
van, driving around the country. My van
got so full of files that I didn’t have hardly any place to sleep. I had the book nearly done, three fourths
done, and needed to sit down. My dad got real [indiscernible], at the end of
seventy-six, my dad got pretty sick here.
I was really [knowing ?] when to come up, so I moved back to our family
land at the beginning of seventy-seven, and had been watching the Gorge - you
know it was ancestral - and watching. It
was really miraculous that the Gorge hadn’t been destroyed. It was so close. But there was this whole thing - in the
Nixon/Ford years there had been a whole backlog of federal parks bottled up in
Congress. There’s kind of a pecking
order, really. You don’t really - You
have to get the ones in front of you out of the way first. So, I knew we had to have Santa Monica
Mountains be okayed, and Redwoods, and all these other parks done, before the
Gorge would be seriously considered.
So
I came back in the beginning of seventy-seven, and planning on finishing my
parks book, just laying some groundwork for the future for the Gorge, and that
was the year the assault started on the Gorge, that this just - suddenly we had
dams built being built all over subdivisions of Skamania County. Just suddenly, after years of bad economy,
probably more than anything, well even the Gorge alone, the assault came.
Portland people were doing nothing, absolutely nothing to defend the Gorge, but
local groups were filling the vacuum. I
think I told you that over dinner or something?
CH: Yeah.
CW: So
there were, so I moved - we had our Indian land there in Skamania. My dad had a trailer there, and there was a
sheep shed of my grandma’s. I moved them
together, and built a little cabin there, and moved in there in the beginning
of seventy-seven. [I] was still working
at Friends of the Earth. It became
obvious within three - my book on my Indian roots in the Gorge was something I
was planning on writing later in life. I
was going to - working on the book for Friends of the Earth on the national
parks, history of the national park system.
It became really obvious, after I had been back for a couple of months,
that the Gorge was under assault, and it couldn’t wait. So I put the parks book on the back burner,
and still never finished, and went to work on the book to save the Gorge, and
to save our tribe’s history. At that
point, Cascades were not well - were not that well known. Now, after my book, everyone knows the name
[laughs] Cascade Indian, but at that point,
there was very little about us.
So I started working on the book on the Gorge, and a there was a number
of these groups around. Here in The
Dalles there was a group called The Mid-Columbia Concerned Citizens. A spin-off group of Wah Chang was trying to
build - Western Zirconium was trying to build a zirconium plant across the
river here in Dallesport. It would have
smelled like a cat box up and down the Gorge.
There wouldn’t be windsurfing, if it ever been built. A group formed here headed by Dr. Bruce
Schwartz whose father did the
illustrations for Leopold - what’s his last name? - that wrote Sand County
Almanac.
CH: I
don’t know.
CW: It’s
one of the bibles of environmental literature.
Anyway, his father had done the - was an illustrator for Wash- for the
Missouri Fish and Wildlife, and had done, for [indiscernible] Leopold, the Sand
County Almanac. He was a great guy.
CH: Oh,
Leopold.
CW: Yeah,
[indiscernible] Leopold. So he got - so
I met with them, and they had kind of appointed [indiscernible] a person [?],
and a group had just formed in seventy-six.
The Klickitat County Public Utility District was trying to build seven
dams on the White Salmon River. They
claimed that that was - they had nothing to do with it, but the output of those
dams was exactly the power needed [for]
the zirconium plant being built in Klickitat County. So a group called Friends of the White Salmon
River. Dennis White was the main - who
had been a teacher in Trout Lake - was one of the founders of that and main -
so I met with him, and got him involved.
There were people fighting condos in Hood River Valley. Vancouver Audubon was a couple from Skamania, Susan and Wilson
Kady were fighting the Steigerwald
Wetlands - Steigerwald Lake Wetlands, that were being filled in by the port of
Camas and Washougal, and industrial plants were being built on it. [I] met with them. So there were all these groups popping
up. And like I say, Portland groups did
nothing, absolutely nothing, on the Gorge.
CH: Why
is that, do you think?
CW: It
had been, like the Providence of the - of Leet.
Gertrude - Jensen I think’s her name - she was kind of the one that had
been, in the sixties, spearheading. She
was one of these old matrons that had big old hats. There’s a famous picture, back when Mark
Hatfield used to talk to me - the first time I ever met him on the Gorge, he
showed me a picture of her with him at an anti-war demonstration. She had this big old hat. She had just - her health had really
gone. She was in a rest home, and didn’t
have any, really energy, or anything to do, had just kind of fallen apart. She was the one that had kind of pushed. They had put in an advisory Gorge
commission. So when I came back in
seventy-seven, there was a bi-state Gorge commission, but they were strictly
advisory. They didn’t really have any
power. But, there were some good people
on the board. We had people - in fact
Bob Straubasken asked me to be on the commission. Now I’m not even allowed to go to the
meetings [laughs], but it was - that’s how different the politics were
then. I was actually asked to be on the
Gorge Commission.
CH: What
year was that?
CW: It
would have been seventy-nine, probably.
But I was living in Skamania, so I told them didn’t think it would -
have a Washington resident on the Oregon Gorge Commission probably - even
though I was born in Oregon, [I] was a resident of Skamania at the time, so I
figured it wasn’t too good an idea. It
just shows I wouldn’t be allowed [laughs] to be considered now. How times have changed post [?] The Friends
of the Gorge.
I
had been involved in virtually every new federal park that had been created in
the country in the past couple decades.
I knew the dichotomy of how it became us against them: the city
environmentalists versus the local people.
I knew that very well. I purposely started organizing within the
Gorge. Before we ever went public, I had
spent two years of constant meetings. I
spent about half of my work time working with Friends of the Earth on other
national park stuff, about the other half of that working on the Gorge on my
own money [phone rings, tape stopped].
[tape continues]
CW: Anyway,
I knew the - since I knew all too well the polarization that occurs in fights
like the Gorge - that I wanted to build up local support. At that time, there was movements starting
up, that I was involved in, called green line parks. These are areas - Cape Cod was really one of
the first ones. In fact, at Cape Cod -
most people don’t know, it was the first national park system area where there
was actually money authorized by Congress to buy lands. Previously, the states or private people had
to buy the lands and then donate
them. The National Park Service wasn’t
allowed to buy land until Cape Cod. That
was one of the first great things to come out of Kennedy’s administration - was
to authorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund and got moneys appropriated
to start buying land. That opened up the
door for new federal parks that previously had to be carved out of federal
lands, usually BLM lands or forest lands, and in some cases, like in the
Smokies where the states had gone in and bought the lands, and donated them to
the Park Service. So that opened up a
whole new door. But a lot of places like
the Gorge, Santa Monica Mountains, Cuyahoga, had large areas that - you weren’t
going to go in and buy out the whole park, like a traditional park. Green line parks are parks where you use a
combination of acquisition and what are called less-than-fee protection
methods. There’s things like scenic
easements, buying out development rights, zoning, and what have you.
I
did a lot of the original writing in - like seventy-six and seventy-eight in
there - promoting this idea. I got -
there’s books and stuff that I’ve done chapters of about that. So the Gorge was obviously - the eastern end
of the Gorge especially fit that bill really good. But I knew we couldn’t move on the Gorge
until we got this whole backlog of parks out of Congress. I [was] really fortunate, and I got spoiled
in that period from seventy-six to eighty when Carter was president, and Cecil
Andrus was the Secretary of the Interior - is maybe the prime time in the
history of parks. We doubled the size of
the national park system, cleaned out virtually the whole backlog. I’m really proud of my role - I was in the
middle that - every day.
CH: So
what - just basically, what projects were you involved in?
CW: We
were - the Redwood National Parks, saving Redwood Creek. I had a switchblade put in the back of the
neck over that one. I’ve paid some
really heavy prices over that, but we got all the - most of the rest of the
virgin redwoods added into park. We
blocked Mineral King - that was going to be a Disney ski area - and got that
added into the Sequoia National Park, stopped the strip mining in Death
Valley. There had been a - kind of a
thing like I was telling you about with Isle Royale. There had been a clause put in the Death
Valley Bill to allow the old jackass
prospectors, with their donkeys, to go around. A couple of big companies had moved in and
were strip mining for talc [in] huge sections of Death Valley. I put a stop to that - got a bill in
seventy-six. We won that one. Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation
Area, Chattahoochee National Recreation Area by Atlanta, the Delaware Water Gap
was one. I gave Andrus - when he came
into office, called me up and asked what I wanted during his term as Secretary
of the Interior. After the previous -
under Nixon and Ford, they wouldn’t talk to us.
I was shocked, and when I kind of recovered, I gave him a list of my
thirteen things I wanted, and got twelve of them. The only one I didn’t get was Tall Grass
Prairie National Park. That was the only
thing on my list that we didn’t win in that four years of Andrus, which is - if
you’re getting fifty percent, you’re doing good. So I was on a roll. I thought I could do anything [laughs].
CH: Now,
your position during this time was what?
CW: I
was the national parks expert and lobbyist for Friends of the Earth, for the
whole country.
CH: So,
from being with Friends of the Earth then, you were working then, side by side
with other environmental groups like the Sierra Club and stuff like that.
CW: Oh
yeah, very closely.
CH: So
what was...
CW: And
all over the country, in all fifty states.
CH: What
was your kind of - what was the format.
What kind of organization did you have that you were a part with these
other groups?
CW: Well
I was the...
CH: How
were you organized?
CW: Well,
basically, like I say, I was the national parks expert for Friends of the
Earth, so I would meet constantly. The
only other group that really concentrated on the national park system at the
time was The National Parks and Conservation Association, and they didn’t have
really field reps. They were a
D.C.-based group, but they really concentrated on that. At that time - and it’s back to that
unfortunately now - once a park was established, all the environmental groups
would just abandon it. They’d move on to
the next legislative fight and then just leave this park there. That kind of became my role. Later, a couple of years into that, the
Wilderness Society hired a friend of mind to work on national parks. So it was - and the Sierra Club was more the
local people that I worked with - and so I was on the road probably eight to
ten months a year. I would go into an
area and meet with the local groups. I
would suggest to them - help them write stuff, and suggest to - you know, how
you do this. I was basically like the
expert that would come in to advise local groups on how to save their park, or
how to manage it, and such. I primarily
worked with N.P.C.A and the Wilderness
society. There was about four of us that
were the only people in the environmental movement that really concentrated on
the management of national parks in addition to the establishment of new
ones. Traditionally, people move on
after.
I
had a huge network all over the country, of - like we - Tall Grass Prairie was
a good one, where there was a big fight there among a couple of local groups,
between Audubon and Save the Tall Grass Prairie, over which sites were
best. A person from N.P.C.A. and the
Wilderness Society, and I went down, we had a big weekend meeting with them,
and worked everything out. We’re going
to go for both [laughs]. Don’t fight
over two of them. We still - two of them
would still would make a good park.
We’re going to go for both of them, that kind of thing.
CH: That’s
the one that didn’t go through.
CW: Right. That’s the only one. And now they’ve got one, the National
Preserve down at the Oklahoma border, they’ve got a start of it finally. But that’s the only one, and that’ unheard
of. People like to - a guy named Michael
Frohman [sp?] who’s a pretty famous forestry writer, and he was part of them
that set up the conspiracy between Nancy Russell and the Forestry Service. He wanted to be the secretary - or he wanted
to be the head of National Park Service.
He wrote one of the definitive books, although it’s kind of a whitewash,
on the National Park Service, and did a definitive book on wilderness, and
Andrus wouldn’t appoint him. So he went
on the warpath against the Park Service.
I have seen him helping the Friends of the Gorge speak about how
horrible the Park Service is, and how horrible Andrus was as secretary of the
interior. I didn’t know what the details
[were]. I got to know Andrus fairly
well. He was always trashing Andrus, and
I would stand up and say, “Hey! I got twelve
the thirteen for Friends of the Earth, how could you even criticize somebody
with that [laughs]. That’s unheard
of.”
So
I saw Cecil Andrus a fear years ago - the last time I saw Ed Chaney, there was
a river rendezvous down in Bend. Cecil
Andrus was speaking there. He comes
over, “Chuck, how are you doing?” I’m
sitting there with Ted Strong and I’m like - you know, I can’t remember - you
know, I won’t know your name in two weeks [laughs]. He hadn’t seen me since he was secretary of
the interior, and, “Chuck, how are you doing?” and stuff, which is why he’s a
good politician [laughs]. So I said, “I
just had to defend you last week.
Michael Frohman was trashing you about how horrible you were,” and I
stood up and said, “what’s with him?” He
sort of told me the story about Mike Frohman had gone in and demanded he be
appointed the head of the National Park Service. Then when Andrus appointed someone else, then
he went on the warpath. He turned out to
be one of the instrumental people in doings in the Gorge, so he somewhere ran
into Nancy Russell, and...
CH: This
is Michael Frohman?
CW: Yeah,
Michael Frohman, who is now a professor somewhere up in Bellingham. In fact, one of the classic - early on, when
I still talked to Nancy Russell, she came up to one time and said, “Michael
Frohman’s going to speak at our annual meeting.” I said, “oh great, tell him hi. He’s an old friend of mine.” She just looked at me, and just glared at
with this hatred, and she said, “How would someone like you know someone
important like Michael Frohman!?” I was
so shocked I didn’t respond, because I thought she was going to, “oh, well,
that didn’t - that didn’t quite come out the way I meant.” She didn’t.
She just sat there, and just glared at me. And here he had taken me to dinner at the
Cosmo Club - you remember the Cosmo Club?
CH: Sure.
CW: He
took me to lunch there, and brought a tie...
CH: At
the Cosmo?
CW: And
brought a tie in, knowing that I wouldn’t have one [laughs]. It was a funny day. Margaret Mead was wandering around the table
with her cane [laughs]. It was a men
only club. But she couldn’t even
understand that I would - and so he was on the warpath with the Park Service,
so - and here Nancy Russell, I’m sorry to say, has proven to be the publicity
terminating [?] concern. Basically, Mike
Frohman put her in touch with the Forest Service, and she started - when she
started in the Friends of the Gorge, they cut deals with the Forest Service -
met with the Forest Service, and agreed that they would fight the Park
Service. The Forest Service was [sighs]
- even though there were wonderful people like Gene Zimmerman [sp?] that I
worked with locally, on a higher level, there were a tree-cutting agency to
begin with, but they did not want to manage the Gorge. They knew that it was totally out of there
abilities. Like people tell me, well the
For - Nancy Russell now claims that, well, they had to go with the Forest
Service, because there wasn’t as much resentment towards them as there was
against the Park Service, so people were used to the Forest Service. My response was - well, I’ve never been able
to talk to her about [it], but in situations like this is, everyone likes the
Soil Conservation Service better than the Corps of Engineers, but when they
built Bonneville Dam, they didn’t ask the Soil Con - you know, it’s not their
turf. But the Forest Service, even less
wanted to give up land. They took the
stand, “The Park Service is trying to steal our land.” That’s been a long-going - in fact the Wilderness Act came about because
of that. When the Olympic National Park
was carved out of the National Forest, the Forest Service went and cut up to
the boundaries, clear-cutting all of the - and all of the areas that were
administratively protected as wilderness.
When they - there used to be really good people in the Forest Service
like Bob Marshall, and a lot of the first wilderness was done by them
administratively. By the time the like -
particularly after the war, when the private timber was running out - the
timber companies previously didn’t like to log the National Forest because it
was competition with their land. But
then they logged over all their lands, they wanted to go into the National
Forest, then they took over the Forest Service, basically. So they started going in every time there
would be a park - when Grand Tetons was transferred into the Park Service, they
burned down the ranger station there, and drove cattle all the way across the
meadows the Forest Service had in retaliation.
There’s this long-standing thing where the Forest Service feels any land
that’s going to the Park Service is being stolen from them.
CH: Now,
why would Nancy Russell want to side with the Forest Service to begin
with? What advantage was that to her?
CW: She
went - at the very best light to that can be put on it, and this is very
charitable. The things she did are so
evil that I don’t believe it, but she went in to Mark Hatfield, and he said,
“no Park Service, no tributaries, that’s it.”
And she said yes - she and Don Clark went in and they said, “yes, boss,”
and went out and killed it. But they
wouldn’t admit to us that they had cut that deal with Hatfield. They kept telling us, “Yeah, we support the
Park Service. We want the tributaries
protected.” And so, that’s...
CH: Senator
Hatfield didn’t want the Park Service in for what reason then, too?
CW: Oh
timber. He’s a total - I mean, look at
his environmental record. He’s Mr.
Clear-cut, Mr. Salvage Rider, that destroyed - probably the main villain in the
last twenty years that ancient forests is Mark Hatfield. [He] did sleazy
tactics like riders in the middle of the night, the Salvage Rider. And he did the same thing with the
Gorge. He was totally underhanded. So, the very best light that can be put on
Nancy Russell is that she was naively duped into it by Mark Hatfield into
it. She did not talk to a single environmentalist,
not a single environmentalist was talked to by the Friends of the Gorge, until
the Sierra Club person that ended up
selling us out had breakfast with them up in Seattle about eighty-four.
So
part of the deal - the eighty-four Wilderness Bill - Hatfield was like - wanted
the minimal amount. Environmentalists,
thanks to Jim Weaver - we ended up getting 800,000 acres, I think, in the
eighty-four Wilderness Bill. In fact,
Jim Weaver just hates the Sierra Club over that, because the House bill was 1.2
million, if I remember right. This was
over a decade ago. The Senate bill was
800,000, and they were going into conference committee. If you worked in the Senate, you split the
difference. So we were looking at a
million acre Oregon wilderness. The
Sierra Club held a press conference with Mark Hatfield, said they supported
Hatfield’s bill, the day before
conference committee. Weaver went crazy,
hated the Sierra Club after that. We
lost 200,000 acres of wilderness by Mark Hatfield’s plan. Sleazy games like that. But we ended up - he originally supported a
quarter million or something. So by
spending years - by the environmentalists taking the right position, we forced
Hatfield from like probably a quarter million acres to 800,000 acres. If anyone cared anything about the Gorge, and
knew politics, you demand what you want, and then let the politicians make the
compromises. You don’t go in and offer
compromises, and you don’t go in asking for the bottom line. When they started doing that, I told Nancy, I
said, “Look, you can’t go in there with your bottom line.” She said, “We’re rich, Congress wouldn’t dare
weaken anything we did!” Of course they
totally gutted it. So her...
CH: The
hundred thousand - the 800,000 acres was including what?
CW: This
was the national forest - this was the eighty-four Wilderness Bill. The two biggest - in 1978 and 1980 - well
from - during the Andrus period we cleared out almost the entire backlog of national
park areas. Like I say, everything but
Tall Grass was cleared. The stage was
set, in terms of parks legislation, for the Gorge. But no one would look at it until the Oregon
and Washington Wilderness Bill - remember, this is the Rare Two, and that whole
ten year process. So there was no way
Congress was going to act on the Gorge until the wilderness was out of the way,
so we had to concentrate on that. What
happened, and Bob Packwood could probably verify this, Bob Packwood thought he
had a deal with Mark Hatfield. Since
Hatfield’s big thing was raping ancient forests, Packwood let Hatfield take the
lead on the Oregon Wilderness Bill that passed in eighty-four, and thought he
had an understanding with Hatfield that then he got to take the lead on the
Gorge and write the Gorge Bill. Packwood
hired two of the most wonderful senate staff people I’ve ever worked with. One of them, Emily Barlow still - if you want
to interview her I got her number - she was his local staff here in Portland,
environmental staff. Then he hired a
National Park Service employee, John - oh boy.
I can’t think of the name, but - hired a Park Service person to be his
staff, environmental staff person in D.C.
They were both just wonderful people.
The Friends of the Gorge, Nancy Russell treated them like dirt. So Packwood thought - I’m getting a little
ahead of the story here, but it’s a real important point, because one of the
reasons why people like me hate Oregon politics so much is that there is this
sleazy, behind the scenes revolving doors, and - I don’t know if you know who
Tom Imason is?
CH: Yes,
I was just going to refer to him.
CW: Well,
he was - we used to call him the third - environmentalists used to call him
Oregon’s third senator. He was
incredibly powerful. Packwood was going
under the impression that he got to write the Gorge Bill, and so he totally
supported, without any changes, Hatfield’s wilderness bill. He thought he had a deal that Hatfield was
going to support his Gorge bill, which is the National Park Service Wild and
Scenic River designation for the Deschutes, the Sandy, the Hood, the Washington
rivers, everything, basically what we wanted.
The coalition’s position, which would have been basically buying the
whole western end of the Gorge, and the eastern end would have been the Cape
Cod formula, and a lot of it would have been left in private ownership, but
with real restrictions, and compensation, not just this regulatory nightmare
that we ended up with. He thought
Hatfield was still with him, didn’t know Hatfield was doing these sleazy deals
behind the scenes with Nancy Russell.
They finally - we got the wilderness bills out of the way, and - well,
let’s see, I’m getting ahead of myself.
I guess we might as well get into the Gorge thing, back into the late
seventies.
Anyway,
so we organized the Columbia Gorge Coalition as ad hoc group, but we didn’t go
public. We were meeting regularly, and
I’d meet with the groups. We were
spending a lot of time meeting with local people, explaining to them how scenic
easements work, how they can - even if
they were in an acquisition zone, they could sell their land, get all but one
percent per year, for a life of state, get all their money up front, and live
their the rest of their years for free.
Then, the land goes into the Park Service. And they were, “where do we sign up?” It was just - people, by doing, by meeting
with all the people, we had so much local support that, in Skamania County,
which Willamette Week just trashes them constantly, unfairly, we had -
we forced an election of Skamania County residents that lived within what was
going to be the Gorge area. Eighty-five
- this was about a month before The Friends formed - eighty-five percent of the
residents in Skamania County voted for a total moratorium on any rural
development until protection was put in place, eighty-five percent. [It] took
Nancy Russell and Don Clark about a month to undo all of that.
So
we were on a roll, and like I say, I kind of back - so we formed this group,
and Craig Collins was one of the people, and Save the Caves, and we had people
from all over the Gorge. We had a
really, just a wonderful group of people.
CH: So,
how did it begin? I mean, what was the,
what was the original gathering or the original meeting, or -
CW:
Well it was a serious - it started out with me, going around meeting with these
groups one on one. And so then each of
those groups had one or two people that kind of became reps for this project,
and basically convinced all the people that we were never going to keep winning
all - even though we - these local groups had an incredible track record, that
we could never save the Gorge that way.
We would just be bits and pieces.
We had to do the whole thing at one time. And here is the precedence. Judging by what has been done elsewhere, we
could buy half the Gorge. We can buy
development rights on the rest of it.
We’ll have river patrols on the river paid for by the feds. We can get clear into - probably even the
Portland Airport, buying the shoreline down there. We could the Sandy bought - you know, it was
- here’s - based on all the precedents I’ve worked on for Friends of the Earth,
here’s what we can get. Everyone’s - you
know, “this is wonderful.” We kept very
quite though. We didn’t go to the
media. So we had regular meetings, and
just out organizing. We were calling
ourselves the Columbia Gorge Coalition, but it was just an ad hoc group...
[End of Tape 2, Side 1]
March 22, 1999
Tape 2, Side 2
CW: ...supposedly
that pretty much financially destroyed him.
CH: Oh,
is that right?
CW: Yeah.
CH: [sound problems] Okay.
CW: So
in seventy-eight we got enough new parks established, that I knew by 1980 - we
knew we’d get the Alaska bill passed in seventy-nine or eighty, which was the
biggest...
CH: I’m
just trying to get the - I’m just turning the phone volume down, and turning
the recording volume up, just to make sure that we get adequate recording. I think that’s - I noticed that it was a
little - go ahead.
CW: Well,
so this had kind of turned a little bit, or something like that.
CH: Yeah,
okay. Yeah, okay, go ahead.
CW: Okay. So, anyway, we were organizing with the local
people here, but we hadn’t gone public.
Then, in seventy-eight we got the Redwoods Bill, and some of the big
bills out of the way. So I knew by 1980
we were going to have enough bills out of the way that we could start
considering the Gorge. [sound problems]
CH: Sorry,
I should try to get it up to max. There,
okay.
CW: Usually,
we have enough volume, it’s not a problem [laughs].
So
before, generally you start a big fight over a new park. And then after you get momentum, all the
opposition’s going, then you bring in the Parks - you get a congressman or
someone to bring in the Park Service to do its study. Then you have all this controversy. I had enough experience in this matter to
know that - to know that if we could get
the study done first, then the controver- you know, we’re going to be halfway
there, and we’re not going to have this two year sag, to allow the opposition
to build up opposition while the Park Service did their study, if I could get
the study going. As part of the Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation, the predecessor to Hookers [?] is probably around, the
Heritage Conservation Recreation Service.
Anyway, they had done a study, and part of - and ironically the
precedence for the Gorge, the two besides - after Cape Cod, the next two precedents
were in 1972, under Richard Nixon, that radical environmentalist. We established the Golden Gate Recreation
Area, around San Francisco, which I worked on.
That was my first big environmental fight. Actually, my first one was when I was living
in New Orleans, to kill the freeway that they trying to build across the French
Market, right through that - and that was my first actually big environmental
fight [laughs] was an urban one. My
second one that I really got my teeth on was the Golden Gate Recreation
Area. That was when I - after I had left Vista, and was back in San
- going to school there at Sonoma State, and worked a summer there in Sierra
Club. Richard - and so then Gateway
National Recreation Area at New York City were both passed in seventy-two. And the night before the election, Nixon came
out - the seventy-two election, Nixon came out - even though it hadn’t passed Congress yet - it was still a
day or two from passing Congress - This was Phil Burton’s [sp?] first big parks
bill, too - signed the bill - or signed - dedicated the new Golden Gate
National Recreation Area, and then the day after he won the election, impounded
all the funds [laughs]. Remember when
they used to impound funds?
CH: Yeah.
CW: But
he - but Nat Reid [sp?], his - Nathaniel Reid, who was Assistant Secretary of the Interior over
National Parks and Wildlife, which is under Nixon, said anyone that doesn’t
want one of these Park Service areas, any big city official that doesn’t want
one of these Park Service areas adjacent to them has to be nuts. Well, Don Clark and the Portland
establishment are nuts. They are the
only - only two counties have ever fought that kind of park.
CH: Why
were they fighting it? Why did Don Clark
fight it?
CW: He
was trying to run for governor, and was in single digits in the polls. So he saw it as an issue that he could get
publicity out of, but he - so Nancy Russell, my theory is - she was an amateur
tennis player, and got too tired - got too old to do that, and wanted publicity. So she was looking for publicity. Don Clark was looking for a way of getting
publicity, and so - but he tried to run for governor, trashing Skamania County,
which may make sense in Oregon politics, but he totally killed all our support
in Skamania County. As I say, we had an
amazing amount of support. And he and
Nancy Russell, when they formed it - I’m getting ahead of myself - started
holding press conferences. They said,
“those stupid local hicks in the Gorge are a bunch of land-rapers, and we city
people are going to show them how to protect the Gorge.”
CH: Now
the reason why - how was he going about dumping on the people in Skamania?
CW: Oh,
they would hold press conferences and trash Skamania County. “We have to - Oregon is totally
protected. We have L.C.D.C. We have land use planning. All the rape is going on in Washington.” It wasn’t true. There was as much going on in Oregon, because
the land use planning is not the good, and the Thousand Friends of Oregon never
lifted a finger to help on the Gorge.
CH: But
there was - there has been -. Is it a
misconception that - or a misperception that the Washington side is not more
developed than the Oregon side?
CW: There’s
a lot more private lands and it’s not as steep, so you inherently have more
development going on there. The Oregon
side had more public land. It did have
land use planning, although it didn’t do much to help in the Gorge, because the
supposed environmentalists, like Thousand Friends of Oregon, never lifted a
finger to try to apply, like Goal Five, the part of the land use - the Oregon
land use planning that protects natural areas.
There’s never been an acre in the Gorge under Goal Five, and Thousand
Friends of Oregon never pushed for a single acre. They just totally ignored the Gorge.
CH: Why
did they - why did they not use that legislation to push for protection. What would their reason be?
CW: I
don’t know. I mean, they just never -
well, their head, then Henry Richmond was out of the timber industry family for
starters [laughs]. They just had no
interest in the Gorge, and still don’t.
I just - like I say, I got a fundraising letter from them yesterday
about how people are building these trophy houses in the Gorge, and it’s got to
be stopped. But they supported those
trophy - they supported the legislation that allows trophy houses to be
built. For instance, the Bea House, the
one, and this...
CH: The
Bea House is - just for reference here on the tape, is the house that’s being
built across from Multnomah Falls, up in the side of the mountain.
CW: Right.
Up in a point that you can see it for miles up and down the river.
CH: Right.
CW: And
it blew the lid off the cover-up. I’m
getting kind of ahead of myself here, but [I] might as well touch on this. The Friends - that was the 750th new house
built in the protected parts of the Gorge since the Friends Bill passed,
entirely because of the Friends of the Gorge.
That’s a point the Portland media, especially the Oregonian,
won’t allow. They treat the Bea House as
if it’s the first house. The only reason
it got any publicity was that it was so obvious that it blew the cover-up off
the Friends cover-up - it blew the lid off the Friends cover-up. The other key thing is that the very fact
we’re even debating building the house across the Multnomah Falls, say - it’s
going to be built and it’s going to stay there - proves that the bill is a
hoax. I mean, the fact that twelve years
after protection passed they’re building mansions across from Multnomah Falls,
proves that the Friends Bill is a failure.
If this - if the Coalition-Packwood Bill had passed, that would have
been in public ownership six, seven years ago, and there’d be no debate over
it. But the Friends killed acquisition
authority in that area. Under the
Friends Bill, to free up money to give to the timber industry, and their
backers, like John Gray, killed any compensation for any acquisition in
sixty-one percent of the Gorge. So that
means - and that’s why so much development’s going on. In every other place in the country, there
would be the option of buying the land, or buying scenic easements at least,
buy up the development rights. In
sixty-one percent of the Gorge, there is nothing but zoning, zoning that’s a
bureaucratic nightmare that - and they’re gutting it. I mean, they’re filling in. They based it on the absolute worst part of
Oregon land use planning. The people
like the Thousand Friends of Oregon took the position that we are Oregonians
are so superior to other states, we know what’s best. The Friends of the Gorge, and Thousand
Friends of Oregon, and Hatfield, and Wyden, refused to even look at the other
precedents around the country. Our three
main precedents for Gorge protection for our bill were Golden Gate National
Recreation Area; Lower Saint Croix National Scenic River, which is just east of
the twin cities, and it’s real similar to the Gorge in that it’s a river
dividing Minnesota and Wisconsin, so you had the two states - half an hour from a major metropolitan - a wonder prece-
totally protected under the Park Service; and Cape Cod; and to a lesser degree,
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation area, which we got that through in
[indiscernible] Park’s Bill in eighty, I think.
CH: Wasn’t
that actually a part of the Topanga Canyon National Area?
CW: Yeah.
And that’s really key - well it has two main relevances to the Gorge. One of them is that they set up a conservancy
there, plus the state has a conservancy, to deal will lesson [?] acquisition
places. The Friends of the Gorge killed
that for the Gorge, because by then they had taken over the trust for public
lands, and Nancy Russell had control of them.
So she didn’t want a competitor there, coming in. The other main way it relates to the Gorge is
that it’s the only other urban county in this country that fought the National
Park Service area adjacent to it. Los
Angeles County fought Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, just
like Multnomah County fought - but there the congressman, Tony Belison [sp?],
who is a friend of mine, was great, and got the Park Service. Wyden totally wimped out. If we kept Bob Duncan we might have gotten
the Park Service, but - which is ir- Sawdust Bob. This is one of the ironies, is that we were
going public just - and, for Oregon Politics, Bob Duncan, whose son has been on
the power council, of course, for - Angus...
CH: Angus
Duncan, yes. Both were.
CW: Yeah,
that’s right. Yeah. But he started with
a district further south, and kept getting redistricted until he ended up with
Multnomah County.
CH: Well,
actually he got - he moved. He was in
Medford, and then he moved up to Gresham, I think it was.
CW: Right. But his district was further south, I
think. It didn’t have the urban - you
know, it was still a timber industry district.
Then that last big redistricting, it took in Multnomah County, and
suddenly he had an anti - or a pro-environment district. We used to call him Sawdust Bob, because he
was such a blatant - representing the timber industry. He was totally against Gorge protection. So Ron Wyden came along, and this is about
the same time Craig Collins [sp?] was getting involved, so we worked on Wyden’s
campaign. He promised us he would
support the National Park Service. We
worked on his campaign and helped him beat Bob Duncan. Bob Duncan came out against us, then polled
his constituency, and it was coming in about ten to one for a National Park
Service area. He stood up in a meeting
during the election, and came out as the strongest person for the Park Service
[laughs]. This is in a meeting in
Portland, at O.D.F.W., and totally turned around. But we still supported Wyden. As soon as Ron Wyden got elected with our
help, he sold us down the river, refused to meet with local environmentalists,
fought the Park Service, and is one of the three or four main villains in the
Gorge thing. He is just horrible.
He
used to actually meet with us. But, part
of the problem is, he grew in Philadelphia, and moved out here, and has no
concept of rural politics. The last time
he met with any of the - there was a
whole group, including Friends of the Gorge, and the Sierra Club, and the City
Audubon, Wildlife Federation, all the major groups meeting with them - he
turned to me and said, “Chuck, you’re just making stuff up about development
going on in the Gorge. I talked to the
Gorge people all the time, and there’s no development. They’re not going to foul their own
nest. It’s not going on.” The local people he was talking to was the
Port at Cascade Locks. Those were the
only - you know it was - and I said, “Ron, you picked a bad day to make a
statement like that. Yesterday, Skamania
county approved an eighty-three house subdivision between my place and the
river, on wetlands.” So he never met
with us again. [He] only met with Friends of the Gorge and Sierra Club after
that, because we wouldn’t go along with the hoax and such. I’ve - I mean, I really loathe Ron
Wyden. He is one of the main villains,
along with Hatfield and Dan Evans, are - within Congress are the three main
villains. And Bob Packwood’s the champ -
[laughs] the environmental champion. Jim
Weaver and Mike Lawry [sp?] were those congressmen, and they were wonderful. I was real close with their staffs. But they were told by Mark Hatfield that the
Gorge wasn’t in their districts, and keep their asses out of the Gorge or he
would get them big time. So they did
what they could. Actually Les AuCoin was
the last one in Congress to cave on the Park Service. But Wyden was the one that could have
won. Because if we had had a house
champion, like we had with Tony Belison, with Santa Monica mountains, to work
with Phil Burton, we could have gotten a really strong park bill through the
House. Then, Hatfield would have had to
have suffered a debate, or at least would have to work - debate the Gorge. The reason we lost the Gorge, in large part,
is because the Portland media prevented debate, and they still do. So, every single time, in the beginning when
Nancy Russell or her hired guns had to debate me or the local environ- we would
win. I mean, people would just hear - I mean, it was just obvious it should be
the Park Service. There was no possible
way you could support their decision. So
they just prevented us from ever being able to make a presentation, and that
goes on. Hatfield had a - right before
he went out of office, he had a tenth year anni - he had promised their would
be a ten year hearing. We weren’t
allowed to testify. Not a single -
Friends of the Gorge were the only group, representing all environmental
groups, allowed to testify. None of us
were even allowed to testify. Friends of
the Gorge - and I think I put their testimony in an article did in the Oregonian
in there, and it said, everything’s wonderful in the Gorge. This was two years ago. We have no problems in the Gorge, a little
more acquisition money, and everything’s
just wonderful. And that’s a total - we
had six hundred new houses at that time.
The vast majority of the private timber lands in the Gorge had been
clear-cut, since the bill passed.
Friends of the Gorge and Sierra Club supported banning any restrictions
on clear-cutting in sixty-one percent of the Gorge. They didn’t ban clear-cutting, they banned any
restrictions on clear-cutting. So we
lost almost all the privates lands with clear-cut since eighty-six, with the
Friends’ support.
CH: You
need to clear up one thing for me, with the - in terms of the Park Service, the
Gorge right now is under a National Scenic Area legislation.
CW: Right.
CH: Now,
isn’t that administered by the Park Service?
CW: No,
it’s administered by the Forest Service...
CH: It’s
by the Forest Service.
CW: ...Commission. That actually - the National Scenic Area name
is my idea, and it turned out to be one of the biggest mistakes of my
life. The biggest mistake ever in my
life was keeping my mouth shut and letting Nancy Russell and the Friends of the
Gorge masquerade as an environmental group, when they were not even
remotely. People were like, “you can’t
have public infighting, Chuck,” and I kept my mouth quiet, and didn’t criticize
them publicly. Like I say, I wake up in
the middle in the night haunted by that.
I know that if I would have gone public at the time I still had the
stature, and Nancy Russell [indiscernible], and we still had two newspapers in
Portland, so I had access to the Journal, that if I had exposed what
they were doing, we could have won the Gorge.
But I tried to take the high road, and I wasn’t around people that just
lie, and just use tactics like that. I
was really naive. I had been living in
the woods for seven years. You know, I
was dealing with bears, people you could deal with like grizzlies [laughs] and
stuff. I wasn’t used to...
CH: Well...
CW: ...people
that would look me in the eye and just lie to me through their teeth.
CH: Wasn’t
there some kind of a debate between wether it would be a National Scenic Area
or a National Recreation Area?
CW: And
see that was my fault. Is that whistling
a little bit?
CH: Oh
[Adjusts recording equipment].
CW: Yeah.
CH: Okay. Okay. So, anyway - yeah, back where we were a
little while ago - so in seventy-six, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation of the
Park Service did a study of potential urban parks - this was a follow-up of to
the Golden Gate National Recreation Area and Gateway - to see what other
potential ones. They studied a couple
dozen places in the country and six of them came out flying colors. One of them was the Columbia Gorge. So, that meant that the Park Service could
come in and study the Gorge without congressional authorization, which was a
plus for me. It was to come in to study
it as a National Recreation Area. I
could provide you all of my original writings on it, referred to it as a
National Recreation Area. We should have
kept that name. As I say, it’s the
second biggest mistake I ever made in my life.
The head of the Park Service study team and I were sitting up on the top
of Beacon Rock, just watching the sunset, just figuring things, and we had two
reasons to not want to use the National Recreation Area name. One of them, we were already starting to get
backlash in the Gorge when it went public that we were going to have hoards of
recreation overrun in the Gorge. The
other was this guy, Chuck Cushman [sp?], had come in. He was an insurance salesman from L.A. that
owned land in Yosemite. He’s a
reprehensible - he and I were born in the same year, both named Chuck. He was from Sonoma County when I was in
Petaluma [laughs], and so we had this long parallel. He now lives in Battleground. I blame my sister. She was in a singles volleyball group with
him, and he kept asking her out, had no idea she was my sister, and she kept
turning him down. He finally got a
girlfriend in Battleground and moved up here.
So I blame my sister for [laughs] - if she’d gone out with him, we might
have -. When he found out she was my
sister, it was like, “you’re related to HIM!?” [laughs]. Small world.
So he had started this campaign, and it was very effective. He’s maybe the best demagogue -
anti-environment demagogue there ever was.
He gets paid huge money to go
into areas where there’s parks or potential parks, and scare the hell out of
the local. You’ll love it. It’s the biggest article Friends of the Earth
ever did, exposing him.
So
he got this right-wing foundation to make a doc- there’s Cuyahoga National Recreation Area. It’s between Cleveland and Akron, and it was
in seventy-four. So there they went in,
and the Park Service was told to go in there in four years and buy all the land
- and people could live there the rest of their life, or a set amount of years
- but to go in there, buy the land, which from a financial and environmental
standpoint is the way to do it. If you
keep putting it off, as you buy land around an area, it gets isolated, and the
value just goes through the roof. But
there was forced sales, no doubt about it.
But people were given relocation money.
They could stay there the rest of their life. I mean, it was done in a very, very fair
way. But it was controversial. So he got this right-wing foundation from
Vermont to do a documentary on how the Park Service throws people out of their
homes. It focuses on Cuyahoga.
Jessica
Savage, for some - who was on Front Line its first year, was on, and
they had - their very first one was the one about the head of - the owner of
the L.A. Rams was murdered over drugs, which has never been proven. But she got this documentary put on Front
Line as fact. Being on PBS, it just
gave an unbelievable credibility. It was
incredibly sleazy. For instance, the end
of the film ends with this house burning, with just black smoke pouring out of
the house. The voice-over - and they
must have waited for it to hit electrical or something, you know to get the
black smoke - and the voice-over implies that the Park Service were burning
these people out of their house. Well
the people - there was a hardship clause, like there usually is in Parks Bills,
even if the Park Service doesn’t want to buy your land, if you can show
hardship, you can force them to buy their land.
And then they have to figure out wether to resell it or what. So this couple had forced the Park Service to
buy their house, and the Park Service didn’t want to. So the local fire department says, “hey, we
never get to practice on real houses, can we burn it down for you, to give
training for our fire department?”
“Great!” So they filmed that, and
that became the Park Service burning people out of their house. That became the battle cry, that if we have a
National Recreation Area like Cuyahoga, people will get burned out of their
houses. So we had that stigma, and this
was before the Friends came in. This was
seventy-nine, during the Park Service.
We were - I was kind of the fifth Beattle on the Park Service
study. You know, the unacknowledged
person that - of the Park Service.
CH: And
where was the Columbia Gorge Coalition - at what point...
CW: Hood
River. Oh, we were in - well, we were an
ad hoc group. The Park Service was - and
I had the Gorge lined up - because of working for Friends of the Earth - lined
up to be studied for - in about 1980 - for the study to start. Then the Park Service was starting to back,
and I put the political screws on them a little more than I should have. And the next thing I know, here’s the Park
Service in the Gorge, “Okay Chuck, we’re ready.” And I go, “oh my God, we’re not politically
ready.” So at that point we went public
with the coalition. We incorporated
it. We opened up an office in Hood
River, and that’s when we hired Craig and two other people on it, and
Susan. That’s when we went public to
provide the support for the Park Service, because immediately there was a
backlash here.
It
was really funny. The then owner of The
Dalles Chronicle is right across the street here, and the then publisher -
or editor, Austin Abrams - I get along
with him well now - he was dressed all in black, with a white tie, white belt,
and white shirt. He knew who I was, but
he didn’t know what I looked like. Cecil
Andrus’ aide was out here, and I had given him a tour of the Gorge. So the Park Service - the word had gotten
out, so they had to have a public meeting to explain to everyone what they’re
doing. So they had a meeting here in The
Dalles. I’m sitting here with Andrus’
aide at the meeting. After the meeting,
Austin Abrams got a group of about a dozen people in a circle around him, and
here we are - Andrus’ aide and I are sitting here in the middle of the circle. He had no idea who I was. He says, “Folks, this is serious. I bet you Friends of the Earth - that Chuck
Williams, I bet he’s back in Andrus’ office as we speak.” I got all done, I said, “Actually, I’m right
here Austin” [laughs]. I never told him
it was Andrus’ top aide that was sitting right with me [laughs]. There’s some great stories. I’m going to do a book one of these days.
And
so at that point we opened the office.
We’re working on the study, and all my - so I started publishing
articles, in the Oregon Environmental Council’s newsletter, Earthwatch Oregon,
Friends of the Earth, and all of these, pushing for a Columbia Gorge Recreation
Area, and I did my letters. I know how
you use to - because of your background
with the Forest Service, you might be interested - but have all of the original
letters that set up the Park Service proposal and such [Telephone rings, tape
stopped].
[Tape begins again.]
CH: So,
going back to your idea about the idea of the National Scenic Area then, what
was the - why were you turning to that idea?
CW: The
two negative reasons were the ramifications that came with the National
Recreation Area. We had the National
Inholder Organization, this right-wing group in here, “you’re going to get
thrown out of your house like at Cuyahoga.”
I was still working for Friends of the Earth when that campaign started,
and I sat down with those people. I gave
them - Chuck Cushman and them - I gave them the benefit of the doubt. I was in a position to make a lot of environmental
policy. I said, “look it. I will - you
back off on this, I will agree with you that in the Columbia Gorge and the
other new parks I work on, we will not have forced acquisition. It will be - unless it is to block new
development. It’s going to cost a lot of
money, it’s going to drag things out, but I think it’s a reasonable
compromise. So I will agree in the Gorge
Bill that the environmentalists will fight any eminent domain except to block
development - incompatible developments.”
They kept fighting it. They had basically won, you know, I’d reach
this comp- and then they still kept fighting us coming in. “You’re going to throw people out of their
homes.” It was real obvious they had a
right-wing anti-park agenda. It wasn’t -
the concerns were just their foot in the door.
So
they were in here in the Gorge, and this is really ironic - we ran them out of the Gorge. Chuck Cushman, who is the one that got James
Watt appointed Secretary of the Interior, admits publicly that this was the only
place he was ever beaten - was the Columbia Gorge, and we ran him out. He went around - he’s an incredible fire and
brimstone speaker. He can stir up a
whole crowd to go lynch someone. I mean,
he is really good. So he started having
his meetings, and he was paid a thousand a month plus expenses to come into the
Gorge and organize opposition. Every
time he’d hold one of these meetings in the Gorge, someone would say, “Hey man,
I have a letter here from those people that you said were kicked out the
houses, thanking the Park Service for saving them financially.” He had one over
in White Salmon that I had - over half the meeting was people I had planted in
there, and I wasn’t there. So he had no
idea. He thought he had a sympathetic
audience, and every one of them I had given a packet. They said, “and in Rocky Mountain this happened.” And one of my friends said, “well, I have an
article from the local paper saying that’s a lie. This is what happened.” It just went like that for about an hour, and
finally one of my friends says, “I got something here about how you have fake
migraine headaches, and you’re getting a thousand a month from the insurance
money to do this work.” “Where’s that
goddamn fucking Chuck Williams! I’m
gonna kill him!” and he ran around for two days [laughs]. He and the head of the Skamania Pioneer,
Ed McCarney [sp?] ran around for two days trying to find me [laughs]. That’s one thing about being single and not
having kids is, you know, they could never - I would have been dead a long time
ago if I had ever [laughs] - if I wasn’t so elusive and such. But it ran them out of the Gorge, and it
killed him.
So
we beat the people, and then the Friends of the Gorge came in and killed -
destroyed us, after we had killed the opposition. They took the ta- their whole thing was these
rich city people are going to come in here and throw you out of your
homes. Well, that didn’t stick. I’m umpteenth generation Skamania County, a
third of my family worked in the mills and the woods in Skamania. People know I’m not - I’m going to look out
for locals. They may hate my politics,
but they know I’m for real, and do have compassion for the local people, and
will stick up for - make sure they’re treated right. So the Friends of the Gorge came along, they
proved it in Bridle Veil. They think
nothing of throwing people out of their houses.
They tried to throw people out of their houses in Bridle Veil, and just
turned the whole community against the Friends of the Gorge. For no reason, just blatant elitism and
contempt for locals. So then they became
the bogey man that the - they were the stereotypes. When they came in, we had an environmental
debate going on in the Gorge. If we
could get it off the Park Service onto what people’s visions of the Gorge were,
we’d have eighty, ninety percent local support.
“Do you want to see no more development in this area?” Ten to one in our
favor. “Do you want to see the Park
Service in?” well, now we might drop to fifty or something. But we had people sold on what had to be
done, and it was on the environmental debate.
Then when Don Clark and Nancy Russell came in and started, “you stupid
local hicks,” and I mean they would lo- Nancy Russell made Cascade Locks - when
she said, “I have the final solution for the Columbia Gorge,” totally oblivious
to the Nazi references. All of the
people said, “Whoa!” and our local support went to a tenth of what it was,
within a month or two after the Friends of the Gorge forming, because they were
- you know, the right-wing people kept saying, “those rich city people are
going to throw you out of your homes.”
They’d say, “Well, wait a minute.
These local people - Craig Collins, Chuck Williams, they’re not gonna
-.” So the minute Nancy Russell came in,
there has never been any debate on the Gorge.
It’s those rich city people want to throw us out of our house. There’s
never been, since Nancy Russell came in, any debate on what the Gorge should
look like. It’s class warfare. It’s rich city people, and we were automatically
horrible because we’re poor. She’s
automatically horrible because she’s a city person, and it’s been class
warfare. There’s never been any debate,
since the Friends formed in late eighty.
And there’s been no debate on what the Gorge should look like since
1980, because of the Friends.
CH: So
the Friends of the Gorge formed in 1980, and what was the reason for the
formation of that group?
CW: Well
that depends upon who you talk to. It
was - in my opinion, it’s publicity-seeking by Nancy Russell, combined with
her elitism. The very fact that I was never once allowed
to meet with the Friends of the Gorge to me proves that they were not serious
about protecting the Gorge.
So
the coalition formed in seventy-nine. We
incorporated, we set up a non-profit group, the Columbia Gorge Environmental
Center. That’s our non-profit foundation
that would provide office space, and would monitor development in the Gorge,
and do the things that a radical political group can’t do. And then the coalition, we purposely kept as
a C-4 organization. That means we can’t
- we were non-profit but donations to us were not tax deductible. We had a group, the Columbia Gorge
Environmental Center, that was our foundation, to do the educational work and
such. So, we opened up an office in Hood
River, and we were just going gangbusters.
This is when we had...
[End of Tape 2, Side 2]
January 22, 1999
Tape 3, Side 1
CH: This
is an interview with Chuck Williams at his gallery in The Dalles, Oregon. The
interviewer is Clark Hansen for the Oregon Historical Society. The date is
1-22-99. This is tape 3, side 1. So...
CW: So,
anyway when I had come back to the Gorge in the beginning of seventy-seven
[and] started working on my book and had
it near done, but the last few months of wrapping up a book are real
intense. And so, in the summer of - in
the summer of eighty, early summer, I told Craig, “Well, go ahead, you want to
do the foundation money - you run the
Coalition.” I loaned Mike 5,000
[dollars] to help pay his salary, to the Coalition money to borrow for the
book. And, [I] concentrated on my book, and was still on the phone and I was
the one that really organized it and such. And things were going great. We had the Park Service doing the study, it
was real positive, totally supportive of us, wonderful. They were wrapping up in early eighty, and so
we were ready to go politically. I was
kind of on, say hiatus, for about three months wrapping up my book, and we held
an organizing meeting down in the Parker House, in Washougal, with all our supporters
kind a getting ready to go on to the next step.
And this was - we were still using the actual recreation area name, that
was right about the transition, and John Yeon brought Nancy Russell to us and
she took one look at me and decided I was the scum of the earth. And [Nancy]
went and told Craig Collins that I was, quote, “offensive to the type of people
whose support we need to protect the Gorge and had to be forced out of the
fight.”
And
so, the main - and plus, I was too stupid to raise money because I was having a
book signing that was to get people encouraged on the Gorge free, because we
didn’t want to keep anyone out - we could have raised tens of thousands of
dollars. She was just too stupid, and this
- that was when she decided to form
Friends of the Gorge. So, her motivation
was in large part publicity. But also,
it was obvious I wasn’t going to get thrown out of the Coalition - I was the founder of it. And so, the Coalition had to be destroyed and
a new group that she controlled set-up.
Don Clark was looking for an issue and he was the head of the county
commission, of Multnomah County, was someone up to that point I had admired
greatly and had thought he was a wonderful person, and no longer do at all
[laughs] - I loathe him now. So, suddenly they started - So, Nancy Russell and Don Clark went and had
a meeting with Mark Hatfield and Bob Pack- .
They went and they got Gail Ackerman [sp?] - this is part of the
revolving - she’s now an attorney with Stoel Rives, she was...
CH: Environmental
. . .
CW: Sort
of environmental. She got an award from
the Oregon Environmental Council for environmentalist of the year. For some
water quality thing . . .
CH: Isn’t
she for Goldschmidt . . .
CW: Yeah. That was after - she was his attorney
fighting - she worked for Stoel Rives -
I don’t remember if she worked for Stoel
Rives then. She was a corporate attorney
and she was working for P.G.E. When
Lloyd Marbet was trying to shut down Trojan she was the one having P.G.E. ads
running every five minutes on T.V. -
with Gail Ackerman against shutting down Trojan. It said, “Oregon
Environmental Council, environmentalist of the year.” It didn’t mention she was
on retainer from P.G.E.. I mean that’s
how - I mean that’s to me [laughs] sleazy.
So, Gordon Beck, who is actually a nice guy, - who is Chris Beck the representative - he
was a big shot corporate attorney. So,
Nancy Russell got Gail Ackerman and Gordon Beck to write their bill. And first of all, it was insane to write a
bill at that point. If she would have
ever talked to any environmentalists, which she didn’t, - she went after the
Coalition and got a couple of our board to break-off. And, [she] promised Craig the job as director
of this new group, Friends of the Gorge, if he would basically destroy the
Coalition - which he almost did - we
just barely saved it. We did lose the
Environmental Center.
The
Friends of the Gorge set up as a non-profit foundation and so all their money
is tax deductible. There was one point
during a lawsuit against them, over an employee that wasn’t fired for
uncovering embezzlement, and they were claiming like seven, eight percent of
their time was spent on lobbying and their executive director had been in D.C.
twenty-eight days that year [laughs].
You know, something [new?] [laughs] and it’s just - and they got away
with it. But it made them tax
deductible. So, they told me, “that we
support the Park Service we did all of this.” We had Congressman Siberling
[sp?] came out, who was the chairman of the National Park Sub-Committee, and
who was a good friend of mine, and his environmental aide was a real close
friend - I don’t know how many congressional aides hug and kiss Nancy Russell
[laughs]. And he came out here for a tour of the Gorge and Nancy Russell told
me I could not go on the tour. I said, “how come?” That is when she told me I was, quote, “too
inferior a person to be allowed to take part in politics.” But she promised me
they were pushing for the Park Service.
So, I called up John Siberling and he said, “tell Nancy Russell to go to
hell, you’re my personal guest on this tour.”
And Don Clark told me I couldn’t go.
So they promised me they’d push for the Park Service, so I agreed to not
go, which was [an] incredible mistake - I mean I had never been around people
like that, that would lie.
The
Park Service never came up. Nancy
Russell told ‘em all the groups are totally against the Park Service. They’re totally against any salmon and
tributary protection, they just want the Forest Service on a commission. So we had that going on. Meanwhile, Gail Ackerman was ordered that
they could not let any environmentalists see their bill. Gordon Beck, who since
passed away as the night, he was one of the old, rich, money; Portland, West
Hills money, and he called me up one night. He said, “Chuck, I have been
working for a month on payments in lieu of taxes. I know you know that in your head, I know in
ten minutes you could save me months more research. I want to pick your mind. I said, “I’m not
sure you’re going to pick my mind, I’m not allowed to see that bill that’s
being written behind my back.” He said, “well come down my off - when are you going to be in Portland?” I
said, “I got to go in tomorrow night.”
He says, “ well come by my office. I can’t give you a copy but I’ll let
you read it.” So, I read it. It was over.
It was a planning bill. They had
no Park Service in it. This is the
original one that they got Bob Packwood to introduce in eighty-one or
something.
CH: By
saying planning bill what do you mean?
CW: Instead
of being a park bill where you went in and bought land in easements, almost all
the protection was done through zoning.
So they took the tack that, Hey, we in Oregon have the only statewide land-use planning. Our land-use planning is perfect. We have no problems. It will work in the Gorge. All we have to do is take our land-use
planning and apply it to Oregon and the Gorge is saved.
Well,
that was total nonsense, but they did two things. One of them was you don’t go in there with
your bottom line. Our proposal had some
things to trade away in it. We knew what
we had to have as a bottom line to save the Gorge. We had text [?] for the Hood River Valley for
instance - which we knew we weren’t going to get. But, you know, we had something to go. They came in with way below our bottom line
- anti-Park Service. Nancy Russell kept going around telling the Oregonian,
and all these papers, that all the
environmental groups support her - Audubon - a complete lie, not one of them
supported her. But how do you deal? I
was totally unable to deal with people that just sit there - she went back to
D.C. and I started getting calls and she went around and told everyone I had
dropped out voluntarily, deferred to her
and I was now against the Park Service. I started getting calls from
Weaver’s aide and, you know, and Packwood’s aide said, “I can’t believe this.”
So I said, “it’s not true.” She orchestrated with Hatfield and they just
constantly lied. They came out with this bill, a year before there should have
been a bill. In other words, if she had known anything about establishing parks
you don’t write the details until you get the concepts agreed to. I wasn’t allowed - I say I still never been
allowed to meet with The Friends of the Gorge. I’ve still been banned. If she
would a been sincere about it, and cared about it, you would of got everyone on
board of the basic concepts.
And
then the bill - I’ve written parks bills - the guy who’s now the head of
Washington State Parks was Phil Burton’s aide, and he could’ve written the bill
in a night. Him and I sat down and we did some other bills. So, there is no
reason to write a bill because you just set-up a target to throw things at. So,
they stupidly write this planning bill that is based on L.C.D.C. - with no Park
Service, no tributary protection, no public input really. So, that moved the
whole - say, here was a full blown national park - here is no protection. We came in here with a
national recreation area - and the other reason for the National Scenic Area
name was to put the counties on notice. And I said look, “I’ll take a name that
allows flexibility - your put on notice. If the counties in the Gorge do their
work - the more you do to protect the
Gorge for the bill pass and less direct federal management there will need to
be. We are going to have a core National Recreation Area on the west end of the
Gorge, but particularly, the east end of the Gorge. How much protection you put
in, will determine how much direct federal control. The national scenic area
gave us that leeway, flexibility, but it turned out to be the main mistake. I
had no idea people I considered “fake” environmentalists were gonna come along
and sell us out.
CH: Like
who?
CW: Nancy
Russell.
CH: Nancy
Russell
CW: Bob
Clark. If we had kept the national recreation area name - Like, say, I am the
one that stupidly came up with the National Scenic Area name - being the head
of the Park Service - Rich Gambardini [sp?] head of the Park Service study team,
we would’ve had a bottom line that they couldn’t have gone below. The National
Recreation Area had precedence and we would have protected the Gorge. But by me
using the name, National Scenic Area, than Nancy Russell was able to come
along, and like Andy Kerr said, “put a sign that says National Scenic Area on
each end of the Gorge and business as usual in between.” So here is total
wilderness, here is our proposal, and here is no protection. Nancy Russell came
in here with their planning bill, and Gail Ackerman [sp?] . . .
CH: In
the middle?
CW: In
the middle. And that wouldn’t even
[have] protected the Gorge. So the
minute they did that, Spellman and Atiyeh were governors, they suddenly came in
with the Atiyeh bill. Which was no
Forest Service, no land acquisition, strictly a planning bill - which was the
Friends bill without any Forest Service involvement. Nancy had forced me out of the fight. I was
totally - I had been pushed out. I
wasn’t allowed to attend any meetings - Packwood and Weaver and Lawry, of
course, I knew them real well, would meet with me. But I wasn’t allowed to take part in any of
the participation. The Friends wouldn’t
allow me in any meetings or testify in hearings or anything.
CH: But
couldn’t you got to these people directly yourself and ask to be a part of it?
CW: We
had no money. They spent over two million dollars fighting us. How am I going to fly to D.C. every week like
Nancy Russell does? There was just no
way we - we kept fighting but we were pretty much forced out. The Governor’s
bill came out and Packwood had sponsored the Friends’ planning bill. Like I say, it was insane to put in a bill at
that point. In eighty-three - then in response to that they came out with
what the - Spellman and Atiyeh got together and wrote the Governor’s bill,
which was horrible, and it was sailing through the senate. Bob Packwood -
through the Congress period came out and held a hearing in Hood River; I
testified and Nancy Russell testified - and he had hired really good staff
then; so, they made sure I testified.
After the hearing Bob Packwood came over and says, “you’re obviously the
brains here; I want to meet with you.”
Remember he used to have that mobile home he took around?
CH: Yeah,
right.
CW: We
went out and met for about an hour in his home, in his mobile home, and talked
details. He really says, “I realized
Nancy Russell has no idea what she is talking about.” [laughs] And you know and
such - “you’re obviously the one.” So,
he says, “ we’ve got to kill this Governor’s bill.” So I said, “I know.” He went back to D.C. and he went to all the
national environmental groups; N.P.C.A., Wilderness Society, Sierra Club [?]. All of them said, “Well, we would like to
help you, but we were working on the Gorge when Friends of the Gorge forced
Chuck Williams out. They won’t work with
us; they have never met with an environmental group. They claim we support ‘em but they never met
with us. We can’t do anything until
Chuck’s back in. Bob Packwood called me
up and says - we had a long talk - and he says, “ you’ve got to come back here;
you can kill this bill because of your contacts in the environmental movement.
I said, “yeah, that’s true.” He says, “you gotta come back and kill it.” I said, “Well, two things; one of them, I’m
not gonna kill it for the Friends’ Bill.
If I kill it, it’s going to be for the Park Service and tributary
protection.” He says, “I totally agree.” He really understood the bill. We would sit down and talk details. He
understood why we had to do certain things.
I am still impressed by his knowledge of the details of the Gorge. Secondly, they destroyed my life and my
organization. We had to close our office, this was in eighty-three, and along
with some reparations, they directly took money from me. We had a deal. He went to The Friends of the Gorge and they
promised to give us ten thousand dollars, to the Coalition, so I could go back
and kill the bill; so we could really start over again and protect the Gorge.
We
opened up an office in White Salmon.
This is the Wilderness Bills for eighty-four; so, we had to get those out of the way. We had one - all of the wilderness in the
Gorge had already been decided, so there was no real controversy. But we had three major areas that the Sierra
Club had gotten - taken out of the Washington Bill. They had traded Puget Sound lands for our
land - for Mount Adams and Indian Heaven, and then Trapper Creek was one that
wasn’t even on the radar. So we decided
if we were going to reopen our office, we’re going after the Wilderness
Bill. We opened up in White Salmon, and
we were the miracle - in three months, with a thousand dollars, we added three
new wilderness areas into the bill. The
head environmentalist that worked on that, Karen [indiscernible], head of the
Washington Wilderness Coalition, and Gene Derney [sp?] with the Wilderness
Society, their Northwest rep., said we were the miracle workers of the whole
state. We pulled off miracles that were
unbelievable.
CH: Which
three wildernesses did you add on?
CW: Mount
Adams addition, Indian Heaven, and Trapper Creek. All of them.
And the Friends, or course, wouldn’t support any of those.
CH: And
why wouldn’t the Friends support that?
CW: They
were bankrolled by utilities and stuff.
We were trying to protect the White Salmon River in the Gorge Bill, and
they were bankrolled by PacifiCorp. I
put a letter in there, a 1981 fundraising letter for the Gorge went to all the
CEOs in the Northwest, signed by John Gray, who got paid off with five million
dollars of federal money, chairman of Schnitzer Steel, chairman of PacifiCorp,
who owned the dam in White Salmon River, Condit Dam, chairman of Weyerhaeuser. Chairman of Weyerhaeuser, Charles Wilson, was
on the Friends board when they decided to fight the Park Service. That’s how bad they were. And that was never made public. That was one of the things that me holding
the press conference, announcing the chairman of Weyerhaeuser was on the
Friends board could have blown them out of the way...
CH: So
which do you think came first? Did you
think that, you know, John Yeon, Nancy Russell, Don Clark, came first, and then
they went to people like the head of the - head of Schnitzer and PacifiCorp, or
do you think PacifiCorp and those people came to people like Nancy Russell and
asked them to...
CW: Well,
those are the people Nancy Russell hangs out with, down at the Arlington Club
and places, so they all knew each other.
CH: Right.
CW: Like
Fred Stickel [sp?] socializes with Nancy Russell, goes to her house. So I think Hatfield orchestrated it. I think Hatfield is a sly old fox that
orchestrated it, and Nancy, she didn’t care.
She wanted the publicity and so...
CH: So
you feel it was probably Hatfield then, that actually was the impetus behind
the forming of the Friends of the Gorge.
CW: Right. Well, in fact I can prove that, because the
first hearing Hatfield had after the Friends formed was in B.P.A. building in Portland,
and Don Clark - you can go back and read testimony and it says, “Senator, they
you for holding these hearings. We
formed a new group to get of the old -” you know, “just like you told us to do,
we formed a new group which we’re calling the Friends of the Gorge.” So he admitted - he started off saying,
“Yeah, we did exactly what you told us.
We formed this new group to get rid of the Coalition.”
CH: And
Hatfield wanted to get rid of the Coalition so that he could keep the interests
of the Forest Service intact...
CW: And
the timber industry and the utilities.
CH: Right.
CW: You
see, he’s very - his environmental record is horrible, and his mail is running
ten to one for a National Park Service
area. I mean, we had - my book, just -
excuse the immodesty, but it really kicked off a thing. We had support running ten to one, so he knew
he had to pass a Gorge National Scenic Area bill. So he just wrote his own - got his own fake
environmental group that would back what he was doing, and he’d use the
National Scenic Area name, but turn it into a conduit to pay off his
fund-raises. For instance, John Grey -
you know, the Salishan developer?
CH: Yes.
CW: He
raised a lot of money for Friends of the Gorge.
When Lonsdale was going after Hatfield, he gave Hatfield $10,000 the day
before the election to do some blitz against Lonsdale, and suddenly five
million dollars that was going to compensate local people went to John Grey to
build Skamania Lodge. There was five
million dollars of federal Gorge money [that] went to Skamania Lodge. But in sixty-one percent of the Gorge there’s
not one penny to compensate local people or protect lands. So everyone...
CH: That
was a public...
CW: Sort
of. A person who was on the Gorge
commission called me up during that public thing that they were having. It was up to the Gorge commission to decide
whether that money went to Klickitat
County or to Skamania County.
Klickitat County had a proposal for
the Bingen Marina there that most people thought was a better proposal
than Skamania Lodge. One of the people I
got appointed to the Gorge commission for Multnomah, over Nancy Russell’s - in
fact, Nancy Russell got - they held a press conference with the League of
Oregon Voters, whose director was out of town, and claimed that Chris Rogers,
now the U.S. Attorney, was a front for developers, and tried to kill her
appointment with the Gorge commission, and put Nancy Russell in. Gladys McCoy
appointed Chris because of the Indians and me. Chris was one of the top experts on Indian
law. Nancy Russell, they had petitioners
out all over Multnomah County, fighting Chris Rogers, trying to get Nancy
Russell appointed to the commission.
CH: And
they were successful, weren’t they?
CW: No,
We won because...
CH: You
did win.
CW: because
Gladys McCoy - because Nancy Russell was such a - excuse me, but, I’m on the
record, but - was such a racist that she just loathed her, and actually called
Polly Costerland [sp?] who since past away, she was the Corbett rep.
CH: Yes.
CW: Remember
her?
CH: Yes.
CW: She
was the county commi- she called me up and says, “Chuck, you know how we were
getting ready to appoint Chris Rogers, which is what we want to do. Everyone in Corbett hates Nancy Russell. We don’t want her, but she’s about - unless
you’ve got an ace up your sleeve, Chuck, she has forced and bought her way into
appointment.” And I said, “well, I do
have one ace.” I marched down to Gladys
McCoy’s office with Columbia River Intertribal Fish representatives, and Warm
Springs reps, and said, “this woman, Chris Rogers, is one of the top experts on
archaeological - we have no Indians that are allowed to take part, the bill the
Friends wrote totally excludes the Indians.”
They weren’t allowed to take part in the negotiations or anything with
Friends of the Gorge. So Gladys said,
“Thank you. That’s what I wanted to do
and you just gave me my excuse,” [laughs].
Actually, Gladys McCoy, one of her black aides said to me that, “Nancy
Russell was one the most racist people that I ever had to deal with.” I said, “in her defense, she hates all people
that aren’t rich, white, West Hills
people,” [laughs]. “It’s not race specific.”
Unfortunately, it’s the truth. I
wish it wasn’t...
CH: This
is what year then?
CW: Well,
that was after the bill passed. That was
right after. And so...
CH: Eighty-six?
CW: Yeah. Well, it passed late eighty-six, so the
appointments could have gone into ninety-seven.
CH: Eighty-seven.
CW: Eighty-seven,
I mean. But it was right - it was within
a month after the bill passed, when all the appointments -. That gets me back to Tom Imason [sp?], and so
this is - so, anyway, so Packwood came - and so the Friends of the Gorge
promised to give us tens of thousands of dollars. And just to show the you just how offensive
they are - we opened up our office, we won the Wilderness Bill, I went back to
D.C., I killed the governor’s bill, and we were ready to go. I called up Nancy Russell and I said, “okay,
I did my work. I want the money you owe
us, so we can get the - we opened our own office out of my own pocket, I
borrowed money. I want the money you owe
us.” She said - she offered to hire me
for one day, to take photographs for Friends of the Gorge, if I could prove to
her I had a good enough camera to take good pictures. That’s how offensive she is to me. I said, “well, I don’t need your money.” We never got any, and they just kept launch-
they broke every promise to Packwood.
They still kept fighting the Park Service, even though Bob Packwood
-. So they had a meeting in Olympia of
all the - finally the bill passed. The
Wilderness Bill was passed in eighty-four, so now everyone is going to
work. Bob Packwood was feeling really
good. He had the impression from Mark
Hatfield that Hatfield was going to support him. We had the bill ready to go. So there’s a big meeting of all the
staff. Then Dan Evans came in - I need
to get off some point off on the Trust for Public Lands, because they became a
major player, but...
CH: Right.
CW: So,
we were ready to go, and then Scoop Jackson died. Scoop was - the Friends don’t understand him
and didn’t know him as well as I did, but Scoop was one of those people - and
he was real pro-Park Service. His aide I
was really close friends with, Tony. So
he would say, “no, no. I’m against Gorge
protection.” But if he knew how it
worked, if you said you worked in the senate, one day, when it got time, Scoop
Jackson is going to walk into his staff and say, “write a Park Service bill for
the Gorge. I want to see it tomorrow,”
and it would be introduced the next day. That’s the way Scoop worked. He was going to come down for the Park
Service. Well, when he died, Dan Evans
put in, and we were, “oh boy! We got an
environmentalist here.” He killed the
bills for two years to allow the developers - and he was horrible. I mean, he was...
CH: To
allow the developers to do what?
CW: To
keep subdividing, like one of the commissioners of Skamania divided Wind Mount-
divided all his land into one acre lots.
They just let people develop like crazy.
Dan Evans killed the bill for two years.
The development went crazy. His
big thing - everyone has these egos - the thing with Dan Evans, he’s a
wonderful environmentalist if you’re within fifty miles of Puget Sound. So what he does is he gives all guard, we
call them the Seattle Mafia, the old guard environmentalists, everything they
want on Olympic and North Cascades, and just screws the rest of the state
environmentally, horribly. I had to -
Sid Morrison, who was - he’s now the
head of transportation of Washington. He
was the conservative Republican congressman from the Washington side of the
[Gorge] - Don Walker had the west end, and then he had the rest. We turned him around into an advocate. He became the number one wilderness
supporter, because of the Coalition.
He’d come in to hold a meeting on wilderness, and a hundred loggers
would show up threatening him and everything, and we’d walk in with a hundred
environmentalists and just be calm and nice to him. It got to the point where he would call me
whenever he was coming to the Gorge, so
we could turn out supporters to counter these crazy loggers that would
threaten him and such. He really - he
and An Act of Nature helped us. We
always talk about environmentalists, how clear-cutting causes erosion, well
he’s a farmer from Yakima Valley. Just
as the Wilderness Bill was almost through Congress, there was some massive floods. All of the farms that were on tributaries,
coming out of Forest Service wilderness in Yakima Valley were intact, and all
the ones coming out of clear-cuts were horrible erosion. He’s like, “Oh my God, There is something to
this.” So that combined - the Coalition
used to be so strong.
[Tape stops].
[Tape begins]
CW: So
anyway, Dan Evans turned out to be horrible, and Sid Morrison, we had turned
around. The Coalition, there had
probably never been a local group as connected and as active as the Columbia
Gorge Coalition. And we had no way of
raising money, we were banned from The Oregonian, and we could turn
hundreds of people out of here, and the Friends couldn’t turn out three or
four. Their board directors - half of
their board of directors we had gotten for them in their Gorge residence. We trusted them. We went out and got people. They said, “Yeah, we’re going to work
together.” Well, they didn’t. Their local reps never had a say in policy. Four people, Nancy Russell, Mitch Bauer
[sp?], Don Clark, and Bowen Blair made
it - and Dave Canard, made all the decisions at weekly breakfast meetings. The board wasn’t ever allowed to make
decisions and such.
[Tape stops]
[Tape begins]
CW: ...Anyway,
I will try at noon to go back an fill in.
So anyway, Dan Evans came in - and everyone has these egos. So he wanted to rewrite the whole bill to
base it on the power council. He came up
with this whole bi-statement. Of course,
we know how well the power council model saves salmon. Well, his power council model has done the
same for the Columbia Gorge. We’ve
totally lost the fight. He killed the
bill for two years. That’s when the
Trust for Public Lands - well, I’ll get into it some other time - but they were taken over by the Friends -
they got in financial trouble, and the Friends of the Gorge got Meyer - Fred Meyer’s
trust [indiscernible] to bail them out, and took over, and fired the wonderful
woman that was our friend in the Gorge, and put their own executive in charge
of Trust for Public Lands, which is why they didn’t want a federal conservancy
that can deal with land, because they’re making millions of dollars off of the
Gorge, the Trust for Public Lands are, without taking any risk. That’s something that is a really bitter to
us.
So
Dan Evans wanted to rewrite the whole thing to base it on the power council. It killed it for two years. Three times in one year I had to go get Sid
Morrison to lobby Dan Evans on the fight.
One of them was for Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge
[sp?]. Evans wouldn’t support it. I had to get Sid Morrison to lobby. And there were three of them in one year,
where I had to get our conservative Republican.
Dan Evans was just horrendous.
And he jumped in with an ego, “I’m taking this over,” and he wouldn’t
with us either. So we had three people,
Wyden, Hatfield, and Dan Evans, that wouldn’t meet with anyone except Friends
of the Gorge. You had to be a
millionaire to go into their office. We
were just told to got to hell. They were
just absolute rude to us. We took Dan
Evans’ aide, Don Bonkers [sp?], and Slade Gorton’s, rafting down the White
Salmon River, and the Klickitat River, and got them -. They had such a good time, they added those -
Wild and Scenic rivers were added into the Gorge Bill as the crumbs given us
for losing the Gorge fight. The Friends
of the Gorge fought those tooth and
nail. Our main enemy against the White
Salmon and Klickitat Rivers was the Friends of the Gorge, bankrolled by
PacifiCorp - I can prove all of that - to fight us on that. They’re both being destroyed because there’s
no land acquisition. All the land
acquisition money we have gotten for them, the Friends have gotten the Forest
Service to spend it in the Gorge. We
have subdivisions being built in the Klickitat.
We could have bought the whole for a thousand an acre back when the bill
passed. So Evans was just horrible.
Anyway,
they finally - we were just kicked out of the whole process yet again. This was the second time I had been [laughs]
kicked out of the Gorge. So anyway, they
had this meeting in eighty-five, where they were going to write the Gorge
Bill. All the congressional delegations’
staff got together in Olympia.
Packwood was feeling good. We had been on the phone the night
before. Tom Imason [sp?], who was still
working for Hatfield then, stood up in the meeting and said, “Senator Hatfield
just cut a deal with Slade Gorton and Dan Evans. There will be no Park Service. There will be no tributary protection. It is going to be a planning bill. This is the way it is. Period.”
Packwood was just blown out - his staff was so mad. They had no idea that was coming. They thought Hatfield was supporting
them.
So
then, to show you how insidious the - it is like the Pentagon revolving
door. Then, right after that, Imason
went to work for PacifiCorp, gave a whole bunch of money to the Friends of the
Gorge, sponsored their winter picnic. In
exchange the Friends agreed to the PacifiCorp cutting all their lands in the
Gorge before the bill passed, and fought the tributary protection. Then Imason became the - then when the bill
passed, Imason became the head of the transition committee for Goldschmidt, and
appointed the Friends of the Gorge to the - all the government appointees were
just - I mean, it just totally ended any hope of protecting the Columbia Gorge. So Tom Imason, then he went back to working
for Hatfield, and then back to work for PacifiCorp to fight us tearing up
Condon Dam [sp?], which we’re to win over the objections of the Friends of the
Gorge [laughs], and PacifiCorp. So we
have held on to win a few fights.
So
once that was done, it was dead. Then
Wyden went along with it. Weaver and
Lawry [sp?] tried to come in, and Hatfield just got real - “you keep your nose
out of this. It’s none of your
business. Ill get -.” So we were totally cut out, and weren’t even
allowed to - we went back and testified one last time, and it was - and
Packwood fought to the end. We met with
Packwood and said, “we got a problem here.”
So Packwood met with us in Hood River and he says, “Look it, if you can
get me the major national environmental groups to sign on to the Park Service
proposal, my proposal - I can roll Hatfield and Evans in New Jersey and all
these other states.” We said,
“okay.” So we were all ready. We drafted this letter that I don’t think is
in there, but I’ll get you, about what we want on the Gorge, our position. Well, suddenly the Sierra Club staff blocked
the local Sierra Club from signing it.
We couldn’t figure out what happened.
It turned out it was the first environmentalist that the Friends of the
Gorge ever met with was the sleaziest person in the history - is the Northwest
rep, Jim Lundquist [sp?], who was this - who also killed the Tall Grass Prairie
Bill. Audubon told me that. He’s just the sleaziest person, and they
wanted access, and he went and traded the Gorge to Hatfield for, we think, the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Hatfield said, “anyone who doesn’t support my proposal for the Gorge I
will never meet with.” There’s - in fact
you’d be interested - there’s a famous David Brower [sp?] letter to the Sierra
Club about how they had...
[End of Tape 3, Side 1].
January 25, 1999
Tape 3, Side 2
CH: ...interview
with Chuck Williams at the Oregon Historical Society in Portland, Oregon. The interviewer, for the Historical Society,
is Clark Hansen. The date is Monday,
January 25, 1999. And this is Tape 3,
Side 1 [actually Side 2].
Do
you want to start?
CW: Sure.
CH: So
we had left off with your description of the trade, or what you perceived to be
the trade, for the Columbia Gorge and the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. And I wanted to ask you about that, and I
also wanted to ask you about the idea that your Coalition had for protecting
the Hood River Valley because it’s not in...
CW: Right.
CH: ...in
the bill the way it stands now, and then I also wanted to ask you about the - a
little bit more about the Trust for Public Lands, so if you could...
CW: Sure.
CH: ...cover
those areas, I’d appreciate that.
CW: Okay. Yeah, when we were - having had a lot of
experience establishing new parks, I knew you had to have something in it to
give away, that when things get down you’re going to lose something, and so we
had put in some things that we knew we wouldn’t win in the end. But you need to push for more, and one of
them was protection for the Hood River valley within the Columbia Gorge
legislation. I did this in large part as
a favor to Kate McCarthy [sp?], who was on the old voluntary Gorge commission,
and who I worked with very closely, her and Vera Defoe. And I did it as a thanks for her, in no small
part. She turned out - there are people
who helped form Friends of the Gorge that were still nice to us, but Kate
McCarthy not only helped form the Friends of the Gorge, she helped Nancy
Russell literally destroy the Coalition, and...
CH: Good. Could you - I just want to ask you a question
here. You haven’t - you’ve mentioned
Kate before, and I don’t think you’ve mentioned Vera Defoe before. Could you give me a profile of each of them.
CW: Sure. Kate McCarthy is a wealthy person who lives
in the Parkdale area in what we call the West Hills of the Gorge, and Vera
Defoe, a friend of hers, was from Portland, and was real involved in the
Mazamas for years, and someone that I still have a lot more respect for than I
do Kate anymore. They were good friends,
and they were both interested in the Gorge, and were specifically helping to
kill a tramway that the Port of Cascades was trying to build up in the
wilderness. They were involved in
that. Since they were on the old
advisory committee, they were some of the first people I started working
with. I still get along with Vera. Kate’s another [laughs] story. I’m really, especially bitter over that,
because I did do so much work to try to protect the Hood River valley, in no
small part thanks to her work. When the
Friends of the Gorge formed, she was one of the founding board members. And when Gail Ackerman and Gordon Beck wrote
the bill behind closed doors, not a single environmentalist, that I would
consider environmentalist, or no one active in the Gorge, was allowed to see
it, until after it was given to the press.
I think I mentioned the other day, that it was incredibly stupid to
write a detailed bill at that time. If
Nancy Russell had known anything about politics in that regard, other than
buying people [laughs], then she would have known you wouldn’t have done
that. You would have gotten the
principles down, Park Service and Tributary, whatever your principles are, and
then you write the bill at the last moment.
We know how to write bills. I can
write them in my sleep. It’s not a big
deal. The gentleman now, Cleve Pennix
[sp?], he’s the head of the Washington State parks, was the staff of the House
Subcommittee that would have written the bill.
He could have written it in an hour.
We didn’t need a detailed bill.
There was no reason to have Gordon Beck and Gail Ackerman write a
bill. It was really destructive at that
point to do it...
CH: Who
was Vera Defoe?
CW: Vera
Defoe is a Portland person, now. She’s
getting up in years now. She had been
very active in the Mazamas. She is a
climber and such, and very - an outdoor person that was fairly involved in
politics.
CH: And
how - what was her relationship to the Coalition and the Friends?
CW: Well,
she kind of was neutral. Kate went -
like I said, she and Kate were really good friends, and were both on the
voluntary Gorge commission at the same time, before it was replaced by the one. They were good friends. They were very supportive, they were both -
and I worked very close - since they were already involved with the Gorge when
I came back to the Gorge in the beginning of seventy-seven. So I worked very close with them, and Vera
I’ve remained respectful of her, and we still get along okay. She kind of was in the middle. She helped the Friends, but also continued to
help us and be nice, whereas Kate McCarthy literally helped Nancy Russell try
to destroy the Coalition. I will never -
and we weren’t allowed to see the bill.
Nancy Russell released her bill to the press before she let any of us
that started the Gorge fight see it. She
sent Kate McCarthy with the bill to a Coalition meeting in Hood River, at Lucia
Wire’s [sp?] house, to show us the bill, and instead sat there and trashed me,
and just said the most horrible things.
“This guy is no good,” and “dump him.
We got real important people now involved in the Gorge, and you should
all just abolish the Coalition,” and asked my whole board to dump my board and
get involved with the Friends. Then, she
showed us the bill, and the whole board - we had already lost a couple of
people off of the board. Craig was kind
of pushed off, and then Susan Kady, who I’m still good friends with, went on the
board of the Friends, as she said, allowed her name to be used by the
Friends. They weren’t really allowed
into the decision-making process. The
rest of the board said, “no way. If that
horrible legislation is what the Friends support, there’s no way we could ever
support that.” Even - everyone, except
the wealthy [laughs], knew the bill was just worthless. It was not a - had nothing to do with
protecting the Gorge, really.
That
pretty well burned her bridges with me.
She still fights us every step of the way, and still will not admit
there’s any problems. She got her son
appointed to the Gorge commission.
CH: Who
is that?
CW: Steve
McCarthy, who lives in Portland. He
makes liqueurs, I think. Like I say,
we’re banned from the Oregonian, but when he started this liqueur
company they did like a four-page color spread on him in the Oregonian. The wealthy get off. He recently left the Gorge commission, but he
was demanding - we’re getting up to more modern times, but it’s critical - and
he made a big deal at a Blumenauer meeting, of which I wasn’t allowed to speak
at, about how the head of - executive director, Jonathan Dougherty [sp?], of
the Gorge commission ought to be fired.
People involved with it were asking me why he was going after the Gorge
commission. I explained to them that his
mom was one of the founders of the Friends, and one of the ones that helped
kill protection. So, like anyone
involved with the Friends, they’re looking for scapegoats. He wanted to blame - the Friends will never
take any blame - they claim their bill has nothing to do with the problems in
the Gorge. It’s just little things like
lack of funding and such, which is total nonsense. So he was basically going to bat for his mom,
which, since I’m really close to my mom, I can understand [laughs]. But it was totally unjustified in my
end. It was their bill, and such.
So
Kate and Vera were on the old Gorge commission that was abolished when the new
one was formed.
CH: So,
could you tell me a little bit more about the old commission? You referred to it as a voluntary commission.
CW: Yeah,
they had no real power.
CH: What
was the title of them?
CW: They
were the Columbia Gorge Commission, and each state had set this up. I think John Yeon [sp?] some people had tried
to get protection for the Gorge. Tom
McCall, who I have a lot of respect for, was not real good on it. A lot of it got into Portland politics with
Nanny Warren [sp?], Mrs. Robert Warren and such, who loathes John Yeon, and
vice versa. We got into all kinds of
these...
CH: What
was your impression of Nanny Warren?
CW: I
personally liked her. She was kind of a
funny person and -. I liked her, but she
wasn’t really the right - she didn’t really understand Gorge politics that
much. They have a massive compound in
the Gorge, across from Multnomah Falls, and they get to keep building. So she was the official Portland
establishment person, but Nancy Russell and John Yeon hate her. She’s from the other part of the blue blood
[thing?] [laughs], and so they hated her and wanted her out. But I don’t think she was a particularly good
or bad commissioner. She ended up chair
of it for a while. I got along good with
her, but they had no power. They were
gubernatorial appointees. Each state had
their half of the Gorge commission. They
were based in Stevenson. I can’t
remember when that was originally set up.
It could have been as back as far as the sixties, but I think it was in
the fifties. There had been effort to
try to protect the Gorge, kind of a half-hearted one. So that’s what the states did to head off any
kind of federal protection of the Gorge, was they set up this bi-state
commission. But they had no power. They could
- they were only an advisory board.
So they would advise, kind of, “we don’t like you going,” - you know,
they were - I can’t remember the island, or it’s a peninsula now, that’s at the
mouth of Hermit Creek, that was being quarried, Government Cove...?
CH: Oh
yeah. Right.
CW: Anyway,
like they were trying to keep - you know, they were pressuring Hood River
County to not rock mine that, and things like that. But all they had was pressure. They were nice people. I’m the only person that ever really went to
any of their meetings.
CH: And
who were they appointed by?
CW: The
governors.
CH: The
governors of the two states?
CW: The
two states, yeah. There was some really
good people on that. In fact, I think in a lot of ways, better people - more -
less self-serving people than there are now, that they get more publicity. Because then, you got grief from the
counties, and you got no publicity, so it was a really thankless job. Whereas now, there’s a lot of publicity with
being a Gorge commissioner, and you’re always introduced to any meeting [?]
that has to do with the Gorge, or anytime there are V.I.P.s around, they
introduce the Gorge commission members there now.
CH: Are
they paid?
CW: No,
they just get some travel-type - you know, they get some expenses, but it’s a
volunteer thing.
CH: I
see.
CW: In
the old Gorge commission, they had an executive director, Jeff Breckel [sp?],
who was a very nice guy. He was a former
Navy nuclear sub engineer, with Jimmy Carter [laughs].
CH: Oh
yeah, right.
CW: He
came back to the Gorge. His wife,
Marilyn [sp?], who is a very sharp person, went to work for Skamania County
government, and was the most competent person there, and kept it together. They just hated her. They’d get death threats. And I think I mentioned that Jeff Breckel
[sp?] and I were the only two guys in Skamania County that didn’t have guns,
and we were the two that’s life were
most in danger [sp?], the two that needed guns the most.
CH: And
why didn’t you have guns?
CW: I
just don’t particularly like guns, and he doesn’t either. Neither of us hunt,
so there was no reason to have guns to hunt.
We probably should have had them for self-defense, considering some
really nasty things that’s been done to both of us [laughs], but he was...
CH: Are
you opposed to hunting, then?
CW: No,
not at all. No, I’m Indian. You can’t be [laughs]...
CH: Well,
I was wondering. That was my next
question.
CW: No,
I don’t personally hunt, but I eat elk and venison every chance I get. It’s just something I don’t personally do,
but, no, it’d be hard for an Indian to be against hunting. I had someone offer me some meat the other
day - I can’t remember where it was - and they started to say, “oh, are you a
vegetarian?” and I said, “Give me that.
A vegetarian Indian’s an oxymoron” [laughs]. There is no such thing [laughs].
CH: [laughs]
And could you tell me some more about the Trust for Public Lands?
CW: The
Trust for Public Lands came into the Gorge before the Friends of the Gorge had
even formed, when we were starting it. I
don’t know where we mentioned it, when we are at lunch or when we were on tape
but there was a nice guy named Gene Zimmerman [sp?] who was the district ranger
for the Columbia Gorge station there, out of Corbett. I liked him very much, still do. He and I brought in the Trust for Public Lands, which was a
fairly new group at that time, based in San Francisco. I know a couple of the founders fairly well
from my work with Friends of the Earth, Phil Wayleen [sp?], for instance, who’s
now the head of River Network and such.
I knew all of them. Gene
Zimmerman and I, kind of separately, contacted them. They sent this wonderful woman named Harriet
Burgess up here, and she became the best friend the Gorge ever had.
CH: The
Trust is located where?
CW: It’s
based in San Francisco. They now have an office in Portland, but when they were
working in the Gorge, they didn’t.
Harriet was out of San Francisco, and she’d come up for a week or so at
a time. Then, they ended up hiring a
former Forest Service employee, Don Vaughn [sp?], who ended up having to quit
when Nancy Russell did her takeover of the Trust, and embarrassed him so bad
that he had to quit. But, he was a great
guy. So he was their on-ground person
here, that met with landowners, and got appraisals and such, and Harriet was
the one that really closed the sales and such.
She was just an incredible lobbyist, and knew everyone in D.C. [She] was
one of those people that everyone loved, unlike your truly [laughs], for
instance. Everyone likes Harriet. She’s just one of those really nice, nice
people.
So
we could only buy land in the Gorge for areas that were already within the
National forest boundaries, or within state parks. Unfortunately, she tried to buy land to add
to the state parks, like around Mayer
State Park, near Rowena, and Dave Talbot, the then head of Oregon State
Parks, who I think will go down as one of the real villains in Oregon
history...
CH: What
is his name again?
CW: I
just said -. Let me think for a sec. Dave Talbot.
CH: Dave
Talbot.
CW: He’s
old Oregon money, a total political hack.
I mean he’d come in and - it didn’t matter what he believed. If Atiyeh told him the Park Service was bad,
then the Park Service was bad, and he’d go to very extreme lengths to kill any
kind of Gorge protection. He fought the
National Park Service every step of the way, and refused to expand any of the
state parks. The Trust for Public Lands
was trying to buy land to add on to state parks. He wouldn’t even accept them when they bought
them. The only land he wanted in the
Gorge was the Reynolds property, which is the land at the mouth of the Sandy
there between the freeway and the Columbia there, going east the Sandy
River. And he wanted that because he
wanted to put a big ego visitor’s center in there that would give a bunch of
publicity to him.
CH: And
what was the basis of his opposition to the Trust?
CW: Well,
he didn’t oppose the Trust per se, he just opposed any protection of the Gorge.
CH: And
why?
CW: Because
he was a complete political hack for Atiyeh, who opposed Park Service
protection. So whatever Atiyeh said, he
went along with, and no - at best, regardless of his own feelings, did anything
Atiyeh wanted. Atiyeh said no Park Service,
so he said, “yes, sir.” But he could
have expanded. Atiyeh didn’t tell him he
couldn’t expand the state parks and such.
That’s totally his own doing.
During his whole term, there wasn’t a single new state park in Oregon,
and that was a time when we had matching dollars from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund, when the majority of the money was state grants that would
match anything. So we could have had
lands in the Gorge for a couple of hundred dollars an acre. He refused to expand any of the parks. He fought the Park Service every step of the
way. He was one of the people who was
instrumental in keeping Indians from even being able to take part in the
debates on the Gorge.
CH: Really?
CW: We
went and crashed - I found out about - there was, after the Friends formed, a
meeting, when they working on legislation down at Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and I found about it the night before. It was Nancy Russell, and she had just hired
Bowen Blair to be their executive director.
They were meeting with Spellman’s aide and Atiyeh’s aide, Governor
Spellman from...
CH: Washington.
CW: From
Washington...
CH: Washington,
that’s right.
CW: ...brought
in - well, I don’t care, but brought in one of the sleaziest machine
politicians [laughs] I’ve ever seen. Ed
Divine, if I remember, is his name. He
was like an old Chicago politician, just reeked of - he was just awful. And then Atiyeh had Bob Duncan’s former aide,
I can’t remember her name right off hand.
She was the head of Natural Resources under Atiyeh, and had been...
CH: Pat
Amadeo?
CW: Yeah. You’ve got it. Pat Amadeo.
So Pat Amadeo and - Ed Divine, Spellman’s aide, and Pat Amadeo had been
appointed by Atiyeh to represent negotiations.
They held this meeting with congressional staff, a secret meeting and no
one else was allowed. She was playing
incredibly sleazy games. So she went and
told the Gorge commission - she told the congressional reps that the meeting
was on Tuesday, if I remember right, told the Gorge commission, who was
supposed to be at this meeting, that the - and this is the old advisory one -
that the meeting was on Thursday. I
found out about the meeting - and no Indians were invited, of course. Since it was O.D.F.W., in Oregon laws it had
to be an open meeting. So one of the
attorneys for Intertribal Fish Commission - I was in Portland that night
before, working on killing a dam on the Wind River, with Intertribal Fish
Commission. So Wilbur Johnson, who was
one of the Warm Springs commissioners on Intertribal Fish Commission was in
town. He and John Plant [sp?], who is
Elizabeth Furse’s husband, who later on became a congressman. At the time she was a legal aide attorney
handling the restoration of my tribe, the Grand Ronde tribe. So we went down and crashed the meeting. They were very upset we came in. They asked, not me, but they asked the
Indians if they wanted to sit at the table, and said, “no, we’ll stay here in
the peanut gallery.” They were really
upset that we had shown up at the meeting...
CH: Why
didn’t they join the meeting? Why did
they stay in the peanut gallery?
CW: Oh,
because it was obvious that we weren’t wanted there. It was really hostile - you know, it was a
very hostile environment.
CH: And
why didn’t they want the natives there?
CW: Because
- well, for Nancy Russell, I’m sure it was just blatant racism, I’m sorry to
say. Atiyeh himself isn’t. He’s a wannabe [laughs] he’s one of the -
epitome of the wannabe Indians [laughs] that you ever saw, but Pat Amadeo is
another story. So anyway, we walked into
the meeting just when Pat - and we got off
to kind of a bad - and the congressional staff started saying, “well,
where’s the Gorge commission. That was
kind of the purpose of this meeting was to meet with the Gorge commission
staff, and some of them.” And she said,
“I don’t know. I invited them
today.” I stood up and I said, “Excuse
me, Pat, but I was in the Gorge commission office the other day when you called
them and told them the meeting was on Thursday, not today.” And there were just gasps [laughs] all over
the room over that one. So we got off on
a real not too good a - Oh, and all the heads of the major Oregon agencies were
there. The L.C.D.C. was fighting Gorge
protection, who Clair Pucchi [sp?], who have since become friends with - it was
just this turf thing, that I’m sure has a lot to do with Nancy Russell. “We’re the planners. We don’t need the goddamn feds in here.” They were fighting the Park
Service. Jack Donaldson, who at the time
was real racist towards Indians, and I will, to his credit - we’re now pretty
good friends. He has really changed,
primarily because of Tim Wapato, who was executive director in the late
eighties, Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission - really worked on
Jack. They’d go hunting together, and
Tim would go with the good old boys that run the agencies. He really broke down a lot of barriers. Jack is now not at all racist, very nice guy
and very supportive. But at the time, he
stood and he said - someone mentioned
something about the Indian fishing, and he said, “I just saw this great bumper
sticker. ‘Next time you’re hungry for
salmon, eat an Indian.’” I stood up and I said, “Jack, I’m light-skinned but I
really resent that. I’m Indian and I
resent that remark,” and I made him apologize to me [laughs] in front of all
the state staff. So he wasn’t too happy
about that. It was a stormy meeting from
the beginning.
CH: Could
I ask you about the - I’m trying to understand better - the reasons why people
might not want to have the natives included in this? And I understand there could be some economic
meetings, and I understand there could be some racist reasons, but at this
point, the natives that were living in that area were basically the Chinook,
right? The descendants of the Chinook...
CW: Right.
CH: And
of what other...?
CW: Well,
primarily people that are enrolled at Yakama and Warm Springs, and Grand Ronde,
at the time, hadn’t been restored.
CH: Right.
CW: ...so
they still aren’t allowed into the discussions on the Gorge...
CH: So
this is what I’m leading up to is I’m wondering - now, the registration of the
Grand Ronde came later.
CW: Right.
CH: So,
was it the perspective of some of these people opposing the native involvement,
that there was not a legitimate native group in the Gorge to be represented in
the first place?
CW: No,
I don’t think so, because Intertribal Fish Commission existed at the time, and
they could have gone to them, which they didn’t. No it was just, “it was none of their
business.” What happened in the Gorge
was the business of rich Portland white people, period. It wasn’t - you know, Indians are just
irrelevant to politics. They didn’t
deserve - and sometimes it’s blatant racism.
Other times, it’s just, why cause more trouble? If we bring them in, it’s going to be harder
to reach a consensus.
CH: Well,
what about the other people that had a very recognized status within the native
community? I’m thinking of people like
Tim Wapato and Wilbur Johnson, and a number of other people that were very
recognized. Were they involved in any
way?
CW: Not
until I brought them. They were involved
before, when I was involved, but Nancy Russell came in. She wouldn’t allow anyone to be
involved. There were four people, Don
Clark originally, Nancy Russell, Mitch Bauer [sp?], who’s a wealthy - he owns a
big trucking company, he’s this multimillionaire in Vancouver, and who later
got caught embezzling $80,000 from the Friends, and Dave Canard, who is an
insurance salesman, who I personally think’s one of the most loathsome people
even environment - and just a reprehensible person, and they originally were
the only four allowed in on decision making.
Then, when they hired Bowen Blair to be their executive director, then
he became - Don Clark kind of dropped
out at that point, so it became the four of them. They had weekly breakfast meetings where all
the decisions were made, and they allowed debate at their meetings. In other words...
CH: Now,
this is the Friends of the Gorge.
CW: Right,
the Friends of the Gorge. So basically,
they didn’t allow anyone except Nancy Russell and the three people she met
weekly with. Don Frisbee, of course, was
in all the negotiations.
Charles Wilson, chairman of
Weyerhaeuser, was on their board. So
they would meet with the robber barons around Portland, but no one else was
allowed. It wasn’t so much a racist
thing against the Indians. They just
didn’t want - if you weren’t a rich white West Hiller, or Vancouver elite, they
wouldn’t talk to you. You were
automatically inferior. So it wasn’t so
much against the Indians, it was just this thing, why should the Indians be
involved. What’s the Gorge got to do
with them?
At
this meeting, what they were determining was who was going to make up this commission. This was for the governor’s bill, that wasn’t
going to have the Forest Service involved.
There was going to be federal
acquisition money, but it was strictly a commission. It was what passed, less the Forest
Service. So they were setting up this
committee, and they - or commission, that was going to be in the bill, and they
decided they would have one representative from each of the six counties. So when Wilbur says, “Well do tribes get
representation on this commission?” they kind of stuck their heads together,
and Ed Divine, Spellman’s aide says, “well, we’ll give -” because at the time
the Grand Rondes hadn’t been restored quite yet, so there were four tribes that
had treaty rights to fish in the Gorge.
You have different types of native rights. There’s ceded area
rights. Those are the areas that were
given up title to during the 1855 treaties, but which the tribes retained,
reserved the right - as in reservation - to fish, hunt, collect roots, and various
things. Within the Columbia Gorge, what
became the Columbia Gorge Scenic Area, there’s, on the Washington side, from
about the Little White Salmon east, is Yakama - Confederated Tribes of Yakama
ceded area. That involves Chinook
people, Cascades and Wishram, and some Hopkin’s Beacon [sp?] people, the people
that lived in the eastern end of the Gorge and the Klickitats. The Warms Springs, likewise, from Cascade
Locks east, on the Oregon side, is their ceded area, where they have the
rights. If you want to do something that
affects Indians in that area, you got to Warm Springs.
CH: Then
how could they make some sort of arrangement for the Gorge, through any kind of
government commission or whatever, without dealing with the native rights?
CW: They’ve
been doing it for over a century [laughs].
It was nothing new.
CH: But
they have enough control over various lands in the Gorge that wouldn’t they
have to be accounted for legally, to be..?
CW: Well
see, they weren’t even acknowledging that, and that’s what - so what
happened-. So anyway, there were four
tribes, and then the Grand Rondes also have ceded lands in the Gorge, the
Oregon side, from Cascade Locks west, and then the area on the Washington side
of the Gorge, west of the Little White Salmon River, is unceded territory. It’s never been ceded in a treaty. I actually opened up a door: Scoop Jackson wouldn’t see me one time, and I
reminded him I was Cascade Indian, and was thinking very seriously of a suit
over the unclaimed land in there. I was
in to see him in about five minutes [laughs].
It was opening the door immediately, because he realized what - that it
would be real problems there. Then, the
other two tribes that had treaty rights in the Gorge were the Umatillas and Nez
Perce. They used to travel down the
Gorge, especially Salilo [sp?], annually to fish. So part of their treaty rights is that they
can fish in the Gorge. They didn’t have
ceded lands in the Gorge...
CH: But
they had fishing rights.
CW: But
they had fishing rights. Basically, four
tribes had treaty rights at the time of these negotiations, to fish. Wilbur said, “well, I think you should have
each of the four tribes have a position on the commission.” Ed Devine, Spellman’s aide, came back and
said, “well, what if we have one position for the Indians and we rotate them on
the four tribes?” And Wilbur says, “why
don’t you have one position for the counties and rotate it between the six
counties?” Well, they didn’t want to
hear that. So they said, “well yeah,
we’ll include you in,” and then the tribes never heard another word. It was, “yeah, we’ll put you on the
commission,” but when it came out, there was nothing to do with Indians at
all. It took a while, but basically what
happened - and I helped write it - was that the tribes, when they started
realizing - and this is something where Dan Evans was fairly good on, was he
understood Indian allotments anyway - was that there was a whole lot of Indian
land in the Gorge, most of it individual allotments that were in trust. So basically, the tribes were totally pushed
out by the Friends of the Gorge, from any negotiations, having any say in Gorge
management, other than what they could do through - you know, they could go to
the commission and make a presentation,
like any other person without treaty rights [laughs] could. They wrote - it’s in the end of the Gorge
legislation, there’s - I can’t remember the phrase, but there’s a whole series
of about a dozen little paragraphs.
One’s to protect B.P.A., where
nothing in this bill shall in any way prevent the Corps of Engineers and B.P.A.
from providing hydroelectric power. So
the tribes and I helped authorize it. We
just put a - we demanded and got - I can’t remember what’s that called. It’ll come to me here. So we just wrote this language, and we
thought of every single word we could think of, and we just put, “nothing in
this legislation shall in any way abri-” what’s the word I’m trying to think
of?
CH: Oh
yeah, abrogate.
CW: “...abrogate,
lessen -” we started out with about twenty verbs there - “every single - any
right of tribal or individual Indian rights in the Gorge.” So basically what happened, all Indian lands
- because the tribes weren’t allowed into the management of the Gorge, all
tribal lands were exempted from any regulation from the Gorge bill. And that’s why, because - like I say, it
wasn’t so much - well, it was racist, because it’s the Friends of the Gorge,
but they wouldn’t allow anyone into the debate.
They knew better, they were rich, and they didn’t need any Indians.
CH: Does
that affect the standing now, regarding the fishing rights and the salmon
protection, and all that?
CW: No,
not at all. People primarily, through
Chris Rogers, the tribes do have some say in it. And she, when I got her appointed to the
commission, she forced the commission to meet with each of the tribal
governments. They went out to each
reservation and met. But they can’t
really take part. I mean, you get - we
got 800 houses, and they’re just deluged with all these applications, and
there’s no way anyone - for a while, they got money to hire someone to monitor
development and such, but it’s - you can’t win.
I mean, they’re all going to go in anyway. They had done some really good things. The Umatilla...
[End of Tape 3, Side 2]
January 25, 1999
Tape 4, Side 1
CH: This
is an interview with Chuck Williams, by Clark Hansen, at the Oregon Historical
Society. The date is 1/25/99, and this
is Tape 4, Side 1.
Go
ahead.
CW: As
I was mentioning, there was no tribal representation on the commission,
although one of the commissioners right now is Louie Pitt from Warm Springs,
one of my cousins - a good guy - but he’s a gubernatorial appointment. It had nothing really to do with him being
Indian. In fact, when Chris was
replaced, we tried to get Kim Simmons, who works for the U.S. attorney’s
office, [and who] is Indian, we tried to get him on the commission. We were told by - who is the chair now,
the..?
CH: Of
the...
CW: The
Multnomah County Commission.
CH: Bev
Stein
CW: Bev
Stein told us there’s already one Indian on the commission, so she went and
appointed the Friends of the Gorge person, a staff person from Thousand Friends
of Oregon.
CH: The
one person being Louie Pitt.
CW: Yeah,
but he’s not appointed because he’s Indian.
He’s a gubernatorial appointment that just happens to be Indian.
CH: Does
he look out for the interests of Indians?
CW: Oh
yeah. He tries to, it’s not easy. Like I say, there’s no Indian appointee,
specifically, but he’s the only Indian on the commission. The tribes do various amounts, it’s just
nothing - you have to be wealthy to take part in the process. That’s why they set it up as such a
bureaucratic nightmare, so that only the developers and the Friends of the
Gorge could even take part in the process.
You have to spend all day, every day, going to these meetings. That reminds me, one of the things I really
need to get into is the way they made no one responsible. Maybe I’ll go ahead and do that. It was one of the...
CH: No
one responsible for what?
CW: For
any problems there are in the Gorge.
Under our plan, we would have had a place where we had less than fee,
and we had regulation and such, but the National Park Service would have been ultimately
responsible for anything that happened bad.
The way it is now, all this horrible stuff goes on, and no one is
responsible, and it was purposely set up by Mark Hatfield to do that, so there
wouldn’t be protection. For instance, if
there’s a horrible, blatantly illegal clear-cut say at the top of Underwood
Mountain, which S.D.S. has been just clear-cutting, right in view of Hood
River...
CH: S.D.S.,
who is that?
CW: S.D.S.
lumber out of [indiscernible]. They’re
the worst - probably the worst land rapers in the Gorge. They are our nemesis. They’ve harassed - they’ve not only done
horrible things like going in and girdling massive old growth oaks along the
White Salmon River, just to kill them, with no intention to use it, just to
harass us, they’ve done some horrible personal things, getting people hired and
such. I lost some land in part because
of them. They’re clear-cutting, so we go
to the Gorge commission, and they say, “well, that’s not our turf. All logging is under the Forest Service
turf.” We go to the Forest Service and
we complain about it, and then they say, “well, that’s not our turf. That was the Washington Department of Natural
Resources.” So we go up to Olympia, and
say, “why are you approving this cutting?”
They said, “well, we signed it, but we were told to by the Forest
Service. We didn’t make the
decision.” So it’s cut, and you have no
way of ever putting on who - I mean, look at B-line house, as I call it,
everyone is blaming everyone else. The
legislation was set up that way. You can
never put the finger on who is responsible.
They had this divided jurisdiction, where the S.M.A.s have only
commission control over - or the...
CH: S.M.A.s?
CW: The
Gorge is split into - thirty-nine percent of the Gorge is made special
management areas. Ten percent of it’s
exempted urban communities, and fifty-one percent is what is called a general
management area. All it is, is Oregon
land use planning applied with no acquisition allowed. That’s one of the most horrible things ever
done. That’s one of the massive failures
of the Gorge legislation. Friends of the
Gorge fought that, evidently to free up money to give John Gray and other
people for economic development, to pay them off. That book, Climbing the West, that
Carl Abbot and some other people did,
O.S.U. published. There’s a section in
there about how I was adamant that there had to be acquisition authority
throughout the Gorge, and that I was just adamant, would never back off, and
had been proven totally right, that that just turned -. Friends of the Gorge still do not admit
that’s a problem. That’s one reason that
there’s hundreds and hundreds of houses going in, because there is no way in
sixty-one percent of the Gorge to compensate landowners, there’s no way to protect
lands. We agreed that in the general
management area that the majority of land would be left in private ownership,
would not go into the - special management areas are supposed to be purchased,
but they’re not only part of - the timber industry gets their land purchased,
but a lot’s not being purchased there.
[In the] general management area, there’s no way to protect lands. You could have a spawning stream, it makes absolutely
no difference. You have to maybe set a
state park or figure out some way, but there’s no Forest Service acquisition
allowed in the general management area, which is extremely unfair at both - it
kills protection, long-term protection, because there’s no deed
restrictions. It’s strictly done through
zoning, which lasts until the next bribe or election. This is what’s happening, is when Dick
Beneris [sp?], the head of the commission, he came in there and the Friends of
the Gorge said, “yeah, you’re going to keep on in-filling everything, and keep
building.” When this started out there
was going to be a freeze on rural development, and the future development was
going to be channeled into the cities.
Well, now there’s something like four times as much development in the
supposedly protected rural parts of the Gorge as in the cities. The growth is not going into the cities. It’s all going - 750, 800 houses now, so far,
all approved by the Friends of the Gorge.
A lot of those wouldn’t have been approved had there been an alternative
for compensating people. For instance, the
Bea house, that’s so controversial, it’s
directly across from Multnomah Falls, but under the Friends bill, no one can
buy it. There’s no compensation.
CH: Now,
you’re referring to the Friends bill is what is actually the Columbia Gorge...
CW: Right.
CH: Maybe
- go ahead and finish if you like, but maybe at some point here we could
actually go though how the act was set up and your problems with it, and what
you wanted to do, and things like that.
So feel free to go into that at any point.
CW: Sure. Well, that’s kind of what I’m getting at
here.
CH: Okay.
CW: So
a lot of the problem is that you can’t finger responsibility in the Gorge. Like I say, Hatfield purposely - he knew
that. He purposely set it up, so the
development could keep on going, and no one could ever stop it, because you had
no way of knowing where to go to, or you have no acquisition if you want to
stop a house or such. Under our bill, we
would have had - the Packwood Coalition bill, the environmentalist bill - there
would have been an area, particularly in the eastern end of the Gorge, that
would have been under the Cape Cod formula, where it was like it is now, where
the local governments draw up the initial plan, and the commission implements
it. But if a variance is ever granted,
then the Park Service had the authority to step in and buy the land, condemn it
and buy it. Plus, they could buy land
everywhere. Not having that Park Service
oversight, and not having land
acquisition is one of the major, major failings of the Gorge bill, and like I
say, it was done purposely that way, so that the development could keep on
going.
CH: So
the Gorge bill, could you explain a little more about how it’s organized, how
it’s set up? I mean, just the way that
the final act was composed.
CW: Okay. Well, the final act was written in the back
rooms, first by Hatfield with Tom Imason [sp?], and then - I think I mentioned
before that when the eighty-four wilderness bill passed, Packwood went along
with Hatfield’s bill, and thought he had a promise that Hatfield would go along
with his bill. The bill he was writing,
with his excellent staff, was our bill, was a real environmentalist bill. It was based on the three main precedents
that we used: Golden Gate National Recreation Area, near San Francisco; lower
St. Croix National Scenic River, just east of the Twin Cities, on the Minnesota
Wisconsin border; and Cape Cod. One of
the elements we were going to take from Cape Cod was the Cape Cod formula, where
areas that are going to remain primarily in private ownership are administered
by zoning, but there is the Park Service overview. What we have now - so when the Friends of the
Gorge and Dick Benner and the Thousand Friends of Oregon mentality brought in
that you’re not going to buy land. You
do regulation through - you do protection [word indiscernible] phrase through
regulation. Dick Benner and none of them
had any idea of really shutting down the growth. They were just going to control it. One of the editors of the local paper used to
describe the difference between the Friends of the Gorge and the Columbia Gorge
Coalition of environmentalists is that they didn’t care how many houses were
built or what happened to fish and wildlife, as long as they were earth-toned
and looked - and were tasteful when they took their friends on their Sunday
drives; whereas the Coalition, we didn’t care whether it was a purple house or
an earth-tone house. A house was going
to wreck wildlife habitat, but the Friends don’t. As long as they’re not poor houses, as long
as they’re wealthy like the Tiger Warren Compound and such, that’s fine. Their whole idea was just to keep on
developing the Gorge, but just limit it.
The problem - well, one problem with that is that we have seven, almost
eight hundred houses now, which is obscene.
I mean, there’s just no way - and the Friends just covered that up until
the Bea house. There was no knowledge in
Portland, because the Oregonian will not cover it, that there had been
over 700 houses built. But the Bea
-lining House is so obnoxious that it blew the lid off the cover up. Like I say, if our bill had passed, that
would have been in public ownership six or eight years ago. The very fact that we’re even debating
building a house across from Multnomah Falls proves that their bill is a
failure. And they’re not only debating
it, it’s built, it’s gone, it’ll never be torn out. The Friends of the Gorge signed off on that
house, and then didn’t start backtracking until a month later, when their -
some of their people that them were starting to get upset about why such an
obnoxious-looking house is being built right across from Multnomah Falls. That’s a major - that is entirely the fault
of their legislation, that that is not in public ownership already.
CH: So
the Packwood bill had a plan that was based on what been done in St. Croix,
Cape Cod, and Golden Gate.
CW: Right.
CH: And
then the public - the Park Service would provide the oversight for the
management of those areas.
CW: Right. Well, they would directly manage all the
public lands, other than state parks.
And then they - particularly the eastern end of the Gorge, the
agricultural lands would be - the local governments could go ahead and do
it. What they do is, in Cape Cod, the
local government - there’s four huge towns there, but they’re not just like we
think of the small towns, they’re massive townships that have a lot of rural
land in them. And what they do their
within those townships - part of it - most of the rest of it’s bought and
managed by the Park Service, just like any national park. But within the townships, the local
governments draw up their planning restrictions, their zoning and such, submit
it to the Park Service. The Park Service
reviews it for consistency with act. If
it is consistent, they approve it, and then the counties and the towns
administer it, but if they start granting variances, and start allowing houses
- developments to be built that are in violation of that, then the Park Service
can step in and condemn it and buy the land.
CH: So
that’s what you mean by the Park Service protecting through regulation.
CW: Right.
CH: And
now how...
CW: Through
oversight of regulations.
CH: Now,
how would that be different from the way the L.C.D.C. does their regulating?
CW: Well,
first of all if it was the Park Service, it would be done a lot less
bureaucratic. I mean, L.C.D.C. - when I
lived in Skamania County I was a big fan of Oregon land use planning, but when
I moved across the river and had to deal with it directly, it is for rich
people, period. I lost most of my
property in the Gorge because of it, because I couldn’t replace an existing
house with all the utilities in on 175 acres.
If I could have hired planners and economists and lawyers I would have
been approved in a minute. What they’ve
done is they’ve set up this - they took the absolute worst part of L.C.D.C.,
with that typical arrogance from both Thousand Friends of Oregon and Friends of
the Gorge, “we’re Oregonians. We know
better.” They refused to ever look at
those models I talked about. They, Nancy
Russell and them, refused to even look at any other models around the country
that were successful. They said, “we’re
Oregonians. We’re smarter, we know
better, and we’re going to base it on L.C.D.C.,” and they took the absolute
worst part of L.C.D.C., such as the Necessary Accessory [?] Test, where you can
- if you rape your land, then you can build a house, because then it’s a
necessary accessory to restore forest lands.
So if you do some horrible economic development of it, then you can
build your house, but you can’t leave it alone and build. One of the horrible
things we have, very similar thing with the Gorge, is that they took these kind
of Goal Three and Four and such. This is
one of the big problems I have with Thousand Friends of Oregon, they’ve never
once asked for Goal Five lands in the Gorge.
There are no lands in the Gorge under L.C.D.C. that are classified as
natural. They’re either urban, ag., or
forestry. In the ag. zones, you have to
hire - if you can - it’s all set up very purposely bureaucratic, so no local
people can take part in it. You can
build your house if you can show certain economic viability of the lands. So if you can go out and spend $20,000 to hire
a consultant to do all these plans, then you get build your house. But if you’re poor and can’t do that, you’re
hung out to dry. So they took the
absolute worst part, and it really isn’t much different. Whereas the Forest - these were huge battles
- after Packwood forced the Friends of the Gorge to start meeting with
environmental groups, we used to have these pretty stormy meetings, when we
were deciding how houses would be let built.
All the environmental groups, other than the Sierra Club and - I don’t
consider the Friends of the Gorge an environmental group, but the Friends of
the Gorge - wanted this really complex bureaucratic language. Like Bowen Blair used to say, “no, we want
the language that says, ‘shall not significantly adversely affect the inherent,
natural, and historic qualities of that land.’” We wanted, if you had forty
acres you could build a house, or whatever.
We wanted very clear-cut, dry - if you have so much acreage, or
something, you can build. If you didn’t,
you could sell out, or sell in easement, or something. They didn’t want - they fought that. It’s because they are the only people that
can take part in it. We can’t take part
in that. Plus, they keep getting develop- you know, you just keep developing
under that. Under the Park Service, it
would have been clear what you could have done, and they would have had over-
it wouldn’t have been that bureaucratic mess.
It would have been a hearing, and if you’re in violation of that, then
you know, you don’t go to court for ten years and bring in all your experts or
something. It goes into public
ownership, and the courts decide the value of the land. Usually, landowners come out really good court
settle though, for what they get paid.
CH: So
now, could you again - could you kind of go over the set-up, the organization
for the Columbia Gorge Act that was - and how - I understand that Packwood had
his plan, and that there was this way of getting around him. You’d explained a little bit about that. But when they finally decided to go with the
act that they have now, what did they come up with?
CW: Okay,
well, they came up with a nightmare [laughs], purposely to fail. Well, the three major things that we lost
with the Friends bill is the no National Park Service, we have a tree cutting
agency that neither has the will nor the skills to actually manage a landscape
like the Columbia Gorge. We have the Forest Service. Second was - I was telling you - the lack of
acquisition. Only [in] thirty-nine of
the Gorge is there any way of buying even scenic easements. If you don’t have the authority to at least
buy deed restrictions, you have no permanent protection. So what’s happening now, is they’ve filled
in, and Dick Benner wasn’t even -he was unabashed, “yeah, we’re going to fill
in the whole thing,” and then we’ll stop the development of the Gorge after a
few thousand more houses are built. The
thing is that’s not even going to work, because they’re already appointing very
right-wing, anti-protection people to the commission. So the minute everything is filled in Gorge -
who knows, 2000, 3000 houses, whatever it gets - then they’re going to give
variances. Then they’re going to undo
the law, and so we’ll never have any end to development. Once you get a deed restriction onto
property, then it can’t be development.
The person can sell it, whatever is on that deed restriction. And those can be very expensive. The Forest Service, for instance up on Cape
Horn, went in and paid ninety-five percent of the value of land to buy it, to
get a scenic easement. It has no public
access to it. It only keeps it in
agriculture.
When
I worked for Friends of the Earth, my kind of rule of thumb was that if you’re
paying more than half of the value of the land for the easement, then you easement,
then you buy it. The thing is that among
- any good idea we came up with, the Friends automatically fought. Like one time the local Sierra Club in
southern Washington, Oregon Natural Resources rep., and I came up with this
idea in, where the Trust had bought all that land - I think I had mentioned -
and had it hang over their heads that they couldn’t sell it, and so we went in
to Sid Morrison and said, “Look it, let’s figure out a way - let’s make [it a]
state park.” We had about three big
areas in there, and one of them was Catherine Creek; and one of them was there
across from Multnomah Falls, a little to the west of there. It was just - we could go in there, give the
states some money, and then set up state parks while we’re waiting for the federal
bill. Well, Sid Morrison jumped up and
said, “Chuck, I had people come in here all day, complaining, complaining. You gave me a wonderful solution.” Then he hugged me. Friends of the Gorge and the Sierra Club
killed that, would not allow it - through Hatfield, wouldn’t even allow it to
be considered, because it wasn’t their idea, and anything like that. One of our best ideas we had - I think. It was mine, so I’m [laughs] obviously not
objective, but - when you buy any land that
would come - as part of the planning, you’d decide which areas you want
long-term to go into public ownership, and which areas are okay to stay in
private ownership: grazing lands, say up above Dallesport would be a good
example. So whenever land in the areas
came up that we were going to have - we wanted to have in private ownership,
the government would buy, and the Park Service would buy, put deed restrictions
on them, and then resell them. People
were going to pay just as much for that land, because the people buying into
the Gorge at that point are going to be the people that want to protect
it. So basically, we could have gotten
almost all the private lands to have free deed restrictions on them, where they
could never be developed, for virtually no money. And the Friends of the Gorge killed that,
totally killed that. They wouldn’t allow
a conservancy and such, anyway, because by then they controlled the Trust for
Public Lands.
CH: So
then there was - then what you’re saying is really, there was no way of protecting
the land in perpetuity without putting the deed restrictions on there.
CW: Right. And in sixty-one percent of the Gorge they
are not allowed to put deed restrictions on land. That’s not an option. You regulate it or nothing. So there is no other options other than
zoning regulations, and those last until the next bribe or election. In terms of the Gorge commission, it will be
gutted, and there will be just - there’s just no hope. It will forever be - the development keeps
going on. There was supposed to be a
freeze. When we started out to protect
the Gorge, everyone supported a freeze on development in rural areas. And now were not - no one’s even - you know,
800 houses in the rural areas, and there’s no end in sight anytime. We’re going to have another 800 in the next
ten years too, just like we did in the last ten. Virtually everything - and one of the things
Hatfield - which is mind-boggling to us, how far out of touch with reality he
is - he was bragging at a friend’s [indiscernible, two words] the other day,
“we don’t know what these people are complaining about, these locals.
ninety-five percent of the development requests are being approved.” Hey, our point exactly. But of course the Friends won’t ever
acknowledge that that’s a problem.
That’s what they’re saying, “well, what are they complaining [about],
everyone’s getting approved.”
CH: So
you also said that there was no acquisition planned for then, either...
CW: Right.
That acquisition could be acquisitioned directly of land and fee, or
acquisition of develop rights and scenic easements. In sixty-one percent of the Gorge, [there
are] none of those options. You can’t
buy land. You can’t buy easements or
development rights. You have no way
other than zoning, temporary zoning to protect the lands.
CH: Those
are all the private lands.
CW: Right.
CH: Right.
CW: So
there’s no way - and by doing that, you have neither protection, nor fair
treatment of locals. I mean it’s - the
Gorge bill is probably the most horrible comparable legislation, and it didn’t
protect the land at all, and it treats landowners horribly. It’s something the Friends of the Gorge will
not acknowledge, that their bill is extremely unfair to local landowners. It was set up in such a duel way that it’s
just really obnoxious. If you had - say
you own a hundred acres on one side of the road in the Gorge, and you’re in the
S.M.A., you can automatically build four houses in there, or you can sell out
all your land to the Forest Service. You
can build one house, and sell the development rights, and get almost all your
property back. You have all these
options. If you’re across the road in
the G.M.A., you’re probably going to be hung out to dry, and then if you scream
and yell and have enough money, then they’ll let you build something. But
there’s no provision for compensation.
The G.M.A.s are being regulated strictly. The Forest Service just lets anything go on
in the Special Management Areas. So
there’s less - the Special Management Areas are supposed to be the special
areas, but there’s often more owner restrictions in the General Management Area
than there is in the Special Management Areas.
You don’t have that option.
There’s no way to compensate landowners, unless you’re wealthy, and then
they find a way. Now the person - it
never would have happened, but Pat Leekney [sp?], who was an old rancher from
Klickitat County, and he became the chairman of the Gorge commission, and he
wanted to retire. Well, he owned this
big ranch up above Dallesport, and there was no way it could be caught. So lo and behold Friends of the Gorge and
Trust for Public Lands set up a state park.
They wouldn’t allow us to do that, but because he was wealthy and was
chairman of the Gorge commission, he got bought out, got all of his money for
his ranch, and now it’s a state park.
But if he had been a poor person, he’d be hung out to dry, wouldn’t be
allowed to use his land, wouldn’t get any compensation.
CH: Now
the private lands, if - what would happen in terms - not necessarily
development for real estate, but in terms of use of the timber and agricultural
things, would the deed restrictions on one hand, or the lack of deed
restrictions and zoning on the hand, protect those lands?
CW: Well,
the lack of it won’t, but if you - when you write deed restrictions, you can
write them however you want. So what our
policy was for the environmentalists was that there’d be no cutting at all in
the Special Management Areas, and if you didn’t like it, you could sell your
land to the Park Service. In the General
Management Area, we weren’t against logging.
We could go along with selective logging in the General Management
Areas. But what the Friends agreed to -
and money from Weyerhaeuser, I’m sure, had a lot to do with it, [and]
PacifiCorp - was that their bill, the Hatfield-Friends bill, bans any
restrictions on clearcutting, beyond state regulations. It doesn’t ban clearcutting. It bans any restrictions on
clearcutting in the General Management Areas, leaves it up to the Forest
Service and the Special Management Areas, which means there’s no
protection. So there is no restrictions
on logging in the Columbia Gorge beyond the State Forest Practices Act, which
are fairly weak. Washington Department
of Natural Resources refused to ever acknowledge that the Gorge even exists, so
they approved every timber cut, no matter how - and the vast majority of
private lands have been clear-cut since the bill passed. If you fly over Skamania County, virtually
the whole scenic area’s been clear-cut.
There’s a little doughnut around Skamania Lodge, a little doughnut. There’s not another tree anywhere near. Virtually all of that was since the bill
passed, with the concurrence of the Friends of the Gorge.
CH: So
when you were talking earlier about the organization of the act, you referred
to the Special Management Areas and then General Management Areas, and then
there were, the - was it the urban...
CW: Exempted
Urban Areas.
CH: Exempted
Urban Areas. Were there other components? Were there other types of zones besides those
three?
CW: No,
not really, other than Indian lands that were exempted from the bill, and the
Corps lands would be - they’re basically exempt too. But other than that everything falls into
that. Like I say, it’s thirty-nine
percent Special Management Areas, fifty-one percent General Management Areas,
and ten Urban Exempted Areas. And they
gave the towns a whole lot of exempted areas, like Dallesport. They have a 7000 acre - one we fought, the
Friends supported - a 7000 acre exemption for an industrial park going halfway
up the hills above Dallesport, which has a few hundred people. What they need 7000 acres for industrial
development for is - you’ll have to ask Nancy Russell or something. But it’s just plain obscene. Does that answer -?
CH: Yeah,
yeah, yeah. I’m just trying to see how
it’s organized.
CW: So,
in the General Management Areas, the commission and the counties have
jurisdiction. In the Special Management
Areas, the Forest Service and the commission have jurisdiction. But you can never tell who’s responsible for
what. Everyone passes the buck to get
out of making hard decisions, and those decisions would not be near as hard if
there was acquisition money available throughout the scenic areas.
The
third major thing in the bill that we were just opposed to is that - Bob
Packwood was trying to protect all the tributaries. What we did is the minute - if we had
protected - which we did, unfortunately, with two exceptions - had protected
just the Gorge corridor - see, the Friends of the Gorge were bankrolled by
PacifiCorp and the utilities to fight any protection for tributaries going up
the Gorge. Bob Packwood was our champion
on this. To me, to only protect the main
corridor without going up any of the side canyons is like cutting all the
branches off a tree and then saying, well, you saved the tree. But they were bankrolled by utilities to
fight that. We knew the minute you cut
off development in the main Gorge, it was going to go right up the
tributaries. I mean, no doubt about it,
Hood River-. So what Packwood agreed to was that we would about - as part of
the Gorge bill, we’d go up about ten miles up each tributary canyon, with either
an arm of the scenic area, back when it was the Park Service, or a National
Wild and Scenic river. Then there’d be a
study within the bill. We had studies
for the Sandy, Hood, Deschutes, Klickitat, White Salmon, Washougal, and Little
White Salmon rivers in the Packwood bill.
So those would have given us a couple year moratorium on dams and things
like that, and would have given us time to work that and get other
legislation. But the Friends killed all
of that. Then we took congressional
staff rafting down White Salmon and Klickitat rivers, and the lower ten miles
of those were made National Wild and Scenic rivers, under the management of the
Forest Service. The Forest Service
refuses to manage them. In fact, at the
Klickitat River, they walked away from it.
It’s the only single solitary federal area in the country that the
agency has washed their hands and walked away from. They got away with it because the Friends of the
Gorge, they won’t complain. That’s what
the Friends of the Gorge support, that.
They were against the Klickitat.
So we now have subdivisions going in there. When the bill passed, you could have bought
river front critical and wonderful land along the Klickitat for 25,000 for
forty acres, was the going price. And
now we don’t have a single acre, not one acre, other than that piece I
mentioned, that a corner went in there, and the Friends used our money - the
tributary money to buy out the place, and the G.M.A. - they’re not supposed to
buy land [laughs].
CH: So
the act, the way it was set up, did it actually solidify or institute the role
of the Friends of the Columbia Gorge, or is this just sort of an informal,
nonlegal relationship?
CW: It’s
kind of an informal, but very blatant.
When - for instance the Thousand Friends had never lifted a finger on
the Gorge, never done a thing to help us.
Six months before the bill passed, the last big hearings, Dick Benner,
who was a staff attorney for Thousand Friends, suddenly went back to D.C.,
testified against the environmentalist bill, for the Friends bill. Within a week, Nancy Russell was in the old
Gorge commission office, told Jeff Breckel [sp?] - he was a really neat guy, he
was the executive director of the old Gorge commission - told him he better get
job-hunting because he was going to be replaced by Dick Benner, as soon as the
bill passed, which they did. The way
they hired him was - we have fairly substantial proof that it was done
illegally, like they were - Friends people appointed to the commission. The Friends controlled the commission
initially, through the gubernatorial appointees. They go their own - Dave Canard, Don Clark,
Barbara Bailey, all the people that were Friends people controlled it. So they hired Dick Benner, in a was that was
so blatantly illegal from the evidence we’ve seen, that the runner-up person,
Phil Crawford, who was the county extension agent in Skamania County, was the
runner up. He would have been
wonderful. He got along with
everyone. But he was never given a
chance, and he had enough ammo to - the Friends of...
[End of Tape 4, Side 1]
January 25, 1999
Tape 4, Side 2
CW: And
so, like I say, the White Salmon and the Klickitat, the lower ten miles of both
those rivers were made Wild and Scenic rivers, but all we got out of that was a
ban on any new dams being built. So we
probably - the tribes could have killed those, anyway. We didn’t get any of the land acquisition,
and the Friends were forced to accept that into their bill, when we got the
whole Washington delegation to add those in.
Hatfield killed the Sandy.
Packwood tried very hard - we took Packwood rafting down the Sandy
River, and he was just gung ho for making it a Wild and Scenic river, and the
Sierra Club helped them kill that.
CH: Really? Now, why would the Sierra Club...
CW: The
Sierra Club - there’s three main villains among supposed environmental groups in the Gorge, and
they’re: The Friends of the Gorge of course, which I consider far and away the
most evil group in this environmental
movement, and that’s a learned decision, because I used to work in all fifty
states when I was working for Friends of the Earth, and I know all the
environmental groups in the country. The
second is the Sierra Club staff, not the local people. The Sierra Club staff, the Northwest office,
refused to ever lift a finger on the Gorge, until about eighty-five. So when Packwood - I think I explained the
other day how when I went and killed the governor’s bill, part of the deal was
that Packwood would introduce a Park Service bill. All the environmental groups - Thousand
Friends sat it out - all the other environmental groups supported that, and I
had letters in there. I mean, National
Wildlife Federation, every group you could ever think of endorsed it, the
rafting groups, everything. Except the
Sierra Club - local Sierra Clubs were not allowed to sign it. The person, Jim Bloomquist, who was our
Northwest rep., who never lifted a finger, suddenly jumps in eighty-five, and
the Friends of the Gorge met with him, had a breakfast with him in
Seattle. It was the first time they had
ever met with real environmentalist [laughs] in all their times, and it turns
out to be the most hated person in the environmental movement. I mean, they went right for the bottom of the
barrel and found someone who shares their lack of morality [laughs].
CH: And
why would he be opposed to it?
CW: He’s
the one, like I say, who traded. You had
mentioned a trade for something. Whereas
the Friends of the Gorge, they had nothing to trade. They were strictly getting paid by money and
publicity and things, but...
CH: And
they were going for the Arctic Wildlife Refuge?
CW: We
think. We have no way of proving
it. But Mark Hatfield told the Sierra
Club he would not even meet with them if they didn’t agree to the Friends bill,
and they said, “yes, sir.” I was in the
room when Jim Bloomquist told Bob Packwood’s staff that he was way too radical
in the Gorge, and the Sierra Club could not support him, and that the Sierra Club
is adamantly opposed to Wild and Scenic River designations for any of the
tributaries, because that was too radical in that political climate. Which is just absolute B.S.
CH: But
it did get that designation though, didn’t it?
CW: Just
for two little rivers, just for two little ten-mile stretches of two
rivers. We would have had about a
hundred miles of rivers...
CH: I
see. And then that designation though,
does do some protection, doesn’t it? I
mean, as far as [indiscernible] zones?
CW: Not
unless the agency will enforce it. The
only protection that comes automatically with it is a ban on new dams. So we’ve killed dams. Like I say, the tribes could have killed that
anyway, so that’s not that big a deal.
And no, you have no other protection, other than what - it’s all - the
Wild and Scenic Rivers act, sixty-four or sixty-eight, has all these things
about - it’s very vague, and it allows acquisition of basically half the
lands. It sets up a corridor, a quarter
mile on each side of the river, and that’s not a hard and fast quarter mile,
but the boundaries are supposed to average a quarter mile on each side. Within that, half of that can be bought using
condemnation, but once half of it’s bought, then the agency can’t use it. They have what are called outstanding
resources. It’s a very abstract
thing. But the agencies have refused to
ever enforce it, and they support clearcutting.
For instance, in the White Salmon River, S.D.S. went in there and was
clearcutting an area that was scheduled for acquisition. The Forest Service would not buy it. This is one of the most horrible things I’ve
ever heard: Art Defalt [sp?], who was the first Forest Service manager of the
National Scenic Area, told us that he was letting the timber industries clear-cut
the whole White Salmon corridor to lower the land values, and save taxpayers
money when we buy the land. That was a
quite unique [laughs] - and by having any debate of that banned from the Oregonian
- the Friends were bankrolled by PacifiCorp to be the main opponent of Wild and
Scenic River designation - no one in Portland ever had any idea. I finally had to get arrested. We were laying in front of bulldozers, and
getting arrested. Dennis and Bonnie
White’s daughter, Nancy, jumped in there when they were just about to run over
her dad, S.D.S. and deal [?], and she jumped in front of the bulldozer. She was a teenager at the time, and even
those people couldn’t bring themselves to running over a teenage girl, and
backed off. So we occupied the Forest
Service’s office.
CH: Where
was this?
CW: On
the White Salmon River, around Spring Creek there, right near Husson [?]. We had almost, probably ninety percent public
support there, but the Friends fought us. They were totally for the
clearcutting.
CH: What
year was that?
CW: Eighty-eight
or nine. It was when I was working for
Intertribal Fish commission, because I - we occupied the Forest Service’s
office, and while I was chained to their door, the director came out, to try to
get me to unlock myself, gave me a letter he was sending S.D.S., saying their
clearcutting was illegal. It was like, I
couldn’t believe it, because that was my smoking gun. But the Oregonian and none of the
Portland people would cover it. So the
next day, after I got out of jail there, we came into the Heathman, and the
Stevensons that were doing the clearcutting owned the Heathman Hotel. We had to go where the money was, and so I
chained myself - we brought in all the scruffy hippies we could find, Indians
in the Gorge, and picketed them. We were
driving away business. They were just
going crazy. Anyway, they got the cops
to force us to leave, so I chained myself to the door, and got arrested. Jackson Browne was playing that night, next
door at the Schnitz, and his aide saw it happen, ran down the stairs and talked
to me. I think I mentioned this, I don’t
know whether he was on tape, but he and I used to go out with the same woman in
D.C., an anti-nuclear lobbyist, and we hit it off right away.
CH: Jackson
Browne?
CW: Yeah,
Jackson Browne’s person, that’s his - handles the political thing, that travels
with him and takes care of the politics and such. He was just enraged when he told him what was
happening. Jackson Browne, he gave me
tickets to his concert that night, when I got out of jail, which was nice, and
he marched down and screamed and the Heathman’s owners, that if they didn’t
start clearcutting the next morning, he’d make sure no musicians would stay at
the Heathman again. They quit clear
cutting the next - we had gone to court.
We had done everything right. We
actually wanted to go to trial. We
settled with the Heathman on a deal where I signed an agreement that I wouldn’t
do anything illegal in the Heathman.
Actually, when I spoke to the National Science Institute there a few
years later on in holdings, we had to get a waiver from the Heathman to allow
me to speak [laughs]. I was the first
speaker in one of their public hearings [laughs] and I had to get a legal
waiver to go into the Heathman. And so -
I forgot where...
CH: We
were talking about the Wild and Scenic Rivers, and the...
CW: Oh
right, I know. So we went ahead and
settled the Heathman, because that wasn’t a big one. We wanted to go after the Forest
Service. A certain person, who is now
U.S. attorney was advising me on the side.
It’s one the experts in the choice of evils defense. There’s never been a choice of evils defense
that’s succeeded. I don’t know if you’re
familiar with that, but it’s where if you can prove you had to commit a crime
to prevent an even bigger crime, you are found innocent. There’s never been one won in Oregon. The courts, in previous ones, set out these
numerous steps, the tests you had to meet to win. I had every one of them. I was the first - the last thing I needed was
a letter that the Forest Service wrote, saying that the clearcutting was
illegal to S.D.S. That was the smoking
gun. You had to have exhausted all legal
remedies, spent ten years lobbying, six years in court. We had filed suits. We had won the suits to stop the logging, and
S.D.S. said, “we don’t care. You don’t
have the money to stop us. We’re going
to cut it anyway.” I had all of the
criteria, so we were looking to a trial.
We were going tell it - it was going to be in Hood River. We were going to sell T-shirts, and Art
Defalt, the Forest Service manager, was a real chauvinist. I had Forest Service staff from - he had been
down at the Chiliquin and down in the Klamath area before, and I had women
staff ready to come up and testify against - he had harassed them [laughs] and
was a chauvinist pig. Strong women
really upset him. I had a great big
black attorney woman from Hood River [laughs], my attorney, Shirley Sheiladale
[sp?]. Like I say, we were going to sell
T-shirts. This was going to be fun. They’ve never pressed the charges against me,
but they’ve never dropped them. My
attorney says she’s never seen anything like it. So I’ve been on probation ever since
then. They’ve never taken me to court,
because we were going to win in the court case, and it would have been the
first precedent of that in the state of Oregon.
CH: You
had mentioned the ideas you had for the protection of the Columbia River
valley, and that’s such a...
CW: Hood
River Valley.
CH: I
mean the Hood River Valley, there’s such a - it’s so - already agriculturally
developed area, and there are also a lot of people that live up in the valley,
how would you have gone about doing that?
CW: Well,
we wouldn’t really, because that was one of the throw-aways. What we were adamant about was that there be a
Wild and Scenic River going up about ten miles, and then the rest of the Hood
River, including the branches, be studied, which would give us a moratorium on
dams, which is real important, because they had been trying to build twenty
years in the Hood River basin.
CH: But
if the Wild and Scenic River would go up ten miles, and generally that would
have a quarter of a mile on either side of the river...
CW: Right.
CH: ...there
are already a lot of people that live within a quarter of a mile of the river.
CW: Right. They’re all granddaddied in.
CH: Oh,
I see.
CW: Everything
in the Gorge is granddaddied in.
Everything. I mean, even things
that shouldn’t have been. That’s kind of
the price you pay. I mean, basically we
were going to say, “okay, in the rural areas of the Gorge we accept everything
that’s there, but we’re going to not put in new stuff. Well now, we accept everything that’s there
and everything that anyone that wants to build, if they’re wealthy. But in the Hood River valley, we knew that
there was no way protect outside of that corridor, but we were just pushing
it. One reason was to put publicity on
it, to force the state and L.C.D.C. and the county to put in protection through
L.C.D.C. in the valley. The other thing
was to have something to give away when we got into negotiations. You know, you’ve always got to have stuff in
[the] bill to give away. And partly, to
thank Kate McCarthy, not knowing she was going to turn on me, to thank her, I
put in the Hood River to put publicity on it.
That was something we were going to compromise out, and accept the Wild
and Scenic River designation to protect the corridor, and then use the
publicity from that. See, that would
free up so much resources in the rest of the Gorge, where we shouldn’t have to
be monitoring. We should have had two
years of monitoring, we could all go home and go hiking. If this was any other park in within the
country, within four or five years after the bill passed, there’s no
controversy to speak of. It’s over. The fight’s over. Here, it just gets worse. It’s worse now than it ever was - or it would
be if the Oregonian would allow any dissent, if they’d allow any
acknowledgment of all the horrible problems.
There wouldn’t. It’s going to get
worse. I mean, we’ll never win the
Columbia Gorge. It’s just going to be
destroyed. The development will never
stop in the Columbia Gorge. It was set
up where it never will. They can just
keep granting variances. By using
zoning, you just keep changing the zoning.
Every other park - I was just down at my mom’s, at Golden Gate National
Recreation and Point Reyes. The only
controversy going on there was whether to buy develop rights - scenic
easements, on 30,000 acres of adjoining ranches, to provide a buffer for the
park. Within the park there is no
controversy. The fight’s over. The boundaries and off-shore oil drilling,
and in any where else there is no fight.
Cape Cod -. It was purposely set
up to lose. There will never be
protection for the Gorge without any legislation, without the Park
Service. And by yet [?] it’s getting too
late. I don’t know whether there will
ever...
CH: Are
there any people in Congress that are potential allies?
CW: Not
really, because...
CH: Isn’t
Lee Hamilton, wasn’t he also a parks advocate?
CW: Yeah,
but he wasn’t on the committees. In
other words, he wasn’t out front.
Hilburger [sp?] was our big parks advocate, and John Siberling [sp?], and
he’s no longer in Congress. The problem
we have is our - Ron Wyden is just awful.
He was one of the real horrible people on the Gorge, and he’ll never
acknowledge the problems. He never
does. I think I told you, the last time
he met with any environmentalist other than the Friends of the Gorge and the
Sierra Club staff was when - was a meeting in his office, when we were getting
ready for the Packwood bill. He turned
to me and said, “Chuck, there’s no development going on in the Gorge. You’re just making that up. I talked to people and they’re just - they’re
not going to foul their own nest.” And I
pointed out it was not a good day - that Skamania County had just - like I
think I said before - had just approved eighty-three houses on wetlands between
me and the river. So he never met with
us again. He’s just - he’s
horrible. Earl Blumenauer is totally an
arm of the Friends of the Gorge. He
won’t even acknowledge - he screamed at me last time that, “there are no
problems with the legislation. The
legislation is wonderful, it’s totally perfect, and it has none of the problems
related to it.” Well, he gets paid by
Nancy Russell and people that do that.
So he’s hopeless.
Our
main - we actually may now have a couple of allies now on the Washington
side. Brian Baird we could get to, but
the Friends of the Gorge will get to - I mean, when you have unlimited money,
when you can pass out hundreds of thousands of dollars to a couple of
politicians like they can, we can’t - you know, what could we do? Patty Murray’s been the last major politician
[who] works with us. She still works closely with Columbia Gorge
Audubon, and the local environmentalists, and tries to help us out. Right now, I’m thinking of doing a big
article for the Columbia, and kind of urging Vancouver to show Oregon how to
protect the Gorge, because they were - Washington was trashed nonstop by Nancy
Russell, Don Clark, and all the Portland elite about how they don’t care about
the Gorge, and they don’t protect it, and all the problems are in
Washington. Well, Washington now - and
then Oregon killed Gorge protection. So
now Washington has a chance to maybe - that’s only possible hope I see. If we can get Patty Murray and Brian Baird...
CH: What
about all the development that’s occurring near Camas, and east of Camas?
CW: Well
see, it’s going into the Gorge. We knew
it would occur right up to there, because see, that’s a bedroom community, and
that was part of it. Once 205 was built,
that evil opens that up even more. And
now it’s being developed. Our bill would
have frozen it at the boundary there. We
did get Steigerwald Lake, no thanks to the Friends of the Gorge, the wildlife
refuge - the wetlands there and National Wildlife Refuge. With the other two National Wildlife Refuges
in the western end of the Gorge, on the Washington side, are the best-protected
lands in the Gorge, and the only lands that are really being restored. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service put
Gibbon’s Creek back into its old creek bed that the Corps and S.D.S. -
Stevenson owned all that land.
CH: Geographically,
is that actually in the Gorge, or adjacent to the Gorge?
CW: In
the Gorge.
CH: How
far from Camas, then?
CW: Oh,
it starts on the boundary. If you’re
coming out - well Washougal, actually - if you’re coming out of Washougal,
you’ll see where the industrial plants
and the subdivisions stop real abruptly, at the water treatment plant. That’s why we drew the line there.
CH: And
is there anything beyond that then, in the actual protected Gorge area?
CW: Well,
below the road, between Highway 14 and the river is protected, because it’s a
National Wildlife Refuge up to the steep cliffs, where it can’t be developed,
at Cape Horn. North of the river is being
destroyed. You go up Bell Center Road,
which is the boundary there, there’s ten times the houses than when the bill
passed. It’s just solid houses. There’s always two or three at
construction. It’s gone. It’s just being raped from the land - and it’s
within the boundaries of the Scenic Area, and should be protected, but it’s
not. There are just houses all
over. There are whole areas there that
had no houses when the bill passed, that are - some friends of mine that -
actually it was Susan Kady, that did go on the Friends board, one of the
founders of that, their street, they were on of two or three people on it. Now, they’ve got bars with gambling, and all
this other stuff, all within the National Scenic Area.
CH: How
far from the river is that?
CW: Not
very far. If you - a mile. The road winds up from - right where there’s
a sign - when you’re heading east on Highway 14, you start to go up the hill a
little bit, and you have to see all the wetlands that we protected. There’s bald eagles in there for the first
time in thirty-five years now, in that area.
Fish and Wildlife’s doing a good job of that. But there’s a road - right where the sign is
about Broughton’s [sp?] - there’s a historic sign there in a pullout, before
you go on up to Cape Horn, and there’s a road that angles off there, that turns
into Bell Center Road. It angles in from
the Gorge. It kind of follows the ridge
of the Gorge. So it starts out right at
Highway 14 and just keeps angle in. It’s
a few feet at the beginning, but by the time you get to the top part, it’s
about two miles in, or something like that.
And it’s just all gone. I mean,
it’s just solid houses. Now Washougal’s
trying to expand their boundary out there, their urban growth boundary into
that.
CH: So,
is there anything else you would like to say at this point? I mean, we’re - you know, we could go back to
this, or anything else later on, but I was going to go back and ask you some
other questions. Is there anything else
at this point that you would like to add to what you’ve already said?
CW: Well,
I’m sure as we think about it, but it’s - like I say, the bottom line is it’s
hopeless. And this is the first national
park caliber area that’s being destroyed because of people claiming to be
environmentalists, and not destroyed by the direct developers, but by their
representatives. It’s one where class
warfare killed Columbia Gorge protection.
CH: One
strategy that I know of [that] a lot of environmental groups have done out here
is, when they have an issue that they can’t get local support for - local being
in the states nearby or the communities nearby - that they’ve gone to other
parts of the country, especially in the eastern part of the country, where the
people there do not have the economic ties that might compromise how they feel,
and they’re willing to support something like that. Have you or any of your groups tried to form
that kind of a coalition?
CW: Good
question [laughs]. Very good
question. Exactly, when the Friends
started fighting us and Hatfield - we never would have needed that if Hatfield
would have been for Gorge protection.
When Hatfield came out against Packwood - that meeting I told you about
where Tom Imason [sp?] set up - and blocked it then - that’s when we sat down
with Packwood and Siberling and such.
Packwood said, “Look it. I want a
letter,” and I have the letter with me, he says, “we can roll these people if I
can get the environmental groups in the east coast to lobby their center [?],”
he said. “So I want a letter from you,
signed by all the major national environmental groups, to support the National
Park Service for the Gorge, and I’ll just bring it to the floor of the
Senate. I think I can probably get the -
Hatfield’s going to hate me, but I think I can probably - I can get New Jersey,
and all these other states, Massachusetts, and all their senators.” So we drafted up this letter, very
noncontroversial letter. We knew the
Friends wouldn’t sign it. They refused
to. So everyone signed on. I spent a few months, we got everyone to sign
on, and the Sierra Club local groups - there’s one in Vancouver and one in
Portland - kept voting to sign it, and Jim Bloomquist, their Northwest rep,
kept vetoing it. The Sierra Club policy
is set up to where policy is supposed to come from the bottom, the volunteer
groups, and then the staff is supposed to implement that. Well, they don’t work that way in the Sierra
Club. The staff claim - well, when I
asked them why they sold us out to Hatfield, their lobbyist in D.C. said, “Well
Chuck, if you were a professional like us, you’d have to know we have to make
these compromises.” And I said, “Hey,
remember? I was a professional like you,
and I didn’t get a lobotomy when I left Friends of the Earth. I know what’s happened.”
So
the Sierra Club refused to sign this letter, and it wasn’t the sort of thing
where it was just set down. We spent a
whole year trying to get them to sign on.
Andy Kerr was saying, “you know, we ought to just move on.” And I said, “well, worked at the Sierra
Club. We really want to get them
on.” Like I say, their staff had never
lifted a finger until Jim Bloomquist met with the Sierra Club [the Friends of
the Gorge?], and suddenly - He had unlimited money. I mean, he’d fly down two or three times a week
to harass the local groups and tell them they cannot support Park Service and
they cannot support Wild and Scenic River designation for any of the
tributaries.
CH: And
where was Andy Kerr standing in all this?
CW: Oh,
totally with us, a hundred percent with us.
His wife, Nancy Peterson, was the point person for O.N.R.C. She worked on the staff. She was wonderful. Portland Audubon, which now is totally turned
against us and are bankrolled by the Friends, was wonderful. They had a woman named Lynn Hering [sp?] that
was this - she’s from actually the Carolinas, and kind of blue-blood, but she
is so refined even Nancy Russell couldn’t tolerate her. She was wonderful. Every single solitary group, except Sierra
Club staff and Thousand Friends of Oregon, backed us and signed the
letter. We had every group you could
think of, and I’ll leave you copies of those.
CH: Good.
CW: So
we were trying to get the Sierra Club.
That seemed really crucial - and New Jersey particularly - that we could
get the Sierra Club. So this guy, Jim
Bloomquist would fly down and he’d fire the volunteer Gorge group, that the
[indiscernible] group and the Columbia group would have, and he’d fire them,
and handpick his own people to fight the Park Service. And as soon as they met with us and O.N.R.C.
and all the group, they were, “Oh yeah, Park Service, oh definitely,” and
support us. He’d fire them. We went over a year and a half. The poor leaders of the Sierra Club - or
their spouses, the volunteer leaders, were just, “you’ve got to drop out.” He spent tens of thousands of dollars
harassing them, made their lives such a living hell that we abolished the
Sierra Club in southern Washington. The
[indiscernible] group we just finally abolished. But while he was doing that, preventing the
letter going out, he was flying back with Bowen Blair to D.C., going around,
telling all the reps that, “we’re against Park Service, we’re against Wild and
Scenic Rivers, and we support all environmental - we speak for all
environmental groups,” which is a lie.
You know, I had Jim Weaver and people calling me up saying, “that’s not
true.” I said, “of course it’s not.” So we finally had this stormy meeting in
Washougal, at the Parker House. We
brought thirty-four environmental groups together, including the Friends, and
we were going to sit down settle, once and for all, what the environmentalist
position was. Well, Jim Bloomquist
didn’t show up. He was back in D.C.,
still fighting us. He sent a third-string
flunky down that had no say, and all groups agreed there would be the Park
Service. The Friends of the Gorge
promised us they would never again meet with the congressional reps -
politicians without one of the main environmental - you know, Audubon or
Coalition, or someone there - and promised us that would never happen again,
and everything. Three days later, they
met with Booth Gardner, Dave Canard, told them that, “we just met with
thirty-four environmental groups and all thirty-four environmental groups are
totally against the Park Service, and are totally against Wild and Scenic River
designations.” Jim Bloomquist from the
Sierra Club was the only person allowed in that meeting, and sat there and lied. I’ve never known how to - and Hatfield just
took it and run. So Bloomquist went on
vacation. The Sierra Club signed the
letter, we gave it to Packwood. But by
then Hatfield had basically killed any chance of doing it and such. So we wasted a whole year trying to get the
Sierra Club and Friends of the Gorge on that letter. It had two major points: it has to be the
Park Service, and protection for the tributaries. The Friends of the Gorge wouldn’t sign it. Finally, when we forced the Sierra Club to,
after a year of intense - all the while we’re being fought - we finally forced
the Friends to sign it, but it was over by then. You know, they had...
CH: Couldn’t
the Wildlife Federation, having such a strong constituency in the various
states, couldn’t they have protested about this?
CW: Oh,
they did! They were totally on our
side. They had a great person, their
Northwest rep, Bruce - boy, it’s been a while - anyway, their Northwest rep was
here in Portland. He was wonderful. In fact, David Brower couldn’t believe that -
when I told him the National Wildlife Federation was pushing the Park Service
real hard, he was, “Wow, they’re afraid of those hunters?” I said, “yeah,” and they were just
wonderful. That’s how we got Trapper
Creek Wilderness. I was talking about
the eighty-four Wilderness bill. We had
a meeting with Sid Morrison in Vancouver, in his motel room. We had the Northwest rep for the National
Wildlife Federation Intertribal Fish Commission, John Platt, myself, and the
Clark-Skamania Flyfishers, and he said, well - and no one was talking Trapper
Creek. I mean, this is something we
pulled right - something that was considered absurd. The Sierra Club, Charlie Reins [sp?] in there
Northwest office, had traded away all our Wilderness areas for areas around
Puget Sound. It was hopeless. We met with Sid Morrison, and so he went over
to the Forest Service, and he agreed. We
sat down and we drew the maps on the floor in his motel room in Vancouver, which
is amazing because people like Earl Blumenauer and Hatfield wouldn’t even talk
to me. And here I used to sit around in
motel rooms [laughs] with senators and congressmen, and negotiate with
them. So, Sid Morrison went over that
afternoon to the Forest Service and announced to them that there was going to
be a Trapper Creek Wilderness. The
Forest Service - they were totally underpinned, and they came unglued, and they
said, “Who’s behind this!?” and he said, “the four million members of the
National Wildlife Federation,” [laughs].
So we were able to use that for the wilderness. But the Friends, they never got the
chance. You know, no one was ever
allowed - the Senate has rules, and Hatfield had seniority over Packwood, so he
prevented Packwood from even being able to do that. If we had - if the Sierra Club had signed on
the letter, and we hadn’t lost that year
from eighty-five into early eighty-six, we could have pulled that off, but the
Sierra Club paid staff killed that. But
that’s exactly what our and Packwood’s plan was.
CH: So
the whole Packwood - the period the Packwood Bill was being discussed was
eighty-five, eighty-six, around there?
CW: Well,
eighty-three was when the Governors Bill came in, so Packwood - the first time
the Friends of the Gorge forced me - destroyed the Coalition and forced me out,
and actually tried to disincorporate it.
We kept it together, kind of in hibernation, and they were trying to
destroy it. And I knew that they would
probably sell us at, even though at that time Nancy Russell was looking me in
the eye, saying, “We support Park Service.
We support tributaries,” which she had no intention of doing. So we kept it in hibernation. Then, when the
Governor’s bill is about to pass - so Packwood introduced their planning bill
that Gail Ackerman wrote, of which...
CH: In
eighty-three?
CW: In
eighty-one.
CH: In
eighty-one?
CW: In
eighty-one or eighty-two. Right in
there. That’s the one that was so
horrible that it allowed Spellman and Atiyeh to come in with the Governors
Bill, that was their planning bill without the Forest Service. That was what was just about to zoom through
Congress when Packwood called me up, and met with him. He just was begging me - he went to all the
national environmental groups because, like you were saying, he understood how
it worked. And every one of them said,
“Sorry, the Friends of the Gorge won’t work with us. We were very involved with the Gorge until
they forced Chuck Williams out of the fight.
Without him there’s no” - you know, they won’t talk to environmental
groups.
CH: So
when was Packwood’s bill out of the question?
When did that no longer become part of the process?
CW: Oh,
not until the very - well, there’s two Packwood Bills. Originally, he introduced the Friends bill
for them, because we didn’t protest. We
had been forced out of it. And so when
that got gutted so bad it was going to be the Governors bill, that’s when he
asked me to come in to kill it. My
conditions - I said, “yeah, I’d be glad to, but A., I’m not going to do all
this work for the Forest Service Bill.
If I get back in and bring in the national environmental groups, it’s
going to be for the Park Service and the tributaries.” He said, “Hey, I’m with you a hundred
percent. Their bill’s crap” - you know,
and the other thing is that they were going to give us a bunch of money. They had destroyed our group, and they had a
$400,000 a year budget at that time, annual budget, and we wanted ten percent
to restore and reopen our office and such.
Packwood agreed to those. Then,
there was never actually a bill at that time, because he was smart enough - you
don’t write a bill at that time. We sat
down with Packwood and we agreed on all the principles I was telling you, the
Park Service and such. So he was going
along on the assumption that that was going to be the bill, and then that Tom
Imason meeting came. He still kept
fighting. So at that point we lost
Wyden, because he was just looking for an out to fight us. It basically left Packwood, Weaver, and
Lawry, were our three - and AuCoin was actually a fairly big supported. Hatfield told the three of them that the
Gorge isn’t their district, and if they butted their nose into the Gorge, he
was going to get them big time, to keep their goddamn nose out of things. It wasn’t their business. That left only Packwood as our champion. He kept pushing it. When it became clear that we couldn’t
prevail, he was still - like I say, his D.C. staff person was a former Park
Service person, and his...
[End of Tape 4, Side 2]
January 25, 1999
Tape 5, Side 1
CH: This
is an interview with Chuck Williams at the Oregon Historical Society. The interview is Clark Hansen. The date is 1-25-99, and this is Tape 5, Side
1.
So,
you were saying -.
CW: So
anyway, the biggest mistake by far I’ve ever made in life - and the second biggest is coming up
with the National Scenic Area, since - I think on tape, when I explained to you
I had kept the National Recreational Area name.
If you noticed the literature I had for the first two years, it was the
National Recreation Area, and then suddenly I started writing about the
National Scenic Area, which turned out to be a horrible mistake, because we
didn’t have any precedent then that gave us a bottom line. So Nancy Russell was able to put signs on
each end saying, Scenic Area, and not protect anything. In a National Recreation Area we would have
had a lot more protection, just because there was a precedence. It’s the minimum we would have gotten. We could have saved the Gorge if I hadn’t
said that. But by far the worst mistake
I ever made was letting the Friends masquerade as an environmental group. Once Packwood came to me and asked me to get
back in, then - I’d known Andy Kerr since he was a teenager, and you know,
since they were the Oregon Wilderness Coalition down in Eugene, he and
[indiscernible]. I knew virtually
everyone in the environmental movement at that time. We decided not to trash the Friends
publicly. In other words, we would just
take our parallel route, kind of take the high road, which turned out to be the
high road to failure. But rather we
never said a bad word about them, we just would push our position, “we want the
Park Service,” every other place. We had
everyone. We had a really good core of
people. We had John Kerpinsky [sp?], and
Bill Keizer [sp?], and people in the Vancouver Sierra Club, and we had Lynn
Hering with Audubon, O.N.R.C. Nancy Peterson, and Bruce - I’m trying to
remember his name. I’ll add it
later. You said we’d get to transcribe
-?
CH: Oh,
yeah.
CW: The
National Wildlife Federation guy. We had
a really good group of about ten of us.
They were totally of one mind. We
got along wonderful. It was one of the
most wonderful environmental coalitions you’d ever see, but we didn’t trash the
Friends. And that turned out to be a big
mistake. We just worked with Packwood,
and we went on our own path, and we’d just say, “well, their bill won’t
protect.” But we’d never call them on
lying, and just the really evil stuff they did to destroy us, and so - which
turned out to be a major mistake. So once Hatfield was able to break the Sierra
- but we were working. We had a momentum
going in our favor. We could have - as
late as eighty-five, we could’ve still won.
But when the Sierra Club came in against us, and Dan Evans started
really fighting us bad, it got to be pretty hopeless. By mid-eighty-five we kind of knew - but
Packwood still - to his credit, still kept pushing. He just was always pushing tributaries. He was always pushing. One of the things he and his staff really
felt good about was that he got a provision in the bill for - you know, he’d be
in these negotiations and just demanding things. One of them was that the Park Service would
be part of the study team to draw up the management plan, even if the Forest
Service ended up the lead the lead agency.
He was really proud of that.
Well, when it came time for the study team, the Forest Service refused
to allow it. It said, “the Park Service
is trying to steal our land from it,” and would not allow a single person from
the Park Service to be involved in the plan.
Of course we got a plan that was a complete piece of crap, that allows
grazing in spawning streams, just for one example. So he kept trying, did everything he could,
but once he had Gordon, Evans, and Hatfield against him, and had the Sierra
Club basically whoring to prevent us from bringing in outside - you know,
fighting us bringing in senators from other states, because Sierra Club’s a very major group. We had all the Audubons, but Sierra Club was fighting - preventing Sierra
Clubs from lobbying for us in states back east and such. Once it became obvious we weren’t going to
win, then it was a matter of the tributary - we really concentrated on the
tributaries, and things like that.
Packwood, right to the very end, still kept trying to improve, and kept
pushing, pushing, pushing. It would be a
lot worse - this is one of the things that - if it had not been for the
Coalition, and the other groups we brought in, and Bob Packwood, there’d be no
acquisition east of Hood River. The
Friends of the Gorge, specifically Nancy Russell, had totally sold us out on
any acquisition east of Hood River. Now,
she’s making money, her and her friends, selling land to the Forest Service in
the Rowena area. But we had to organize
Audubon and the O.N.R.C. and the Coalition had to launch a campaign - even the
Sierra Club was appalled by that one.
There would be no protection for the tributaries at all. There’s a number of things we got that are
strictly - Bourgogne Mountain would be solid subdivisions. Major Creek would
not be protected. Nancy Russell bought a
big complex at the mouth of Major Creek, and you can see it for ten miles up
and down the river, but she doesn’t have to screen it like other people
do. It’s just a horrible blight, a big,
huge complex. She fought protection for
Major Creek. Even after we had Dan Evans
and Slade Gorton on board, they still continued to fight it. They were like - even if you give them credit
for wanting to do the right thing, which obviously I don’t, they were like the
British Army: they took a position, no matter how wrong, and they just pushed
ahead, and they’d lo- it was horrible.
And we were more like the Colonial guerrilla fighters: if they were
fighting us over here, suddenly we had two new state parks we were proposing
over here. We just kept - the opposition
never knew how to deal with us. Plus, we
weren’t easy targets. We were not rich,
wealthy city people trying to throw people out of their homes, so that didn’t
stick. We had - like I say, they killed
those state parks we had. Anything that
was our idea that was good, they would go after us. So they were just one mind [that] would never
flex, would never even entertain anything.
One of the ironic things is, being Indian, I just hate Slade Gorton,
Slippery Slade. He built his career on
fighting Indian fishing rights, but he met with us. We had a situation where Dan Evans, Mark
Hatfield, and Ron Wyden would not meet with anyone who was not a
millionaire. We were told we had to go
through the Friends of the Gorge. We
were not allowed to ever meet with those three people, but Slade Gorton would
meet with us poor people. We would go
into office - actually it was more Morrison, but they were never allowed to
hear the other side. They just would not
even allows us into their offices and such.
We were told we had to deal with lower staff, and that’s not who makes
the decisions. Lower staff, as you know,
are real important, but you have to get to the big boy at some point [laughs]. Hatfield made it very clear - that’s one
reason the reason the Sierra Club caved in - he would never meet with them
unless they supported his position on the Gorge. They were more interested in access. That’s where the wildlife refuge and other stuff
they wanted, and so obvi - we can’t prove it, but obviously they agreed to
support him on the Gorge, and kill Park Service protection for the Gorge, in
exchange for him supporting stuff elsewhere.
CH: Do
you think that - with the change in 1981 of Reagan coming into power, that
maybe the whole chemistry of trying to make a park out of the Gorge was all of
the sudden that much harder to...
CW: It
was harder, but it was far from being impossible, because we had really good
people in Congress. This was Nancy
Russell’s excuse. In fact, they even
build themselves as a Republican organization, when they were - in late eighty,
right after Reagan got elected. See, I
had already cut the deals with Cecil Andrus and [the] Carter
administration. We were already on the
Park Service. We had already totally
agreed on the bill and everything. When
Reagan got elected, that was Nancy [Russell] - ,”well, we have a Republican
administration; we need a Republican group to deal with them,” and that was her
excuse. The fallacy in that is that we
still had total control over Congress.
We could have gotten, with Hatfield’s help, anything we wanted out of
Congress. A few weeks, if not days, before
Reagan signed the Gorged scam, he signed the Great Basin National Park bill. So there is no reason to think - one of the
things that is so frustrating to us is that there would have been - not only
would there have been less - for anyone like Reagan or something, there was no
more damage in signing a good bill than there was in the bad bill. There were some people, other than the timber
industry, that had written the Friends Bill and were getting - had their
Christmas tree, but for the right wing anti-park people, they didn’t car if it was
the Forest bill or the Packwood Bill.
This is an interesting point: for the politicians to sell out, claiming
they needed the Forest Service because [of] Reagan is nonsense, because they
would have actually taken less heat if it had been the Park Service
bill, because there would have been acquisition. There was no more damage in Sid Morrison or
someone supporting the Park Service than there was the Forest Service. The fact that you supported a National Scenic
Area was - it didn’t matter what the details.
So they would have, short-term, not had any more wrath supporting the
Park Service, and in long-term would have had a lot less wrath because there
would have been acquisition, and people would have been treated. Ron Arnold, who’s one of the main spokespeople
for the right wing, the anti-park group - it’s really interesting, because he
did an editorial in the - they wouldn’t let it in the Oregonian, of
course, but in the Columbian - he’s out at Bellevue - he got a hold of
the letter I was telling you about - I think I gave you a copy, that John Gray,
and Schnitzer Steel, all of the - PacifiCorp, Weyerhaeuser had signed - and he
did a column in eighty-three saying that, “I bet you anything that people like
John Gray are going to get millions of dollars to build lodges and develop the
Gorge, and poor people aren’t going to be allowed to develop it. The rich people are not only going to
develop, but they’re going to get paid federal money to develop,” and of course
he was right [laughs]. I pointed that
out. So he did - I ran into him three or
four years ago, and he had just come out with a new book, one of his exposés of
the environmental movement [?]. It’s a
fascinating book. So he gave me a co- I
ran into him at the environmental law conference in Eugene, and he gave me a
copy, and he said, “to Chuck, who turned out to be right on the Columbia
Gorge. We wish we would have supported
you,” - or, “it was a mistake to not support you.” So what we have is that the right-wing people
realize that we have a totally incompetent of the Gorge, and local people are
not being treated fair. If we had the
Park Service, there would have been compensation for people, and it would have
been done professionally. A whole lot of
people who were opposed to us, now would support Park Service. Dan Durrow [sp?], who moved back to the Gorge
in seventy-seven, and worked for the Mid-Columbia Economic Development
District, when they were trying to build the zirconium plant in Dallesport -
we’ve been butting heads since seventy-seven, but we’ve remained good friends,
he lived in The Dalles, so we see each other all the time. So he - out in the really stormy - when they
were adopting the plan for the - the Gorge management planning - the Gorge
Commission was having all these meetings, we were standing outside in The Dalles
and a guy came out - so we had just made an agreement that I would make sure
all the environmental groups support acquisition authority and thus
compensation throughout the whole Gorge.
In exchange, he and the other people that fought us would back the Park
Service. So we came to this - what I
thought was a great deal. One of the
guys he knows comes out, just in a rage, “goddamn commies are stealing my
land,” and everything. He kind of winked
out me and said, “let’s try out our new theory.” He says, “well, what if we had gone in there
with the Park Service and we had bought the quarter they want to protect, and
then you’d have been left alone in your other land, maybe getting it in seed
[?] -.” He just, “yeah, I could have
lived with that,” [laughs]. Just totally
defused. But the Friends don’t want to
do that. They want to do it through this
bureaucratic regulation.
CH: Where’s
the Coalition, your group? Where’s that
at now?
CW: We’re
in hibernation. I mean, we still
[indiscernible] every year, so I do a newsletter, just to raise hell.
CH: How
many members would you think...
CW: Oh,
we don’t even try to have regular members.
We’ve got eight people on the board.
We still file suits, and timber sales - we shut down a big timber sale on
the White Salmon River. But Columbia
Gorge Audubon has become the major local force.
We do that because they have the credibility to be in the national
group. Audubon used to be really good,
but they’ve since hired Paul Katchin [sp?] from Thousand Friends of Oregon, and
now Portland Audubon’s horrible. They
won’t help us at all in the Gorge. They
won’t even - they just had two opportunities where they had meetings and hearings
they were invited to: one by Blumenauer and one by Channel Two, and they never
told Columbia Gorge Audubon. So no one
showed up from local environmentalists.
So they’re now trying to - Portland Audubon’s trying to basically ruin
Columbia Gorge Audubon. But having a
group like that, that’s affiliated with a national group, has so much more
credibility than the Coalition, so basically - and we’ve done this twice before
- we’ve gone into hibernation, but kept the group alive. We’re still incorporated, and renew it.
Our
main goal now is to be a truth - is just point out the truth, to go to some
area and say, “wait a minute, this is not true.
Here’s what’s really going on.”
We’re not allowed to take part in the political process, and we have no
money or anything, so we just file appeals.
We concentrate the tributaries primarily, the Klickitat. Like I say, we just filed a big appeal on the
Klickitat River.
CH: And
how did you kill the governor’s bill?
CW: Got
the national groups to - went back to D.C., and I knew that John Siberling
[sp?] was chairman of the Parks Committee then, and just built up opposition
among national groups, you know, what you were talking about. I went back and got National Parks and
Conservation Association, Wilderness Society at the time was still a pretty good
group - I have a lot less respect for them now.
They had a person, Ron Tipton [sp?], who I had known going back to when
we exposed the scandals in Yosemite, when I was working for Friends of the
Earth. He was their national parks
expert. American Rivers was a very good
group. They helped us out. So basically, I just got all the lobbyists
for the national groups to go in and make it very clear that we were against
it. It was able to - it was just flying
through Congress, and we shut it down really fast [laughs]. So - I think you told you - I called Nancy
Russell and she offered to hire me for a day to take pictures...
CH: Oh
that’s right, yeah.
CW: proved
to her. We were looking to forty
thousand dollars and she was looking at one day of pay. That’s a little bit of discrepancy.
CH: Little
discrepancy, yeah.
So,
at this point, is there anything else you’d like to say on that, or -?
CW: Well,
do you want - I could go ahead and just kind of my personal - where I went with
the tribes there from -.
CH: Okay,
well, we can go back onto that, and then if you think of anything else that
will come up, we’ll probably have another session. And in between the sessions then, you’ll be
able to...
CW: Right. How soon do these get transcribed?
CH: I
don’t what the schedule is. We’re trying
to do them pretty quickly, though.
CW: Usually
that’s the type things that drag...
CH: Then
you’ll be able to go through it...
CW: Yeah,
know what I’ve missed.
CH: Exactly. Well, that’s a good idea. We might want to wait for that, just so you
can do that.
When
I was going back over some of the early things here, I wanted to ask you what
you remember as your first contacts with the Columbia River and Columbia River
Gorge. You had talked a little bit about
spending summers...
CW: Right.
CH: ...up
in Stevenson...
CW: In
our Stevenson land. Yeah well, Skamania.
CH: Skamania
rather.
CW: Stevensons
kind of at the bottom [laughs].
CH: And
do you have any other recollections of your first impressions, your first
connections with the Gorge.
CW: Well,
that property I have - and I can’t even remember when it wasn’t in my
mind. There was this wonderful creek we
had - and she was actually one of our secret weapons - is Duncan Creek went
along our property there, and on the east side is where the old general store
used to be [that] my dad owned, and that’s where I moved back to. It was where he was born, on that piece of
property, in the back of the old general store.
And then, across on the west side of the creek, Stella Hazard, Stella
Potts [sp?], was the local postmistress.
She was my dad’s high school girlfriend.
She was just wonderful, and everyone loved her, and she was an adamant
environmentalist. She was one of our
secret weapons. By the time Nancy ruined us and we were getting back, she
had passed away. So we’d always go up
and spend time on the property, and walk around. I remember my sister chasing a little bear,
trying to look under its tail, and we’re, “oh no!” [laughs], trying to drag her
back. We’d get steelhead out of the creek, and then we’d go see Stella and have
dinner over there. So that place is so
ingrained in my mind, since I can remember.
I can’t remember not knowing that place.
That to me was the Gorge. The
rest of it was sort of abstract. To me,
the Gorge was western Skamania County, the rain forest, where my Indian family
was from, and my great great grandma’s orchard.
We’d go down there and pick apples and stuff. My main image of the Gorge
was our property, and the area around it there.
CH: Could
you explain on a real - sort of a general level, and then maybe more
specifically, why the salmon are important in the Columbia River.
CW: Well,
being Indian, it goes beyond the food.
It’s not sport. In fact - kind of
a little side thing here, but it’s one of my favorite stories - the biggest
problem among environmentalists and Indians is over sport fishing and catch and
release versus commercial or subsistence fishing. The policies of the environmental movement
are for the most part determined by sport fishing groups, like Oregon Trout,
and such. They often try to take the
moral high road in dealing with Indians.
They say, “we throw our fish back so we’re morally superior to you
Indians who won’t throw them back.” When
I was working with Intertribe, a guy from Woodland came down, a sports
fisherman, made a bunch of presentations to the commission about why Indians
should be doing catch and release fishing.
All the leaders sat there very quietly - very amazingly politely, because
these people were really fighting them on every level. And they sat there quietly, and in about an
hour and they got all done, and they got done making the presentation. Harold Culp [sp?] was an elderly, since past
away, Warm Springs guy, had a massive grin with gold teeth, just ear to ear
grin. He just smiled and says, “well, I
was raised to not play with my food,” and that was [laughs] - that was the end
of the meeting. So the idea of the
fishing for sport is not something that’s an Indian mentality. You fish for food or spiritual reasons, but
it’s not a sport. Indians view fishing
as, why would you harass a fish and then let it go, if you’re not going to eat
it. I had someone one time, knowing I
was both Indian and [an] environmental activist, ask me, “So what do you think
about catch and release fishing?” I
said, “well, if you’re on a stream where there’s both native and hatchery fish,
and you’re letting the wild go, and keeping the hatchery, that’s one
thing. Other than that, how’d you like
to be walking along a stream, and you see an apple, and you pick it up, and
suddenly you’re yanked under water and shook around until you’re almost drowned
to death, and then a fish throws you out to the bank to let you recover?” He said, “well, that’s pretty clear,”
[laughs].
So
for Indians, it’s the whole center of the religion and such. You don’t eat salmon in the spring until
there’s the ceremony at Celilo, which is probably the most important religious
ceremony, for a Northwest Indian.
Celilo’s kind of Mecca for Northwest Indians. It’s integrated into our whole culture. Even though I’m not a traditionalist that
way, it’s something I definitely honor that way. But to me it’s subsistence or spiritual. It’s nothing to do with sport fishing, or
flyfishing. I have no particular
interest in that.
It’s
just a sad thing to have them disappear.
A lot of the problem being - Bonneville Dam’s built on top of my
village. It’s really ironic - is the
second powerhouse at Bonneville Dam is the newest dam on the Columbia River,
and it’s the biggest fish killer. So
somehow technology has not advanced. I’m
not ready to get into it, but a lot of the problem have with being from
Bonneville Dam was that in the Mitchell Act in 1938, the company, Bonneville
Dam was to set up hatchery programs to restore salmon that are being destroyed
by the dams. Obviously, the salmon runs
being destroyed by the dams are upriver from Bonneville, because it’s a lower -
eighteen out of the twenty-one hatcheries put in under the Mitchell Act are
below Bonneville Dam, purposely set up so the Indians would never get the fish.
They’re set up as terminal hatchery fish producers for commercial, not Indian,
fisherman. That’s one of the things I really worked with when I was in
Intertribe, was forming an alliance between upriver sportsmen and the Indian
tribes, which worked very good. It kind
of forced politically Congress to reprogram the money, and start spending the
money upriver, were the dams were done -
or where the dams were doing the damage.
One of the key things is that the biggest harvester of salmon at the
dams, it’s not the Indians, it’s not the commercial fisherman, it’s the
dams. And it’s not just the dams, the
fact that there’s salmon runs, coho crashing on the coast, where there aren’t
dams proves that habitat has - clearcutting and such has a lot to do with it.
East of the mountains, mining and grazing are, more than clearcutting, the
problem. But the dams - the Power
Council estimates two thirds of the mortality is from the dams on the Columbia
system.
CH: How
did that all happen? I mean, the
development of the Columbia River basin sort of happened back in the mid
eighteen-hundreds, as the inhabitants started coming in, and navigation, and
things like that. How did it get to the
point where it is today, and why weren’t - maybe you could describe how the
Native American people were involved in what happened.
CW: Well,
they were basically left out of any decision making, and did not have political
clout. The dams, there was a private dam
that preceded Bonneville, but Bonneville in thirty-eight, and then Grand Coulee
in forty were the big ones that really - and Grand Coulee, by itself, blocked
off a third of salmon spawning habitat.
When they closed it in 1940, it immediately wiped out the June hogs, the
hundred pound summer Chinooks that used to go clear up into Canada to
spawn.
CH: Why
would Canada allow that?
CW: They
didn’t really have a whole lot of choice, plus they wanted a dam up there. But I doubt if they had the political clout
to stop the United States. It was,
everyone kind does what they want in their borders, and there was not a treaty
with Canada involving fisheries until eighty-five. But I imagine they wanted to build their own
dams. No one was really concerned about
fish at the time. It was never even
brought up. A number of factors happened
- most of the dams were authorized during the war. Like The Dalles Dam, even though it wasn’t
completed until fifty-seven, [it] was authorized during the war. The Warm Springs and the Indians that tried
to fight it were literally threatened that they’d go after their
patriotism. In other words, if they
tried to fight the dams, they would go after them for being unpatriotic to the
war effort. So you weren’t allowed to do
that. And then you had agencies. One of the most stunning things is when the
Bureau of Fisheries, the predecessor to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, did the
environmental assessment on the impacts from The Dalles Dam, they said, “yes, it
will kill a lot of fish, but it’s also going to have the side benefit of
destroying Indian fishing, and prevent Indians from being able to fish. So their will be a net improvement in salmon
runs because of The Dalles Dam. No
federal agency could ever get away with [laughs] - with that today, which shows
a chance. The tribes - traditionally
it’s been the states and private citizens going after Indian fishing, and the
federal government has trust responsibilities.
So the main opponents of Indian fishing have always been the states,
which until about twenty years ago commercial white fishing groups had control
over the state fisheries agencies. And
since then, sport fishing probably has an equal - you know, it’s much more
equitable there. So what would happen is
- and the tribes, it took them decades and decades, and went to the Supreme
Court: the Boldt and Belloni decisions.
The Boldt decision’s the one for Puget Sound, and the Baloney’s the
companion one for the Columbia River, which was the Warm Springs, Yakama,
Umatilla, Nez Perce, tribes filed that.
They one their treaty rights, I think it was sixty-nine. It took them many many years to get up to the
Supreme Court. So the Supreme Court
ruled that the states could not regulate Indian fishing, except for
conservation reasons. There had to be -
we didn’t have an Endangered Species Act then, but there had to be endangered
species. At the time, BIA had trust
responsibility over tribal fisheries.
The tribes themselves, it was still a patronistic system, and the tribes
didn’t really have much direct input into fishing policy. So what happened after the - sixty-nine, when
we won all the Supreme Court cases, what would happen would be the states would
open up the commercial fishing in the lower Columbia, and as soon as the run
would start crossing Bonneville Dam, they’d go into court and shut it down for
commercial reasons. So the tribes would
still lose. They won the Supreme Court
[laughs] but had no way of enforcing it.
So, in seventy-seven, Carter put in a self-determination program, and
the tribes said, “Whoa boy! Yeah, we’re
all for that. Give us BIA’s money and
we’ll run our own fisheries.” That’s
when each tribe really upped their professional expertise, and that’s when
Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, so that the tribes had their own
biologist. I don’t know, I don’t work
their now, but when I left Intertribe, they had never lost a suit. Since seventy-seven, when the tribes had
their biologist, the states would keep going in and, “well, we’ve got to shut
this down.” The tribal biologist would
come in, and it was real obvious who was telling the truth, and the tribes won
every single law suit after that.
Things
got really better for a while. The fish
runs started coming back, fall Chinook,
steelhead...
CH: When
was that?
CW: From
seventy-seven into the early eighties.
But then around eighty-five, just all the other factors, dam moral- you
know, all the other dams going in, just kind of undid that. But there was a huge improvement following
the tribes getting control over their own fisheries. There’s another - that’s not really been
enforced - there’s a second decision called Boldt Two, that ruled that half of
nothing doesn’t fulfill treaty rights.
So the federal government, under treaty rights, cannot allow any more
development that hurts salmon runs. It
was one of those that has never been tested all the way to the Supreme Court,
and it’s in no small part because this is still the Reagan Supreme Court, and
it’s not a time to take Indian issues to the Supreme Court. So there’s a lot of debate going on. But that’s theory - I mean, I don’t know,
this may be what Ed Chaney mentioned.
But that’s theoretically the most - strongest way of protecting salmon
that will ever be.
CH: I
think part of his view too, was that so many people were arguing - so many of
the various groups were arguing who had what percentage of the catch.
CW: Right.
CH: Including,
you know, the Native American groups...
CW: Sure.
CH: ...Were
doing the same thing, and that, by framing the debate within that context, that
it was ignoring the main problem of the fish, which was the dams -the dams
killing the fish. And instead of
everybody focusing on that one issue, they were focusing on who would get the
percentage of the catch.
CW: Right.
CH: And
that gave the dams, the B.P.A., the Corps of Engineers, and whatnot, sort of
the excuse to say, “well, we’re only part of the problem, and the commercial
fishers are part, and the Forest Service is part, and the other groups are
part, and the other groups are part, the natives are part. And that - So we’re just one part. Do you think that was a...
[End of Tape 5, Side 1]
January 25, 1999
Tape 5, Side 2
CH: ...You
wanted to finish up with the chronology on your involvement.
CW: Right. And so - is that going?
CH: Yes
it is.
CW: So
then, like I say, when I got back involved, the Friends of the Gorge had
promised Packwood that they’d give us tens of thousands of dollars. We were looking at a tenth of there - a ten
percent tithe of their $400,000 a year budget.
And they refused to ever give that money. They went through - there’s some really
interesting stuff there, where they only one executive director that ever tried
to work with us, and this was after the bill passed.
Just
to throw this, in case I don’t forget it, he came up to me one time and wanted
to take me to lunch and I said, “I don’t take anything from the Friends that
doesn’t have at least three zeros behind it,” but I did go out and talk to
him. And he’s the only director they’ve
had out of - who knows, ten, twelve - that ever tried to work with local
people, and treated local people right.
All the rest had known their job was to prevent us from ever being able
to take part in politics, and to disfranchise us, to not only not talk to us,
but do everything they can to never allow us.
The condition of his being hired was that he get to look at the books,
and they stalled and stalled, and they finally got a hold of the books. It turned out that the treasurer was the
treasurer and writing the checks, and when he got a hold of the books,
he found out $80,000 had disappeared. So
he was fired by Nancy Russell and Bowen Blair.
And the person embezzling wasn’t gone after, they went after their new
executive director. He filed a law suit
against them, and ended up winning a huge settlement against them. A lot of the stuff in his files are just
incredibly incriminating. I guess - I
never made an effort to go get them. If
I do my book, I probably will. But
there’s some mind-boggling stuff in there, but he was fired.
Anyway
they had - Bowen Blair was the director during - after the Don Clark era ended,
well, they hired a new director. Nancy
Russell was, my - from a fairly good source, was the only guy that wanted to
hire this guy, Bowen Blair, who’s an heir to International Harvesters, old
Chicago money, [indiscernible] money, and very elitist lawyer, just graduated
from Lewis and Clark. She was the only
supporter on the Friends board of him.
The others wanted to hire Alan Mercer, from Seattle, who made the
mistake of telling me he thought that my pol- my proposal made a lot more sense
[laughs]. She blocked it, and they hired
him. Things were supposed to change, but
they didn’t. He was every bit as
horrible as the previous ones, and just refused to work with us and such. Anyway, we came up through - and like I say,
we were not fighting them directly, which is the worst mistake of my life,
which is why we lost. By late eighty-five,
we knew we were going to lose. It was
just - you know, it ain’t much. But
Packwood kept trying. When the Friends
of the Gorge never gave me the money, and I lived on money off my book sales,
rather than paying my debt. I had
borrowed over a hundred grand to get my Gorge book out in time to save the
Gorge. Instead of paying that off I
lived off that money to protect the Gorge.
And it ended up, by eighty-five, I was on the verge of losing
everything. So Intertribal Fish
Commission hired me at the beginning of eighty-six, versus the publications
editor. I stayed there for about three
and a half years, and the last half of that I was the manager of the Public
Information Department, and did the publications end as a department
manager. That was when Tim Wapato was
the executive director. It was a much
smaller place. It was just the most
wonderful place to work then. And now
it’s a bureaucracy [laughs] unfortunately.
Then it was just family. It was
wonderful. When Tim left, in 1980 - No. In ninety.
CH: 1990?
CW: Yeah. He left in late eighty-nine, early
ninety. I had been there three and a
half years, so I just left - I had to move into Portland, and rent an
important. I stayed in Vancouver first,
and that commute about killed me, so I rented an apartment in Portland, and
lived for about three and a half years working for Intertribe, and got totally
burned out with city life, and got enough debts paid of to get back on my feet. Then in ninety, I went to work for the Yakama
Indian Nation part-time, doing the publications for the Yakama- Klickitat
Hatchery Project, in which our other tape I’d go into a lot of detail, because
that’s a fascinating - you know, that’s a really fascinating one. And I did that for a year, and then just kind
of worked my way back into being an artist and a photographer, and start
working on books. Then, I bought my
gallery, in the beginning of 1994, in The Dalles, and had just opened it. While I was in the process of opening up my gallery,
I wrote a friend of mine, who had done a documentary on fishing throughout the
country I helped him on for ABC, formed a non-profit group called the Earth
Conservation Corps, and had a connection to the Department of Energy, and he
called - back during the Bush administration, we had first met, we had come up
- we didn’t have the name [indiscernible, two words] yet. But we had come up with this idea to have an
Indian youth group that worked to restore salmon habitat in exchange for
college scholarships. We made a proposal
to the Department of Energy, and were promised a billion dollars by the admiral
who was in the - the secretary of energy and such, and we never saw a
penny. So we had kind of given up on the
idea. Then, in the beginning of ninety-four,
he gets a call from - there’s some carryover for the Department of Energy. Hazel O’Leary
had just ordered the Department of Energy to put together the most
innovative AmeriCorps program in the country.
One of the carry-overs remembered our proposal, and dug it, and called
us up and said, “hey, you’re sitting this?”
And we said, “hey, we’ve been there before,” you know [laughs]. They said, “no, no, no. This is the Clinton administration. We do things.
So I took a couple months while I was opening up the gallery, and went
and visited the four Intertribe tribes.
CH: Which
ones were they?
CW: Warm
Springs, Umatilla, Nez Perce, and Yakama.
Same ones in Intertribal, that’s why I knew all the heads at the
fisheries. And then the Shoshone Bannocks
at the Fort Hall reservation. And that
program, they weren’t part of Intertribe, but Lockheed bankrolled that
money. So while we were in the process
of writing this grant, waiting for our AmeriCorps money - and we worked. We got a 2.1 million dollar grant from the
AmeriCorps and the Department of Energy.
The Department of Energy matched it, and were really wonderful, I must
say. I had the real doubts about them
being one of the three - my three bosses, but they were wonderful. So we wrote this grant, and we ended up
getting a 2.1 million dollar grant. So
that summer in August - all the other AmeriCorps projects around the country,
almost all of them had year-long planning grants and a lot of staff, and time to
get ready. From when we finally got the
AmeriCorps money, I had one and a half months to set up an entire a program,
and never got back to my gallery. I was
on the road. You know, Monday I’d be at
Yakama, and Tuesday at Umatilla, and Wednesday, Nez Perce, and Thursday
[laughs] I’d be at Warm Springs. I just,
I threw my back out. I just lived on the
road, and I wasn’t even - [hadn’t] had time to have people run my gallery. So I ended up closing down my gallery for a
while. Like I say, I didn’t plan to mana
- we got the grant, and all this money, and a wonderful program, and nothing
happened. Finally, the tribes said,
“hey, smart guy. You dreamed it up, you
run it,” [laughs]. So I managed it for
the first year, until late ninety-five.
That’s one of the proudest things I’ve ever done. One of the things I really liked about it was
that we just had kids out there - eighty kids every day out doing incredible
work. You get eighty pairs - or a
hundred six- you know, eighty pairs of hands going four days a week, it’s just
mind-boggling what you could do. The
most wonderful thing about it for me was that the Nancy Russells and the rich
people of the world couldn’t block me.
We had the kids out there just doing work, and there was no way they
could stop me [laughs] from doing all this great work. So, it was...
CH: Now,
were you working with AmeriCorps then?
CW: Yeah,
it was an AmeriCorps grant. I worked for
the tribes and the Earth Con- it was a partnership between the five tribes
involved, the Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, the Department of
Energy, and a non-profit foundation in D.C. called the Earth Conservation
Corps, and they administered the program.
So I was the manager of the Salmon Corps. Then the Earth Conservation Corps had other
programs. They had the Eagle Corps working
on eagles, and a few others, but Salmon Corps was their biggie. This is the one that put them on the map.
CH: So
who were you working with in AmeriCorps, then?
CW: Well,
we had a person, Brian Tressle [sp?] I think was his name - he was out of D.C. Each project has an officer. We were a direct federal grant. Most AmeriCorps programs are through the
states, and you work - like at PSU is the Oregon office, and then there’s one
that’s in Seattle I think it is, over the Washington - and most programs, the
grants go to the states, and they divvy it up.
But we were a direct federal with the Department of Energy, and there
was another one locally in Portland and Trout Lake, the Northwest Service
Academy, that was the one John Stuart [sp?] ran. They were a direct federal with the Forest
Service.
CH: John
Stuart ran the one in Trout Lake?
CW: Well,
he was over the whole program.
CH: Oh,
the whole program.
CW: Yeah. The Northwest Service Academy had a residency
program in Trout Lake, where the young people stayed there and lived. And then they had a big one in Corbett that
was strictly a daytime, where they went home at night, and they came and
volunteered in during the day. He was
the big boss over both of them, and then had a manager over each program, and
did a great, great job.
CH: So
then what was his relationship, in his structure, to yours?
CW: We
were peers. We were both managers of our
programs, and so...
CH: So
did he coordinate his activities then, with your activities
CW: Oh
very much, yeah.
CH: Did
the groups actually work together?
CW: We
did a couple of times, and it was great.
At Celilo, there’s all kinds of work and such, so a couple of his crews
from Trout Lake, and crews from three of the reservations came down and camped
there for a week, and restored the kitchen, and put in insulation, and...
CH: What
were you doing in Celilo? What’s there?
CW: Well,
it was to get ready for the spring pow wow.
There was thousands of people coming for the salmon feed and the pow
wow, and there were no bathrooms, there was no - roof leaking, there was - just
the infrastructure to host 5000 people [laughs] or however many showed up,
wasn’t there.
CH: What
exists there now?
CW: Well
there’s, in terms of community buildings, there’s the longhouse of course,
which is the religious center. And
hooked onto it is the kitchen. There’s a
big kitchen where they do all the meals.
Then there’s the - what do they call it, the arboretum? Something, there’s another big building with
no floors. It’s dirt floor and a real
just plywood, tin roof building, but that’s where most of the pow wows are
held, in there. Then there’s two
trailers put together, and one side of it’s not active. It was kind of the local office for it, when
they had a more active government there.
The other half’s the Head Start and the Indian youth programs and such.
So those are the only public buildings, and then there’s maybe forty
people that live there.
CH: So
people are still living there.
CW: Yeah,
there’s about forty that live there, despite the fact that they’re not legally
not living there. The courts did
everything they could to get them out of there, and they just never left, and
just stayed there. So technically, most
of them are squatters and such, but they still have their community.
CH: But
they’re endowed lands. I mean,
they’re...
CW: Well,
they’re trust lands that are in a unique position where they’re jointly
administered by the Warm Springs, Yakama, and Umatilla tribes. I don’t know of any other trust lands that
are administered by more than one tribe.
It causes a lot of problems.
You kind of have the tragedy of the
commons, where everyone else is the - there’s a long tradition of the river
Indians, the river people of which I’m one, fighting the tribal councils. When the river people were forced - after the
1855 treaty, when the river people were - well, that reminds me, on your list
of the Homestead Act and such, in the Gorge in the Columbia River, the Donation
Land Act in about 1850 was much more of a factor of getting white-owned land
than was the Homestead land. It was the
early eighteen-fifties. That was where
the Indian land was really taken away by whites, was the Donation Land claim,
similar to the Homestead Act.
CH: Was
that what followed the Stevens Treaties?
CW: Yeah. Or actually, it preceded the treaties.
CH: Preceded
them? Because I think it was 1853 or
something.
CW: Yeah,
and the treaties were fifty-five, the main ones. So the treaties were kind of - they had already
illegally - and Indians talk about that a lot, that most of those Donation
claims were not legal because the lands hadn’t been ceded to the U.S.
government. But a hundred and fifty
years ago, it’s hard to go back [laughs] and do that, but that’s a definite
sore point.
CH: I
know that Celilo’s always been talked about the longest settled, inhabited
place in North America.
CW: Well
it’s just downstream from there. It’s
actually more Chinook people, Wishram people.
It’s the Wake-em-up [sp?] that was excavated, before it was flooded by
The Dalles Dam. It’s actually
Celilo-speaking people. So, from the
mouth of the Columbia to where the long narrows were, to where Horse Thief Lake
State Park, is roughly where that village was, and was Chinook people. Although, on the Washington side there were a
lot Shahaptian speaking Klickitats
intermingled with Chinooks, which is real unusual. Two different language groups lived together
in the area. But, in general, up to a
little east of The Dalles, was Chinook people, Wascos and Wishrams - Wishkums
as we call ourselves. Then, from Celilo
on, were Shahaptian people. The place
that was continuous - see, they were migratory - is a Chinook area. It had been continuously occupied for 11,000
years. When they excavated, there was a
total - I can’t remember what you call it - stratification without a break for
11,000 years. 11,000 years ago was the
last Missoula flood, and so...
CH: Even
if there were people before that, they wouldn’t...
CW: Right,
there’d be no trace. So there probably -
if there were people there immediately after it, you could make a good logical
argument that there people there, but there’d be no - you know, when you have a
mile of water [laughs]...
CH: Right.
CW: ...roaring
through, there’d be no - but it had been continuously occupied, and that is a
Wishram - Wishkum village there. We’d
always say, “at least 11,000 years.”
CH: Yeah. Right.
CW: And
they’re starting to date back further. I
think they’re - in North America, they’ve got sights going back 30,000 years.
CH: Nearby?
CW: I
think Fort Rocks, back to something like that now.
CH: 30,000?
CW: Yeah.
They keep - you know, everyone said the Indians came over 11,000 years ago over
the Bering Land Mass, and the Indians said, “no, we were here before
that.” Now, they keep going further and
further back. I don’t - in fact they
were talking about that this morning, across - with the Indian curator across
the [indiscernible] - the fact that there were Indians here before doesn’t
necessarily conflict with people coming over on the Bering...
CH: Oh,
yeah.
CW: You
could have both.
CH: Sure.
CW: And
particularly from the mouth of the Columbia up to Alaska, a lot of the coastal
people have somewhat Asian - my great great grandpa had a Fu Manchu mustache,
and such. So you have some Asian
characteristics. So, like I say, they’re
not mutually exclusive. Anyway, the Salmon Corps, I ran that until late
ninety-five. Then - this is just personal
- then a week later I got the type of bacterial pneumonia that killed Jim
Hansen of the Muppets, and ended up I was within an hour of being dead. I was into the death rattle, and lost most of
that year, and wasn’t able reopen my gallery, and left me bankrupt. I just got well and found out my mom was
dying, and spent time with her. Then,
[I] got last year by a drunk driver in The Dalles, and totaled my car - hit my
with a great big Cadillac, and they never caught her, and that pretty well
wiped out that year [laughs], so I just opened my gallery finally, here, just a
few months ago, in the fall of ninety-eight, and tried to get back on my
feet. I had already been bankrupt from
all the Gorge work, and lost most of my property because I wouldn’t clear-cut
it. So, I’m just now getting back on my
feet. In terms of the Gorge - actually
this is just - I guess you want some personal history there [laughs].
CH: Yeah. No, I appreciate that.
CW: So
I finally have reopened my gallery a couple of months ago, and I’m slowly
trying to get books published, and I’m just - you know, I have massive debts,
sixty-five grand in credit cards to support myself when I was laying the
hospital almost dead [laughs] and stuff, taking care of my mom and stuff. Which, this makes me really angry because the
Friends of the Gorge have - I don’t really care that much about money, but when
they have a minimum of six people being paid high salaries, none of them had
ever lifted a finger on the Gorge until there was a high paying job for
it. None of them ever lifted a finger
afterwards. They just get keep getting
paid, and not one penny has ever gone to a local person. It just tends to make you really - you know,
when you start getting into financial troubles, and you see people fighting you
getting big salaries, and you never got a penny, it’s a very bitter pill
[laughs] to take there.
CH: So
are you doing anything on the Columbia Gorge right now?
CW: Yeah,
we still raise a lot of hell, and a lot - actually, I picket the Friends of the
Gorge [laughs] as much as anything.
We’re down to the point where basically the biggest problem we have in
the Columbia Gorge right now is the cover up.
The Friends of the Gorge have totally covered up the truth, and they -
we’re still banned from the Oregonian.
There’s still never been an interview or a letter to the editor, or an
opinion piece in the Oregonian since the mid-eighties, since the Journal
was - but we had a screaming match in eighty-five that led to getting about a
four-inch article from the Coalition’s office manager. That’s the last time a local environmentalist
has ever been allowed in the Oregonian to comment on it. The Friends of the Gorge keep saying
everything’s just wonderful and - one of the things that just enrages me about
Hatfield is that he held a press conference last fall, here at PSU - I sure
wish I’d known about it - with the Friends of the Gorge, and announced, “for
some people just don’t understand, there still are some problems in the Gorge,
and the Friends of the Gorge say the same thing.” He held a tenth anniversary hearing right
before he retired, and didn’t allow a single environmentalist to testify. The Friends of the Gorge person, who was from
Arizona, got to testify, and none of us were allowed to testify. She said, “we have no problems at all in the
Gorge. Nothing that will -” and there
was already 700 houses at that point, which she didn’t acknowledge. Hatfield, from information I had given to his
staff person who really was impressed - he thought I was a crackpot until I met
with him. About ten minutes into it, he
realized I knew what I was talking about, had all the...
CH: Who
was that?
CW: Dave
Robertson?
CH: Jack
Roberts? Jack Roberts is with the B.P.A.
CW: No,
I think his name - he’s been doing contracting work for Friends of the
Gorge. Nice guy, and he was really
impressed, and went and asked Hatfield to let me testify, and Hatfield said,
“No way. Absolutely no way.” So the Friends of the Gorge said we have
absolutely no problems, and they did an editorial piece in the Oregonian
saying, “the Gorge Bill’s paid off and it’s all protected. A little more land acquisition money and
everything’s protected. Now they’re
saying, “we don’t understand why people -” but they totally covered until the
Bea House was so ugly that it blew the lid off.
So, we’ll never get Gorge protection until there’s a public perception
that there’s a problem in the Gorge, and...
CH: Have
you tried to go through other public forms to do that, either like publications,
and you were talking about Vancouver...
CW: Vancouver
Columbian will, and Seattle Times - both interview us. But the power that can save the Gorge is in
Portland. Until we get Portland - the
Oregonian won’t acknowledge problems except for the one house.
CH: What
about Willamette Week?
CW: Willamette
Week will not either, there since - they were wonderful back when Pat
Amadeo - remember how I told you how she lied to the Gorge Commission about the
days they were supposed to meet? I
leaked all that information to Tom Alkyer [sp?]. You probably remember him.
CH: Tom
-?
CW: Alkyer. He was a writer, and he worked with them from
the early eighties. He did a great piece
called “Twilight for the Gorge.” I think
I have it in that stuff - and he exposed all that. In fact, Craig and I actually gave him all
that information. Pat Amadeo almost got
fired over it. I mean, it just blew her
job to pieces. That’s the last time Willamette
Week - when I got arrested chained to the Heathman, they printed the
Heathman’s rebuttal, but never said why I got arrested, or what our problems
were. They just - assessment’s totally
in with the Friends of the Gorge.
They’re just the yuppy dating paper [laughs] as far as I know. They trash Skamania County, being responsible
for what problems are in the Gorge, but never allow us to print our rebuttal,
saying, “wait a minute. Let’s look at
Multnomah County.”
CH: What
about any of the environmental organizations for getting these ideas out?
CW: It’s
almost - the Friends of the Gorge, after two million dollars - there’s almost
nowhere we can - they’ve just worn us down with money. We basically rarely go outside the Gorge,
except to picket the Friends. Like I say, there will be no hope for the Gorge
until we get the word out that there are problems. We have this massive cover up. We go to people in Portland, “well,
everything’s just fine. Why would we
want to change legislation?” So, almost
all of my energy on the Gorge now is spent exposing what’s going on and
why. I’m as likely to picket the Friends
as I am S.D.S. lumber and such. My main
focus now is on exposing what is going on in the Gorge. Like I say, the Vancouver Columbian
will print articles and such, but we got to get - Portland’s where we do
-. I’m still involved. We still file appeals and things like that,
but we’re not really that active, in semi-hibernation. But our day may come. Things are getting so bad that somehow
they’re not going to keep the - but people have been telling me for six seven
years, that know what’s going on the Gorge - the local people - “things are so
horrible, they just can’t keep the lid on this.” In fact, when they started clearcutting there
below Crown Point - John Katen [sp?] - did you meet him? He was an environmental reporter for Channel
Eight. See Channel Eight and the Oregon
Journal were the two Portland media that really supported us. As late as eighty-five was doing editorials,
which I have copies, and even did a brochure, urging people to make the Gorge a
National Park Service area, and had the Coalition listed above the Friends of
the Gorge as the group to contact.
They’re still the only one. They
were great. People try to cover up that
we actually [laughs] had some support.
But they and the Oregon Journal were the two Portland media that
the Friends were able - but now, we just don’t have the people - we just do our
work in the Gorge and don’t come in. I
forget what I was telling you about Channel Eight. Something about...
CH: You
were talking about someone that was...
CW: Oh
yeah, so they started clearcutting about three years ago below Crown
Point. The Friends of the Gorge were
appalled, of course, and they ended up doing a trade for some old growth of the
Forest Service that’s now going to be raped, that they traded. That’s the way the Friends work. It’s not in the Gorge, so that’s okay. Their land trades in the Gorge are a real
scandal. Old growth timber was given in
national forest elsewhere for third growth in the Gorge. It was just a massive boondoggle for the
timber industry, and Dan Evans and Hatfield orchestrated that whole thing. It’s just sleazy beyond belief. So anyway, we called up John Katen and said,
“that’s nothing, I could name you a hundred clear-cut right now.” He’s like - he obviously did not believe me,
and he said, “tell me where,” and I said, “mouth of the Little White Salmon,
mouth of the -” and I named all these places.
So, he called me up the next night and he says, “I got them to let me
take a helicopter through.” He says,
“you’re right! It’s almost
clear-cut. From the air, there’s just
almost nothing left standing in the Gorge,” my point. So he went up and interviewed Dennis
White. We had three days on T.V. of
local environmentalists. He’s now - went
to work for an environmental group in Montana, so - our person that would cover
it. I remember a friend of mine’s
working for Elizabeth Furse, and she said, “man, Chuck, you’ve finally blown
the lid off this cover-up. We were
getting more calls on this than anything.”
I said, “Friends will have it totally killed within the week. I guarantee it.” She said, “no way! We’re getting hundreds of calls a day.” Within a week there was no more mention of
that, to any clearcutting in the Gorge [laughs]. The Friends just totally...
CH: Do
you know who the Friends then talked to, to squash that?
CW: Well,
at the Oregonian, they go right to Fred Stickel, the publisher. He’s one of Nancy Russell’s friends.
CH: What
about the television stations?
CW: There,
it’s more just neglect. They don’t want
to do the homework. It’s not like they
really have to squash it. They only talk
to people in Portland, and they know the Friends of the Gorge, so they just
call them. It isn’t really - I don’t
think with say, Channel Two or Six there’s any particular intent on it. They just don’t know any difference, and will
not - that’s the thing with Channel Eight.
They did a documentary in eighty-five - you ought to try to get a copy
of it - called, “The Gorge Under Siege.”
It was wonderful. I need to get a
- in fact, when Boyd [sp?] was still there, the news director, I had ordered
one, and we never got up there. I wonder
if you can still get one that old.
CH: Channel
Eight?
CW: Eight,
yeah. They did one, “The Gorge Under
Siege.” It was an hour-long documentary,
and it’s by far the best thing ever done on the Gorge. There was, Lory Van- beautiful young woman -
but they used to give them like six months or so to do documentaries, where other stations, “you’ve got a week to
do on the Gorge.” She went in, like
everyone else in Portland, with The Friends of the Gorge are the main
group. They gave her six months, and
about a month into it she realized that the Friends knew nothing about [laughs]
what was going on. So she based it on -
I’m on there two or three times, as much as the Friends of the Gorge are. The whole thing’s centered about me, and
interviewing the inner office in White Salmon, and such. It was an excellent - the best piece ever
done on the Gorge. They were totally
supportive of us. We just don’t have the
money. So we’ll go educate these people,
and the next week we get a call from them, they got a new reporter on. So we spend five days educating them, and
they’re gone in two weeks. We just can’t
do it. The Friends have six staff to
just go around full time, “there’s no problem.
There’s no problem,” and have unlimited expenses. We have no income, no money, so there’s no -
we just can’t - we did every take ever day, every minute we’re awake, and can’t
finance it, so we go after the Friends now, instead of second hand. We just go right to the problem [laughs], and
picket their annual picnics, and whenever they’re having some scam meeting that
they’re raising money, we picket them and point out the truth [laughs].
CH: Well,
at this point is there anything else you’d like to add to that? Or should we pick up later on...
CW: Well,
not too much. I mean, I do think it’s totally hopeless. I don’t see any way. Until we can blow the lid on the cover
up. The Friends have total control over
Earl Blumenauer. One of the things that
enrages me about Multnomah County is there’s only been two counties ever in the
history of the country - and I don’t know if I mentioned this the other day -
that fought a National Park Service Urban Area adjacent to their city. The other was Los Angeles County. There we had a great congressmen, a friend of
mine, Tony Bealason [sp?], and he just pushed and pushed for the Park
Service. We won there, despite the
opposition.
CH: You’re
talking about the Santa Monica Mountains?
CW: Right,
National Recreation Area. L.A. County’s
the only other county other than Multnomah that fought Park Service area next
to there, adjacent - like I say, Nixon’s head of the secretary of the interior
over the parks said, “any kind of big city official would have to be nuts to
fight one of those park areas,” So Ron Wyden sold us out. If we had had - if Don Clark had supported Park
Service, and if Ron Wyden had kept his promise, we could have won the
Gorge. Now he’s a senator, he’s never
going to - I mean, the Friends will never admit wrongdoing. All the problems in Gorge, or ninety-nine percent
of them, are directly the fault of their legislation. They will not even acknowledge they are any
part. Like I say, Earl Blumenauer
screamed at me at the legislation, “it’s perfect! There’s absolutely no problem with their
legislation.” I said, “why are we having
all the -.” “Well, it’s the budget! They’re cutting the budget,” and I say, “740
of those 750 houses were approved when they were fully funded.” You know, “don’t tell me -” [laughs], the Bea
House was approved by both the Friends of the Gorge and the commission before
the budget started getting cut. So, it
has absolutely nothing to do with it, but everyone’s looking for a
scapegoat. I don’t think Nancy Russell
ever will admit there’s any problems with the bill. She’s made it very clear that she’d rather,
unfortunately see it wholly destroyed, than ever admit she was wrong. That’s just kind of the way her personality
is. Then you have politicians - they
give them out. If Nancy Russell really
wanted to protect the Gorge, you don’t go to Hatfield and let him set your
policy. You work to force him over. By having a fake environmental group, she
just gives people like Wyden and Hatfield an out, and allows them to claim that
they’re environmentalists protecting the Gorge, when in fact they’re not. If Hatfield hadn’t had a fake environmental
group we would have won the Gorge, because there would have been no way the
public would have let him put in the bill the way it is now. If it had been the regular environmental
groups, there’s no way Hatfield could have put in such a hoax as that. But he had his own personal environmental
group that he controlled the strings of, that would never buck him on anything,
never once have ever bucked him, no matter how abusive it got for the timber
industry. So anyway, I just think - I
don’t see any hope now. Like I say, all
we do is try to go around...
[End of Tape 5, Side 2]
Chuck Williams
17 March 1999
Tape 6, Side 1
CH: This is an interview with Chuck
Williams at my house, this is Clark Hansen, 3200 NW Skyline Boulevard in
Portland, Oregon, at the top of the west hills and I am the interviewer for the
Oregon Historical Society. The date is
March 17th, 1999, and this is tape six, side one.
In
our last session you were from my impression at least, very pessimistic about
the Columbia Gorge and the Columbia River.
You said that things won’t improve until people perceive that there’s a
problem with the Columbia Gorge. And
then at one point you said that the situation was totally hopeless.
CW: Yes, it is. It is totally hopeless. We’ve lost...
CH: How do you feel about the article
that came out today, in today’s paper about the listing of the various fish and
fish runs on the Endangered Species Act?
Do you think that’s a step in the right direction?
CW: Oh I think it definitely is. It just brings up a tension, urban people
have tended to cover over the problems they’ve created. They’ve just kind of assume those are rural
problems and where of course we’ve got the great city of Portland still dump
sewage in the river every time it rains and hasn’t made a, doesn’t to me like a
really serious effort to try and clean up that mess although the sewage rates
keep going through the roof.
CH: What do you think needs to be
done? What steps need to be taken?
CW: Well, the problem with salmon is
that so many, they cross so many jurisdictions and there are so many things
need to be done. And I don’t know
whether the things that need to be done will ever be done, I mean they tend to
go after the weakest links first. I know
Tim Wapato when I was working for the Intertribal Fish Commission debated an
Idaho supposed environmental group and on their board they had a person who
worked for the Corps, you know a dam person, they had a rancher, they had a
timber industry so all the blame was on Indians. And Tim was saying well, whoa, we’re the only
people being blamed for this because we’re not at the table there. And the thing is you have the ocean catch,
you have the habitat, you have the passage on the river and so much has to be
done. I think the draw downs are going
to have to happen but you still need habitat there too. I don’t know, it’s such a - you need to get
two countries together, Alaska catches more Columbia River salmon than Oregon
and Washington do.
CH: Off the coast.
CW: Off the coast when they’re up
there. They actually were able to block
a treaty between the U. S. and Canada for a couple of decades. They had enough power in eighty-five when the
U.S. and Canadian treaty was finally signed basically Alaska finally got
rolled. But they had been able for -
they catch Canada’s fish and the lower forty-eight’s fish, so they just fish on
everything. So they had enough political
clout to block any treaty for along time.
So much has to be done in terms of logging and in terms of restoration
that I don’t know whether - how serious - look at the controversy over the
draw-downs and there’s still no draw-downs yet there’s really no dams really
being taken out.
CH: If you had it your way, what
steps would you take? Are there certain
dams you would take out? Are there
certain draw-downs you would put in place or?
CW: Well, the two dams I’d move the
most are of course Bonneville Dam, that’s built on top of my village. The second powerhouse is built on top of the
village that my great-great grandfather was chief of. And their visitors center is on top of what
was my family cemetery. So, I have a pet
peeve there. And Celilo, of course, was
flooded by The Dalles Dam which was one of the major crimes in history. So I have a pet peeve about those. But actually, for the Snake River runs it’s
the four lower Snake Rivers which are not really big power generators. It’s more recreation and irrigation and I
think the draw-downs of those is crucial to ever get the Snake River runs
back. And on the Columbia the John Day
is the long one. I don’t know whether
we’ll ever be able to see that or not.
Actually,
I just read an article in High Country News had an article on the Bea
house in the Gorge and I was totally perturbed.
It was written by Kathy Durbin who used to be with the Oregonian
and she’s with the Cascadia Times which was supposed to be an
alternative to the Oregonian slanted coverage and she wrote this totally
slanted article on the Gorge. I was
wondering why she had done it and I looked at the thanks and they had thanks to
Nancy Russell for giving them a big contribution which explained that and
evidently Bullet foundation which is really tied to the Friends just bailed
them out and such. So, she wrote an
article for High Country News which described the Bea house as an
anomaly It said that it was one that
slipped through the cracks. Well, five
hundred and fifty others have slipped to the cracks. And so I mentioned to her, I had dug out an
old article in High Country News had a big feature on me on what an
optimistic person I was, this very hopeful was one of their exact quotes. I just send them off tomorrow my rebuttal
letter saying that I’m not hopeful anymore, I’m totally cynical and demoralized
because the political process just won’t allow the right thing to be done. Particularly here in Oregon where we have the
Oregonian, a monopolied media.
There will never be any real debate I don’t think. I don’t know, I’m not really optimistic about
the salmon.
There’s
so many things that have to be done. You
have the harvest problems. River
harvests are really the problem. The
closer you get to the source of the spawning the easier it is to regulate
fishing so you don’t hurt the endangered runs where you can fish on the
hatchery runs and such and the fall chinook runs which are pretty good.
CH: So, why is it not a problem to
have - why is it easier to control the fishing at the source?
CW: Well, you’re down to which
run. When the fish come up the river in
the lower river they’re all mixed together and that’s the biggest problem for
commercial - people who fish commercially, it is hard to separate runs. And the closer you get to the source then you
can fish on harvest runs or ones that aren’t endangered and so that’s one of
the biggest problems is the Tribal fisheries in Zone 6 between Bonneville and
McNary and that’s been the way through treaties and lawsuits and negotiations
and such. You fish further up the
tributaries you have an easier time separating out the runs. It’s a mixed run. Of course in the ocean you have everything
really mixed in to everything.
But harvest - ocean harvest is fairly
big. Last I knew about sixty percent of
the fall chinook were being harvested in the ocean. But then you have river passage and the
common thinking has been that upstream passage had been, wasn’t great but had
been fairly been solved at the fish ladders but that’s even come out lately but
that there’s not near the passage people thought there were of the upstream, of
the adults returning was near as good as people had thought. And then the downstream passage, of course,
is really horrible. They average about
fifteen percent kill on each dam. So the
runs coming down from Idaho that have to pass six dams or so you have ninety
percent mortality in a good water year and ninety-seven, something like that,
in a low water year. And so that’s where
the real passage problems have been down river and the barging, of course, is
very controversial. I did a newsletter
for the Intertribal Fish Commission once talking about fish are on truck coming
down the highway and wheat’s in boats coming down the river and somehow the
fish ought to be put on the river and wheat on the road. [laughs] So it was
mixed up there.
CH: I guess scientifically I have a
question about the barging of fish that - since salmon have some mechanism that
guides them back to their source...
CW: They think it’s smell primarily.
CH: Well then how did they - I mean
if you take them down in trucks or barges or anything else, how are they able
to figure out how to get back?
CW:
Well, most of the scent is from where they were born so that should
already - by the time they’re coming down river that should already have been
ingrained in them.
CH: But if they don’t allow them to
come down the river...
CW: Right. But they have the smell from the original,
where they spawned and were born. They
have that born in. I think probably a
bigger problem is putting them together in barges. You have the incredible disease problem and
such. And so I think that’s actually one
of the bigger problems is putting them all together in there. But they seem to be imprinted fairly well if
they’re acclimated to the area where they spawned, to their natal stream and
such.
CH: There’s a lot of damage to the fish
in terms of the vacuums or whatever that they use to draw them up and spit them
out.
CW: Right, yes. Just the crowding in tanks and such. And it’s got to be incredible stressful. When they dump the release down below Bonneville
then the Corps just assumes that they all live which is not a valid
assumption. And then the third part
between the passage and the harvest, the third major factor is the habitat
which in the forested areas clearcutting is by far the biggest problem. And the dryer areas it’s more grazing and
mining are the bigger problems. There’s
finally some work starting to be done in habitat which has been fought for
years. Like Salmon Corps, the AmeriCorps program I set up does incredible amount of
fish restoration work. A lot of the
bigger environmental groups talk about that but that’s not where their money
goes. Most of the habitat restoration is
being done by small groups, AmeriCorps groups and such.
CH: Could you tell me some more about
the Salmon Corps and how that was set up and what you did?
CW: Sure. Yes, it is one of the proudest things I’ve
ever done in my life. A friend of mine
who’s a film maker, Bob Nixon, we worked together on a film done for ABC called
Fishing In America when Bush was president and it started out with Bush fishing
in the Everglades. This guy Bob Nixon I
had met who was the film producer was finishing up the film and he was rafting down
the Colorado River with Martin Linton who does the dory, the old
environmentalist who takes the wooden boats down the Colorado. And was telling him and Harriot Burgess [sp?]
who back then was with the Trust for Public Lands rafting with him. And he was
telling him, “I know I’ve got to have Indians in a program about fishing in
America but I don’t even know where to start.”
So, they said, “Call up our friend Chuck.” So he called me up and came up and ended up
hiring me to help produce the Indian side of it and it turned out to be the
most praised part of the film, of the documentary. And so he had been planning for quite awhile
to set up a nonprofit group that would train kids, to have kids do habitat
restoration and environmental work. So we got together and dreamed up Salmon
Corps, we didn’t have that name at that time, that would involve primarily the
lower Columbia River tribes. I went and
met with the tribes and got everything and we made an application to the
department of energy - can’t remember his name who was the secretary of energy
under Bush - he was a general I think.
Anyway, he promised us a billion dollars with a ‘B’ and such [laughs]
and we never got a penny out of it.
And
so when Clinton came in we got a call one day from the Department of Energy and
Clinton had instructed the secretary of energy, Hazel O’Leary to put together
the most innovative AmeriCorps program in this country and their had been a
holdover person in the administration from the Bush days that kind of
remembered our proposal and went back and dug it out. And they said, “Wow, this looks great” so
called us up and are you still interested and we kind of been there done that,
we don’t really care to put time into something that’s going to be rejected. And they said, “no, no, no this is the
Clinton administration, we do things.”
So
I took a couple of months off and went and visited with primarily the Warm
Springs, Yakama, Umatilla and Nez Perce tribes, the ones that work through the
Intertribal Fish Commission and worked out a proposal. He was in the process of forming Earth
Conservation Corps, a non-profit group out of D.C. so we put together a
proposal for Salmon Corps on five Indian reservations and the other reservation
was Ft. Hall, the Shoshone-Bannock people in southeast Idaho. So we got funding from Lockheed to do a test
program there while we’re waiting for the AmeriCorps and we ended up getting a
two million dollar grant. It was
AmeriCorps funding for about forty percent of what we needed and then Department
of Energy matched it five to four, I think they put in about fifty percent of
funding and the rest we raised from private sources. And it was one of the proudest things I’ve
ever done in my life.
We
started out with eighty young Indians from eighteen to twenty-five all on five
different reservations in the Northwest.
They would work a year and they can extend it for another year for up to
two years and they do fisheries restoration, other habitat work and at the end
of the year they get a forty-seven hundred dollar AmeriCorps scholarship to use
for college. And they work four days a
week and the fifth day is an education day called a payback day. And that was for me was a really exciting
time because one of the things that I wanted to do was to expose the young
Indian kids to environments they’d never been in before.
For instance, on the Umatilla Reservation over
half of the young people in that program had never seen the ocean. We think of people living near Pendleton in
Oregon never having seen the ocean. So
they say, “Hey, we want to go see the ocean.”
So I told my manager up there.
Well, go visit the Hatfield Marine Science lab don’t mention anything
about the ocean in your report [laughs].
We won’t get in trouble if you do it that way. So they did, they did a trip out to the
Hatfield Science lab and all the kids got to see the ocean for the first time
and such. Took them up to universities,
and they went to the University of Washington spent a couple days there, went
to a football game and we’d just take them around different environments.
Took
them down to the environmental law conference in Eugene and we’re in the huge
meeting where they had four white lawyers arguing about paper fish as I said
and talk about all they were doing.
Finally during the question period I announced to the room that we had
thirty young Indian kids in there that were out every day fencing off streams,
planting native plants and it ended up they got a huge standing ovation. And I said while all you lawyers are arguing
about paper fish these kids are out there everyday really returning fish and
they end getting a standing ovation and it was great for their self
esteem.
I
think that was the biggest surprise for me, the most pleasant surprise out of
the program was how much the self esteem came up in such a short time. So many of these programs are aimed towards
kids that are in gangs and are really in trouble. That wasn’t really the problem on the
reservations they just had no opportunity.
And here some people came along and gave them a chance to really make
something out of their lives and they really responded to the vast
majority. At least two hundred young
Indians are in college now of which three or four maybe would have been able to
go to college otherwise. I’ve had about
a half-a-dozen parents tell me I saved their kids life which is the biggest
reward of all. Particularly after the
Gorge and being fought every way. It was
really refreshing because I had eighty people out everyday restoring doing
environmental work and none of the Nancy Russells and people could do anything
to stop it. [laughs] It was such a fun thing for me to do because I could every
day see physical work. I could see the
trees being planted and such. And within
two or three months the young people had self-esteem that I figure would take a
year to have. They had the confidence
and most of them are really make something out of their lives and they’re doing
really good. So I’d say that’s one of
the proudest things.
So
I co-founded it and then managed it for little over a year, set up the
program. We started out one of the
really fun projects was the Trust [ ] and BPA
had bought a big ranch, the Conforth Ranch near the town of Umatilla that had
huge section along the Columbia and they had an option on the land. It was supposed to become a national wildlife
refuge. About half of the land that they
had the option on was water. They had
these massive potholes with tens of thousands of waterfowl in there at any one
time plus a couple mile long stretches of undeveloped to the Columbia
River. You sit down there at night and
you couldn’t see lights. I don’t know
any place else on the Columbia River you could sit there, even though it’s a
reservoir, it was wonderful. And so the
local ranches there went crazy over this land.
It was the biggest feed ranch in Oregon and they were really mad about
it. So they went to Bob Smith the then
congressman, and he killed the national wildlife refuge. So the Umatilla said, well, we’ll be glad to
take this over. And so we’re arranging
for that and they finally got title to it just as I was setting up Salmon
Corps.
It
had no fences around it and it had had two years of no cow and the burling owls
had resettled into the area, two endangered species had settle back in. The waterfowl was just coming in by the tens
of thousands and they’d had a two year rest from any grazing but it wasn’t
fenced on the outside and the rancher
was just salivating. All the cattle that
had been raised on the Conforth ranch he was releasing in month and they were
all going to head in there. There was
all that wonderful high grass and they’re all headed in there. And the tribe didn’t know what to do. They were in a panic. So, let’s just take all the eighty kids and
lets go camp out there for a month for training. So we did and within the month they.... It was a rough time. It was really cold, they suffered a lot but
it really put them together. One of the
proudest things is that Shobans called Indian country and the Nez Perce have
been traditional enemies and have not had anything to do with each other and I
got the kids from those two tribes camping together and we’ve got life long
friendships out of that. And I think a
lot of the tribal leadership in a couple decades most of it I think will be out
of Salmon Corps and they’ll have these relationships that go way back and
they’ll be old buddies. I think - it’s
not something I talk about publically much but it’s one of the things I’m
proudest of. Being out there freezing
our butts of and really hard work. It
really in a way kind of common adversary that really bonded all the young
people together but we fenced off the whole refuge, tore down all the internal fences and fixed up the
house and we had an operating tribal wildlife refuge at the end of the
month. And the rancher next door was so
mad he kept cutting the fences and they had a Umatilla crew up every week to
redo te fences and keep the cows out but we had some major success stores. Just this wonderful little now natural gem
along the Columbia River.
And
we fenced off a huge section of the Deschutes River on the Warm Springs
Reservation which had been really hurt on both sides of the Deschutes going
through. It had just been hammered by
grazing with no vegetation and we fenced off the Warm Springs side of the
Deschutes and put in solar pumps which we can’t do in most places because
they’d be stolen. But out on the
reservation there’s so much control there’s no problem. And put watering tanks...
CH: Like a holding tank.
CW: No, for the cows to drink out of.
CH: Oh yes.
CW: Like a kids swimming pool kind of
thing.
CH: Troths
CW: Yes, basically round troths and
had solar pumps with solar collectors pumping the water up into these to keep
the cows from getting near the river. So
along the Deschutes we fenced off most of the Deschutes through the Warm
Springs Reservation and put in troths for the cows to get to water back away
from the river and fenced out within a month there was about an inch of grass
and within a couple months about a foot of grass and it’s now just day and
night on the other side of the fence.
And
we did another one. One that was really
fun, Wild Horse Creek which is just east of Pendleton, runs there along Athena
and the little towns there. And it was
totally hammered, I mean there was nothing over a foot tall growing along that
poor river. I know tribal elders who
remembered when there were salmon in there but grazing’s wiped out all the
vegetation and the water temperatures get up into the eighties and such and it
wiped out all the salmon in that river.
A lot of landowners there are pretty anti-Indian and resisted any type
of restoration work. And finally one
rancher there that owned a mile of Wild Horse Creek signed an agreement with
the Umatilla Tribe. And we sent the
Salmon Corp in there and all he had to do was sign an agreement that he would
maintain the fences for the next five years and then BPA put up the money for
the fencing as part of the salmon restoration effort. And the Salmon Corps kids went in there and
built fences within the riparian zone.
And then they went through and planted native willows and alders and
cottonwoods along the river and it’s just amazing. There’s just really thick, really high vegetation
in there. It became such a showcase that
the other ranchers started feeling really guilty and papers like the East
Oregonian out of Pendleton which is not a really pro-environment paper were
doing big front page stories about how the Indian kids were restoring
that. And even the most racist rancher
up there finally went in and signed up with the tribe. And so we’ve got a whole watershed there
being restored. That was a really fun
one.
And
then up at the Nez Perce Reservation we raised sturgeon, took over some old PUD
utility tanks and started raising sturgeon in there to release back into the
Snake River. We raised about - I can’t
remember, I think about three million salmon out at Hanford in the old tanks
out there. And Salmon Corps kids from
Yakama went in there and their, fortunately, in the upstream side of the
reactors so you don’t have the contamination.
They’d been sitting there for decades empty and were full of mud and the
Salmon Corps kids went in and cleaned it all out. One of the Department of Energy big shots
working with Salmon Corps actually was staying in Hanford in one weekend, she
turned on the TV and here was all the union people that work at Hanford working
for free on a weekend hauling away all the mud and dirt that the Salmon Corps -
she was just blown away [laughs]. She
said, I’ve never heard of a thing like this.
And so I think we raised I think three million the first year of chinook
and raised sturgeon in there.
And
down at Shoban the bottoms there along the Snake River we had the same problem
with grazing. Not only had to keep the
cows out, which barb wire fence will do, but had to keep buffalo out and they
don’t pay any attention to barbed wire.
So the kids built these beautiful split river fences all along the river
and fenced off the whole bottom lands to keep the cattle and the buffalo out.
CH: They had buffalo in there.
CW: Yes, the tribes reintroduced
buffalo into the lowlands. So, I said,
they don’t pay much attention to barbed wired fences [laughs]. So the fences are really beautiful. They’re really works of art that wind down
along the river there, along the Snake River, they’re really neat. I say it’s just been incredibly successful
and the tribes within a year or so couldn’t even imagine what they were doing
without a program like that. The program
I think will go on forever. It’s become
such a part of the tribe. And suddenly
when they realize that each tribe had about twenty pairs of young hands to go
to work, I mean, it’s just mind boggling how much we planted. I think the first year we planted fifty
thousand native trees along streams.
Up
in Yakima, for instance, a couple of the big farmers loaned us - they had huge
greenhouses they weren’t using and so - and then a big nursery donated all the
potting soil and pots. And the young
people went out and took particularly willow and cottonwood and did trimmings
and then raised them all year in the greenhouse. Then next spring went out and planted
them. The Yakima River goes through the
town of Yakima. The Corps had
channelized it, and straightened it out and basically tore out all the
structure that’s necessary for fish on the river. So up there there was a big windstorm that
blew down a lot of cottonwoods so the Yakama Salmon Corps crew went out and
built these huge triangles out of the cottonwoods. Then they collected all the Christmas trees
from the tribal members and hooked them on to these triangles and sunk them in
the bottom of the Yakima River all through the town of Yakima to provide
shelter for the salmon and such. I used
to joke that we’re the un-corps. We go
around undoing what the Corps of Engineers did in previous centuries. [laughs]
CH: How closely did you work with
AmeriCorps.
CW: We were an AmeriCorps
project. Most of the AmeriCorps projects
are through state AmeriCorps offices but a few are direct federal. We were a direct federal one through the
Department of Energy and they put up money.
And so AmeriCorps paid for about forth percent of the cost of it and
they provided primarily the scholarships which was a big - and we raised the
money to pay the young people about a hundred-and-fifty a week living stipend
so they could get by. Newt Gingrich was
trashing AmeriCorps for being paid volunteers or ridiculing the idea of paying
a stipend to people who were supposedly volunteers. Well, I’ve been in both the Peace Corps and
[ ?] you get paid comparable amount,
a hundred-and-fifty a week to get by.
The thought that Indian kids would have enough money to volunteer a year
of their time without any living expenses is just totally out of touch of
reality. Obviously Newt had his idea of
volunteers was rich people’s wives volunteering down at the art museum or
something [laughs]. So fortunately he
lost that fight. That’s one of the great
thing Clinton did AmeriCorps. It’s just
a wonderful, wonderful program. I’m
really proud to be one of the...
CH: Who were you working with most
closely in AmeriCorps?
CW: Well, they had Brian Trello I
think was his name. He’s now down at the
Presidio but he was our contact person back in Washington, D. C. Each program had a contact person back there
and Brian, I’d have to look up - Trello or something like that. And then Department of Energy we had various
people, Pam [ Devo ?] and Linda [Lingle ?] people like that. They always had a person in the Department of
Energy and they were just wonderful. I
was really expecting trouble at the Department of Energy and they turned out to
be just wonderful partners. Just
couldn’t have been more supportive.
CH: Do other environmental
organizations work along with you those projects?
CW: Not environmental groups per
se. We had another AmeriCorps program,
the Northwest Service Academy which has one program out of - they’re more
closely tied with the forest service and they have one program up at Corbett,
up in your old neck of the woods that a day - where people live at home and go
up there during the day. And then they
have another one at Trout Lake where people actually live there for the
year. A smaller one. We did a lot of joint project with them. No, most of the environmental groups are not
directly involved in restoration. Some
of them like Pacific Rivers Council raise millions of dollars supposedly to
restore and spend it on big salaries and never do a tenth of the work that the
Indian kids are doing now. Evidently, I
guess, there’s more and more volunteer groups doing watershed restoration. Big environmental groups, sorry to say,
aren’t - don’t get their hands dirty [laughs] doing that type of work. They’re out there arguing in Congress but
meanwhile a lot of kids are out there working.
CH: But, is it important that there
are groups arguing with Congress and lobbying and whatnot?
CW: Oh, very definitely. But I have a real - unfortunately coming to
loath the environmental movement these days.
I don’t know whether this is what you want me to get into here or not. I used to be the national parks experts for
Friends of Earth in the seventies and been involved in the environmental
movement for about three decades now.
And starting about eighty I’ve seen a real change for the worst in the
environmental movement. It used to be
primarily run by idealists, the people that were most activists were the
grassroots, unpaid people. And when
people would become so valuable on an issue as a volunteer well then someone
like David Brower would go figure out where to get the money to give a minimal
salary to that person so that they can work full time on the environment. And there was a period at the Wilderness
Society...
[End tape 6, side 1]
Chuck Williams
Tape 6, Side 2
CH: and the environmental groups were
trying to be more like the corporate structure they were opposing.
CW: Right. I see that Bill [Turney ?] who is actually
married to Ansel Adams daughter and became his business manager and the one
that talked Ansel Adams into destroying his negatives and made him so famous. And he became the head of the Wilderness
Society and fired all the grassroots activists and replaced them with lawyers
with three-piece-suits with double, triple the salaries and such. And they no longer work with grassroots. And Sierra Club’s the worst of all. Where the paid staff won’t even work with the
local Sierra Club people and the local Sierra Club people supported us on the
Gorge and the paid staff in Seattle Jim Bloomquist specifically, fought park
service protection and fought what the local group stood for and was actually
involved in the salvage rider, one of Mark Hatfield’s great legacies that
destroyed a lot of ancient forest and such.
So,
I’ve become very disenfranchised. Like
the joke that David Brower is probably the last visionary left in an
environmental movement run by bureaucrats more interested in careers than they
are in the environment. We have people
more interested in access. Most of the
major environmental groups no longer even talk to grassroots people. You know, they think grassroots people should
write letters but shouldn’t be involved in decision making, shouldn’t meet with
people in Congress and such. And so
they’ve become major lobbying groups and got real rich during the James Watt
era. The fundraising went through the
roof and they got comfortable with these big fat salaries and such and then
when Watt got fired it was - all their fundraising dropped off and they just at
that point quit working at all with grassroots groups. And David Brower and some Friends of the Earth
used to support local grassroots groups and would help them get
foundations. When I worked for them that
was one of my main jobs and now the big groups will not even have anything to
do with the local grassroots groups and view them as competitors for funds not
as allies that could be very helpful.
You see, I like to compare it to the environmental movement for the last
couple of decades has built this real fancy facade of this real strong
movement. But the foundation of the
environmental movement, the grassroots is just crumbling and the effectiveness
is really dropping off. I think here in
Oregon A Thousand Friends is the epitome of this. They will absolutely have nothing with poor,
rural grassroots people. And I
personally think they’re becoming the main enemy of land use planning in Oregon. They have no compassion at all. Is this something you’re interested in?
CH: Of course.
CW: I went and crashed the Thousand
Friends of Oregon’s, besides the Sierra Club’s staff, the only group that
support the Friends of the Gorge against us.
And now they’re fundraising - they doing their last fundraising letter
to send them money to help stop all the trophy houses being built on every
ridge in the Gorge. And they fought real
protection for the Gorge and have never lifted a finger, ever, and are hated by
most grassroots environmentalists I know.
And they just have no compassion.
I went to one of their meetings last year, their big annual meeting, and
their president Gail Ackerman who wrote
the horrible Gorge bill behind the back of environmentalists - there was
something in the paper a couple of weeks ago she’s representing the irrigators
who are trying to wipe out ground squirrels in northeast Oregon. And I went to this meeting and she was the
president of A Thousand Friends, someone that works for a corporation. She was the one that did all the ads fighting
the shutdown of Trojan and such. And
they wrote down Environmentalists of the Year under her name on the ads but
forgot to mention that she was on retainer from PGE and such. And she’s the president of A Thousand Friends
of Oregon. And she and Robert Liberty,
the executive director whet on for over an hour talking about how A Thousand
Friends of Oregon were no longer an elitist white group but now were very
grassroots and included a lot of people of color and such and I finally
couldn’t stand it anymore. There were
about four-hundred people in the room and I stood up and said, “I’m the only
Indian in this room and I see one person of color in this room and I see a
whole lot of rich white people, where are these people of color?” [laughs] And
what it was obvious they were doing was that they had gotten a huge grant from
Meyers or someone to spread out diversity so they were making a video tape
about how they were doing this. But if
their videotape ever spanned the audience they wouldn’t see any people of
color. [laughs] And they won’t even talk to rural people other than a few rich
ranchers.
They’ve
got a dozen or so multimillionaire ranchers rural people that are their
supporters that are their idea of grassroots.
But they refuse to ever talk to
any of the grassroots activists in the Gorge or anything. I think they’re a large part responsible for
the problems we have. The opposition to
land use planning is is that it’s very elitist.
It is purposely set up so the wealthy people that can hire the lawyers
and such can go in their and do whatever they want and poor people are hung out
to dry. And I was, I lost most of my
property in the Gorge because I couldn’t rebuild an existing house on a hundred
and seventy five acres. But down the
hill from me people are building subdivisions that rich and just the right
people rear ends and such and can do whatever they want. So I think Oregon land use planning is
extremely elitist and is very destructive.
I mean, it’s very pro-timber industry also. But there’s no rural support for the actual
land use planning. There’s plenty of
rural support for protecting areas but the land use planning is so pro wealthy
people and so anti populist that it’s really loathed by most rural grassroots
activists I know loath the land use planning.
But, we’re in a real dilemma because we’re not allowed at the
table. And so A Thousand Friends are the
only group that really have input into the land use planning and they could
care less about poor people.
So,
it’s kind of the epitome of what’s going on nationwide in the environmental
movement is right here in Friends of the Gorge and A Thousand Friends of
Oregon. I’m afraid we’re the precedent
for what’s happening in the rest of the country. Foundation money now has become the driving
force in the environmental movement.
David Brower, who I idolize, says that the biggest problem in the
environmental movement now is foundation money and the strings come with it. If you want to get money in the Columbia
Gorge from say Bullet Foundation who have to go along with the Friends of the
Gorge. You can’t ever criticize and take
a position different. You can’t ever
complain about a problem in the Gorge.
They’ve basically, the foundations have become the arms of the
corporations to control the environmental movement and they’re so dependent now
on the foundations. Virtually all the
money of the groups which used to be member supported are not corporation and
foundation supported. Enron, PGE
supported the Friends of the Gorge and another couple dozen environmental
groups in the Northwest including some like Meyer and they just kind of pretend
that that’s not a conflict of interest but it’s a major conflict of interest in
my mind [laughs].
It’s
hard for grassroots people now because we all just do it out of our own pockets
and here we’re fighting paid environmentalists who get paid sixty to seventy
thousand dollars a year, have unlimited expense accounts so they can just spend
their whole time going to meetings to disenfranchise us and we can no longer
participate in that. When I was working
for Friends of the Earth in the seventies all the environmental groups would
get together and we would put together in the back room, any problems we had
we’d settle internally and we’d come out with one united position. We would always with congressional
delegations as a group with one position.
Now local grassroots people go in an meet with someone like Hatfield
when he was in Congress. The next day
the Sierra Club would go in and say well, we’re totally against them we’ll
settle for half of this. I mean, they
supported Hatfield on the salvage rider, the same Jim Bloomquist who helped
kill Columbia Gorge protection supported the salvage rider from hell and worked
with Hatfield.
David
Brower wrote a wonderful letter a few years ago. He was attacked by the conservation director
of the Sierra Club for being not willing to compromise enough. And he went back to his hotel room that night
and wrote this classic letter. I think
ONRC published a few years ago but it’s basically saying the Sierra Club wants
access so bad that they’ll sellout an environment just to be part of the
process. Hatfield is just a master of
that. On the Gorge he wouldn’t speak to
anyone on the Gorge that didn’t support his position which was a losing
position so the Sierra Club’s the only group that got to meet with Hatfield on
the Gorge for selling us out. Brower had
a great line in there. He said how the
Sierra Club thinks that there so powerful lunching with the corporate bosses
but it’s still Bambi lunching with Godzilla [laughs].
CH: How do you feel about Brower
now? Do you feel that he’s maintained
his integrity?
CW: Oh, yeah. Like I say, he’s the last real
visionary. I just saw him last week and
his wife’s right at the end of her life.
I had dinner with him last fall down in San Francisco and it was really
sad because she’s just a wonderful person.
He’s not doing very good at all.
I saw him last weekend and “how are you doing Dave and he said not real
good. So I think he’s right near the end
of his life but he’s still the last visionary and a real purist. And he’s a grassroots person. Any group he’s involved with views the local
grassroots groups as the core of the environmental movement. The other groups just loath, there just kind
of pests that should write letter to support the big groups but aren’t ever
allowed to meet with the big groups, have any say in decision making and such
and Brower’s a real grassroots [person].
He understands that’s where the strength of the environmental movement
is. In fact the big fight in Friends of
the Earth that kind of led its not being the incredibly powerful, effective
group is was in the seventies and into the eighties was that people more and
more wanted to be supported by foundations and Brower wanted to have a
membership grassroots based group. And
that’s just become an anachronism in the environmental movement where all the
money now is corporate and foundation.
CH: So, what kinds of things are you
involved in now? What are your current
efforts?
CW: Well, I don’t do near as much
politically as I can. I mean, I’ve been
destroyed financially, spent over a hundred thousand dollars of my own money. The other main activists in the Gorge
likewise have spent over a hundred grand out of our own money while I’ve had
over two million of corporate and foundation money spent fighting us and we’re
not allowed at the table anymore. Rivers
are still my pet passion but we can’t - we don’t very rarely lobby or we’re not
- like Earl Blumenauer or instance won’t even meet with Gorge activists. He will only meet with city environmentalists
that will support the Friends of the Gorge.
We’re not allowed to attend any of his meetings beyond panels and such. Basically, we’re left with pointing that the
kings naked or the queen as the case may be in the Gorge and rabble rouse and
getting arrested. I was arrested a
couple times stopping illegal clear-cutting along the White Salmon River. And we can still file appeals and lawsuits to
the degree that we can do it ourselves or get lawyers to donate time or do it
at minimal cost but we’re no longer at the table, we’re no longer able to take
part in mainstream politics. So we’re
kind of gadflies around trying point out the trust. We’re as apt to demonstrate against the
Friends of the Gorge as we are SDS Lumber which is our main adversary in the
Gorge. [Telephone rings - pause in tape]
Anyway,
basically I and the other local environmentalists that started the campaign to
protect the Columbia Gorge now we just kind of look at what noone else does
which is the tributaries and we go in and we’ll fight subdivisions along the
Klickitat and a lot of it is just publicity and such. We’re banned from the Oregonian so we can’t ever have any say. I just sent an opinion piece in last - to the
Oregonian, I dropped off last Thursday now that they have ombudsman or
woman or something to complain to and I don’t expect too much. But we’ve sent in hundreds and they haven’t
printed one since a few months before the bill passed in eighty-six after a two
week scream and arguments with the editorial board. They finally published
about a four inch opinion piece by one of our representatives and that was the
last time any local environmentalists has ever been allowed to be interviewed,
quoted, to say nothing of a letter to the editor or opinion piece in the Gorge
which makes us really mad because Pulitzer prize winning reporters like Bill Dietrich
from the Seattle Times will come interview us whenever they do a story
on the Gorge. They give us equal time
but we’ve been banned from the Oregonian since the mid-eighties, totally
banned. So we just kind of go out and
sometimes lay in front of bulldozers or whatever we have to do but we’re not
allowed to take part in mainstream politics anymore.
So,
we just look at what noone else is doing and go after which is primarily the
tributaries like the White Salmon. Now
we’ve got a situation, we’ve got young windsurfers coming in that are getting
foundation money now supposedly represents environmentalists but we never see
them anywhere. There seems to be a trend
among the younger environmentalists, you get paid to do environmental
work. I’m guess I’m kind of an
anachronism out of the old generation some things you did volunteer but to the
young people expect to get paid. It’s
now become a career. We have people
working for the big groups that aren’t the environmental idealists they used to
be. Now it’s a career position and
people will go to work for the Sierra Club and then they’ll get in and then
they’ll go work for a congressmen and then a Senate staff and it’s just a
career step so there willing to give away because their motivation isn’t to protect
the environment, it’s a career choice or something, sorry to say.
CH: Do you feel that your focus on
tributaries you can affect more action on a smaller....
CW: Well, it’s partly that but it is
more that noone else will do that. The
Friends of the Gorge fought any protection for tributaries and they were
bankrolled by PacifiCorp, PGE, and still are, to fight any protection for the
tributaries. So that fact that noone
will do it, it has more to do with that those are the areas that noone and none
of the major environmental groups, with a couple exceptions on tearing out
Condit Dam on the White Salmon River we have had help from American Rivers and
Friends of the Earth.
CH: You haven’t mentioned American
Rivers before I don’t think.
CW: No, there a pretty good group
although they’re now getting money from Enron, PGE too but they did help us
along on our campaign which looks like we’ve almost won to tear out the dam on
the White Salmon River although PacifiCorp’s backsliding now but I think we’ll
end up winning that one. Not out of the
goodness of their heart but we were able to force them to put in fish passage
back in the mid-seventies. The Klickitat
County Public Utility District was trying to build seven more dams in the White
Salmon basin. The port of Klickitat
County was trying to build a zirconium plant at Dallas port, across from The
Dalles. And it was Western Zirconium, it
was a spinoff of Wah Chang. It would
have been just a horrendous thing. The
whole eastern end of the Gorge would have smelled like a cat box and the
utility denies there any connection but the output of these seven dams just
happened to be identical to the power needs of this zirconium plant. It was actually one of the original fights we
got in in the Gorge when we were putting together the parks service
proposal. We didn’t even take the
radical position of being against the plant per se, we just demanded they put
pollution controls on it and Western Zirconium tried to blackmail, and said
“well, if we have to put on pollution controls we’ll go to Utah or someplace
else.” And expected there’d be a big
backlash against the environmentalists and instead people said “Good
riddance.” And so they didn’t build it
there and they went and built it near Provo, Utah. The day it opened up all the oil workers at
the refinery next to it went on a wildcat strike because of all the horrible
pollution from the zirconium plant. And
the mayor of the town said they were tricked and it’s a disaster and we were
totally vindicated. But that was one of
the big fights that kicked off the Gorge plus the seven dams.
So
having worked with Friends of the Earth and having had a little experience in
environmental things I said, you know, if we’re going to fight these seven dams
lets go after their existing dam. The
best defense is a good offense has always been one of my guiding rules. And so we went - in 1977 our group that was
forming then The Columbia Gorge Coalition and Friends of the White Salmon
River, which formed to fight those dams, and the Yakama Indian started a
campaign to tear out Condit Dam and it looks like we’re about to win it. This is one where Hatfield had a really
horrible role in. We got the Northwest
Power Planning Council demand - not demand but require PacifiCorp, whose a
subsidiary of PP & L own the dam and it has hardly any power output. The power wasn’t as much an issue as they
didn’t want a precedent for tearing out dams.
And so they went and hired - so they were ordered to have fish passage
around Condit Dam in place by November of 1985.
When it was built back in the nineteen-teens the first year - they put
in fish ladders and they washed out in 1918 within a year after it was built
and noone ever put the fish ladders back in.
So,
PacifiCorp, rather than putting fish passage around they hired Tom [Imason ?]
from Hatfield’s staff and walked in and got Hatfield to go behind the scenes
and require a multi-year study by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service out of Olympia
and they just refused to do it. We finally
persevered and persevered and finally got FERC to require them to put in
passage and the passage turned out it’s gonna cost them around fifty million
dollars to put in the passage and FERC claimed it would cost about that much to
tear out the dam but the Yakama Nation hired a consultant and they figured out
that you could tear it out for about fifteen million, about ten to tear it out
and about five to restore the fish runs.
And so we’re going to win on economics [laughs]. PacifiCorp’s sitting there, we don’t want
this dam out but the economics point to tearing it out. And that’s one that the only national groups
or major groups that have helped in the Gorge at all in recent years have been
American Rivers and Friends of the Earth Seattle office and they did the legal
work for tearing out the dam, been very helpful. And Greenpeace did a little help out on Lyle
Point which we’re about to win without one bit of help from a single national
group or Friends of the Gorge. So the
two biggest victories in the Gorge in the last decade have been from local
grassroots activists with the Yakama Indian Nation people without any help at
all from the national groups. Not a
single group like Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, A Thousand Friends of
Oregon, none of the major wealthy groups will lift a finger on the Columbia
Gorge. They wash their hands of it,
given it up basically.
CH: Are you doing group work with the
Native American tribes in the area.
CW: Yes, both with local activists,
Johnny Jackson, Cascade Chief there lives right at the mouth of the White
Salmon, he’s real active. But almost all
the victories in the Gorge now are the local environmentalists working with the
tribes. All the victories. That partnership goes way back into the
mid-seventies. Our group, the Columbia
Gorge Coalition for instance worked real close with the Yakama Tribe, and a
sportfishing group, the Clark Skamania County Flyfishers and we killed a bunch
of dams on the Wind River. They were
going to dam up Panther Creek and one of the people building the dams one of
the bankrollers of Friends of the Gorge and so, of course, they didn’t fight
it. And we killed a bunch of dams. And most of the big victories have been
through that coalition with the local group.
And our group, the Columbia Gorge Coalition is somewhat in hibernation.
CH: Why?
CW: Because there’s nothing we can
do. So, we’ve put all of our resources
into a local Audubon Society now, the Columbia Gorge Audubon Society. There the main group working in the Gorge now. And the reason for focusing on them is that
they have that national connection and so it’s easy for the Friends of the
Gorge, A Thousand Friends, Sierra Club to ridicule and keep local
environmentalists and even our group, even though we were a massive group at
one time and credibly effective from being at the table. But if you have that name Audubon it will
open doors, having that national affiliation.
So, the local environmentalists put most of their work into the Audubon
Society now, although we increasing are fighting Portland Audubon Society now
has become opponent of the Columbia Gorge Audubon Society.
CH: Really.
CW: Yes, which is sad because I’ve
worked with them for years. Part of
that’s Paul Ketchum, they hired a person from A Thousand Friends of Oregon as
their conservation director and he’s right out of the - controlled by the
corporate people, Friends of the Gorge, and is a major adversary of Columbia
Gorge protection now. One of the biggest
fights out there, which I’m not involved in, is over the windpower in the
Columbia Hills on the east end of the Gorge.
The Vallican Foundations bankrolling environmental groups to fight for
the windpower and to fight Columbia Gorge Audubon and the Yakama Indian Nation
who are the main opponents.
CH: What is your reason for being
opposed to the windpower?
CW: It’s not an issue I’m real
involved with. It’s the location of
it. It’s just going to wipe out
raptors. It’s going to have a horrible -
it’s right in a flyway, and it’s going to have a horrible affect on the raptor
population. But being against windpower,
you know for environmentalists is being motherhood and apple pie. And so the local Audubon Society and the Yakama
Tribe are not fighting windpower per se it’s this particular project and they
were going to put poison all over the ground to wipe out the rodents so that
the raptors wouldn’t be attracted to it.
A horrible place right up above Maryhill Museum up on the whole
ridge-line there. They’ve got major
environmental groups fighting for it and getting bankrolled by foundations with
corporate money.
CH:
Why were they going to wipe out the rodents?
CW: So the raptors wouldn’t be
attracted and get killed by the blades.
The main downside of this. And
it’s right in a flyway with a huge raptor population. So they figured if they poisoned all the
raptors’ food then the raptors wouldn’t come around. But Dennis and Bonnie White are the ones to
talk to about that. I’ve got my hands
full with the tributaries. Being Indian
rivers have always been my main priority.
In fact my name Chuck is Chinook jargon for river. My nickname in Indian Country is wild and
scenic Chuck because of all the rivers that I’ve helped save around the
Northwest.
CH: Anything else that you’re
currently working on?
CW: That’s the main thing. Unfortunately, the main role left for me now
is to go around and point out the queens naked.
Actually just go places to hearings and call people. They’ll have these stacked meetings on the
Gorge where not a single Gorge person is allowed to testify. And just stand up and say, “Wait a
minute. That isn’t one house. That’s five-hundred and fifty of those Bea
houses and such.” And since we’re not
allowed at the table we just have to rabble rouse and like I say, we lay in
front of bulldozers. And we know enough
to file appeals. Like on the Klickitat
River is just one of those horrible situations in the country. Friends of the Gorge are bankrolled by
PacifiCorp to fight any protection for the White Salmon and Klickitat. They were our main opponent of protecting
those rivers in the Gorge bill. They’re
in cahoots in the Forest Service so on the Klickitat River we got the lower ten
miles designated a National Wild and Scenic River and the Forest Service washed
their hands of it, walked away from it, refused to manage it. The first time in history a federal agency
has walked from an area they’ve been ordered by Congress to protect. But they get away with it because the Friends
of the Gorge are against the protection of it and so won’t criticize them. We file appeals and like we filed against the
plan and we won one level on making them expand the boundaries out for wild and
scenic rivers but then they walked away from it. We took it as far as we could go with appeals
but when we got to the point where we had to have lawyers then we couldn’t take
it any further because we didn’t have any money. And so it’s being destroyed. So we file the worst of the timber sales we
still file because we can take that to a certain level without money. So what we do is we file appeals and
publicize through letters to the editor.
The local papers, of course, will let us print until the Portland media
we’re allowed to. And so a lot of our
goal right now is just trying to be a truth sayer, going around trying to point
out the truth about what’s going on.
CH: You had mentioned several times
that you’d been involved in laying down in front of bulldozers and things like
that. Which projects were those that you
were...
CW: The two times I’ve been arrested
in the Gorge were over SDS clear-cut along the White Salmon River. When we lost the Gorge being protected, when
I went to Forest Service in a weak commission instead of the park service. Some people in Congress knew that we were
being screwed horribly. So we took all
the Washington delegation rafting down the White Salmon and Klickitat Rivers,
Don Walker’s staff and Senator Evans’s staff, and even Slade Gorton’s staff
loved it. And got them so excited that,
despite the fact the Friends of the Gorge fought it, they added in two ten mile
- a ten mile section each of the White Salmon Klickitat Rivers as National
Scenic Rivers as the crumbs given us for losing the Gorge fight. It’s been pretty hallow. We’ve got a moratorium or a ban on any dams
being built on those rivers, that’s about all we have. It’s been twelve years ago and the Forest
Service has still not bought a single acre on the Klickitat River and when we
get someone like Senator Patty Murray who still works with the local environmentalists,
one of the last politicians that will, appropriate money for the tributaries
the Forest Service and the Friends of the Gorge go and buy it for land in the
Gorge even though it’s designated for the Wild and Scenic Rivers. The Forest Service allowed SDS to go in there
and clear-cut all of their lands that are within the boundaries of the National
Wild and Scenic River along the White Salmon.
And when we confronted the manager of the Forest Service why he was
allowing them to go in there and clear-cut all this land that was supposed to
go into public ownership he said it’s to save taxpayers money. That it’d be a lot cheaper to buy the land
after it’s clear-cut. So he’s just
helping out the taxpayers. [laughs] I thought that was a quite unique theory.
So
SDS is in there clearcutting and so all the local area - horrible area along
Spring Creek where it comes into the White Salmon, just a horrendous
clear-cut. And so all the local people
are laying in front of the bulldozers and such.
We occupied - and the Forest Service approved it and we went and
occupied the Forest Service office in Hood River. So we occupied and I got arrested chained to
their door there. And the manager of the
National Scenic Area wrote a letter to the SDS turned out to be our smoking
gun. Basically said that the
clearcutting was illegal. My attorney
couldn’t believe that they were dumb enough to give us a smoking gun. But the Oregonian and the Portland
media wouldn’t cover it. So the people
doing the clearcutting, SDS Lumber owned by the same people that own Heathman
Hotel.
So
we moved - we figured we had to go where the money is and so we started coming
into Portland every day demonstrating in front of the Heathman Hotel and
driving off customers and we started getting attention because about half the
people were turning away and not going into the Heathman because of us. We’d get of course the scruffiest hippies we
could find to get the blue bloods that stay at the Heathman really upset. So finally got arrested chained to their
door. And Jackson Browne was playing in
town that night and his environmental aide saw us getting arrested and came
down and talked to me as I was being hauled off. Turned out he and I used to go out with the
same woman, an environmental activist back in D.C. So Jackson Browne gave me a ticket for his
concert when I got out of jail that night, which was nice. And Jackson Browne stormed down the desk and
demanded of the Heathman if they didn’t stop clearcutting by the next morning
he’d make sure no musicians ever stayed at the Heathman again and they did stop
clearcutting the next day. And the
Forest Service still never bought the land.
So now it looks like we’re about to go through it all over again.
[End tape 6, side 2]
Chuck Williams
17 March 1999
Tape 7, Side 1
CH: Alright, this is an interview
with Chuck Williams at my house, Clark Hansen, 3200 NW Skyline Boulevard. I’m
the interview for the Oregon Historical Society. The date is March 17th, 1999 and
this is tape seven, side one.
So
are there other things that you would like to mention regarding this oral
history?
CW: Well, I think the saddest thing
of all about the Columbia Gorge fight is the fact that we’ve lost the fight and
we have all the problems right now. It
was totally unnecessary. If when the
Friends of the Gorge formed if they would have complimented our organization we
probably could have won. We knew what we
were doing. I was the national parks
expert for Friends of the Earth, I knew these fights, I knew what we needed, we
had the precedents done and people for publicity seeking and elitism destroyed
our organization and killed any support for the Gorge. And if Nancy Russell and the Friends of the
Gorge had not been such elitists and had not been so intent on getting all the
publicity and had complimented us we could have had the Park Service, we could
have had the tributaries protected. What
they did - the best angle that can be put on what they did is that they were tricked
by Mark Hatfield into selling out the environmentalists on the Gorge. And Nancy Russell and Don Clark went into him
and said, what will you give us? And he
said, no Park Service, no tributary protection”. And they said, yes boss and set out to
destroy us because we wouldn’t go along with that. Anyone that knows anything about
environmental politics knows you don’t let Mark Hatfield set your agenda and
set your position. You take the right
position, like we did on wilderness and then you work to force him politically
over to that and they didn’t. They just
let him dictate the Friends of the Gorge policy which is a total failure. And if they had taken their money and
influence and complimented with our incredible grassroots organization and our
knowledge and my connections with the environmental movement we could have won
the Gorge. We could have had Park
Service, our life would all be wonderful.
I could go hiking again. We
wouldn’t have wholesale destruction.
Bill
Dietrich, the Pulitzer prize winning reporter for the Seattle Times
interviewed me a couple years ago in my gallery up in The Dalles and he had
just interviewed the Friends of the Gorge.
He said, boy they hate you. Why
does Nancy Russell hate you and force you out of the fight. And I said, I’m poor, I’m rural, I’m Indian
and I’m a hippie. I’m the poster child
of her hatred all rolled into one. [laughs].
Unfortunately, it was class warfare and that’s the saddest thing. None of this was necessary if they would have
worked with us. Because we used to turn
hundreds of people out at hearings, we had an incredible grassroots
network. But once it became an elitist,
social battle, it was class warfare not an environmental fight. The day the Friends of the Gorge formed
there’s never been any debate within the Gorge about what our vision was or
what the Gorge should be like. It’s
strictly been class warfare. So that the
saddest thing. All of the crisis in the
Gorge and all of the suffering we’ve gone through, local people have gone
through is just totally unnecessary. It’s
just a few people wanted publicity more than they wanted to protect the
Gorge. That’s the saddest thing of
all. All of this is unnecessary.
It’s
also become the stalking ground for the corporate people to take over the
environmental movement. When the Friends
of the Gorge declared war on us and forced us out of the fight, that was
unheard of then. And now it’s becoming
the norm. We have friends of this,
friends of that all over that are corporate and foundation sponsored fighting
the grassroots groups. Unfortunately,
it’s become a precedent for - Friends of the Gorge still like to talk about the
Columbia Gorge legislation being a great precedent for saving areas. But it’s not.
We’ve lost it. It’s a precedent
in how rich people can destroy an area while getting credit and even awards for
saving it. It has become a precedent but
it’s how you destroy grassroots environmental movements and coopt them with
corporate money and such. That’s the
saddest thing.
And
also the salmon. Here we had a wonderful
opportunity to protect a whole lot of rivers.
Bob Packwood, that radical environmentalist totally supported our
position which was that the Gorge be protected under the National Park Service. And the lower ten, fifteen miles of each of
the tributaries and that’s the Sandy, Hood, Deschutes, Washougal, Wind, Little
White, Salmon, White Salmon, Klickitat Rivers would all be arms of the Parks
Service area. And then we’d have wild
and scenic river studies for all the tributaries on top of that which would
give us a two year moratorium on dams and would give us breathing time. And that would have done so much to save
salmon runs but when the utilities Friends of the Gorge to fight that we’ve got
horrible damage going on on virtually all of those tributaries to salmon. And the Gorge legislation is so bad that you
can graze cattle. There’s no
restrictions on grazing cattle right in salmon spawning streams in the Gorge. There’s no ban on that or anything. This was a chance in one bill to really save
a whole lot of salmon because those tributaries in the Gorge are really
important because they only have one dam - well, the Deschutes has two. The fish have to go through The Dalles dam
but the rest of the tributaries are either downstream like to Washougal and
Sandy from the first dam on the Columbia, the Bonneville, or else they have to
pass one dam instead of eight. And so we
had a chance to really rebuild fish runs into there. The Deschutes a lot of that’s since been
protected, fortunately, but the Klickitat is being destroyed. The White Salmon we may still restore fish
runs but what the coalitions position on that was to protect the Gorge proper
without protecting the tributaries is like cutting off all the branches off a
tree and then saving the tree. And
that’s been a really horrendous loss. We
could have saved a lot of salmon. But we
may get them back on the White Salmon.
And Friends of the Gorge used to criticize us for being too
radical. And I’d say, yeah, salmon in
the White Salmon river, what a radical concept. [laughs] We may win that
one.
The
other good news we have locally is that Lyle Point’s going to be saved it looks
like and we’ll finally embarrass the Trust for Public Lands into buying an
auction on it. I don’t know whether -
probably become a state park possibly a Yakama tribal park. But that was within an urban boundary so the
Friends of the Gorge refused to fight that subdivision and they have all the
resources. We and the local Indians did
what we could to fight it but Klickitat County just rubber stamped it through
and we had thirty arrests or so out of there.
We occupied it for two years, illegally, all kind of harassment. And finally it looks like we’re going to win
it. Every time they’d get a real estate
- they’d win huge legal fights because Klickitat County approved it so fast
that everything was in place and the judge would say you we’re there when it
happened. Well, we never had a shot at
it. It was rubber stamped so fast. So, whenever they’d get a realtor we’d go
picket them and after a couple of that the realtor would drop the listing. They won every legal fight but couldn’t sell
any of the lots. So we finally got the
investors - the person that was doing that is a guy named Henry Spencer who’s
from Massachusetts and he destroyed big areas out on Cape Cod and then moved
out here and bought Lyle Point, old railroad land through dubious negotiations
and then subdivided into thirty-four lots for windsurfers and million dollar
lots and selling them.
I
like to joke that the old pioneer trick of people coming from the east coast
out on the Oregon Trail and getting land particularly through the railroad
through dubious legalities and then chopping it up to attract more non-Indians
from the east coast to come out. Still
goes on. The only difference is now they
come out on the Oregon Trail in Jeep Cherokees. [laughs] But we finally got to
his investors and through some rich people, Ethel Kennedy’s in the Gorge
helping the Audubon Society we got his investors back in Massachusetts and let
them know this was going on forever.
There was no way we were for sale and such and they finally ordered
their guy out here, Spencer to sell it.
We could have had it half price three or four years ago if the Trust for
Public Land would have moved then but they have an option on so it looks like
we’re going to win that. Those are
really the only two victories.
Did
we talk much about the Bea house?
CH: We did talk about in context with
the other houses that have managed to get through the system and approved,
hundreds of other houses.
CW: Right, yes, it’s about
five-hundred and fifty now. That’s been
a real - the Oregonian just had an editorial here saying that the
Skamania County and the Beas and the Gorge Commission all share some of the
blame for that. I just wrote an
editorial - or an opinion piece they probably won’t print but it says they’re
all to blame but the real villains are the legislation and the Oregonian
and that five-hundred and fifty mother houses, that’s who’s responsible for
it.
Since
we talked last time I went up the Washington side where I used to live there,
in Skamania, and there’s just new houses.
I was in tears but the end of the day.
Everywhere you look there’s new houses.
There’s three new ones by the Bea house already. So there’s just no stopping it. Every single ridge up there now has houses
being built all over the place. It’s
just wholesale assault. And every
comparable place in the country there’s a moratorium on development and very little
ever goes on. And every one of those
houses there - I mean, I hate clearcutting but it grows back. But those are house are, you know
five-hundred and fifty new houses now.
And the fact that there is no land acquisition in the area of the Bea
house is indefensible. You know, that
land in any other park would have been in public ownership years ago. And the very fact that we’re still debating
building houses, to think nothing of building them directly across from
Multnomah Falls, the most visited place on the Gorge twelve years after it’s
protection proves that the bill is a failure.
But they’re trying to bill it as an anomaly, just something that slipped
through the cracks but five-hundred and fifty more slipped through. That whole areas going to be developed.
When
we started the Gorge fight land in that area in Skamania County was two hundred
an acre, that’s where I’m from. We could
have bought the whole western end of the Gorge.
And now, because of all the rich houses being built, all the trophy
houses, that land’s just going through the roof and we’ll never be able
to. But if we had really protected the
Gorge we could have bought the whole western part of Skamania County under
public ownership and that would have given us north south wildlife
corridors. One of our key things was to
get all the land there between Stevenson and the Washougal River into a public
ownership and then we’d have a north south corridor for animal migration and
such and now there’s just hundreds of houses in there so that dreams totally
gone.
The
most protected lands in the Gorge right now are the National Wildlife Refuges
and we have three of them. Steigerwald
Lake which was one my first battles when I moved back to the Gorge beginning in
seventy-seven. The local Audubon Society
then, it was the Vancouver Audubon Society were fighting the industrialization
of the wetlands there at Steigerwald Lake and weren’t having too much
success. I had a little experience in
that matter and it took me about a week to block all the federal funding. They had a - the Port of Camas and Washougal
had a one-point-three million dollar grant from the EDA, Economic Development
Administration money to fill in the rest of the wetlands and turn the whole
thing into industrial park. And they had
about a third of them filled and I went in there and blocked that. Dixie Lee Ray went crazy. I had the head of EDA call me up one day and
say, “Now that you and Friends of the Earth are involved we’re pulling the
money. We know we’ll lose.” Dixie Lee Ray went bananas and she held a
press conference and said it was her top priority in the state and she was
really mad and we needed more industrial transportation to develop the
Gorge. And I’m like, we’ve got a
waterway, an interstate freeway, a state highway, two railroads, an
international airport at the mouth, I mean ,we have everything except a space
shuttle I don’t know what your talking about [laughs]. But we blocked that long enough. It was owned by the Stevensons the same
people that own the Heathman Hotel and SDS lumber and they bought those
wetlands for something like fifty-thousand dollars in the fifties, got the
Corps of Engineers with federal money to dike it all off, drain the wetlands
then got Clark County to change the zoning from agriculture to heavy industry
and when we finally blocked all the development and forced it into the National
Wildlife Refuge we had to pay them six million dollars to buy back that land to
get Steigerwald Lake. They cried all the
way to the big. They’re big contributors
to Mark Hatfield too. The one good thing
about that is that money came out of the Corps of Engineers budget. It was mitigation money so it didn’t come out
of the Gorge acquisition money.
Then
[when] we’re protecting Wells Island the Trust for Public Lands, which had
helped to save Steigerwald, bought that option and rather than waiting a year
or two for us to get the money for Wells Island which is right off of Hood
River, the biggest Heron Rookery in the lower Columbia. They turned around and sold it to the Forest
Service immediately and made a big profit off it and it came out of the Gorge
money instead of the mitigation money.
The
other - we have the Pierce Ranch National Wildlife Refuge which was donated by
Mrs. Pierce, the old Pierce Ranch and that’s an important piece there just on
the east side of Beacon Rock. That was
an interesting one. Friends sold us out
on payments in lieu of taxes when land went into federal ownership in most of
the Gorge but that was a National Wildlife Refuge for the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife was paying Skamania County far more in payment lieu of taxes when they
took over the Pierce Ranch as the ranch had been paying taxes. Back then I was living in Skamania County,
Skamania County was getting about eight million dollars a year from the Forest
Service for timber revenues and we had six thousand people in the county. So, property taxes were zilch and they’d do a
paved road, you know, hey, I want to clear-cut my land you’d have a paved road
there the next day or something.
But
the one close to my heart is Frenz Lake when I realized that we were going to
lose having the Park Service be the manager of the Gorge I wasn’t about our
allotment. It was my Grandma Kalliah,
Indian Mary’s land, it was her allotment.
And we had been saving it in the family for decades assuming it would go
to the National Park Service when the Gorge was finally protected. When it became clear the Park Service
wouldn’t get it I got a rider through Congress setting up the Frenz Lake
National Wildlife Refuge and our property was the cornerstone of that. That’s when I moved to the east end of the
Gorge.
CH: So, you said three but there’s
the Steigerwald wetlands and the Wells Island and Pierce Ranch?
CW: Wells Island didn’t end up a
wildlife refuge. It’s under the Trust
for Public Lands in between had been taken over by the Friends of the Gorge and
they’re now a moneymaking machine so they - I wrote to their president begging
them to hold onto it so we could get appropriations through Congress to make it
another National Wildlife Refuge. What
our plan was to have a Columbia Gorge National Wildlife Refuge and it would
have a number of units within it. And
the Trust for Public Lands by then had gotten into financial trouble and were
taken over and all four senators looked this wonderful woman named Harriet
Burgess, I don’t know if I talked about her at all.
The
Trust for Public Lands used to be the best friend the Columbia Gorge ever had
and they were involved back with the Forest Service, the Corbett Station and
Gene Zimmerman was there before there ever was a Friends of the Gorge
organization. The Columbia Gorge
Coalition worked very close to the Forest Service and the Trust for Public
Lands. They couldn’t buy very many lands
outside of the Forest Service boundaries.
But within the Gifford Pinchot Mount Hood Forest where they went into
the Gorge there were huge in holdings.
So during that era we concentrated on buying out lands within the Forest
Service boundaries and then getting appropriations to get those lands into
public ownership and we had a great project going.
Then all four senators - there were
subdivisions being built like crazy.
There was a sixty-seven house subdivision approved there in Skamania
County and so all four Senators looked the woman, Harriet Burgess from the
Trust for Public Lands in the eye and told her to go in there and buy out all
the subdivisions in the Gorge and they’d bail her out within the year. And that’s when Dan Evans came in and killed
legislation for two more years to allow the subdividers including the Columbia
County commissioners, to subdivide the hell out of their land and develop it
and drive up all the prices. So TPL had
put about ten million into the Gorge and they were about to go belly up and so
the rich people had to come bail them out.
CH: What was TPL?
CW: Trust for Public Lands.
CH: Oh, I see.
CW: Which used to be, boy, they were
the most wonderful friend we ever had in the Gorge back then. Then when they got in financial trouble the
Friends of the Gorge had no contact with them till then, went to Meyer Memorial
Trust and got a big loan to bail them out and then they fired the woman that
was out helper and then put Bowen Blair in charge of it who was executive
director of the Friends of the Gorge so he was rewarded. Took over it.
Now they’re just a money making machine.
They don’t take risks like she did.
So, when they bought Wells Island they had already taken over so they
immediately sold it to the Forest Service before we could even start our
campaign to get money. That money came
out of the Gorge acquisition budget not out of the Corps of Engineers
budget. That ended our whole plan for
all these wildlife refuges.
We’ve
been really vindicated in terms of the wildlife refuges are the best protected
lands by far on the Gorge. Steigerwald
Lake now there’s swans and bald eagles have come back in there first time in
thirty-five years now. There’s over a
thousand swans a day on Frenz Lake which was our family property. Once our family, our Indian land became part
of the wildlife refuge than U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was able to buy the
rest of Frenz Lake and we got the cows out of there. Wapato which was the most important plant for
Gorge Indians, it was our potato, our main source of starch is real susceptible
to cattle grazing and had been almost totally wiped out in the Gorge. There was one big patch left when we started
the Gorge fight in the mid-seventies there was a big patch left at Rooster Rock
and Dave Talbot, the then director of Oregon State Parks was a horrible
opponent. He was the major opponent of
Gorge Protection mainly because he was just a political hack. I don’t think he cared one way or the
other. But he’d leased out Rooster Rock
for cattle grazing and wiped out all the wapato in the Gorge. And now within a couple of years after we got
the cows out of Frenz Lake now the whole north shore is solid wapato. I assume they were probably brought in by
swan poop. There’s over a thousand swans
a day during the winter time on that lake now.
So that’s been a huge success.
The Fish and Wildlife Service is doing great things. They took Gibbons Creek which is there - in
Steigerwald Lake just east of Washougal - the Corps of Engineers when they
diked it off and drained the wetlands channelized it and diverted over and
built a new river and wiped out all the chum.
Further up river a lot of chum salmon on the Columbia. So they’ve now put Gibbons Creek back into
its old creek bed and restoring that and we’re going to have salmon back in
there and I said we’ve got eagles back in there and swans. Three wildlife refuges have been the biggest
success story. They’re being managed
like the whole rest of the Gorge has but all the land above them is under the
Gorge Commission and the Forest Service and it’s been virtually all clear
cut. While the Fish and Wildlife’s doing
all this great restoration work on the lower end of these watersheds, the area
under the Gorge Commission and the Forest Service having the hell clear cut out
of it, massive silt. And so it’s undoing
all the work the Fish and Wildlife Service is doing. Those refuges are our main high points.
CH: Is there anything else that you’d
like to mention at this point.
CW: I don’t know, like I say it’s
just the sadness. This is the first
National Park System caliber area in the country that’s being destroyed so some
blue bloods can get publicity for themselves.
There’s never been anything like this ever in the history of the
environmental movement. I’m afraid other
rich people are looking at this as a precedent.
I’m afraid it’s going to be the model.
But, like I say, it’s really sad.
But we had an environmental movement, we had an office in the Gorge and
the Friends of the Gorge have never had an office, they once had three
offices. They were in Portland,
Vancouver and Seattle for fundraising and would not have an office in the Gorge
and that just makes local people hate them.
And they should. And we had an
office, we had the courage to have an office first in Hood River then in
downtown White Salmon right next to a combination liquor store and gun shop,
that’s a real... [laughs] - that was quite a neighbor there. That’s like nitro and glycerin, but we had
the guts to do it. No one from the
Friends of the Gorge ever came to our office.
They refused to acknowledge we exist or anything like that. That’s the sad thing was that it totally
disenfranchised the local environmentalists and left a lot of our lives in ruins. We’ve got one wave of a half-a-dozen so
yuppies at a time getting paid big salaries to come in their and fight us and
we’re not allowed to be on TV other than channel eight and their environmental
reporter just left so we no longer have a single Portland media that will
acknowledge there are even local environmentalists in the Gorge other than of
course the Alliance or - your speaking to the converted. Although that’s even worthwhile, though.
The
Alliance did a wonderful series of articles on Dan Dancer’s subdivision which
is destroying upper Rowena Dell and it’s supported by the Friends of the Gorge
and he’s one of the locals that’s getting foundation money to supposedly
support the Friends of the Gorge. And
the Alliance did a great article on him.
It raised a lot of hell because people that would be sympathetic to us
have no idea of what’s going on in the Gorge.
They and KBOO actually did a good thing.
KBOO has done some good shows but that’s the only Portland media really
left that will cover what’s going on in the Columbia Gorge. Even the Willamette Week used to back
when Tom Alkyer in the early eighties did some great stories and they won’t -
seems to me they’ve become a yuppie dating service, it’s really not a paper
[laughs] I think it was in eighty-one when Atiyeh was governor - I think we
talked about this, Pat Amadeo was his environmental aid, yes, they had exposed
her lying shenanigans. [laughs] But now they won’t even cover us, we’re not
allowed. They’ve done two rogue of the
month’s lately attacking Skamania County over the Bea house. And I’ve written letter, hey, it’s Multnomah
County’s responsible for that not Skamania but they won’t print them of course
or anything.
CH: Now why is it that Multnomah
is...
CW: Because they killed protection
for that area. Multnomah County was the
ones that helped set up Friends of the Gorge and killed the environmental
movement. They’re the - only two
counties in the history of the country have fought national park - only two
urban counties in the country have fought National Park Service areas adjacent
to them and they’re Multnomah County and Los Angeles County. And in Los Angeles county the local
congressman, Tony [Belifson sp?] fought
for the Park Service and got the Park Service...
CH: This is in Topanga?
CW: The Santa Monica Mountains, the
Santa Monica Recreation Area which includes Topanga Canyon. And here we had Ron Wyden who fought us. So Multnomah County’s the only county in the
country to kill a National Park Service area on it’s boundaries. Richard Nixon - this is a carry over parks
and wildlife refuges and Nat Reed made a statement that any city official that
fought one of his park service areas adjacent to them has to be completely nuts. Well, Multnomah County was completely nuts
and fought it. So I view them as one of
the main villains. Skamania County just
did what any rural timber dependent county would do and expected that. That was in our equation, no problem. But when Multnomah County came out against
the Park Service that’s what killed protection.
It was such a - did I tell you about the time Pauline Anderson about
when they were passing a resolution to support the Forest Service?
CH: Pauline Anderson was a county
commissioner for Multnomah County.
CW: Yes, Multnomah County formed
Friends of the Gorge with Mark Hatfield.
Mark Hatfield orchestrated it and was kind of the puppet master there
and then they killed the protection so bad that we got back involved. And so they were going to Multnomah County
Commissioners to approve the Friends of the Gorge position on the Gorge and we weren’t allowed to testify,
noone was invited but Nancy Russell, not Portland Audubon who was on our side
or any of the other groups. So someone I
knew down in this government, Multnomah County, they tipped me off so I showed
up that morning and Pauline Anderson was chairing the committee. So Nancy Russell gave her testimony and when
they were setting up the Friends of the Gorge they refused to talk to their
parks expert. They had Lorna Stickel
who’s now with the state water, she was their head of planning and they let her
determine their position and planners like planners and she fought the Park
Service but they never talked to their parks person. So, they were getting to vote, Nancy Russell
testified and they’re getting ready to unanimously approve it and I said,
“Excuse me, Pauline, is this public hearing, can I testify.” Well, I guess and they reluctantly let me
testify and I explained that every other comparable place is a Park Service
area and I couldn’t understand that.
“Well, maybe we should ask Charlie [Seikel ?] our head of Multnomah
County Parks.” And he was in the room
and they called him up and they said, “What do you think?” And he said, “Oh, Chuck Williams is a hundred
percent right. It’s just totally nuts to
have the Forest Service this is a Parks Service area.” And Pauline Anderson said, “Well, it’s too
late to debate that.” They just voted
and supported the Friends of the Gorge and it was just a total payoff and here
their parks person was on our side and they would not even debate it. They said, well, it’s just too late. Anyway, I hold Multnomah County in a large
part responsible for the disaster in the Gorge.
They
still take this moral ground attacking Skamania County and they were the first
county to get their plan approved by the Gorge Commission and that was in the
morning. And in the afternoon they
applied and won from the Gorge Commission to create new one acre lots at
Bridalveil. And here we are, the county
is supposedly protecting it is pushing for and winning approval of brand new
one acre lots to build houses at Bridalveil and this is just after the Trust
for Public Lands had just bought a whole bunch of property at Bridalveil and
the old TPL would have let people live there they were poor people. So TPL and Friends of the Gorge are trying to
force all those people out of their houses for no reason which the old
stereotype used against us by the right wing is that these urban elitists are
going to kick people out of their houses.
Well, here we had it, proof that that’s exactly what the Friends - and
there was no reason for that, no reason to [not] let people keep on living
there. And it just turned all of east
county against the Gorge protection, against the Friends of te Gorge
specifically and against Gorge protection.
So
anyway I hold Multnomah County - and they’re still - along the Sandy River
letting people build houses on real tiny lots there and they fought Wild and
Scenic protection for the Sandy River.
It was so self defeating, Multnomah County’s main sheriff’s boat is
named after my great-great grandpa, Chief [Tumove ?] and I was the one that
broke the champagne on the bow of it which I’m kind of embarrassed at, but if
we would - if Multnomah County wouldn’t have fought the Parks Service they
would have had Park Service patrol boats out there and any comparable place the
country the Park Service furnishes boat patrols and it really helps the
county. But we don’t have any of
that. The Forest Service isn’t going to
put patrol boats out. And if Multnomah
County hadn’t fought our position Park Service probably bought the whole shore
Bob
Packwood was pushing for federal appropriations to buy out all the land along
the Sandy River and now there’s house all over along the Sandy River thanks to
Multnomah County fighting protection. So
they fought payments in lieu of taxes and they really fought against the
interests of Multnomah County residents and it’s when I kind of realized that
Portland politics are run by the wealthy.
I went off and was born in Multnomah County in fact and I’m now ashamed
of considering what they did on the Gorge.
They just fought of protection everyone else got. They just did themselves in. They hurt their own residents. It’s when I learned that Multnomah County and
Portland politics are not near as democratic as it looks on the surface. There’s this nice veneer that looks....
[end tape 7, side 1]
Chuck Williams
Tape 7, Side 2
CW: ...foundation money for doing that. That’s kind of a really sad - and the people
that really know it, like Dennis and Bonnie White, that really know the issues
are not allowed because they were banned from all Portland media were banned
from meetings. It’s really sad. Blumenauer paints himself as kind of a
populist but he will not talk to anyone from the Columbia Gorge unless they’ve
been pre-approved by the Friends of the Gorge.
I
don’t know if I mentioned it to you, I went to - I said the Oregonian
hasn’t printed a letter to the editor and when they were having some public
forums here a few years ago the Oregonian had these kind of town
meetings chaired by Fred Stickel and I stood up and I asked Fred Stickel why I
and all the local environmentalists are totally banned from the Oregonian
ever since the Friends of the Gorge formed and that I knew he went to Nancy
Russell’s social functions of the Friends and such. Oh, that’s just nonsense, he just pooh poohed
it and asked someone else a question. So
I went up to one of the editorial board writers and I said, that’s true and he
said yes, Hatfield came to our editorial board and said local environmentalists
and the National Park Service aren’t in any way relevant to the Gorge debate
and so don’t ever mention them and so we don’t.
He confessed to me that that was what had happened. Like the old saying about freedom of press is
guaranteed to those who own one. [laughs].
I
never thought of the Oregon Journal as a liberal, pro-environment paper
but they always gave - even after the Friends formed, they gave us equal time
always with the Friends of the Gorge. If
they interviewed Nancy Russell they’d interviewed me. And they editorially supported us, as did channel
eight. And now we’re just totally
banned. The day the Oregonian
bought the Journal despite claims that they weren’t going to do it,
immediately put it out of business. That
was the end. There has never been any
mention of the Park Service, any interview of a local environmentalist and
such. The Oregon Journal kept the
Oregonian honest. If you want to
see the damage done by monopoly media just go no further than Portland. People move here from other places, [and say]
how can they do that, isn’t that illegal?
And I say, no [laughs] not when you own it. Even when they print outright lies, like
Jonathan Nichols one of his columns one time about there’s this wonderful
woman, Nancy Russell - did I mention this before?
CH: I’m not sure.
CW: and wrote a column about how
there’s this wonderful woman named Nancy Russell that’s working around the
clock to get the National Park Service to manage the Gorge and to protect all
the tributaries like the Sandy River and send her your money. Did a big fundraising thing for them. And when I pointed out and proved to him that
quite the opposite was true, she was the main enemy of both, he wouldn’t rebut
it, they wouldn’t print any of my rebuttal letters. So they went ahead and raised money for
Friends of the Gorge by distorting her position and taking our position and
saying. That’s a lot of the reason we
lost the Gorge was that every group that had supported the coalition, the
environmental position like Audubon the ONRC and such the Friends of Gorge just
went around and said they support our position.
And they took our name, National Scenic Area, which was one of the
stupidest mistakes ever made. I’m the
one that came up with that name. The
head of the Park Service study team and I were sitting up on top of Beacon Rock
one night talking during the study period and watching the sunset and we’re
starting to get this big backlash based on the fact we were pushing for a
Columbia Gorge National Recreation Area and people were starting to in the
Gorge about these images of hoards of
recreationists coming in and wiping out the Gorge. The first public meeting a guy from Cascade
Locks stood up and said, “I don’t want these urban people coming here trampling
my trillium,” [laughs] and that became kind of a battle cry for them. And the
Chuck Cushman, the National Inholders had gotten this right-wing film made
attacking the Parks Service at Cuyahoga Valley national Recreation Area. And through Jessica Savage had got it put on Frontline
and so it became a public broadcasting documentary even though it was funded by
a far right-wing foundation out of Vermont.
It was just blatant lies. They
got it put on PBS which gave it incredible incredibility. For instance the film ended with a house
burning with just black smoke pouring out of this house. They must have waited for it to hit some
wiring or something. And the voice over
implied that the Parks Service was burning these people out of their
houses. Did I tell you this story?
CH: Yes you did tell me that, yes.
CW: Ok, yes. So I know I told Barbara Bernstein one of her
things, I don’t know. Anyway, so get
away from the bad connotations in National Recreation Area we decided to use
the name National Scenic Area but unfortunately, there weren’t any
precedents. Part of the reason was to
allow more flexibility for the counties and such. We just put them on notice that the more you
do before the bill passes the less direct federal management there’ll be. And the National Scenic Area gave them leeway
but it turned out to be one of the two worst mistakes I ever made in my life in
that we had no bottom line. If we had
kept the National Recreation Area name, which we should have done, then we
would have had a bottom line of protection, that there were precedents all over
the country and we would have actually had protection. But by using the National Scenic Area name
they were able to put in this stupid planning bill that didn’t resemble
anything that had been done anywhere else and was a premeditated hoax and they
were able to get away with it.
I
wake up in the middle of the night haunted by that, primarily by the fact that
I turned my cheek, I’ve gone into this, and didn’t criticize the Friends. Friends of the Earth was in a big internal
fight at that time over David Brower, you know that infighting just really hurt
me and everyone [said] you can’t attack the Friends. So I went from, they formed in late eighty
until the bill passed in eighty-six I never publicly criticized them even
though they attacked me, told me I was a too inferior person to be allowed to
take part in politics, that’s a direct quote.
And fought us. Wyden took money
from utilities and corporations, Weyerhaeuser, people like that and I never
exposed them. And now people get really
made at me for attacking the Friends of the Gorge and say, we gotta get
along. I said, no, that’s why we lost
the Gorge. I wake up in the middle of
the night haunted by the fact that if I would have exposed what they were doing
we probably could have won the Gorge.
The National Scenic Area is the second biggest mistake I made in my
life. By far the biggest was to not
attack the Friends of the Gorge and for trying to get along. That’s my basic philosophy, you know, is try
to get along. I’m not a very adversarial
person. But I really was way too much of
a softy on that one. If I would have
criticized and exposed what they would have done because they’d hold press
conferences saying all these environmental groups support them. Blatant
lies. And I should have held press
conferences and pointed out that none of those groups - they supported a National
Scenic Area but not what the Friends of the Gorge, not this Forest Service
Commission thing. My biggest regret out
of the whole thing is not pointing out what the Friends were doing, not
exposing their collusion with the development interests and such. Something I’m going to have to live down the
rest of my life for having been too nice [laughs]. So when people come now and tell me you gotta
quit criticizing the Friends I just tell them to go jump in a lake, that’s why
we lost the Gorge.
CH: Well, you’ve really got a lot to
say and I really appreciate the time that you’ve spent on this.
CW: I don’t get very many chances to
....
CH: Well, it’s a lot of information.
CW: I’m the only person that’s been
involved in it all the way through. I
don’t know how much - did we talk about John Yeon do you know?
CH: A little bit.
CW: Dennis and Bonnie White came over
the other night and that came up. We had
started the fight and John Yeon got a hold of me and he was just so happy that
I came along because he was really pro Park Service. I think I mentioned that but this came up the
other night and I hadn’t really thought about it since then. He was just adamant that the Gorge protection
end at the Forest Service boundary about five miles west of Hood River
there. He thought that the eastern end
of the Gorge was inferior landscape. He
had that rainforest chauvinism of Portland people.
CH: Yeah right. [laughs]
CW: He was just sure that I was going
to kill [it] by pushing that the whole eastern end of the Gorge be protected at
the same time as the western end that I was going to kill the whole thing. My motivations for doing that were, number
one, one of my main goals working with Friends of the Earth as a national parks
expert was to get within the national parks system a protected area of every
major ecosystem within the country. So
that we had a - as a genetic bank. And
that was one of my main motivations for Santa Monica National Recreation Area
and the Channel Islands National Park was to get a huge hunk of chaparral in
there into the national park system. And
tall grass prairie has been the main gap in that whole project and was one of
my top priorities. Only one of my
thirteen top priorities I didn’t win during the Carter administration with Andrus. And so I was arguing for the protection of
the eastern end of the Gorge for the biological diversity so that we would have
some of the high desert within the protected area and then also the
archeological sites, you know, Celilo the Wasco area around The Dalles are
incredible historic areas.
But
John Yeon was just adamant that I was going to lose Park Service protection by
pushing for too much. He wanted us to
only protect from the Sandy River to the Mount Defiance area there, the eastern
edge of the Gorge. So right before we
kicked off our big campaign I just found some notes the other day and I don’t
think I mentioned it, but we had this big picnic with John Yeon’s place in late
eighty. It was when my book was being
published and it was a big...
CH: The Shire across from Multnomah
Falls.
CW: Yes. So we’re having a huge party their. It was a kickoff celebration. It was the publication of my book and we just
had hundreds of people going. And right
before it we had a planning meeting at the Parker House in Washougal and John
Yeon brought Nancy Russell with him. It
was her first time she’d ever been involved in anything in the Gorge or any
politics that I know of. And so after
the meeting she went and got a hold of Craig Collins and Susan Kady of our
staff and demanded that I be banned from the gathering at the Shire because I
was quote offensive to the type of people whose support we needed. And plus we were really stupid to not use it
for fundraising. And then when they
refused to ban me from the kickoff meeting for protecting the Columbia Gorge
that was when she said, well, I’m going to go form my own group. She didn’t say it but basically destroyed the
coalition. She was, for the first year
or so, she was going to work with us and support the Park Service and support
tributaries which, I’ve since found out, she knew from the beginning she never
had any intention of doing that. That
type of blatant lying is just something I’ve never been around. We ran into that with the rich people in the
Gorge. The poor people that have moral
standards, even the right-wing people that we hate their politics, I mean, they
were honest and I still have a lot of good contacts with the right-wing people
in the Gorge because we respect each other.
CH: But didn’t John Yeon really,
wasn’t he sincere in his desire to keep the Gorge protected.
CW: Oh, he was very sincere. But the irony, I guess the thing I was
leading up to, the ironic was that he thought me pushing for a bigger area was
going to hurt the chances of protecting the west in and it turned out the
person he brought in, Nancy Russell was the one that killed the Park
Service. She turned out to be the main
enemy of the Park Service. He brought
her into the Gorge fight and she was the one that did him in, not me, on the
Park Service. But he could never, until
his dying day, he could never admit that so he blamed it all on Don Clark and
Lorna Stickel and he used it to call it the Lorna Stickel bill, the Friends of
the Gorge bill, the Stickel bill and he blamed it all on Don Clark because he
couldn’t acknowledge the fact that he had brought in the person that turned out
to be the main enemy of the Park Service.
But he ended up doing in all of his dreams fort he Gorge by bringing
Nancy Russell into the fight. We’d all be better off if that didn’t
happen. Ironically, he was so shook up
about the Forest Service taking over his land that he turned it over to the
university to keep it out of the Forest Services land he was so mad over losing
the Park Service. To his dying day he
couldn’t face up to the fact that he set the gears in place that killed Park
Service protection for the Gorge. He was
very sincere. Very nice man. We got along good. He was kind of a cheapskate. I mean, he could have really financially
helped us a lot and that was the excuse Nancy Russell used for destroying the
coalition is we weren’t good fund-raisers.
That was her public reason. They
could have helped us and if the Friends would have complimented us instead of
fighting us and used her connections and money and our knowledge and our
incredible organizing abilities in the Gorge we could have won the Gorge. We would have had it all. Because our only downfall was really
finance. We weren’t all that good at
raising money but that was partly premeditated in that I wanted to be locally
based and I knew we were going to lose a lot of money and a lot the volunteer
support by being based in the middle of the Gorge not the urban area but that
was a tradeoff. We has right on our side. I knew we were going to prevail. I don’t think there’s any doubt in my mind
and most of us that started that we would have gotten the Park Service.
But
when Nancy Russell formed the Friends and asked people to help destroy the
coalition she said they’d have protection within one year and this was in late
eighty. And by late eighty-one if
everyone would support the Forest Service and fight the coalition they could
have the Gorge protected within a year.
And of course it was another five years and we had to get back involved
in eighty-three to even get any bill at all.
They had killed any chances of ever protecting the Gorge. We got back involved at Bob Packwood’s urging
to salvage something and we salvaged a little bit but nowhere near enough. But it took another five years and a lot of
heartache and such.
My
only defeat, in my long environmental career I’ve only ever lost one
fight. I was the national parks expert
for Friends of the Earth for five years and been involved for over a quarter of
a century and I got spoiled. The peak of
my career was during the Carter Andrus years when we were winning thing left
and right. I only lost one environmental
fight in my entire life and it was for my own home, the one that broke my
heart. It’s left me emotionally
destroyed. I go through the Gorge,
western end around Skamania where I’m from it’s just houses everywhere, very
rich white people moving in and building their trophy houses and such. The poor are hung out to dry and such. It left me a broken man in a lot of
ways. I guess that’s a good ending spot
there.
CH: I appreciate your telling me your
story.
CW: I’m sure I’ll think of some more
you can save that little bit of the tape there [laughs].
CH: Well, I’ll be glad to add it if
you come up with other things that you’d like to....
CW: Okay. I’m sure.
That thing about John and Nancy Russell, you know, demanding to go into
Craig and Susan demanding that I be banned from the meeting. I had forgotten all about that when I was
going - I’ve got a whole packet of background information put together for you
and I didn’t - I didn’t know we were going to get together. I found the note about that and I was like,
oh, my god, I had forgotten how bad that had gotten.
CH: Well, I’d like to see the
information.
CW: The Gorge Commission also has
asked me to put it together because there’s noone on the Gorge Commission now
that was involved in that. They have no
idea. When I spoke in front of them the
other day and they were like, oh, you mean other places are under the Park
Service. You mean we could have had
acquisition everywhere in the Gorge and they.... They met Tuesday at the Discovery Center and
one of the - actually I’ve got a little time to tell one more story.
One of the
problems was that the Friends of the Gorge fought and successfully
killed any land acquisition in sixty-one percent of the Gorge. Only within the special management areas
which is thirty-nine percent of the Gorge is there any authorization to buy
lands. And without buying land or at
least buying scenic easements you have neither protection, long term
protection, because with the zoning can be changed immediately. The minute all the houses are built on the
exiting zoning in the Gorge they’ll just start granting variances and they’ll
just change the whole thing. So it will
go on forever. But if you buy the land
or even buyout the development rights on it then that’s forever.
And
the other bad thing is that it’s horrible - you know, there’s no compensation
for local people in which - they’re rich they didn’t care. And so we got neither protection nor
compensation in the majority of the Gorge.
And that’s one reason there’s so much development because the commission
[said] “Well, we can’t stop people from building on their land because we can’t
buy it out.” In Wasco Country there’s
only one piece of land left that’s an open space that hasn’t been reclassified
to allow development and so the owners have agreed to sell but it’s in the GMA
so they were having a debate. The Gorge
Commission was going to pass a resolution to send to Congress to ask them to
appropriate the money to buy the last piece of open space left in Wasco County
and that’s when I went through the roof and said, “You know, I came to this
commission before and begged you and begged you to pass a resolution to
Congress to make the whole general management area open to acquisition so we at
least could buy out things like the Bea house and such.”
And
I went to them once previously when the plan came out and I was just
practically in tears begging them and said, “No, no, Friends of the Gorge they
know what they’re doing, they’re ok.”
That was before lunch. After
lunch SDS came in and said, “Well, we’re going to clear cut all our lands
between Hood River and Mosier if you don’t buy it.” And they said, “Well, it’s GMA and we can’t,
you know, Forest Service can’t buy it.”
Well we better consider this. And
SDS came in and asked them to do it and they were considering it but they
wouldn’t even listen to me.
The
Oregon State University Press book, Planning the West that was done by
some PSU professors, they have a whole section in there about how I was just
adamant to the end that there be acquisition authority throughout the Gorge and
that not listening to me has turned out to be one of the biggest mistakes in
the Gorge. I keep xeroxing that and
passing it out because no one acknowledges that I exist [laughs]. I think that book didn’t paint the bad side
of the Friends of the Gorge, it was kind of a coverup. But they did acknowledge that I started, had
a sidebar on me and they did mention that I was just adamant to the end that
that be the case and that I’d been proven right. That’s still
- the very fact that the Bea house is not in an area where you can buy
land is just insane. I mean, that’s just
total insanity. So anyway, if we’re ever
going to protect it [we need] the Park Service and to get land acquisition
authority throughout the Gorge. Those
are two main things that need to be done.
But with five-hundred and fifty new houses now instead of maybe fifty
which we expected under our bill and there just going to keep on going
forever. And everyone of those means
that we’ll never have the wildlife habitat.
One
last thing on the Bea house, the Friends of the Gorge signed off on the Bea
house and they didn’t start fighting it until the public outrage turned out so
bad they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and they’ve signed off
on all those five-hundred and fifty houses and they claim, well it wasn’t built
like what they approved, signed off on.
Which is true. It’s higher and
more out front. But it doesn’t matter in
terms of destroying wildlife and plant life and such whether it’s a pink house
or three story or two story, they signed off on all those houses and that’s
destroying wildlife habitat. If it had
been built a little further back like they approved it and been more earth
colored it wouldn’t have been as noticeable when they took their friends on
their Sunday drives. But it would have
done just as much to destroy wildlife habitat and such but that’s never been
one of their concerns. And we could have
locked up that whole area across from Multnomah Falls all public ownership and
total wilderness and such and now those five-hundred and fifty houses aren’t
going to be moved in my lifetime anyway [laughs]. And the land costs were so cheap back
then. We could have bought so much of
that.
CH: Well, thanks for your postscript,
I appreciate it.
CW: Sure.
[end tape 7, side 2 - end of
Interview]