One of my great frustrations and one of the reasons why I sometimes 

 look so very much older than people give me credit for being, is that I 

 cannot^^ persuade everybody that our objective is universial. Everybody 

 argued about how you get there. We will get there by never killing 

 another coyote so long as you shall live. Or we'll get there by eradicating 

 coyotes or something in between, but we never quite comprehend that 

 we're all after the same thing. 



I worry about that a little bit, not only because of fish and wildlife 

 values or environmental values. I have a great concern-- and I have 

 developed this only after having been in Washington--that has something to 

 do with water in Washington. I have this infection that troubles me, that 

 somehow maybe not enough of us are concerned about things in their 

 logical consequence. We are more concerned about what happens tomorrow 

 or a week from Wednesday than we are about what happens over a longer 

 term. And when we have that attitude we are able to permit the most 

 bizarre kinds of things to happen. 



An interesting point... an item in the Washington paper the other day 

 has an analogy to the sanitary landfill example I set for you. Washington 

 has a lot of people in it and they produce a great deal of sewage which in 

 turn produces a great deal of sludge, which is a little tough to get rid of. 

 And there have been all kinds of schemes advanced to get rid of the 

 sewage sludge from the four million people who live in the Washington 

 metropolitan area. The most recent one of which was to ship it to Haiti. 

 Laugh if you wish, it was an honest and straightforward suggestion that 

 we ship sewage sludge to the Island of Haiti. The people in Haiti are in 

 dire straights. I'm not sure the best interest of the United States is 

 served by giving them sewage sludge, but there was a preoccupation about 

 our problems which we were willing to hand to somebody else in the form 

 of sewage sludge. It's most unfortunate that we pick on one of the least 

 developed neighbors in this hemisphere. I don't think it's going to 

 happen but it was suggested. And it's that kind of possibility that raises 

 interesting images in my mind, very discouraging ones sometimes. How 

 come you do me like you do? Maybe that's what the Haitians, who have 

 long said it to their rulers, might say to us. How come you do us like 

 you do? 



Another question that I think is worth posing because the answers 

 are a little overwhelming, at least to me, relates again to the larger issue 

 which is of less moment to Butte, Montana than it may be to other parts of 

 the world now, are the kinds of things that none of us who are in our 

 business with our interests ever can lose sight of--and the recitation of 

 these things is old-hat to many of you. You know about acid rain and its 

 impacts in the East. Acid rain is a rather remarkable phenomenon. It 

 kills fish, as you know. It is alleged that it came to the attention to 

 easterners not through the killing of fish but because it eroded the fig 

 leaves off the statues in Philadelphia and people were offended at the 

 result and it was only then that they began to discover that this stuff 

 coming out of the sky was somehow powerful. Acid rain is a cosmopolitan 

 phenomenon. We give it to the Canadians and they give it to us and we 

 argue about who gives most of it to whom and then both of us give it to 

 northern Europe. And, it spreads to the West as the wind cycles change 



