Allen Chrisman’s letter (Dec. 18 Beacon: “Work Collaboratively on Forest Plan”) defending the Flathead National Forest from criticism by Keith Hammer asserts that “The Forest Service made no commitment to the Whitefish Range Partnership that they would adopt our recommendation intact.”
That’s correct — but Hammer never alleged such a commitment. He merely argued that remarks about the Whitefish Range Partnership’s agreement by the FNF’s supervisor and chief planner were gratuitously complimentary, thus prejudicial, and therefore amounted to favoritism. I agree.
Hammer did not criticize the WRP. But Chrisman chose to criticize Hammer, and to criticize him in a deliberately patronizing manner that not only is without merit, but that is not in keeping with the civility and mutual respect required for successful collaboration in the larger forest plan revision process of which both men are a part.
James Conner
Kalispell