Take Me to Your Leader

A huge annual gathering of hippies freaks out the National Forest Service

Sam MacDonald from the February 2001 issue

(Page 5 of 5)

Neither Feist nor Sweeney could point to a single specific long-term negative environmental impact suffered at any of the previous 27 Rainbow Gatherings. The worst they could recall was a widespread breakout of a gastrointestinal disease after a meeting in North Carolina. Since the National Incident Management Team had been involved in only the last three national events, Sweeney said, they lack sufficient data to make any conclusions.

On the other hand, the Rainbows proudly display the final impact studies conducted by the Forest Service after each Gathering. Scores of hard-core Rainbows stay behind each year to pick up trash, reseed trampled ground, bury latrines, and conduct other hard work, such as corralling abandoned dogs. The federal impact studies are designed to study the effectiveness of the cleanup crew and gauge the long-term environmental impact of each Gathering. Last year’s study concluded that "there will be minimal long-term negative resource impacts" to the site. "One Heritage site was damaged during the event," it noted. "All other resource impacts have been adequately addressed, mitigated or rehabilitated."

This year’s study hasn’t been completed, but Bill Fox, head of the Forest Service team that monitors the Rainbows, said there have been some problems. "Cleanup of the garbage has been OK, but there is a lot of compacted soil," he said. "There were some slit trenches that were not properly filled, and there were a lot of trails that were not completely obliterated. I think the forest is very up-set over that." According to Fox, the basic geographical realities of Beaverhead-Deerlodge, such as its hard soil and short growing season, made it a particularly difficult area to restore. And that, he argued, is why the Rainbows should sign the permit and cooperate with the authorities to select more appropriate sites in the future.

But according to Barry Adams, it’s the Forest Service that won’t cooperate. "I tried this year to do my best to work with the Forest Service," he said. "I wanted to act in a Good Samaritan relationship. I care about this forest. I’m a native Montanan. But Bill Fox told me there would be no talking to anybody. He told me no one would talk to anybody until a permit was signed." Adams said he invited officials to participate in the consensus-building councils that guide the Rainbow tribes, but they refused. "They could work this out by accepting the process we use, but they have chosen not to do that," he said. "We don’t have a process that they recognize, but we have a process. If they would have come out and sat at the council, we might not have gotten full consensus, but we would have gotten an operation plan."

Fox denied that Adams or any other Rainbows made such conciliatory overtures. "I think that in Barry’s mind he might think he did that, but he did not get in touch with the forest supervisor," he said. "He is not being truthful on that issue." Either way, he added, no talks could have taken place before someone signed on the dotted line for the Rainbows. "The regulations say you have to have a permit," he said. "We would have been violating our own policy."

The issue is now in the hands of the federal court. Adams and the other two Rainbows each face possible jail time and a $5,000 fine. The larger dispute, meanwhile, shows no signs of disappearing.

Volunteer scouts are already searching the country for next year’s site. According to an unofficial Rainbow Web site (welcomehome.org), the focus is somewhere in Washington or Idaho. As always, all interested parties are told to check back sometime next June to confirm the actual place.

Bill Fox said he’ll be there. Barry Adams said he will too—as long as he isn’t in jail. Adams added that he still won’t put his name on the Forest Service permit. Ever. And Fox said he’ll keep pressuring the Rainbows until someone signs.