Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
Yep, that's right on the money. Folks in the Midwest don't need solitude,
clean water or beauty. They don't need to feel a delicate wind in the pines, while looking down a ribbon of water. They don't need to see pintails on the water, or a heron in the rushes. They have Walmart, stocked full of worthless crap made by slaves in a far-away land where they don't have to bear witness to the consequences of their actions. They have Pizza Hut, and McDonalds on every intersection, and can fatten themselves by the day at an endless fountain of high-fructose corn syrup-charged pop. No, you're right-- people in the Midwest don't need wild rivers. They've already got it all. Chuck http://www.wildcountry.info in article , stone at wrote on 9/28/03 6:34 AM: Interesting point, but if you want natural rivers go to Alaska, not Michigan or anywhere in the Midwest. We can not alter our environment to meet the emotional needs of a few elitists. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
Wow, you are as bitter and rabid about "wilderness" and "wild rivers" as I
am...just on the other side of the stream! But on a more conciliatory tone, if they want wild things, they need to go where they are not try to "restore virginity" here.... "Charles Pezeshki" wrote in message ... Yep, that's right on the money. Folks in the Midwest don't need solitude, clean water or beauty. They don't need to feel a delicate wind in the pines, while looking down a ribbon of water. They don't need to see pintails on the water, or a heron in the rushes. They have Walmart, stocked full of worthless crap made by slaves in a far-away land where they don't have to bear witness to the consequences of their actions. They have Pizza Hut, and McDonalds on every intersection, and can fatten themselves by the day at an endless fountain of high-fructose corn syrup-charged pop. No, you're right-- people in the Midwest don't need wild rivers. They've already got it all. Chuck http://www.wildcountry.info in article , stone at wrote on 9/28/03 6:34 AM: Interesting point, but if you want natural rivers go to Alaska, not Michigan or anywhere in the Midwest. We can not alter our environment to meet the emotional needs of a few elitists. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
"stone" typed:
Wow, you are as bitter and rabid about "wilderness" and "wild rivers" as I am...just on the other side of the stream! But on a more conciliatory tone, if they want wild things, they need to go where they are not try to "restore virginity" here.... Yeh, but... If everyone who wants a wilderness goes to the same relatively small area where true wilderness exists, there will be so many people that the true wilderness will CEASE to exist there. How much better to try and restore enough lands in the lower 48 to enough of a semblance of "wilderness" to meet the needs of outdoorspeople, so that the resources will not exceed their carrying capacities and cease to resemble "wilderness"? If people want more Chevys, GM makes more Chevys. So, if people want more wilderness -- or, at least, something like "wilderness" -- why should we not make more "wilderness"? Some heal their souls by walking in urban parks. Some heal their souls by driving in farm country. Some heal their souls by hiking in crowded National Parks. Some heal their souls by backpacking in "restore[d] [non-]virgin" woodlands. Would you argue against the creation of enough urban parks to fulfill the demand? Would you argue against the creation of more National Parks, to reduce crowding and enhance the experience of visiting? If some people can fill their need for [perceived] wilderness by spending time in restored non-virgin woodlands, why would you deny them that? If restoring non-virgin woodlands to some semblance of wilderness is the best we can do with what we have left, why would you resist the attempt to do the best we can? Is there anything more elitist than to say that only those with the time and money to go to Alaska should be permitted to enjoy primitive camping in what appears to be a natural environment? You set up a false dichotomy when you say environmentalists are against people, in favor of animals. Jeez, we can have BOTH! You set up a REALLY false dichotomy when you say environmentalists hate loggers. The timber companies have put more loggers out of work, with "productivity gains" from ever more-destructive mechanized logging, than environmental and conservation movements ever have (not to mention putting all the millworkers out of work by shipping the milling overseas). These false dichotomys have you fighting people who really want the same thing you want: a beautiful United States to live in. -Richard, His Kanubic Travesty -- ================================================== ==================== Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471 Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077 OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters. ================================================== ==================== |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
The point of all this is that the wilderness in the lower 48 is gone....long
gone. If you want a "wilderness experience" go to Alaska or get Disney to make you for you. You can't bring it back....areas logged over three times ain't wilderness......and will not ever be so again.....and don't dare to tell me that because I live in a relatively "undeveloped" area I have to stop my ecomonic developement so you can wander around in the "woods." You evidently live in NC....which is a wonderful state with many great places....but don't stick your nose in our Michigan and tell us how to live our lives.... nuff said.... "Oci-One Kanubi" wrote in message om... "stone" typed: Wow, you are as bitter and rabid about "wilderness" and "wild rivers" as I am...just on the other side of the stream! But on a more conciliatory tone, if they want wild things, they need to go where they are not try to "restore virginity" here.... Yeh, but... If everyone who wants a wilderness goes to the same relatively small area where true wilderness exists, there will be so many people that the true wilderness will CEASE to exist there. How much better to try and restore enough lands in the lower 48 to enough of a semblance of "wilderness" to meet the needs of outdoorspeople, so that the resources will not exceed their carrying capacities and cease to resemble "wilderness"? If people want more Chevys, GM makes more Chevys. So, if people want more wilderness -- or, at least, something like "wilderness" -- why should we not make more "wilderness"? Some heal their souls by walking in urban parks. Some heal their souls by driving in farm country. Some heal their souls by hiking in crowded National Parks. Some heal their souls by backpacking in "restore[d] [non-]virgin" woodlands. Would you argue against the creation of enough urban parks to fulfill the demand? Would you argue against the creation of more National Parks, to reduce crowding and enhance the experience of visiting? If some people can fill their need for [perceived] wilderness by spending time in restored non-virgin woodlands, why would you deny them that? If restoring non-virgin woodlands to some semblance of wilderness is the best we can do with what we have left, why would you resist the attempt to do the best we can? Is there anything more elitist than to say that only those with the time and money to go to Alaska should be permitted to enjoy primitive camping in what appears to be a natural environment? You set up a false dichotomy when you say environmentalists are against people, in favor of animals. Jeez, we can have BOTH! You set up a REALLY false dichotomy when you say environmentalists hate loggers. The timber companies have put more loggers out of work, with "productivity gains" from ever more-destructive mechanized logging, than environmental and conservation movements ever have (not to mention putting all the millworkers out of work by shipping the milling overseas). These false dichotomys have you fighting people who really want the same thing you want: a beautiful United States to live in. -Richard, His Kanubic Travesty -- ================================================== ==================== Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471 Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077 OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters. ================================================== ==================== |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
"stone" wrote in message
... The point of all this is that the wilderness in the lower 48 is gone....long gone. If you want a "wilderness experience" go to Alaska or get Disney to make you for you. No, I don't want a manufactured experience. I want to hike or canoe in the outdoors. In my home state. You can't bring it back....areas logged over three times ain't wilderness......and will not ever be so again.....and don't dare to tell me that because I live in a relatively "undeveloped" area I have to stop my ecomonic developement so you can wander around in the "woods." You want economic development, move to Denver. Much of the "development" in rural areas has been one-shot based on non-renewable resources. The area gets logged or mined, the business takes its money and moves on, leaving behind a scarred landscape. Besides, tourism is one of the biggest industries in Michigan. People come here because of the outdoor character. Improving it makes for a better tourist destination. Sustainable economic development. You evidently live in NC....which is a wonderful state with many great places....but don't stick your nose in our Michigan and tell us how to live our lives.... Don't pretend to speak for all Michiganders. nuff said.... Hardly. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
"stone" typed:
The point of all this is that the wilderness in the lower 48 is gone....long gone. If you want a "wilderness experience" go to Alaska or get Disney to make you for you. Man, I am sooooo tired of listening to you elitists telling me that if I cannot afford to go to Alaska I must do without, or accept a mass-market commercial imitation. You can't bring it back....areas logged over three times ain't wilderness......and will not ever be so again..... Actually, that's patently false. All depends upon the time-scale you apply. But I repeat: absolute, pristine wilderness is not necessary to fulfill the spiritual/emotional needs of most Americans (look at Europeans, who have "recreating" themselves by shelter-hiking the Alps, for centuries). An undeveloped, un-clearcut wood, with some renmaining natural fauna, is quite enriching for many people, even if there are blazed trails and -- omigosh -- huts and footbridges along the way. And even if it was a clear-cut site or a strip-mine several decades earlier. and don't dare to tell me that because I live in a relatively "undeveloped" area I have to stop my ecomonic developement so you can wander around in the "woods." No, I don't think I want to tell you that, unconditionally. But I would certainly support regulation of the forms of development that you would be allowed to choose. This is a fairly well-established principle, where, for example, zoning boards across the country will not allow businesses to be established in the middle of a residential neighborhood, or industry to be established in a commercial neighborhood. It's just a matter of scale, and on a large scale, the United States is my neighborhood and I don't care to see destructive industries in that neighborhood -- even if it's yer backyard being trashed, not mine. You evidently live in NC....which is a wonderful state with many great places....but don't stick your nose in our Michigan and tell us how to live our lives.... Sorry, mister, but yer Michigan is part of my United States, and I am interested in keeping my United States a beautiful place to live. If despoilation is how you want to live yer life, I'll tell you yer wrong, and I'll vote for Federal regulations to force you to change. And if yer state legislature allows you to trash yer state, then yer state won't get any of my tourist dollars. nuff said.... Yer not kidding. Too much said, with not enough thought. -Richard, His Kanubic Travesty -- ================================================== ==================== Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471 Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077 OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters. ================================================== ==================== |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
Good points made by all and certainly good discussion!
My argument is that true wilderness, somewhere without the footprint of man, essentially does not exist in the lower 48.....I am sure there are some exceptions but they are rare and out in the north west. No amount of bitching and moaning or legislation will ever restore it. If you want a true wilderness experience therefore it is not going to happen in the lower 48. If you want to wander around in the woods and stumble across a transplanted moose or two, or even see a native wolf or bear, it is very possible and in the UP at least, fairly easy to do so. We regularly have moose and bear in town (3 times a year +/-) plus damn deer all over the place....I live on the edge of town but not on the extreme edge and they are in the yard every day.... There are places the damn four wheelers and dirt bikers do not get to and driving your kayak on the Superior coast isn't wilderness but to a degree it does approach it....depending on where you are. But there are those jets....we are on a air route and seeing the contrails from high flying jets is common.....and from a purist sense, that certainly destroys a "wilderness" experience....... Keeping selected areas pure (relatively) and free of development is important. We don't need concrete everywhere but so is a sustainable economic base which means jobs etc...so it all comes to a balance...... We have an interesting problem brewing in Marquette County. The Kennecott Copper Co. is exploring the potential for a nickel mine in the county on the Yellow Dog Plains. Remember this is exploring only, to determine if the deposits are sufficient in size etc, costs of development etc...No permit applications have been made to the state. No EIS started, just a real early exploration. Already the extreme environmentalists are organizing to oppose the company! They held one meeting to fire up the public to the danger and refused to have a Kennecut representative there! I do not know whether the mine is a good idea or not. We do have a long history of iron and gold mining and the operators have by and large, been excellent corporate citizens plus providing a stable economic base. But I will not make up my mind without additional data. The extreme environmentalists however do not need information....just the very idea of development is evil to them. And that is where the danger lies. When they take extreme positions like that it really poisons the well as to dialog and understanding. We will see how it all plays out. The Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore is also going thru a fight. The park wants to designate more wilderness areas and the local people do not, feeling they have enough already. It is so bad the City of Munising (gateway to the park) and Alger County officially passed resolutions against the park. I have never heard of such strong hostility by local government to the NPS. I suspect the park is being pushed (lead?) into the wilderness fight by the strong lobbying effort of the environmental extremists from downstate and elsewhere, at least that is what I am hearing from the locals. Lots of issues here but taking extreme positions is never the answer..... "Mary Malmros" wrote in message ... (Oci-One Kanubi) writes: "stone" typed: The point of all this is that the wilderness in the lower 48 is gone....long gone. If you want a "wilderness experience" go to Alaska or get Disney to make you for you. Man, I am sooooo tired of listening to you elitists telling me that if I cannot afford to go to Alaska I must do without, or accept a mass-market commercial imitation. Not sure it's elitist, but it is a rather strict definition of "wilderness". Who's humpty-dumptying the definition? It doesn't really matter -- just be aware that in this conversation, there are at least two widely divergent definitions of "wilderness" being used. -- :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::: Mary Malmros Some days you're the windshield, Other days you're the bug. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
Mary Malmros wrote in message ...
Not sure it's elitist, but it is a rather strict definition of "wilderness". Who's humpty-dumptying the definition? It doesn't really matter -- just be aware that in this conversation, there are at least two widely divergent definitions of "wilderness" being used. There IS an established definition of wilderness. "A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain." The Wilderness Act If you are looking for "Pristine," then you are likely to be very disappointed. You should have been born millennia ago. On the other hand, if you are looking for places where "man himself is a visitor who does not remain" you can find that in most states. It also has a lot to do with your state of mind. I can find "wilderness" in many places that lack a pristine quality. It really does not bother me if I can see a contrail or if there is an established trail. Randy |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Natural Rivers (or not) - Pine, Upper manistee
"stone" typed:
The point of all this is that the wilderness in the lower 48 is gone....long gone. If you want a "wilderness experience" go to Alaska or get Disney to make you for you. You can't bring it back....areas logged over three times ain't wilderness......and will not ever be so again.....and don't dare to tell me that because I live in a relatively "undeveloped" area I have to stop my ecomonic developement so you can wander around in the "woods." You evidently live in NC....which is a wonderful state with many great places....but don't stick your nose in our Michigan and tell us how to live our lives.... nuff said.... Disregard my last, Stone. Everything I typed in my last is true, and I stand behind it, but the fact is, it is almost possible to reconcile two contrary abstractions. Reconciliation has to come about in the realm of concrete reality. If I were standing with you on yer property in Michigan and you described the development you had in mind, I would probaly say "oh, is THAT what you mean? Yeh, that makes sense". And if you and I were standing together looking at some clearcut stand of US National Forest, where the timber had been harvested for a token payment and then shipped off to Japan and the river was running brown with runoff, you would probably agree with me that SOME kind of regulation was required. So, I'm sorry that my last started to verge on hostile, and used terminology that probably riled you when you read it. Unfortuately, my abstraction really cannot kick yer abstraction's ass. That's the way abstractions are. -Richard, His Kanubic Travesty -- ================================================== ==================== Richard Hopley, Winston-Salem, NC, USA rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net 1-301-775-0471 Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu 1-336-713-5077 OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters. ================================================== ==================== |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
River Grades - Rafts vs Kayaks | General | |||
Survey - How many rivers/new rivers? | General |