next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
d2hlbiBJIHdhcyBhIGNoaWxkLiIgVGhpcyBpcy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Whitman" <dendroica.caerulescens@gmail.com>
To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Miner's Marsh offleash park...
> As Dave has implied, the discussion has passed its "best before date".
> I read all of it and feel that much could be summarized as "it didn't
> cause any real problems when I was a child." This is quite possibly
> true but I believe in most cases the point relates to 50-60-70 years
> ago. There have been great changes in our world since then and we need
> to deal with it as we see it today.
Hi Rick & All,
Thanks, I guess, for setting up another favourite soap box. But first, I
object to the conclusion that because my memory extends back 75 years my
comments are 50 years or more out of date.
Being able to compare conditions over this long a period gives me a good
background against which to interpret the present and look into the future.
From a personal point of view I see only one positive in the future; I will
soon be dead and will not have to watch our tattered ecosystems pass through
the shredder of successive disruptions.
At this point I will paste from a previous e-mail--
START OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Hi Randy & All, Apr 30, 2013
This has been a high-volume topic so I will not try to respond to
comments from all but instead will back up a step and explain more fully the
lens through which I see things.
My lens is 78 1/2 years old, so my memory spans about 75 years. The
extent of environmental destruction, degradation and fragmentation that has
taken place during this period is nothing short of staggering. And the rate
of change is exponential; in the order of 10 times the loss in the last 30
years as in the previous 45.
And you may with justification ask; "So what ?" All this has happened
in spite of a Conservation Movement in North America that spans at least 150
years, Naturalist Societies that span up to 100 (?) years and a more
activist Environmental Movement that spans 50 years. These movements have
exercised considerable clout due to the large numbers of votes involved.
And now it is my turn to ask a question. With all these good people
doing good works with increasing intensity over time why is the environment
in tatters ? And remember, for a healthy natural world only one condition
is required; a healthy environment.
I think the environment is in tatters because the primary cause of this
mess, the internal combustion engine, the private automobile and various
energy demands that developed as consequences have been accepted from the
start as positive, progressive and inevitable.
But unless some way can be found to wean people from this mindless
pursuit of the horizon, and all the consequences that follow from it, then
the natural world will hit the wall. Splat. Not picking flowers will not be
sufficient to avert global warming; already well underway. Nor will it bring
back to life road kill, bridge impassable barriers to animal movement,
resurrect dead streams, unfill frog ponds or restore vegetation to the huge
expanses of pavement.
And, with this backdrop in view, it is relevant to look at demographics,
attrition and recruitment. The Hunting & Sport Fishing ranks, core
Conservation support, are thinning. Attendance at National Parks has been in
decline for 4 decades (?). Most young people are more interested in virtual
trees that grow in 5 seconds than they are in real trees that need 5 decades
just to get started. And practical level-headed people are repeatedly turned
off by the zany egg-head notions that keep escaping from the contemporary
version of Pandora's Box. .
So the really tough problem lies ahead and the political clout of those
who might wish to do something may be on a downward course. Consequently the
focus should be on the truly destructive forces, and how to diminish them,
not on politically correct thought and deed or youth indoctrination.
END OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
All that being said, I commend those who attempt, in one way or another,
to convey interest in the natural world to the coming generations. But "Be
not forgetful to entertain strangers:" (or strange ideas) "for thereby some
have entertained angels unawares."
I have frequently noticed an unfortunate tendency for professional
Biologists and 'Genuine Naturalists' to look down on ' the common people' as
an alien destructive race that can not be trusted. This breeds resentment,
mainly because it is rarely warranted, and e.g. leads to cheers when
scientific programs are cut or teminated, especially if the environment is
involved. So there is much fence mending to be done; at ground level; not
from a high horse.
Yours truly, Dave Webster, Kentville
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects