[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[pct-l] Oil for the trail
Hey, all that abstract stuff like helping control population, save the rain
forest, etc., is cool, but my need for wilderness is more important, more
immediate to me. I need to know that there is an escape to a sanctuary from
the woes of civilization that I can at least visit from time to time. Sure,
overcrowding endangers wilderness, but there is little I can personally do to
prevent overpopulation except through letters to congressmen or kick in some
bucks to save -the- whales- type organizations.
But I CAN have a hands on experience of the wilderness and the powerful
serenity that it provides by simply spending time there. It can be quite
addicting you know. And of course I want to protect my "source" and do so by
expecting strict enforcement of the 1964 Wilderness Act
I saw a show on TV recently in which the president of the Sierra Club
said she would oppose drilling in ANWR even though she could be shown that
the latest oil drilling technology would cause virtually no damage to the
wilderness. Why? On principle alone, because if a precedent is set at ANWR,
then Yellowstone (thermal energy) or the Grand Canyon (hydro electric) could
be just down the road a piece. I'm not a member of the Sierra Club, but I
agree with her completely as does a majority of Americans. On principle
alone. And indifference abets those who inspire and conspire for "commercial
enterprise" in wilderness areas
Perhaps economics will have a say, instead of politics, if cheap gas is
going to stay around for a while