Muddy wetland rules and will couch potatoes decide the future of our land?
Two interesting environmental stories today. At first glance they might not seem too connected aside from the broad environment topic, but look closer. The first and big one describes the split decision of our Supreme Court over our Federal Wetlands Regulations. The vote was split pretty much the way the country is split over property rights and environmental regulation.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13442439/
The second describes the results of a nature Conservancy funded study, which shows that per capita visits to National Parks have been declining since 1987. The study shows that the increase in use of electronic media ie, internet, video games, movie rentals, etc. was most responsible for this decrease, which makes good sense if you consider the year of the turnaround.
http://www.nature.org/success/art18259.html
So what do these have in common? They both reflect the growing disconnect between people and their environment. One story does this with obvious evidence, while the other portends the future ramifications of this disconnect. Justices who do not understand the value that even wetlands remote from a major waterway play in the quality of our water are apt to find them disposable. Perhaps it is not even their fault. Perhaps it is ours for not updating such an important law as that regulating the quality of our water now and for future generations. W e should have, and should still, urge our lawmakers to change the language in the law that ties wetlands to such an archaic notion as necessitating a direct connection to a "navigable waterway". Underground movements of water are far too poorly mapped to say that a wetland with no obvious connection to a navigable waterway has no effect on water quality.
Once again, we only get what we hold our lawmakers to, and our children will find it difficult to value what we don't teach them is valuable.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13442439/
The second describes the results of a nature Conservancy funded study, which shows that per capita visits to National Parks have been declining since 1987. The study shows that the increase in use of electronic media ie, internet, video games, movie rentals, etc. was most responsible for this decrease, which makes good sense if you consider the year of the turnaround.
http://www.nature.org/success/art18259.html
So what do these have in common? They both reflect the growing disconnect between people and their environment. One story does this with obvious evidence, while the other portends the future ramifications of this disconnect. Justices who do not understand the value that even wetlands remote from a major waterway play in the quality of our water are apt to find them disposable. Perhaps it is not even their fault. Perhaps it is ours for not updating such an important law as that regulating the quality of our water now and for future generations. W e should have, and should still, urge our lawmakers to change the language in the law that ties wetlands to such an archaic notion as necessitating a direct connection to a "navigable waterway". Underground movements of water are far too poorly mapped to say that a wetland with no obvious connection to a navigable waterway has no effect on water quality.
Once again, we only get what we hold our lawmakers to, and our children will find it difficult to value what we don't teach them is valuable.
posted by ecovoice at
3:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home