next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Miner&#39;s Marsh offleash park. --047d7b2e50c061328904fd40bd40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi folks, Dave I do agree that your broad views and longtem perspectives are valuable and beneficial to the list and make people consider their views and biases deeply. However, if views are expressed on the list that seem to be contrary to those generally accepted by the scientific community it must be expected that listers will challenge those ideas and ask for a defence of that position - whether you are in the right (and we've been blindly following an erroneous meme) or not. And I see that as a fair request and part of the process of testing out new ideas - not as arrogance, fear or unwillingness to entertain strangers or strange ideas. Cheers, James On Wednesday, July 2, 2014, David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com> wrote: > > ----- 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 comments are 50 years or more out of date.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 > > > > > -- James Churchill Kentville, Nova Scotia jameslchurchill@gmail.com (902) 681-2374 --047d7b2e50c061328904fd40bd40 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi folks,<div>Dave</div><div>=A0I do agree=A0that your<span></span>=A0broad= views=A0and longtem perspectives are valuable and beneficial to the list a= nd make people consider their views and biases deeply. However, if views ar= e expressed on the list=A0that seem<span></span> to be=A0contrary to those = generally accepted by the scientific community=A0it must be=A0expected that= listers will challenge those ideas and ask for a defence=A0of that=A0posit= ion -=A0whether you are in the right (and we've been blindly following = an erroneous=A0meme)=A0or not. And I=A0see that as a fair request and part = of the process of testing out new ideas - not as arrogance, fear or unwilli= ngness to entertain strangers or strange ideas.<span></span></div> <div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>James<br><br>On Wednesday, July 2, 20= 14, David & Alison Webster <<a>dwebster@glinx.com</a>> wrote:<br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Whitman" <<a>dendroic= a.caerulescens@gmail.com</a>><br> To: <<a>naturens@chebucto.ns.ca</a>><br> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 3:38 PM<br> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Miner's Marsh offleash park...<br> <br> <br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> As Dave has implied, the discussion has passed its "best before date&q= uot;.<br> I read all of it and feel that much could be summarized as "it didn= 9;t<br> cause any real problems when I was a child." This is quite possibly<br= > true but I believe in most cases the point relates to 50-60-70 years<br> ago. There have been great changes in our world since then and we need<br> to deal with it as we see it today.<br> </blockquote> <br> Hi Rick & All,<br> =A0 =A0Thanks, I guess, for setting up another favourite soap box. But firs= t, I object to the conclusion that because my memory extends back 75 years = my comments are 50 years or more out of date.<br> <br> =A0 =A0Being able to compare conditions over this long a period gives me a = good background against which to interpret the present and look into the fu= ture. 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.<br> <br> =A0 =A0At this point I will paste from a previous e-mail--<br> START OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\<br> Hi Randy & All, =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= Apr 30, 2013<br> =A0 =A0This has been a high-volume topic so I will not try to respond to co= mments from all but instead will back up a step and explain more fully the = lens through which I see things.<br> <br> =A0 =A0My 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 rat= e of change is exponential; in the order of 10 times the loss in the last 3= 0 years as in the previous 45.<br> <br> =A0 =A0And you may with justification ask; "So what ?" =A0 All th= is has happened in spite of a Conservation Movement in North America that s= pans at least 150 years, Naturalist Societies that span up to 100 (?) years= and a more activist Environmental Movement that spans 50 years. These move= ments have exercised considerable clout due to the large numbers of votes i= nvolved.<br> <br> =A0 =A0And 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 =A0only one conditi= on is required; a healthy environment.<br> <br> =A0 =A0I think the environment is in tatters because the primary cause of t= his mess, the internal combustion engine, the private automobile and variou= s energy demands that developed as consequences have been accepted from the= start as positive, progressive and inevitable.<br> <br> =A0 =A0But unless some way can be found to wean people from this mindless p= ursuit of the horizon, and all the consequences that follow from it, then t= he natural world will hit the wall. Splat. Not picking flowers will not be = sufficient to avert global warming; already well underway. Nor will it brin= g back to life road kill, bridge impassable barriers to animal movement, re= surrect dead streams, unfill frog ponds or restore vegetation to the huge e= xpanses of pavement.<br> <br> =A0 =A0And, with this backdrop in view, it is relevant to look at demograph= ics, 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 virt= ual trees that grow in 5 seconds than they are in real trees that need 5 de= cades just to get started. And practical level-headed people are repeatedly= turned off by the zany egg-head notions that keep escaping from the contem= porary version of Pandora's Box. .<br> <br> =A0 =A0So the really tough problem lies ahead and the political clout of th= ose who might wish to do something may be on a downward course. Consequentl= y the focus should be on the truly destructive forces, and how to diminish = them, not on politically correct thought and deed or youth indoctrination.<= br> <br> END OF PASTE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\<u></u>\\\<br> <br> =A0 =A0All that being said, I commend those who attempt, in one way or anot= her, to convey interest in the natural world to the coming generations. But= "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers:" (or strange ideas) &q= uot;for thereby some have entertained angels unawares."<br> <br> =A0 =A0 I have frequently noticed an unfortunate tendency for professional = Biologists and 'Genuine Naturalists' to look down on ' the comm= on people' as an alien destructive race that can not be trusted. This b= reeds resentment, mainly because it is rarely warranted, and e.g. leads to = cheers when scientific programs are cut or teminated, especially if the env= ironment is involved. So there is much fence mending to be done; at ground = level; not from a high horse.<br> <br> Yours truly, Dave Webster, Kentville<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> </blockquote></div> <br><br>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr">James Churchill<br>Kentville, Nova Scotia<b= r><a href=3D"mailto:jameslchurchill@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">jameslchur= chill@gmail.com</a><br>(902) 681-2374<br><br><br><br></div><br> --047d7b2e50c061328904fd40bd40--
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects