http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/blogs10/a-scenic-area-is-home-to-an-ugly-fight-20150424
My comment to Mr. White's editorial which also appears in the comments under the editorial is as follows:
Mr. White,
I basically agree with the thrust of your arguments and you
comparison to national parks is more relevant than you might imagine.
I find it very
disappointing that a fundamental and
relatively benign effort to protect the 1000 Islands meets so much controversy,
when as you point out, it doesn’t appear the SASS designation would inhibit development
in any substantial way, but could bring a host of positives.
It seems the potential upside to this designation might far
outweigh any regulation it might impose, which by your admission appears
minimal.
I find your comparison to the national parks of Grand
Canyon, Grand Teton, and Yosemite, and the 1000 Islands very interesting.
Most of the year I live about an hour from Grand Canyon, and
have hiked there a number of times. My wife has twice run the Colorado River through
Grand Canyon on extended raft trips, and within our family are river guides. I have climbed and summited the Grand Teton
at 13,700 ft. In Yosemite my wife and I completed
a 5 day 40 mile winter ski expedition trip across Yosemite. Currently we hike and adventure all over the West,
but particularly the Desert South West.
But with the good fortune to live with the incredible world
class tourism, scenery, and outdoor opportunities on our doorstep, we still seek out the incredible beauty of
the 1000 Islands for three to four months every year. I agree with you that the 1000 Islands are no
less spectacular, from the ”Bridge”, a boat, or just relaxing on the shore.
And isn’t it interesting that the Canadians had the
foresight to designate some islands in the 1000 Islands as a national park. Frankly it makes the American side look a bit
foolish to not have greater vision with an official designation and protection
of the Islands.
It is interesting that environmental issues such as the SASS
designation always seem to come back to a fundamental set of issues, money vs.
environmental, scenic, or historical protection. The SASS designation and the 1000 Islands are
no different. It is the same with wind
energy development in our area, the promise of money vs. the visual destruction
of our region. With the massive and
increasing size of wind turbines one large wind development can have staggering
wide ranging visual impacts as we all now
know from the Wolfe Island wind farm.
And if all the local wind development proposals were to come to fruition the region will undergo a
staggering wholesale environmental and visual transformation from renowned
scenic destination to a vast industrial energy complex. Sheer insanity that should never be allowed
or even considered!!!
It is also interesting the national parks you compare were
at one time under similar threats from some industry or moneyed interest trying
to exploit natural resources (timber, mining etc.) vs. others trying to saving these spectacular places for future
generations.
In Grand Canyon for
example it was our own government proposals for huge hydro dams right
in the Grand Canyon!!! Which now to the
reasonable person seems idiotic.
The PBS series by Ken Burns on our national parks showed the
evolution of our parks from places of exploitation to protection and national
treasures.
I would think that
most people who visit our national parks and other nationally protected treasures
would now agree the protections,
significant laws, and regulations that protect these treasured places are
appropriate. And the regulations in
these places are generally very tough and restrictive, and in some there are large
tracts designated as wilderness where you not only can’t develop, but no mechanical
means of travel is allowed, and the area is to be left in a natural state
unaltered by man forever.
In all my experience in wildernesses and talking to people
about it, I find that to some, the idea that large tracts of land be left
undeveloped is an extremely foreign concept, almost obscene to some!
You can’t just do NOTHING with the land.
I don’t understand the fuming of the people opposed to
SASS. The 1000 Islands is far far from
undeveloped, it has been developed bit by bit for over a century in terms of
tourism and vacation homes and the services that support them, and it will
continue, SASS or no SASS.
For God’s sake why so much griping? It’s not exactly like historically there has
been some radical unreasonable restriction on development in this region…and no
one from what I can tell is proposing that.
So I find it a bit absurd when we talk about a relatively
benign but important protection for the 1000 Islands, to bring it national and
international recognition. Recognition which
could actually enhance the beauty and the tourism economy at the same
time. Yet some get their underwear
all in a bunch in an irrational fear
that it is too restrictive. This seems a bit over reactive.
When you examine the forces that once threated our national
parks, you find it took visionary and courageous people, like Teddy Roosevelt
or John Muir, for example, to stand
against the complete exploitation of our treasured places and realize the
wisdom of protecting them.
So just like our national parks the historical
environmental fight goes on right here
in the 1000 Islands area.
Now in our region the
flame that lit the fuse in this ongoing historical environmental debate is industrial wind energy. The people, who if allowed, would completely
exploit and transform a region for basically a gold rush scheme based on false
green promises, against those who have some vision and wisdom for the
preservation of a world class environmental resource and scenic treasure.
Ultimately the people who stand for the unreasonable
exploitation of treasured areas like the
1000 Islands and Golden Crescent, and would willingly sacrifice it, don’t
realize that their excesses are what bring the cries and reaction for more
protections as a result.
It’s a simple formula proven over and over by history, and
the national parks Mr. White talks about are testament to how those excesses
were brought to awareness, hotly debated, and then defeated.
The silver lining in local
wind development is that it ignited an extremely important and heated
environmental conversation about the essence,
meaning, and value of our area that is
probably long long overdue. The debate
is so important for example, it has already brought unprecedented change in that
it overturned an entire town government in Cape Vincent, and brought an NYAG
investigation regarding the ethics of the people who should have placed the
environmental stewardship of our region ahead of self interest. They didn’t realize it or intend it, but
ironically that debate was brought to us by the very people willing to exploit
our treasured scenic resources with unreasonable excesses.
Indeed we are now like
Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, and Yosemite, National Parks with a historical
environmental connection no less important, and not only by comparison to their
beauty!
It’s not that the debate is an ugly one Mr. White, or that
either side has made errors. It’s that
there is finally a long overdue highly visible and contentious debate over the
protection and future of our regional scenic and environmental treasures.
No comments:
Post a Comment