[at-l] Pot-pourri

[spiriteagle99@hotmail.com (Jim and/or Ginny Owen)]

I'm beginning to think some of you don't hike at all.  What were you doing 
home today?  Whaddya mean it's cold out there - I was out there and it was 
beautiful.

For anklebear who said:
 > Moreover, what was so earthshatteringly important about the
>"issue" of McKaye's and Avery's relationship?

The answer is -- nothing.  In spite of RnR's wordiness, it comes down to 
this - they're both dead, their clashes are of no more than historical 
interest to anyone who isn't obsessed with one or the other - or both.  With 
one exception - they provide an illustration of the necessary symbiosis 
between the visionary and the "doer".



For Weary who said:
>But that doesn't mean that it would be bad to now finally
>achieve some of MacKaye' original vision, which was for a wild as possible 
>trail.

You also need to go back and read MacKaye's original document.  That wasn't 
MacKayes original plan and the way the Trail was built precludes adherence 
to that original plan.  Don't be pullin' revisionism on me here, Bob.  That 
wasn't MacKayes plan - it's yours.

Secondarily - you said: E-mail me and I'll put you in touch with the 
pertinent folks.  Do it.  I'll call ATC this week myself - the computer 
simulation should have been done weeks ago if this is a real problem (and in 
this case I'll assume it is unless proven otherwise). It ain't that big a 
deal.  Also - noise might be an issue if there are plans for future 
development anywhere in the area.  Paint - CAN help to minimize visual 
impact - as can other things, BUT when you light it up at night like a 
carney midway, the paint doesn't do crap.  Haven't figured the visual 
problem myself yet - butI will.


For Rick Boudrie who said:
>Sure its an issue.

Sorry, Rick but the numbers are statistically insignificant.  Given the 
number of windfarms and the overall bird population and the kill rate, any 
decision maker who considered this to be more than a nit would be seriously 
considered to be stupid.  One reliable estimate is that in Britain, house 
cats kill 55 million birds per year.  Since about 0.6% of our energy is 
generated by windfarms, even increasing the windfarm output (which means 
both area and capacity) by a factor of 100 would leave the bird kill as a 
minor problem.  And that won't happen soon - if ever.  Raptors - there are 
some killed - but far less than you imagine.  Keep in mind that California 
is a major area for windfarms - and doesn't seem to have the eagle problem 
anymore.  There's no reason to assume that future sites would have it.  
Flyways - are and should be a major consideration in siting installations.

For saunterer - I have the reference but have to dig it out - I'll get back 
to you later tonight or tomorrow.

There's more but I've gotta go now.  Later.

Walk softly,
Jim









_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.