[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