On 12/4/11, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
For special places like Bryce, preservation should have high priority. I vote to keep the dark skies and all the other advantages of the national park and to protect BLM land where its natural values are high. -- Joe
Dark skies are a priority for a minority of the American public. It doesn't affect the gelological formations of the park one bit. Is the general public wrong? From our point of view, yes, they are. From their point of view, we are nutjobs. The American system states that the majority shall have their way, for better or worse. Democracy is not based on the scientific method or ethical truth. If this mine goes ahead, it may have negative repercussions on wildlife. But wildlife exists in far more places than just in and around national parks, and those areas get no protection. No outrage for those areas/species/eccologies? There are many, many other areas that have skies as pristine as Bryce, they just don't have National Park status and don't have amazing geological formations. No restrooms, no amentities, no Interstate highway leading up to the gates. Could that have something to do with our Groupthink? There is a larger issue afoot here, and for anyone to take a stand on precedent or perceived ethical high ground is probably incomplete, at best. I'm not saying anyone is wrong, but polarization is so easy. Resolution to the satisfaction of a majority can be very, very hard. The key to success is convincing the Amercian public of the superiority of your claim. In today's ecconomy, with a shrinking middle class and fewer educated, informed, and environmentally conscious people paying taxes every year, you have a tough row to hoe.