Reading Siegfried Jachmann's letter in the latest on-line NOVA, I was a bit surprised to learn that interest in a permanent dark-sky site is currently insufficient to pursue such a venture. There has been talk of such a facility for as long as I can recall. I'd be interested to hear what the list members think of this. It seems to me that a person interested in a permanent observatory at a dark sky site would probably: 1. See astronomy as their #1 recreational activity, regardless of season. 2. Be involved in a serious, ongoing observational program for research or imaging. 3. Have little interest in daytime activities while at the site. A permanent site has several advantages: 1. Equipment need not be transported to and from the site for each session. 2. Power availability 3. The site will not be occupied by non-astronomers who happened to get there first. Can we conclude, then, that most area amateur astronomers: 1. Have other interests that they like to combine with observing, such as daytime hikes, fishing, etc.? Is astronomy by itself insufficient to justify a camping trip? 2. Are mostly of the "nature-lover", visual tourist, rather than doing any science with their instruments & time? 3. Don't mind taking all of their equipment with them to their favorite dark-sky sites? Anyone else have any observations about this? Care to attempt to draw further conclusions? Personally, I'd love a dark-sky site. My own long-term plans, however, involve a retirement home, with the observatory in my own back yard....could it be that most of us want something similar? Complete control of our own facility? Privacy? Thanks Chuck __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com