Dear HCN,
Ed Marston’s essay, “Show
me the science,” leaves me perplexed (HCN, 3/16/98). On the one
hand, Ed admits that the typical rural lifestyle near and using
public lands has led to environmental degradation. On the other
hand, he claims environmentalists are enemies of the rural
economies and life. He cannot have it both ways. Why do I have to
subsidize rural economies and lifestyles that are based on
destroying my public resources via inappropriate grazing, mining,
logging, and oil and gas drilling?
A large amount
of federal lands in the United States are not appropriate for any
type of development. We have taken productive, natural ecosystems
and so altered and degraded them that the only way they can heal
and not continue to be degraded is by leaving them alone or using
them sparingly. We are to the point now that further degradation of
these lands will make them essentially unusable. The only other
alternative is accepting much reduced use or nonuse. I am glad
environmentalists are pointing this out. I doubt the present uses
are sustainable to the seventh generation or farther into the
future.
What’s the beef? Denial is still riding
high in the West and we all pay for it. I want my money and healthy
ecosystems and public lands back! No one has a right to continue
such environmental
destruction.
Brandt
Mannchen
Houston,
Texas
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline The rural West can’t have it both ways.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
