|
|||
|
By Sarah St. John
Staring up at the night sky, I feel insignificant. Billions of starts glitter in the immense black space, and I am reminded of how small I actually am. Nature is amazing; the complete comprehension of it leaves us awestruck. However, sometimes I wonder if in our race for progress, we take it for granted. In his book Desert Solitaire, Edward Abbey wrote: "Standing there gaping at this monstrous and inhuman spectacle of rock and cloud and space, I feel a ridiculous greed and possessiveness come over me. I want to know it all, possess it all, embrace the entire scene intimately, deeply, totally, as a man desires a beautiful woman. An insane wish? Perhaps not -- at least there's nothing else, no one human to dispute possession with me." In the evening as the crickets chirp and the sun spews colors throughout the western sky, life seems to slow down. Stress, deadlines and obligations become things of the past. Alone we come to find ourselves. It is at this point that the possessiveness Abbey writes about strikes me: I never want to leave and I never want to share. As progress pushes us to the future and chips away at the world we once knew, this simple pleasure slowly begins to dwindle No, I am not another environmentalist suggesting that we tie ourselves to trees and never take showers to conserve water. I understand that we are a society that needs to develop and expand, and taking showers is a precious joy in my life. What I am suggesting is that at times, our obsession with progress may lead us down a path of justified ignorance. Logging, mining and water resources have become invaluable over the course of this generation. They create thousands of jobs and supply us with the comfort we need for modern-day living. In our search for these natural resources we may have unnecessarily damaged pristine nature. Take mining, for example. Peter Kolesar, professor of geology at Utah State University, says there are two typical types of mining, open pit or strip mining and underground mining. Open pit mining is the worst form of mining. "The company strips off all the overlying soil and searches for material. It is very efficient and highly inexpensive," said Kolesar. For the most part companies are required to restore the area as it once was. Unfortunately this is a very expensive process and most mining companies end up declaring bankruptcy rather than participate in land reclamation. The Silver Butte Mine is an example of problems that occur with open pit mining. Acid mine drainage flows out of this mine in Riddle, Ore. The acidic water is toxic to aquatic life and dangerous to human health. Cleanup has presented a problem and the government is still looking for ways to create a healthy environmental solution. Like the Silver Butte Mine, the Berkley Pitt in Butte, Mont., also filled with water. Although this water is also not safe for human or wildlife consumption, it is better managed. The EPA and other organizations have monitored the water levels carefully to ensure the least amount of environmental impact possible. These two similar situations led to two different outcomes. The complexity of these issues makes generalizations very difficult to discern. However, mining is not the only area in which this dilemma occurs. Forest management has become a major issue in current events. The Healthy Forests Restoration Act has brought a lot of attention to the process of forest management. Groups such as the Sierra Club argue that increasing harvesting only damages local ecosystems. Supporters of healthy harvesting state that harvesting trees clears away the undergrowth, allowing more sunlight to penetrate, which creates healthier forests. Smart harvesting has even been accredited to mitigating the devastation of forest fires because it decreases the fuel supply so fires do not burn with as much intensity. Each side has its benefits and each side has its problems. Randy Simmons, head of the political science department, says there are problems with current environmental actions, but for the most part "air and water is cleaner since we started keeping records, we just are not as efficient as we could be." Federal government intervention has proven highly inefficient in solving environmental problems over the years. A prime example of this is seen in Illinois v. Milwaukee when the Supreme Court of Illinois ruled that Milwaukee needed to clean up their sewage disposal tactics because it was empting into Lake Michigan. The court ruled in favor of Illinois. The real problem was that when the federal government established the Clean Water Act, the standards it imposed were lower than the state's. In the end Milwaukee failed to accept the higher standards imposed by the state because it only had to conform to the national requirements. This kind of action represents a problem in trying to establish good environmental policies. "A way to overcome this is to establish a matching principle," said Simmons. "You match the problem with the geographical location and allow them to deal with it." The location is usually more in touch with the situation and so they handle the problem more effectively. We will always be in search of something different. "Change is inevitable but change could be better," says USU student Christy Boyer. If society pushed for improvement in the logging and mining industry, more effective ways would be obtained. The problem revolves not around the technology needed to supply these effective measures, but rather in society's awareness of these issues and their commitment to change. With knowledge comes the ability to understand the consequences of our actions. When this is realized, we may take steps to prevent undue damaged caused by ignorance. Sometimes I feel nature is so large that we take it for granted. We think it will be here forever for us to enjoy, but if we remain ignorant, after time, mountains will crumble and lakes will dry up and we will be left with dust swirling around our feet.
--Sarah St. John is a USU student
NW
|
||