Hi Kelly, I agree that the 1st world has taken the lead in designing environmental regs for land, water and air quality protection, many of which serve as models for 'developing' nations.
However, the efficacy and implementation of these regulations in the FIRST world is another matter. For instance, we have yet to be able to design efficient riparian buffers for controlling nonpoint pollution in streams. A lot of the regulations are watered down by compromise to the point of being meaningless, such as the 'no net loss' policy for wetland mitigation, that equates a natural wetland with its centuries of community development with one that is created with a bentonite liner. There are numerous such examples we all know. And then practically the entire manufacturing sector and toxic waste disposal has been *conveniently* shipped to the third world. "We are cutting down on > everything from fertilizer-use to driveway car-washing, improving our > agricultural practices (no more cows wading in streams, etc.) and our stream > bank care." I have to absolutely disagree with this. The hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico is growing, precisely due to fertilizer runoff throughout the Miss. watershed. The everglades is undergoing plant community changes due to fertilizer runoff from Big Sugar. Driveway car washing -- the third world does not even know what this is. Cars there are washed with a bucket and a rag. Stream bank care -- if this was happening in any significant scale in the 1st world, freshwater aquatic biodiversity would not be declining. Clean water is admirable, and a first step, but it is not enough. National parks need to include the river continuum concept. and so on. Having said all this, I have also pointed out in an earlier email, that from a planet Earth perspective, there are TWIN problems, of not just overconsumption in the first world, but also population in the third world along with rising urban consumption there. I am not just pointing fingers at the first world. The mess is increasing everywhere. And as long as the defense budget far outweighs the combined budget for environmental management, education, healthcare and so on, there is not much hope of arresting the dialectical fate of any civilization or dominant species. regards amartya Quoting Kelly Stettner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Osmar makes some excellent points: even though 1st worlders can lay claim to > the highest material consumerism, we can also lay claim to the highest rate > of governmental beauracracy (sp?) when it comes to pollution caps, > environmental controls, waste water treatment facilities, and the skills, > education and abilities to take care of our resources. We don't have > villages where people defacate in the streams. We are cutting down on > everything from fertilizer-use to driveway car-washing, improving our > agricultural practices (no more cows wading in streams, etc.) and our stream > bank care. 1st worlders lead the way in research and technologies that > improve our ability to care for the natural world -- each of you posting from > a 1st world country is living proof of that. > > Respectfully, > Kelly Stettner > > > Black River Action Team (BRAT) > 45 Coolidge Road > Springfield, VT 05156 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.blackriveractionteam.org > > ~Making ripples on the Black River since 2000! ~ > > > --------------------------------- > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. >
