The question stands. How is our government trying to destroy the biosphere, �
or on a smaller level, what are the city governments
anti-environmental�policies?
I appreciate some of the responses to the question. From what I've seen I
remain unconvinced that there is some nefarious city policy to destroy the
environment. I certainly do not accept there is anything close to a "mission
to destroy" anything environmental let alone the biosphere. I do believe the
city, government in general, corporations, and people are very capable of
making oops when its comes to making decisions. I do believe that money is
one of that factors in making decisions, and that citizens have to be
vigilant to preserve what is important to them, including the environment.
But I just can't see the black helicopters on this one.
I also believe that I have chosen to live in a city, not a wilderness area.
RobertYorga feels "it comes naturally to remake our landscape." That's right,
it does. We have a multitude of varied individuals living in a concentrated
urban area who need to find ways to balance their needs and concerns,
including the environment. The natural environment before this area was
heavily settled lost its battle a long time ago. We need to learn from our
past mistakes and hopefully improve, but environmental oops will still happen
and disagreements on the correct environmental decision will continue.
I also believe that some of the goals we have are the same in the long run.
Robert Yorga wrote "It just seems whenever I find a cool place to get away
from the stress of modern life, the first question that pops into my head is
"Will they take this place from me too?" I rely on a personal fix that I can
only find in my soul spot in the north woods, a few miles from Canada (Sorry
Dave, I left Mpls for a moment). Perhaps I have lived in the city too long
however, but I also find myself, along with several hundred others on a nice
day, walking the Lakes or Minnehaha Creek to get a piece of that feeling. The
scary thing is how in tune I am with my city, enjoying the environment found
walking on a warm summer night through the warehouse district, absorbing the
smells, sound and lights of the city. Of course when you're walking the lakes
you appreciate separate paths, and wide ones so you can get around oncoming
traffic. Yes, that means some trees are gone. I guess that is a compromise. I
can make that compromise, I realize others can't.
This results in disagreement on how to proceed with environmental questions.
For example, should our parks be managed for recreation purposes, gamefields,
tot lots, pools, tennis courts, walking paths or should parts be left to grow
back to a "natural" state (who gets to decide what that "natural" state is at
this point).
I find lately that a lot of people in their politics have become religious,
both left and right. If you do not have correct beliefs, then you are
morally, religiously wrong. There is no compromise. There is no discussion.
When there is an ooops, it becomes part of a sinister plot. As Robert says to
a decision he disagrees with "No one in their right mind would do such a
thing." I interpret that to mean that if you are "green" you always have a
right mind. But then I get confused. Holle listed as an anti-environenmtal
policy the "big expensive LRT system that is of dubious environmental and
social value." A second green response was that LRT was a good idea. A third
response was that LRT was a bad idea and that we should have "dedicated bus
paths and paint the busses to look like trains." Who has the right mind on
this one?
Evan must have some knowledge on this matter because his post refers to the
"real enviormentalists" who appreciate what LRT represents.
I have always thought recycling was a major goal of the environmental
movement. I know our household works to do its small part. Yet Holle lists
the metal shredding plant as indicative of an anti-environmental policy of
Minneapolis. They don't shred the metal to bury it, they shred it to recycle
it. Yet Holle goes on in the same list to include a suggestion to improve the
City's environmental quality by "Expanding the recycling program to include
industrial waste." What kind of waste metal is being shredded?
Non-industrial? I personally believe our city government made a major oops on
this one, as has been well pointed out by others. I don't want that beast on
the river. But who does want that metal muncher in their backyard. I have to
admit I don't. Can you recycle industrial metals without such a device? Good
question. Hey, maybe Iowa will do it for us.
I personally believe that environmental questions are crucial to decisions we
make today. One of the eleven goals of the City of Minneapolis listed as part
of our rating system on CLIC is "Preserve, enhance and create a sustainable
natural and historic environment citywide." I take that seriously. I am
frustrated with some in the development field who have a mindset that pays
lip service to the environment. I am also frustrated with some on the
environmental left however who believe that if you don't agree with their
interpretation of what "environmental" entails, that you do not have a "right
mind," you are not a "real" environmentalist, or you have a "mission" to
destroy the biosphere. I personally do not believe that there is an
environmental holy book, or holy person I can talk to that will always give
the one correct answer.
Since LRT appears to be a forgone conclusion for at least the first run, and
since the 55 reroute is done (although I think it will be talked about for
some time), I think one of the interesting "environmental" questions coming
up concerns the future direction of the Park Board. They have a budget
submitted for $36,000,000 of park improvements over the next five years. The
CLIC approval process for capital improvements has started, there are Park
Board Elections heating up. Is the Park Board headed in the right direction?
Do we need more fields and bike paths, or more natural preserves? Do we need
a big water park? There is $3,000,000 requested for NE Water Park. Which way
do we go?
Bob Gustafson
13th
