HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Rhetorical question on wi...

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 03:02 PM

Rhetorical question on wilderness vs. development.

So I'm driving to the beach yesterday through one of our scenic canyons here on the coast of California. I hadn't been down this one in several years. Now this canyon, other than some ugly oil derricks was pretty pristine otherwise in native vegetation and wildlife. I was dismayed to see that a large portion of the land had been cleared and a new vineyards for wine planted. When I first moved here, there were no vineyards, then the wineries started coming in. Just how much wine is needed in the world? Granted vineyards are an attractive replacement, but they way they are done is not ecological and I believe it stresses and marginalize the wildlife even more than it is already.

My question is, although I know it's a fool's errand to try to stop development, just what should the ratio be between development, whether agricultural or structure and land left as wildlife preserves for the original residents of these lands of other species? I say we shouldn't develop more than 30% and leave the rest alone and definitely, we should create wildlife preserves around the waterways, like rivers, creeks and lakes. Are there any studies out there or anyone in the field who has studied this to give me a shove in the right direction to learning more about this?

19 replies, 2044 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rhetorical question on wilderness vs. development. (Original post)
Cleita Apr 2012 OP
lunatica Apr 2012 #1
Cleita Apr 2012 #2
JNelson6563 Apr 2012 #12
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #3
Cleita Apr 2012 #4
Cleita Apr 2012 #5
muriel_volestrangler Apr 2012 #6
Cleita Apr 2012 #7
RobertEarl Apr 2012 #8
Cleita Apr 2012 #9
muriel_volestrangler May 2012 #18
Cleita May 2012 #19
Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #10
Cleita Apr 2012 #11
Taitertots Apr 2012 #13
raouldukelives Apr 2012 #14
Cleita Apr 2012 #15
cbayer Apr 2012 #16
Cleita Apr 2012 #17

Response to Cleita (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 03:13 PM

1. This is what I think should happen

Not only will it preserve areas that are pristine now, but it would actually allow millions of acres of 'developed' areas to go wild again. And I truly believe it can be done right now. I can envision buildings like these every few blocks in cities making them self-sustaining without the need to import any food. It would create jobs too.











edited to add more photos

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 03:18 PM

2. I do like that idea as it also eliminates the need for pesticides. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 07:17 PM

12. Would love to see this in lots of cities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 03:53 PM

3. I think a lot of wineries are tax writeoffs. I also noticed that this little hobby of the 1%

 

has grown to such an extent that there are now degrees in "winery management" and such offered by universities.

My friend's kid got one. He's going to be managing tax-write-off wineries for the 1%.

One of the wonderful ways those folks continue to create jobs for you & me. Yay for the 1%!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #3)

Sun Apr 29, 2012, 04:11 PM

4. Maybe they should only be allowed 1% of the land to

pursue their little hobby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 02:39 PM

5. I still have this questions if anyone wants to chime in. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 03:42 PM

6. I thought you said the question was rhetorical (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 04:09 PM

7. Why would that make a difference? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 05:20 PM

8. Read Aldo Leopold's

"Sand County Almanac"

It is an oldie but a goodie.

Our problem is that we really have no respect for the land and its diversity. Maybe because it is given to us is why most folks devalue it so willfully?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 06:49 PM

9. Thank you. I will look for it in the library. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Reply #7)

Tue May 1, 2012, 06:08 AM

18. Because people don't expect answers to rhetorical questions

The rhetorical question is usually defined as any question asked for a purpose other than to obtain the information the question asks.

http://rhetoric.byu.edu/figures/r/rhetorical%20questions.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #18)

Tue May 1, 2012, 12:55 PM

19. Answers are nice though. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 06:57 PM

10. K&R. We don't have to stop development, good planning and making those that profit from it

 

pay the true costs of their development are sufficient.

Of course, that eats into the profits of the plunderers, and they are campaign contributers, so it doesn't often happen. You live in Cali, look into the history of your Representative, especially their family finances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 07:13 PM

11. Oh, I already have. All of them are GOOPer Rethugs of the worst caliber. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 07:27 PM

13. Without Population Management the Ratio will always be shifting away from wilderness

There should be more wilderness than development, but exponential population growth makes it an impossible dream.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 08:40 PM

14. Some of the smaller wineries are organic and pretty cool operations.

But sadly most of them wind up being a huge loss for the local ecosystem. I live near a few wineries that are run by bored rich people who think it's just fine to cover the fields in pesticide and then drain it off into the creek they use to irrigate the fields. We used to have a lot of deer around but since the 1% moved in they kill all the does & fawns that come around because they eat the precious grapes.
They aren't supposed to but they do take large amounts of water from local creeks & rivers to protect the grapes from frost when it's cold. I've heard of two getting caught and the fine they wound up paying was less than it would have cost them to pay for the water. Lovely.
This place has gone to hell since it became "booze alley".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raouldukelives (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 08:42 PM

15. Yes, it's a shame how destructive it is. They kill the birds too because they

eat the grapes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cleita (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 08:45 PM

16. I would rather see vineyards than oil derricks.

I love those canyon roads and use them frequently. Like you, I love that you can go through long expanses of undeveloped area.

Fortunately much of what I regularly drive through is protected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 08:52 PM

17. I would love to see the derricks go too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread