Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 07:33:11 -0800 (PST) From: bruce dudley <bddudley@yahoo.com> To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg3365$foo@default> Subject: RE: "government" land vs private ownership
Hi group
I agree with everyone who has written so far. The
government is meant to maintain order and protect it's
citizens. However, usurping land from private owners
would not accomplish the ulitimate goal: wise
land-management.
First, the government can not manage our lands!!! If
we give them they will clear it, fill, and put a road
on it. The way they replace this land is to 'remake'
another wetland area somewhere else... not in it's
exact condition either.
Second, we cannot tolerate any more government
interference than we see already!
Third, Let's get our citizens to appreciate the
natural beauty of THEIR lands. The private owner is
more protective of the plants/animals on his land than
the government is. There is simply not enough rangers
in our parks to do an effective job at detering
piliaging. Private lands need to remain private!
There is no 'answer' to the problem we see. Clearly,
man has done tremendous damage to world-wide
ecosystems. The significant alterations to the
landscape of wetlands and waterways has already proven
detremental to thousands of species. If carnivorous
plants are to remain in the wild the private owner is
the best chance they have. Frankly, the joke "I have
a swamp I'd sell you" sounds like a good proposition
to me!
Bruce Dudley
Eastern NC
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:15 PST