05-19-2008, 04:10 AM
I see this as pie in the sky wishfull thinking that is totally impractical. My property for example is zoned ag 1. At the same time it is essentially fresh pahoehoe lava with a thin layer of dirt and vegetation on the top. The only way to "farm" this would be to rip the hell out of it and I mean all of it. Now I think that any line of reasoning that is logical will also be consistent. The first step in "preserving" this rainforest would therefor be to rezone it to whatever preservation land is zoned. Bye bye farming, residential yards, and a lot of other uses that average folks would have for it. Most importantly, I just don't see the rezoning happening. I also don't see where the resources would come from for the order of magnitude greater paperwork, bureaucracy, and enforcement, and I just can't see that we would benefit from such an increase in government.
It's not that I object to preserving the rainforest, but I find such an open ended, arbitrarily defined, and difficult to enforce proposal to be inconsistent with how useful law gets done.
To change the topic somewhat, this is also exactly the kind of attitude that gets local folks up in arms, where people who are primarily outsiders decide that the locals aren't doing things right and that this should be changed. This is not to say that all local traditions are right. They aren't. However, this proposal isn't right either.
It's not that I object to preserving the rainforest, but I find such an open ended, arbitrarily defined, and difficult to enforce proposal to be inconsistent with how useful law gets done.
To change the topic somewhat, this is also exactly the kind of attitude that gets local folks up in arms, where people who are primarily outsiders decide that the locals aren't doing things right and that this should be changed. This is not to say that all local traditions are right. They aren't. However, this proposal isn't right either.