Mcfarlane: A Short Story

Gilmartin begins by describing the typical rookie officer. Most are energetic, idealistic, enthusiastic and very driven. Quickly this enthusiasm can change from one of positivity to one that is very cynical and emotionally charged. These behaviors and thoughts over time if not corrected become exacerbated leading to noticeable mental and physical changes. The author, Gilmartin, uses personal experiences and other real life stories effectively so that many officers can relate and identify with the topic of the book.

In addition to environmental concerns, opponents argue that government regulation is too lax and as Bahr states, “It is all too easy to mine on public lands and the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have made it extremely easy to validate claims.” Although uranium miners recognize federal obligations to reclaim operation sites Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Program

National parks should not be preserved and protected by the federal government because the government currently owns too much land

National parks are lands which our great nation were founded upon, and some still contain ancient artifacts of earlier times in our history. In her article, “A Monumental Fight,” Katy Steinmetz points out that tribes of Native Americans believed the Obama should have

Officer Renegade: Believe he was acting in good faith and his actions were within legal authority.

Caught between obsession for spiritual transcendence with nature and encouragement for the leisurely enjoyment of nature, many questioned if the development of land and preservation could co-exist. On one side, those that encouraged recreation in the great outdoors, others however, advocated preservation of natural wonders. For example, even though Yosemite is a national park, however many were concerned for Yosemite’s commercial exploitation as a tourist destination. Adams, Gleason, Brower, and members of the Sierra Club joined efforts with Howard Zahniser, director of the Wilderness Society to lobby government for preservation of the parks and wilderness. Zahnsier even spoke at the U.S. Senate’s Subcommittee on Public Roads regarding building an interstate highway system and impacts to natural areas. Tensions continued to mount between those that believed in harnessing the land for industry and a source for raw materials with those that viewed the land as nature’s garden. I will return to this

There are numerous rules that are in place to protect the country’s nature preserves, and many of them are applicable to the land set aside for the native americans. However, there is a major difference between a nature preserve and a preservation for humans to live and be at one with the earth. In ordinary preservations, civilians can visit freely and enjoy the scenery, but this is not an acceptable feature in land that is set aside for people. Even though they live differently from us, the native americans are not specimen and are not meant to be treated as animals. The government and park rangers can work together to keep citizens out of the land that is set aside for the Indians. An example of another helpful and protective law that would help this situation is no construction work or major roads within a two mile radius. This will make the preserve seem more genuine. These are just a few of the laws that can be put in place for

Although the extremist may not be the voice of the masses, they are definitely the loudest voices. These voices usually point their hate speech and angry protests at something called “forced pooling”. They take stabs at the idea, saying it's the private version of “Public Domain”; that it's destroying our environment by destroying the local ecosystem, but have very little evidence to back their outlandish claims and the evidence they do show is very circumstantial or a result of scares, random accidents. These groups are willfully ignorant to the benefits of forced pooling and how it actually protects the land/mineral rights of citizens instead of taking it. To explain forced pooling and its benefits we must first understand the concept of mineral rights versus surface rights, as well as what a mineral lease consists

People who love the parks and their rare beauty are not the only ones concerned with the government's recent budget cuts,

Acres and acres of irreplaceable forests and wetland taken away for one purpose: more money. PolyMet wants to build a copper-nickel mine in northern Minnesota. They don’t want to just build this mine on a black field in northern Minnesota but on Chippewa National Forest. PolyMet does own the mining rights of this specific chunk of land, but USFS owns the land on top. I think this mine is a terrible idea because it will create both land disturbances and air and water pollution.

In the Lake Powell area, there are many recreational and historic sites, such as Rainbow Bridge National Monument. “The flooding of Glen Canyon has damaged critical habitat for endangered fish and plant species and destroyed tens of thousands of archaeological and sacred sites, including a significant portion of Rainbow Bridge National Monument – one of the most sacred sites and culturally significant sites for Native American tribes of the Colorado Plateau.” (“Glen”) Now the example used is the “National Monument,” which was made by the US government. The actual existence of Rainbow Bridge was not harmed at all. It is still well out of the water, now a one mile hike from the lake. This actually makes access to the bridge easier, without destroying the area of importance to the Natives. A “national monument” title and set amount of land is not important to these first people, only the sacred piece of ground. The Navajo nations natural resources director denounced the Sierra Club on the issue “for giving legitimacy – and momentum – to the radical fantasy.” (Zengerle)

I believe many of these areas need to be preserved for many generations to come. It would be a terrible thing when something as iconic as the Delicate Arch was destroyed. These are the things that we need to preserve for everyone to enjoy and establishing National Parks have been useful. On the other side, much of this land is enjoyed by people who are active in motor sports, mountain biking, and others recreational activities that may have some impact on the environment. These places are where I grew to truly understand the beauty of our world, met many people with the same interest as I have, become closer as family and friends. All these things have created such a strong bond with me and the outdoors that it has actually led me to be more responsible for our world, things like cleaning up others trash just so that we don’t get a bad reputation so that we can preserve what we love to do. I think letting people of future generations to go through the same bond and understanding that we need to make an effort to preserve our lands while still being able to use them for our personal recreation, whatever that might

The Issue of National Park conservation has become a widely controversial issue today. With the National debt reaching 17 trillion dollars some politicians think it is alright to either sell off national park land to commercial foresters, miners, and even foreign nations or to just close some parks entirely to make up some of the national debt. They are completely unaware that the parks arent just a “pretty area of land for tourists”. Many cities depend on the parks for their well-being. A quote from a local newspaper in California supports this “National parks don’t boast concession stands or charge tax, but data indicates they bring in millions of dollars to local economies each year”(Tree). Supporters of cutting the parks include big CEO’s of major companies and some of them not even in this country.

“I think that it is important to utilize public lands because they are set aside by us and are paid for indirectly from our taxes,” Watson said.

I am writing to you in regard to the Bridger -Teton National Forest. I write to you as someone who believes in preservation. I believe that the forest should be preserved and not conserved. The Bridger -Teton National Forest is a landmark and should be kept that way. “It is a place where locals find solitude in huge tracts of forest backcountry when nearby wilderness areas and national parks are crowded with out-of-state visitors. It’s also a place that supports traditional, sustainable activities such as outfitting, guiding, ranching, and recreation” (“Wyoming Outdoor Council” 2009-2013). All of these values are being threatened because the forest is being considered for oil and gas development. While oil and gas may be useful to us, I do not think that the forest should suffer the consequences. The natural resources should be left alone for everyone to enjoy in its natural state. To upset this would be environmentally incorrect.