|
Feedback ForumSend us your opinions reactions and ideas about "How Green?"Submissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space. Poster: Rich O'Neil Comment: I am so glad that Carole King has the guts to defend the land when others want to pillage and rape it for their own selfish needs. Yes,she owns 128 acres in Idaho on a ranch that existed well before she bought it. So what! That does not mean she doesn't care about ALL the land in Idaho that should remain wilderness. She has been an environmental advocate for decades-opposing public land giveways-OUR LAND-to private enterprise. She has been opposed to logging companies using OUR lands to cut down our trees for THEIR profit. Come on folks,you know it isn't about rich vs famous. These are our lands and yes,now more than ever we need to keep what's left of our wilderness intact. The compromises have already been made, is an understatement. Get a clue. Wildlife matters or it doesn't. Poster: John Galt Comment: This was a fascinating interview but it leaves many unanswered questions. In order to be fully informed, the public must know what governmental policies are favored by younger pops stars such as Britney Spears and Christine Aguilera. After all, with the aging of the Woodstock generation, it is young, up and coming celebrities like Britney and Christine who will be setting policy and making decisions for future generations. Their voices must not be ignored. I hope that PBS will continue to provide a forum for wealthy pop stars to share with us their thoughts, their wisdom, and their vision for our future. Thanks a bunch Poster: jo tavener Comment: love the show - about How Green, politics of compromise as shown here is intriguing and can be educationally useful, moving republicans out from under a simplistic characterization of environmentalist. However, by enabling future growth for the region, how does such a compromise as this bill actually safeguard the environment and wilderness . If anything, growth puts greater pressure on the wilderness, cutting out segments of it decade by decade. Sooooooooo, while compromise seems reasonable and eminantly democratic in spirit, it may be the end all of copouts! Perhaps what we need is a show about development and growth. This show pitted no-growth vs private development. surely those are not the only terms in which to see this problem. By sticking to such a dicotomy, we lose the battle for wilderness before we begin and that smacks too much of weak-kneed democrats in Congress! May we never follow their lead. Yours in struggle jo tavener Poster: Bill Gallagher Comment: I agree with Carol King! The government has to preserve the wilderness. I heard no mention of 100% electric vehicles. These electric vehicles would have almost no impact on the environment. Of course, this makes too much sense and therefore will never happen. bill gallagher Poster: Tom Holter Comment: The rich think they are more intelligent. I suspect the opposite. Shame on them. They're ignorant. Poster: Tom Holter Comment: I'm from MN. I'd love to retire to a pristine lake property. And then make sure that it remains pristine! I can't afford to even purchase such a property. The rich rule the world!!! And they are ignorant!!! You want to keep the wilderness wild? You're insane!!! You'd need to own and be able to protect your world. You may be rich, but you don't have the military power to protect your pristine world. You're an idiot! Good luck! Poster: Roger Sideman Comment: Pardon me if I'm missing something, but the reporter who interviewed Ron Paul was sort've off base by making such a strong point about how Paul said he didnt want money from white supremicists. Is that such a revelation? Should we care that he doesnt care about taking money from fringe racists? Poster: Robert Lata Comment: The proposed legislation is a shamefull sell-out! Wilderness should remain wilderness, preserving something of great value for future generations. Have we not ruined enough of America? Poster: Ron McComb Comment: RE; WILDERNESS BILL. WHY NOT PUT A REQUIREMENT INTO THE BILL THAT ALL MOTERISED VEHICLES SHOULD BE MUFFLED SO THAT THEY CAN'T BE HEARD BY A PERSON WITH NORMAL HEARING AT A DISTANCE OF MORE THAN 5 FEET? Poster: nathalie richcreek Comment: I totally believe Ms. King is on the right track. She has lived there for 30 years and watched while many right-wing, uneducated, belligerant adults want to have their toys with much noise & air pollution ruin the country atmosphere around rural Idaho. I myself have never been there but I do live in a rural section on northern California that has been run over by Maxxam out of Scotia, CA where this lumber company has raped our woods of most of the last remaining Redwood trees, ruined most of the rivers and streams with runoff from totally raped mountains where Redwood forests once ruled. May Maxxam go to hell! I am proud to be an env ironmentalist and will be until the day I die. I want for people in our country to awaken to our beauty within the rural areas of our land. This President and his friends have done so much damage to our rural lands because of his right-wing dogma where money talks and it has been this way far too long. I don't like those people who want to compromise the rural lands so that some idiots who spend money on loud vehicles inn order to get back to nature and most are way too fat and unhealthy and should be hiking, biking (bicycles). Not only is it right-wing uneducated people but right-wing educated money and greed oriented people looking at land as $$$$$$ for real estate, hotels, malls, etc. I am so very glad that Carole King is fighting for saving Idaho's wilderness and I'm certain there are many more of her aroun d. If I could vote I'd vote for saving as much of our wilderness as we can. We've already ruin ed enough wilderness! Poster: alden moffatt Comment: The most unusual wilderness in central Idaho is the Sawtooth Valley. High mountain wilderness is set asside in many areas. The Sawtooth Valley floor wilderness is as amazing as the Yellowstone Valley. Turning the valley floor into a housing development in exchange for wilderness designation for surrounding mountain peaks is not a compromise. The compromise was made years ago, when every other beautiful valley surrounded by mountains was paved and polluted. There are plenty of those polluted valleys. The people who favor developing the Sawtooth Valley should move to the beautiful LA valley where they can find a lifestyle they will appreciate. Poster: kriss fitzgerald Comment: Carol King has enough money that she can live in a paridise that she doesn't want to share. I appreciate the concept of keeping our beautiful lands pristine, but where do you draw the line, letting the rich live in paridise and keeping the common man out, Poster: Clayton Howatt Comment: As a person who was born, raised and currently lives in the upper midwest, Minnesota, but has lived in Idaho ('99 alumn of the U of I) I sppreciated the coverage of the land use issues in the Sun Valley/Stanley area. The issues that residents of the states of the interior west, including Idaho, deal with in the political arena are not even on the radar screen of the major media and political centers of our country. Logging practices, threatened species protection, fire control, water resources, invasive forest species, dam removal, grazing rights, and a host of other issues that have to do with federal and state land management are the issues that really matter in these places, not only to politicians but residents left and right, rural and urban. I do have a complaint however. You failed to mention that just north of Stanley, ID there are three wilderness areas that surround the Salmon river that joined together make up the largest wildernes area in the US, excluding Alaska. These three wilderness areas are larger than the states of Connecticut an Rhode Island. Those wilderness areas are also surrounded by other federal forested lands managed by various federal agencies. So the idea that a 80 acre parcel could be developed should have been weighed against the fact that it is just south of over 10,000 square MILES of wilderness. These issues seem to get a national story when people like Carol King make a stink, good because at least it gets out there but bad because there is little understanding of the really important threats and issues. The number one example would be 150 miles north of Stanley where the hollywood stars don't have there mansions and have little concern for what goes on. Idaho has the highest acerage of virgin (never been logged) land in the lower 48, much of which is north of Stanley near the town of Elk City. For years there has been a battle, at times frightening, between the logging industry and locals on one side and outside environmentalists on the other. The push has been the same as in Stanley to designate the land as wilderness to permantly protect it from logging. This habitat is not only scarce in ID but it is an extreme rarity anywhere in the US to have virgin forest, it seems obvious to me that not only is the land near Elk City more important but so is the debate. But it remains an untold story. Poster: Curt Booth Comment: With all due respect, our public lands and our Natioanl forest as well as our wilderness beong to the American people not to the Sierra Club or to the conservationalist or to any special intrest organization. I take great offense in these special orginizations that wnat to take away the ights of the American public even to the extent of commiting crimes to achieve their goals. These special interest groups have cost the American public Billions of dollars due to there miss guided stupidity. Let me make myself clear, I am not for distroying our public lnads nor am I for the distruction of our Natioanl Forest of our wildernes lnads. I am also for the protection of our national resources and animals but not to the extent that we restrect the americal people from enjoying our haritage and rights as american citizens. I belive the solution to our future issues are not in closing down trails or road access within these lands, it is in proper managment and conservational efforts and law enforcement that will preserve our natioanl resources. I am old enough to remember years ago how well our national forest and public lands have been taken care of, yet today our natioanl and wildlife have beeb neglected, not taken care of. The money seems to bave been diverted towards letigation and other resources other than taken care of our national lands and partks. We currently do not have enough forest rangers to enforce the laws. I love our country and our animals and our rights as an American. I hunt, fish, camp, hike, explore, and enjoy four wheeling as well as many other activities. Our children deserve the right to always enjoy these activites to reconnect with the outdoors without being losing anymore of our inheritant rights as established be our forfathers. Enough is enough. Poster: John Lewis Comment: Thanks for the program. I wish it was wilderness, but I don't live there. I have to trust the local folks can make good decisions. Poster: Bev Comment: P.S. Carole, How about giving one of your 128 acres to me. I'll take care of it. Poster: Dave Skeldon Comment: The wilderness advocates are nothing more than environmental hypocrites. They're against motorized access to wilderness areas but still want their own tickets in. If they really, truly believe in the sanctity of wilderness, then there should be no access for anyone, no skiers, no campers, no hikers, no horseback riders, ...nobody, just pure uninvaded wilderness. But that wouldn't be any fun, not only would the purists have to stay home too, they wouldn't be able to look down their noses at all of us unwashed masses whose mechanical hulubaloo they find so satisfyingly deplorable. Poster: Robin Shaw Comment: After seeing the piece that aired and then watching the extended interview with MS King, it appears to me that having purchased 128 acres, she now expects to be able to keep 3 million acres tied up for her own privte enjoyment. It is however public land, and if you hve the most beautiful jewel on earth locked away in an in accessible vault, is it beautiful at all? Poster: Pat S Comment: I'm a firm believer in people of opposing viewpoints sitting down together to try and iron out their differences and reach compromises. Having said that, I am strongly opposed to opening or creating roads in the wilderness area mentioned in this program. The wilderness is meant to be seen in its natural state....peacefully and quietly on foot! Please, let's keep the roar of engines....snowmobile, ATV, and otherwise out of it. Poster: todd remaley Comment: It seems to have been forgotten that these are Federal lands that belong to us all. Why are we catering to local lobbies and intersts? Poster: Ed Goldfarb Comment: Normally I endorse environmentalists concerns, but in this case they strike me as being somewhat selfish. How would Carole King feel about knocking her house down and allowing her 128 acres to revert back to it's wilderness state? Poster: Howard Z. Comment: Carol King has her head in the clouds. The Idaho Conservation League and Congressman Simpson clearly have the right approach to get the wilderness designated. King can ask for the sun, the moon, and the stars all she wants but it's never going to happen. Compromise is the only approach that is ever going to work. That is the cold, hard reality. |
Who's Helping Our Wounded Vets?
Elizabeth Warren on the Economy
Nurses Needed
Electric Car Dreams
PBS Special Report: Health Care Reform
