There are areas in the desert southwest that are off-limits to motorized off-road travel to protect, among other things, Desert Tortoise. Now, if you don't give a care about tortoises then this was a bad move.
It almost seems as if you are saying that any person who has a disagreement with the policy to close extremely large areas of land to access by motorized vehicles for off road travel by simple decree doesn't give a care about tortoises. That would be a very simplistic deduction.
Especially as population grows it is obvious that we cannot have it all. I don't think that we, as a society, have done a very good job of balancing access with protection. Some of that is because some folks choose to ignore the rules. Bottom line is, I believe, that if we wish to share the earth with naturally reproducing/self sustaining population of natural resources then we need to limit/control some of man's activities.
It is a choice. It is either/or.
While your second quote is generally correct it is also extremely simplistic. I say that it is simplistic because I have the same disagreement with your second quote as I do your first.
Should these limits/controls be placed upon a population by simple decree from one man? Frankly I do not see that as an acceptable way to handle the situation. Who is to protect the population from an ellected zealot?
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" Lord Acton
Previous Topic
Index
