Subject: Re: baidarka Coincidentally
From: Jonathan Stehn (stehn@cgspouses.net)
Date: Sun Nov 19 2000 - 14:46:52 EST
John Reynolds wrote:
> There is an analogy here to the man that moves near the airport then
> grumbles about the noise. Yes Alaska has poor access to much of the land. If
> more convience was desired one could easily move to a large city with its
> full complement of conviences.As for the Feds having much of the land
> locked up, we the owners of the Federal government have spoken and we have a
> great desire to preserve our Federal lands (in Alaska and elsewhere). When
> considering the loss of jobs you only need look at the forestry statistics
> of the 80's & 90's that show the cut increasing dramaticly but jobs in that
> industry dropping in the inverse of that number to see that the Feds are not
> the job loss villans they are painted to be. Residence in Alaska does not
> mean that your claim to those Federal acres is any stronger than any other
> tax paying citizen.
> I'm glad you have the opportunity to enjoy what Alaska
> has to offer and I'll defend your right to do so as long as it does not
> degrade the value of MY Federal property there. I spent 5 months in Alaska
> approx. 8 years ago. I was thrilled with the natural beauty that I found
> there but I got the distinct impression that man was beginning to encroach
> pretty heavily on the natural surroundings. I understand that people want
> jobs and convience but once a natural ecosystem is screwed up the timeline
> for recovery is measured in the hundreds of years. Let's ere on the side of
> conservation. After all we can always screw things up tomorrow.
>
> John Reynolds
In general I agree with everything you said but I vehemently disagree that the
local residents should not have a louder voice with the Federal Government. This
is my backyard and what I say should have more weight as I am the one being
affected. After all this is supposed to be a Republic of States that have their
own interests and should be able to preserve them.
As for convenience, that is not what I ask for. I ask for access. The legal
ability to get into area to experience it.
My main concern is that many of people in the lower 48 feel that if they lock up
Alaska so that they have a place they can see wilderness then they have done their
part. They then don't have to worry about the next subdivision that is replacing
the woods up the street or that the town is killing deer so that their ornamental
shrubs will not be eaten. Why don't they also work on preservation and cleanup in
their own areas.
I have had the pleasure/task of living in 7 different communities in my 14 1/2
years of US Coast Guard Service. In all of them I have worked as a volunteer in
local cleanup and preservation efforts and have spent a considerable amount of time
exploring the local treasures (every community has had at least one special
place). The funny thing was that I was almost always the only person there. When
I speak to the locals about my chosen home, all want to visit Alaska to see the
"beauty". When I speak to them about the beauty of their own home they are almost
never aware. What good is something if you don't enjoy it.
Here's the thing. If we preserve the land forever, we don't alter it, but 99.99%
of the people that we are preserving it for never see it because you can't get
there by airplane, four-wheeler, four wheel drive vehicles, snowmachine or even
mountain bikes (yes they are mechanical means of travel and are therefore banned in
wilderness areas) what good have we done. We "preserved it for the 0.01% who are
rich enough to take two weeks off to hike in, instead of let the average Joe take
his SUV into the area with his kids, park it and spend the weekend hiking and
fishing in an area that he otherwise can't afford the time to get to. Do you
realize that one of the premier kayaking destinations in Southeast Alaska was
almost closed off due to this kind of narrow thinking. They were going to ban the
use of power boats in Misty Fjords National Monument and Wilderness Area which
would have stopped the use of water taxis. This would have required people to
paddle 40 miles of often rough cold water to get to an area that is wonderful and
safe for folks to experience their first times in kayaks and camping. Then there
are places like Glacier Bay National park where commercial fisherman (locals) are
not allowed to fish because it is against the "spirit" of the place, even the
natives aren't allowed to hunt and fish there even though it is the reason that
their families have lived in the area for thousands of years. All I can guess is
that seeing people working for a living ruins peoples vacations while they cruise
into Glacier Bay on 1000 foot long cruise ships sipping wine
Don't get me wrong. I don't want to pave Alaska, I just want the people of the
lower 48 to realize that turning the State into a Wilderness Area does not give
them absolution for what they do in their own community. They should get out and
see their own areas of natural beauty and clean up their own mess. They could turn
all those fallow fields in the north-east into woodlands instead of subdivisions.
Then they wouldn't need to cut down the Tongass to make rayon.
Anyone else Folks? Please dispel the notion that folks don't act local in a
reasonable fashion (this absolutely rules out the groups such as Earth First
burning ski lodges and Sierra Club spiking roads used by four wheeled vehicles)
that I gathered in the last 6 years of living outside in New York, Texas and
Colorado. I really would like to hear about new canoe trails established, new
coastal kayaking routes with campsites marked and cleared, areas set aside so that
folks who enjoy offered motor sports can have fun and not get arrested. Or, how
you used the neighbors tree that fell over to make a beautiful boat instead it
going to the dump.
For those of you who are considering coming to Alaska there is supposed to be some
great kayaking here in the Kodiak area (I haven't built a boat yet and sold my last
ones before I did time outside) There are several rental or guided trip companies
here ready to supply you and I will help you with any info that I can. Also a
great museum with an example of the local Natives version of the baidarka. The
group, the Koniags, paddle in the kneeling position with single bladed paddles.
Apparently the locally abundant foods led to development of a slightly different
hull form (wider is what I noticed) that gave them a better position to hunt from.
-- Jon Stehn jstehn@uscg.net- Baidarka Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside Baidarka or Baidarka archives without author's permission Submissions: baidarka@lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: baidarka-request@lists.intelenet.net Searchable archive: http://rtpnet.org/robroy/baidarka
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Fri Dec 01 2000 - 01:00:02 EST