Terminalcoffee discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Feeling Nostalgic? The archives
>
Senate boosts wilderness protection across US
date
newest »


Well, its not a bad thing, it is a start and hopefully the areas can be expanded over time.

And it's not even the population growth in this country, it's just the continuous expansion and sprawl. That's what we've gotta start restricting. Build up instead of out.
Right? And everyone wants their "own land" so they refuse to live in any sort of apartment, mixed land use building, etc.

I also refuse to live somewhere with a condo or neighborhood board or whatever that make everyone regulate what color they paint their house. Bleh.

I love my large yard right now, it has a couple flower gardens, a fruit and vegetable garden and fruit trees so we get lots of fresh produce. But as soon as the kids are out of school, condo with no snow or yard work responsibilities here I come.
My yard right now is filled with 1.5" of crusty snow, some sodden lawn furniture, one cement turtle and a wooden wishing well I wish Sweeter hadn't brought home from a yard sale.
Well I guess I should have been a little more specific, my is covered with snow right now too, but in the spring and summer...
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
The measure — actually a collection of about 160 bills — would confer the government's highest level of protection on land ranging from California's Sierra Nevada mountain range to Oregon's Mount Hood, Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado and parts of the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia. Land in Idaho's Owyhee canyons, Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore in Michigan and Zion National Park in Utah also would be designated as wilderness.
What do you think? This is good, right? As our population grows, how can we sustain wilderness areas?