Friday, February 28, 2014

The EPA cannot siimply consider the 'immediate' effects on sensitive areas, they need to also assess the sustainability of any insult to these areas.

One of the most destructive forces in sensitive areas of nature are roads. 

They frequently start as logging roads. Frequently, the trucks that run along those logging roads carry invasive species with them. That is simply a truth that I have witnessed and worked to reverse. I know it for a fact. The industry probably doesn't have a clue either. They don't realize they are doing it. The plants and/or seeds travel from one place to another on the trucks themselves. Mean every word of it.

Then it becomes a way for trucks of all varieties to roll into a natural area justified as an appreciation of nature. Then it progresses from there. The EPA has to consider the roads necessary and the pollution they carry as well as the actual work at the mines. The runoff from the roads will be just as devastating to these areas as the mining itself.

Hiking trails and access is a far cry from any type of road. Hiking for the sake of an economy is far more sustainable and benign than any industry. That needs to be considered when assessing the damage mining and their roads will cause as long term damage to the watersheds and water movement in any area.

That's right, I am one of those pain in the ass 'detail people' in regard to conservation. Oh, by the way, I am proud of it. I have thought about starting a new club entitled, "Proud to be a pain in the ass environmentalist." Just imagine what the T-shirt will look like.