I had some of the same feelings Mark and Provo had about what exactly our
role was, especially if we, as 'educated folk,' found no problems with the
proposal. I'll also admit that, so far, they've given it more thought than
have I. Deane brings up the point that the Public has the right to ask any
question they want to. The 206 folks aren't submitting these papers to us
as students or professionals for review; we're supposed to be the average
John Q. Public, wary of any sort of development in our back yard in a
natural setting. Just because a report SAYS something, what guarantee do
you have that it's ACCURATE? How do YOU know (even if you, the student do)
that what they say is accurate regarding, say the regenerative success of
a saplings on the north slope they're planning to log (you know, the one
you look at from your (J.Q. Public) back yard? This is how I plan to
approach my rebuttal to the proposal.
What is comes down to is we (most of us) think fairly rationally.
The Public doesn't necessarily think that way. I'm not saying we have to
dumb ourselves down, or that the Public is a bunch of raving idiots. Just
don't think about the issue as a NR student.
| *** Help Stop the SPAMMING of the Internet! Visit www.cauce.org! *** |
|/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ eennis(at)zoo,uvm,edu is... /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/|
|\/ Mr. Erin M. Ennis, Water Resources Major, University of Vermont /\|
|\/\/\/\/\/\*** VISIT http://www.upstartmagazine.com ***/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\|
|\/\/\/\/\/\ I can't complain but sometimes I still do. Joe Walsh /\/\|