RonSonic wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 07:40:50 GMT, Mike Vandeman wrote:


===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)


No I don't. Why does the absence of humans make a habitat "pure?"

It's pure(ly) wildlife habitat. No humans.

My dog feels
that way about squirrels, why would you feel that way about humans.

Are humans somehow impure? Is this some sort of greenist original sin?

Of the tens of thousands of species that alter their environment to make it more
suitable for themselves are humans to somehow deny themselves this ability.

Humans are BY FAR the most destructive of all species.

It
is unique among those species in setting land aside from itself, which is yet
another manifestation of altering the environment to suit itself.

Does knowing that some parcel of land is banned to humans make you feel better
somehow?

Of course. But more important, it makes the WILDLIFE feel better.

Because it is pure and they are not? Shouldn't this be read to indicate
that perhaps more land should be off-limits to humans, and if making more land
off-limits is good wouldn't making all land off-limits be better? It's the only
way to make all land "pure."

This is looking like a very strange belief system you've got there.

Learn to read. English. DUH! You guys are amazing.

Ron