Water Rights
According to the textbook the eastern states and the
western states have different laws that determine water rights. In the east, water rights are controlled by
“riparian rights”. This concept comes
from English common law. In the western
states water rights are governed by “prior appropriation”. Since both of these concepts were explained
in the textbook, I won’t go into the definitions. You can find information about riparian
rights in Chapter 9, page 210, Water Wars and you can find prior appropriation
in Chapter 14, pages 366-367, Sustainability of the Ogallala.
The problem with both of these concepts is
that at some point, you can’t use water that doesn’t exist. Rather than fight over the rights to water,
we need to find ways to conserve and maintain water as a natural resource.
In 2010 Massachusetts created an advisory committee that was made up of water suppliers, conservationists, agricultural groups and state agencies to develop a holistic approach to water conservation and water management. This was the beginning of the Massachusetts Sustainable Water Management Initiative. The basic idea was to create a solution to satisfy the water needs of all stakeholders while recognizing and supporting ecological issues and water shortages. According to the Environmental League of Massachusetts, this was a very new approach to water issues because “…three agencies – the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the Department of Fish and Game – all participated and brought their respective areas of expertise to the table”. The article on the ELM website seemed pretty positive. We’ll have to see what happens.
In 2010 Massachusetts created an advisory committee that was made up of water suppliers, conservationists, agricultural groups and state agencies to develop a holistic approach to water conservation and water management. This was the beginning of the Massachusetts Sustainable Water Management Initiative. The basic idea was to create a solution to satisfy the water needs of all stakeholders while recognizing and supporting ecological issues and water shortages. According to the Environmental League of Massachusetts, this was a very new approach to water issues because “…three agencies – the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the Department of Fish and Game – all participated and brought their respective areas of expertise to the table”. The article on the ELM website seemed pretty positive. We’ll have to see what happens.
A photo from the Update the Bottle Bill campaign, sponsored by the ELM
National Parks and Tourism
I liked this section because I really like
national parks. My family has visited a
number of parks for both winter and summer vacations. There always seems to be a lot of fun and
funny things created in some of our national parks.
My first memory is visiting Dinosaur
National Monument in Utah where you can see dinosaur fossils that are exposed
right on the surface of a mountain side.
They built a structure around this dig and now you can walk along a
walkway and see these fossils. We also
visited the Grand Tetons, Yellowstone and the Devils Tower on that trip; although
at the time I had no idea that I was visiting the Intermontane region of the
country.
In the textbook the author refers to
national parks as “zoos of the land” where you look but don’t touch (Mayda, pg.
434). I agree with the fact that
preservation seems to end at the gates of the national park but I’m not sure
that I think national parks always causes nature to remain “static”. Preserved national monuments like Adams
Historical National Park will probably seem more simulation than a hiking trail
in the Berkshires. I would never want
access to national parks to become exclusive but I do like the idea that some
many national parks are protected and maintained rather than exploited and
“Aspenized” by the private sector.
No comments:
Post a Comment