This article is funny for a number of reasons. The new grass cutting method utilized by a horse... I know we may be a little slow on the uptake, but in Texas we call this "grazing."
"We think it's a tragedy for the develoopers to destroy this site of natural beauty when they could keep it an open space everyone can enjoy." This is practically a communist statement, at least one of a looter. What right or claim do they think they have for their enjoyment of someone elses property. That is like people coming around to lobby and gaggle about what they think I should plant in my back yard, and when I should mow it. None of their damn business, actually. Their mistake is thinking because their eyes or feet have wandered across it, that it gives them some right to speculate about it with any authority or voice of concern. "We don't think any ecological and environmental scientific study has been taken out ont he site" Well, that about sums it up. He doesn't think it has happened, probably because nobody discussed it with him. Well, let me tell you, from a few thousand miles away, it certainly has. Before land is ever purchased by a developer, it is put under purchasing option, and test are run. They run a geotech analysis, an environmental, soil analysis with plasticity indices, etc all done by professionals, and certified by engineering firms. These are just a few of the tests. Seems rather foolish to buy the property first, get ready for construction, and then say "maybe we should do a land survey first before we dump a bunch of houses on it, what do you blokes think?" So what is going to happen? I'll tell you: Business as usual. The orchids may be a superficial concern, but it is a mere triviality. At worst, the developer will have to pay some extra fees for the damage he incurred to the environment of the orchids. Unless there isn't already a provision by the city for such things, in which case, the whole thing goes off without a hitch. How the hell do I know this? Not to sound snotty, but I've worked at the geotech, survey, and engineering firms. Secondly, my father is a land developer for the US's largest custom home building corporation, and I am familiar with the development process from land entitlement to home warranty. No simpler way of saying it. So, I have a little bit on knowledge on how the whole machine works. What do I mean by environment damage? Let's say that the city says we have to keep so many trees, and we can't affect the water flow across the land. We cut down whatever trees we want, and put in ponds or drain lakes if we please, and displace wildlife. In reparation, we pay fees to the city for cutting down the trees, and we build drainage systems to keep the water flow the same across the land, and coyotes stroll down the street and eat pets. That is the cost of doing business. Ecologically disgusting, but business as usual. If you want an environementally friendly community built into a nature reserve, we could probably build those at quadruple the land costs and you're gonna pay for it, but you certainly aren't getting it for free. But people don't want to buy those. They don't want to pay $450,000 for a smaller home crowded with trees, instead of a $300,000 home with a nice lawn, backyard, swimming pool, patio, community center, and home owner's association. So what should the people do? Ask the developer for permission, enter the land and take whatever plant life and soil you please. He surely doesn't care. That is about as good as they can hope for, and is good publicity for all. At worst, it might cause a slight delay to the development because of publicity concerns, but they will be steamrolled anyway and you can kiss the orchids goodbye. The city isn't going to give up the growth, money, jobs, taxes, and goodwill that the development will bring. Conserving the orchids is in nobody's best interest, except those who don't have any claim to the orchids themselves, and don't stand to loose anything by arresting the development. It is the nature of people to want something for nothing. This is why I advocate buying land that you want to protect from habitat loss, because otherwise you have no say. Even nationalized land can be bought from the less affluent countries. So once again, let's take up a collection and buy up the Philippines. If we really care, let's put our money where our mouths are instead of speculating about what private people should do with their private property. On December 3, 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > news story : > > "RARE ORCHID MAY BE A THREAT TO GATEWAY SCHEME > > CAMPAIGNERS fighting for Harlow's green spaces are hoping a rare plant will > thwart the controversial Gateway Scheme" > > source and full story : > > http://www.herts-essex-news.co.uk/star/news/story.asp?id=176555 > > ******** > Regards, > > Viateur > > > _______________________________________________ > the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com _______________________________________________ the OrchidGuide Digest (OGD) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orchidguide.com/mailman/listinfo/orchids_orchidguide.com
