01-11-2014, 05:44 PM
I think it's wrong, and it looks to me like it's just a way for the SCI to finagle a "hunt" for something that would normally be off limits. But at the same time it's my perception that the same people who make a lot of noise about this type of stuff do the same types of things when it suits them. In our town, the shakespeare theater built their theater right in the middle of sensitive riparian habitat, bald eagle nesting, etc. When the environmental impact statement came back and said no, they were up in arms and were able to pull political strings to get an ok. Now they want to build their offices in some of the remaining habitat. Same with semi-well off people and their beautiful mcmansions built in "scenic" habitat. And when they need a road for their commute or developments, it just has to go through despite environmental impact. It's too bad, but humans are just built to selfishly utilize every last drop of resources, and it's my opinion that most people have more impact than they think. kj.