Do conservation groups as a whole do more harm than good???

[afishinado]

poopdeck wrote:
Sorry sal, but go back and read your first post. The question is in the title but your opinion is a continuation and in depth explanation of the question.

You have successfully worded the question that the only way to answer is to answer the same way you would. Why would anybody discuss the other side of this just to be attacked and belittled by the Environmentally correct side. Personally I think there are bad groups out there but when you lump every group into the same group you take that stance away. I also think anglers need to be real careful in what they are supporting since some of these groups are nothing more than useful idiots to powerful people.

Your question about teaching, or not teaching, kids to fix what we broke is disturbing. Personally I'm not breaking the environment so nobody has to fix anything caused by me and I have never taught my kids they need to fix the environment because daddy drives a car, heats and cools the house and pays a lawn service to keep the weeds at bay.

I've said this a thousand times, but until you toss away all modern conveinances you cannot act as if your Doing more to save the environment than anybody else. All the environmental preaching without the action is nothing more than talk to fuel a higher feeling of purpose over those who have no intention of driving a smart car.

^ I don't completely disagree at all. There are some valid points above.

Like in everything in this world, there are extremes and extremists on both sides.

Greenpeace boats ramming whaling ships, as well as extremists pounding in metal spikes in trees to injure workers cutting down trees are examples of "environmental" extremists that I abhore. And I agree, too abrupt of a turn from fossil fuels will turn our economy upside down, but we must make that turn as quickly as technology allows.

On the other end of the spectrum, industries or individuals with no regard for the environment, polluting our water or air just to make a buck are just as abhorrent.

Again, like everything in this world, do some research before you leap. Chose the groups you support very carefully. You are likely to find no group or cause is perfect and completely aligns with your point of view or perspective.

Sitting on the sidelines and doing nothing (but complaining) solves nothing. There are plenty of people out that care little about the environment and care only about their wallet.

Most (IMHO) conservation groups are working hard to preserve what we have, so consider joining a group with goals you agree with, and maybe help steer it in a direction that will make a difference.

 

[allan_s]

To think that all conservation groups overall are a bad thing shows a complete lack of understanding of the history and current conservation efforts taken to give us the opportunities to pursue fishing, hunting or any other outdoor pursuit.

There is a long list of books I would suggest for those thinking the world would be better off without conservation groups but I highly doubt they would help because you would have to mighty thick headed to think that in the first place.

Can we go back to the good old gear envy threads?

 

[Mike]

Big wins in SE Pa, but not necessarily by whatever groups you folks are referencing here...farmland preservation, which involves the purchase of development rights.

I have also seen a watershed association quietly, parcel by parcel, persuade landowners to establish conservation easements on their riparian lands along a Class A wild trout stream as well as got to bat for and achieve upgrades to EV status on a few streams.

 

[afishinado]

Mike wrote:
Big wins in SE Pa, but not necessarily by whatever groups you folks are referencing here...farmland preservation, which involves the purchase of development rights.

^ No doubt, Mike. Just check out some of the conservancies in SE that have bought up lands for preservation that were to be developed.

SEPA Conservancies

Plus many other organizations too numerous to list.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

Mike- Pretty sure the whole "farmland preservation" thing is a crappy deal. We have quite a few farms here that originally signed on and when the right deal with developers came along were somehow able to then sell off the property. $$$$$

 

[poopdeck]

Not saying I'm the only who is not homeless. I'm saying I'm the only one who is not homeless but who also doesn't decry the effects on the environment the amenities that I, and I assume you, appreciate and work to have. You can reduce your carbon footprint all you want. You can grow all the food you want. You can reduce your electrical usage all you want. You are not making the world any better than I am. To say so is just making you feel better, more intellectual and caring than others who drive cars, eat food and use electricity.

My position is not advocating the return to the industrial revolution days. I'm simply advocating a honest conversation on the environment and our impact in realistic terms and not feel good banter about feel good measures that are absolutely meaningless, environmentally speaking.

I agree, as a whole, conservation groups have been a benefit but anymore the new environmentalists are simply pawns for those making millions of dollars on your emotions all the while harming the environment in totally new ways.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Can we go back to the good old gear envy threads?

Unless your envious of vintage Hardy or Cummings glass rods, I might not be able to offer much up there for you.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

Poopdeck,

That's the very point. See troutberts post on ending the cause of pollution so nature can then fix the issues in a Watershed.
This whole thing got started simpily because I started a Watershed group who's goals are pretty straightforward at the moment. Foxtrapper took it upon himself to then add all the unrealistic terms without even giving our group a chance. Sure some groups are better than others but attacking a group that is 2 days old seems pretty unrealistic to me. Doesn't it to you? Then to turn and attack environmental groups in general took it to the insane level.So now you have the conversation we are having rather than a more level headed one.

I disagree with you that reducing your impact is not making the world environmentally better. If everyone did, it certainly would but that's another topic and not what we are discussing,but I did add it in my commentaries when I mentioned teaching your kids. Yes I believe we should be teaching our children to reduce impact and help the environment when they can. I'm not teaching them to feel guilty, I'm teaching them to do more for it. Feel free to find this disturbing if you wish.

I don't disagree that nature would be better off without man and given time would fix itself. Fortunately and unfortunately, I don't see man going away, so do we just give up or attempt to reduce our impact and fight to fix places that need it? That's rhetorical, you already gave you answer.

Also this thread has nothing to do with belittling or attacking the other side, in fact it is quite the opposite that happened here. I have never once belittled anyone for not trying to be environmentally sound with what they do or believe. I expect the same in return, didn't get it so I posted the question to see if I'm just crazy. In a lot of ways Iam but in this regard, I'm sure I'm not.

Personally I find smart cars not so smart. Again another discussion. Drive what you wish.

 

[ryansheehan]

Well said afish. I'm torn on issues like these. I do see unitended consequences that come from the best of intentions. In turn I think the positives out weigh the negatives when it comes to most of these groups.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

sal- I didn't attack you. I merely said I don't support certain actions on a certain stream and question motives. If you recall i also brought this up with you well over a year ago in a private message when you initially proposed something like this. you assured me I had nothing to worry about. Now all these groups are decending on this small creek and you and your group are all onboard. So be it.


popdeck is probably right about the big picture stuff. But if it feels good to do stream clean ups and plant a few trees I'm all for it.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

sal- I didn't attack you.

yack yack yack..... facebooking and blabbing.... Do you even fish? You guys can't even pull together a simple stream clean up.

AND by the way squatch ....what did you and your fellow blabbers actually DO? Yack Yack Yack

The proprietor of Hammer has spoken. And he knows what is best.

Yack yack yack. If you really want to help go plant some trees or pick up trash. Like the old saying goes "There are talkers and there are doers"

with friends. All the yacking (which I've heard on here from this same crew before) never results in squat.

Feeling blessed to walk the creek with Ad(vertisement) Crable.

All in the first few weeks before anything was proposed, done or anything.

Now I've made headway on some major issues and I've move from talker to do gooder. Interesting. We put together a stream clean up, we are on the verge of getting EV status and I might have helped to get Lebanon County Farmers to end the cycle. I must be doing such horrible things to deserve your lashings.
1)you did attack our group and me.
2) we did organize a clean up and will have another before seasons end.
3) used to being wrong yet?

Yes I remember your PM and again there is NOTHING I can do to stop the projects even if I wanted too. So we are going to roll with it. Get it through your head that you are blaming the wrong entities. Even if we opposed them it would still happen.
Also I find your concerns as ridiculous now as I did then. IMHO of course.
I suggest you start your own SAVE THE HAMMER FROM BEING SAVED group and see how much support you get. You get enough you can finally put an end to the do gooding horn tootin yakkers that apparently are paving a road to hell simpily because you don't agree.

 

[foxtrapper1972]

sal- All your quotes are taken out of context.

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

By all means explain your context. It's pretty hard to paint it in another light but you trying could prove entertaining and worthwhile.

 

[poopdeck]

I must admit I had no idea there was a riff prompting this question as I did not see the thread that started it all. Or possibly I became tired of the thread and didn't continue reading it. I will bow out of this fight but thanks for listening and thanks for your reasoned responses.

 

[Hook_Jaw]

troutbert good luck getting the amish to keep the cattle out of the water.

 

[Hook_Jaw]

The amish out elk creek that feed penns creek is full of cows in the water.

 

[FarmerDave]

tomitrout wrote:

Conservation of the stream itself vs conservation of your fishing access? Guess it probably depends on your view of the 'big picture.'

Good point, Tomi. I don't consider the latter to be conservationists if that is the only goal, but I suppose some do.

 

[FarmerDave]

Dwight put it well in an early response. The best conservation work consists of making it so nature can fix the scars.

 

[FarmerDave]

poopdeck wrote:
I must admit I had no idea there was a riff prompting this question as I did not see the thread that started it all. Or possibly I became tired of the thread and didn't continue reading it. I will bow out of this fight but thanks for listening and thanks for your reasoned responses.

Same here. Didn't see what prompted all this.

 

[FarmerDave]

Hook_Jaw wrote:

The amish out elk creek that feed penns creek is full of cows in the water.

Hook_jaw, The Amish do understand the value of money, just like everyone else.