Comment Archives: stories: Letters + Opinion: Mailbox: Last 30 Days

Re: “Where Have the Birds Gone?

Utter nonsense.

Twenty five years ago Humb.Co. Planning Commissioner Denver Nelson called for water carrying capacity studies for our headwaters. At a minimum, certification for expected impacts on fresh water should be required prior to approval of ANY development, it's not brain surgery!

But OHHH NOOO, the "liberal", "progressive, "environmentalist", "back to the land", "low impact", "homesteaders" would have none of it!!!

NOT ONE SoHum resident bothers to testify in support for their "low impact" lifestyle in front of the Planning Commission and instead SoHum came out in force to partner with wealthy speculators and their "Humboldt Citizens for Property Rights" to lobby, (and win), the Planning Commission's uninterrupted right wing, political legacy of deregulation.

Congratulations Betty, you and the other SoHum "environmentalists" got what you wished for! Go ahead, put up that guest rental you always wanted and wire it up any damn way you want! Grow lots of pot!

We are experiencing the 6th largest biodiversity collapse and extinction event because of lost habitat and diminishing clean water. Yes, it's a slower loss than allowing continued clear-cutting, but the end result is indistinguishable.

Industrial Pot follows industrial timber because the folks living in our headwaters want to retain their ancient "Lockian" philosophy (John Locke), in effect, whoever can afford the deepest wells, fattest pipes and biggest pumps get the most water.

Until we extract ourselves from this 300 year old philosophy, Humb. Co. will continue down the identical path of rural SoCal 100 years ago...like most of the rest of the world...

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Sammy Ortiz on 08/08/2017 at 9:33 PM

Re: “Where Have the Birds Gone?

I agree.

Posted by Gloria Picchetti on 08/03/2017 at 8:07 AM

Re: “A 'Trumpian' Rant

Fred's lovely letter took the edge off my boring morning.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Gloria Picchetti on 08/03/2017 at 8:05 AM

Re: “Oh, mercy

I am sorry to have to say that Merricks' response simply validates my contention that he does not understand what imprinting means. The study of animal behavior is ethology, not animal psychology and while it certainly has 'moved on' in the sense that new knowledge has been acquired since Lorenz time the work he did on imprinting is still as simply valid today as it was then because animal behavior in that respect has not changed. A goose hatchling will still imprint on the first moving being or object it sees and will still follow that object/being and believe that is what they are. It's just nonsensical to say that is not a hard and fast idea. It is built in animal behavior that does not change over the 40 plus years since Lorenz died. It is not a "tool" that changes with time, that's just foolish to say. It is a hard and fast FACT and is essential to understand if dealing with animal behavior. I had the rare privilege of meeting with and visiting Lorenz in my home in Cambridge, Mass. on his only brief visit to the US in the 60's and he was an amazing and knowledgeable man. Unfortunately his legacy is besmirched by the stands he took during WW2.

Posted by Sylvia De Rooy on 08/02/2017 at 1:29 PM

Re: “Oh, mercy

Actually, the ideas of imprinting, habituation, their definitions and the differences between them are something we take very seriously in our work, as do all wildlife rehabilitators. These definitions exist, not as commandments but as tools that change with time. Ideas about the consciousness of animals are as subject to revision and review as anything else and at the moment, there aren't hard and fast ideas about what imprinting means, or even if that idea is particularly useful. No disrespect to Konrad Lorenz intended, but the fields of animal psychology have moved on since his time.

Posted by Monte Merrick on 07/30/2017 at 3:19 PM

© 2017 North Coast Journal

Website powered by Foundation

humboldt