Dave Kruger wrote: > Enough of them, as an aggregate, will "crush baby ducks" by making those > sloughs and backwaters untenable for nurturing small waterfowl, not to > speak of the effects of disturbance on over-wintering birds. > > We've know for a long time that the enemy is us, especially more of us. > I just need some help sorting out how to handle all of this. What's a > body to do? Hayduke's methods seem inappropriate here! Perhaps one solution is for all non motorized recreators to look for their vacations and recreation in places other than "the best spots on the face of the earth." We could probably spread out alot more and find more solitude in the process. Then we could all come home & get involved in politics to make more places free from destructive uses. One thing I'm convinced of: We need to increase the use in wild areas, not decrease use. Simply because wild areas need friends. If non motorized users don't love an area to death, you can bet that motorized users will -- and the death will be a lot more permanent. It's heartwarming to see the sensitivity of kayakers worried about disturbing seals and whales. But 2 stroke motor boats put more petrol into the environment every year than the Exxon Valdez. Kayak damage to whales is pretty trivial by comparison. Proposal for a new kayak ethic: One hour writing congress for every 10 hours on the water. Peace, Brian *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************Received on Thu Apr 23 1998 - 18:19:18 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:29:56 PDT