U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-20-2016, 03:58 PM
 
26,578 posts, read 52,013,240 times
Reputation: 20356

Advertisements

Surprised at how certain many are when it comes to these things...

I'm not a Republican but many of the cornerstone environment legislation originated under Republican Leadership and this cannot be denied.

Teddy Roosevelt believed that government ownership of forest land was necessary to prevent a timber famine and would foster sound ecological stewardship. After World War II, most major environmental laws were adopted with broad bipartisan majorities in Congress. The lion’s share of the nation’s environmental regulatory infrastructure was erected during Republican administrations

Republican Nixon, presided over the birth of the modern environmental regulatory state. He created the EPA by executive order and signed into law more major pieces of environmental legislation than any president before or since. Though his support for environmental measures may have been largely opportunistic, the regulatory architecture erected on Nixon’s watch largely remains in place and continues to provide the foundation for federal environmental regulation to this day.

The Reagan administration pursued deregulatory efforts in other areas, such as transportation, it made little progress scaling back the environmental rules adopted over the previous decade.

George H. W. Bush pledged to be the “environmental president” and was true to his word, even if environmentalist lobbying groups would never admit it. Bush appointed a member in good standing of the Washington environmental establishment to head the EPA and signed several environmental bills into law, most notably the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the most expansive and perhaps most expensive piece of environmental legislation in the nation’s history.

So how is it that Republicans don't have a good reputation on the environment?

http://www.livescience.com/28857-sur...entalists.html

Last edited by Ultrarunner; 11-20-2016 at 04:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-20-2016, 04:03 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,828 posts, read 41,843,630 times
Reputation: 43201
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanguardisle View Post
Now that the Republicans have taken power and have control of Congress, the presidency, and soon probably also the Supreme Court how do we protect our environment? I assume they will now attack clean air and water regulations and allow companies to pollute all they want to . What can we who care about the environment do to continue to protect it when those who make the rules do not?
I have been thinking about this since I'm both a Republican and conservationist.

My suggestions will cost you some money, though.

1) buy a hunting license for your state. That money goes directly to the Department of Natural Resources/Environment for conservation. In Maryland the base license is about $25.
2) buy a fishing license. The money goes the same place as a hunting license. The cost here if a Tidal License is included is around $20.
3) go to the Post Office and buy a waterfowl stamp. It's $25 and goes to resource conservation.
4) if you don't hunt or fish, buy a friend some hunting or fishing equipment. The more expensive the better since the tax on equipment is 14% which goes to conservation.
5) join an organization like Ducks Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl, Pheasants Unlimited, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, etc. The money sent to them go to conservation projects all over. In the case of DU, all over North America.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 05:44 AM
 
Location: Wappingers Falls, NY
1,586 posts, read 1,938,963 times
Reputation: 1059
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
I have been thinking about this since I'm both a Republican and conservationist.

My suggestions will cost you some money, though.

1) buy a hunting license for your state. That money goes directly to the Department of Natural Resources/Environment for conservation. In Maryland the base license is about $25.
2) buy a fishing license. The money goes the same place as a hunting license. The cost here if a Tidal License is included is around $20.
3) go to the Post Office and buy a waterfowl stamp. It's $25 and goes to resource conservation.
4) if you don't hunt or fish, buy a friend some hunting or fishing equipment. The more expensive the better since the tax on equipment is 14% which goes to conservation.
5) join an organization like Ducks Unlimited, Delta Waterfowl, Pheasants Unlimited, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, etc. The money sent to them go to conservation projects all over. In the case of DU, all over North America.
There's a distinct difference between environmentalists and conservationists. Conservationists are generally out there trying to live in harmony with nature to some degree. Environmentalists are out there trying to tell other people to live in harmony with nature to some degree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 06:09 AM
 
Location: New York Area
15,567 posts, read 6,140,705 times
Reputation: 12126
Quote:
Originally Posted by npaladin2000 View Post
There's a distinct difference between environmentalists and conservationists. Conservationists are generally out there trying to live in harmony with nature to some degree. Environmentalists are out there trying to tell other people to live in harmony with nature to some degree.
I think there is some reasonable ground for people to advocate policies related to the environment without being authoritarian. For example, I advocated restoration of the wolves to Yellowstone, attended events and donated money towards that and similar causes. What I have a problem with are causes such as "climate change" that are at best tangentially related to the environment. Ditto garbage recycling, or most of it These activists do not know nor care if their activities create any benefit at all; it makes them feel good.

So I would rephrase what you posted: "Conservationists are generally out there trying to do things that directly benefit the environment and nature. Environmentalists are out there trying feel good by telling other people to live in harmony with nature."

On a separate note I even petted an animal yesterday that was 97% wolf chromosomally yesterday. It licked my hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 07:39 AM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,828 posts, read 41,843,630 times
Reputation: 43201
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
....

On a separate note I even petted an animal yesterday that was 97% wolf chromosomally yesterday. It licked my hand.
My son who works part time for a caterer says that was a tasting tour to see what tastes good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Portal to the Pacific
5,025 posts, read 5,030,746 times
Reputation: 6201
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
I think there is some reasonable ground for people to advocate policies related to the environment without being authoritarian. For example, I advocated restoration of the wolves to Yellowstone, attended events and donated money towards that and similar causes. What I have a problem with are causes such as "climate change" that are at best tangentially related to the environment. Ditto garbage recycling, or most of it These activists do not know nor care if their activities create any benefit at all; it makes them feel good.

So I would rephrase what you posted: "Conservationists are generally out there trying to do things that directly benefit the environment and nature. Environmentalists are out there trying feel good by telling other people to live in harmony with nature."

On a separate note I even petted an animal yesterday that was 97% wolf chromosomally yesterday. It licked my hand.
People who are more into sustainability are trying to protect the planet to benefit people. People who are environmentalists are trying to protect the planet without necessarily benefiting people.

Conservationists can cut both ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 08:47 AM
 
Location: Land of the Great Bears
3,424 posts, read 1,873,116 times
Reputation: 3665
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingsaucermom View Post
People who are environmentalists are trying to protect the planet without necessarily benefiting people.
Protecting the planet benefits people, though the benefit may not be immediate enough for some people to appreciate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 09:14 AM
 
Location: New York Area
15,567 posts, read 6,140,705 times
Reputation: 12126
These threads are similar, How do we protect the environment with a Republican Clean Sweep ? A mod should think about merging them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Haiku
3,886 posts, read 2,517,961 times
Reputation: 5676
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingsaucermom View Post
People who are more into sustainability are trying to protect the planet to benefit people. People who are environmentalists are trying to protect the planet without necessarily benefiting people.
I would agree with that categorization. The thing that has always worried me about the sustainability camp is that it ends up being a mechanism by which we can continue to grow the human population. For instance, more efficient agricultural practices means more food per acre, but more food means it is cheaper so having larger families is more affordable. This is what happened in India in the 60's as a result of the so-called Green Revolution.

Sustainability never leads to a situation where we shrink the amount of arable land and decrease the human footprint.

But I am not sure environmentalism is any better. The trouble with environmentalism is that it often is done in an ad hoc manner, lurching from crisis to crisis, putting band aids on whatever we broke. We end up playing god, trying to determine what the right number of salmon should be migrating up the Columbia River, or what the right number of Northern Spotted Owls should be. Or whether it is OK to sacrifice one species in favor of another (like killing sea lions to protect dwindling salmon). Or how much CO2 we can allow in the atmosphere, or what temperature the ocean should (so it does not kill coral). That whole thing bothers me also. We should not even be to the point where we need to step in and play god with all the other creatures on the planet and micromanage chemicals and temperatures that we caused to be out of balance. We simply have way over-stepped our bounds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2016, 11:59 AM
 
Location: New Mexico U.S.A.
25,196 posts, read 41,162,051 times
Reputation: 29252
The thread:

How do we protect the environment with a Republican Clean Sweep ?

and

Is climate denieing Trump threat to Green living?

Have been merged...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top