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.
If people in Montana really care about their land, they should take a look at what the mining companies and cattle ranches have done--and are doing-- to it. There's a very interesting chapter in Jared Diamond's "Collapse" devoted entirely to the destruction of Montana. You would find it very interesting, I'm sure.
If people in Montana really care about their land, they should take a look at what the mining companies and cattle ranches have done--and are doing-- to it. There's a very interesting chapter in Jared Diamond's "Collapse" devoted entirely to the destruction of Montana. You would find it very interesting, I'm sure.
This is a great point. Diamond is a great author, btw.
Also interesting is the conflict between ranchers and grazing rights, and groups like the Western Watersheds Project, which tries to buy up grazing rights and retire them.
There is a serious environmental concern about free range public lands cattle grazing, and the effects that it has on watersheds, promoting invasive grass and plant species (cheat grass killing out native plants), etc. But most farmers see the WWP as a radical conservation group out to harm their way of life, and tend to resist the efforts of WWP.
Originally Posted by MovingForward
If people in Montana really care about their land, they should take a look at what the mining companies and cattle ranches have done--and are doing-- to it. There's a very interesting chapter in Jared Diamond's "Collapse" devoted entirely to the destruction of Montana. You would find it very interesting, I'm sure.
Interseting point....you know, years ago myself like many others, rightly or wrongly were really concerned about what the timber and mining industries were doing to the state.......but in light of what is happening now with - call it sprawl - as it turns out it's the invasion of people and sprawl that is what is really ruining montana.......looking back the timber and mining industries were not nearly the destructive force that growth/sprawl of today is.....for example - all those clear cuts are growing back, while a shopping malls or McMansion subdivision will never grow back - it's lost forever.
I have been reading what people have been saying and now i feel badly that i posted a message asking about apartments in livingston.
I travel around a lot and i like living in different places... i dont have loads of money and i like to keep life VERY simple. i am usually in it for the scenery..thats my big love... fresh air...sunshine and the scenery...
i had no idea people would be so angry about it. that explains why i most likely wont get any response to my post about apartments in livingston.
well... ok .... i have to say all this is very interesting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by halliwellalien
i have been reading the posts here, and most of what i have been reading makes it seem like some of you just dont want ANYONE to move to montana. you blame everything on the 'outsiders'. have you ever thought that some of us want to go to a place where we can live and survive?
where i live now, a 3bd 1 ba house with a very small yard (if any) will cost you about 700k. i have lived here most of my life and i am already sad about having to leave. but, i am not bitter toward anyone who moves here. whether they have money or not. change will happen whether you like it or not.
please stop blaming everyone for the bad things. good and bad are everywhere. some of us really do want to move to montana because of the beauty we see. not to make it worse.
If people in Montana really care about their land, they should take a look at what the mining companies and cattle ranches have done--and are doing-- to it. There's a very interesting chapter in Jared Diamond's "Collapse" devoted entirely to the destruction of Montana. You would find it very interesting, I'm sure.
This is a terribly simplistic view of Montanans, mining and ranching that shows little understanding of the natural environment.
People in Montana DO care about the land. We do look at the impacts of mining, ranching and logging.
Mining has left behind many messes in Montana that the mining companies now refuse to acknowledge as their responsibility. Mining companies, for the most part, promised in the past to clean up after themselves but instead, left huge scars behind and now refuse to clean up; many of those that previously didn't mind mining have become jaded and distrustful of mining companies. I think we've learned our lesson from it. We most recently voted against legislation that would allow cyanide heap-leach gold mining.
Cattle ranching is not always destructive and there are many responsible land stewards among ranchers. In fact the Nature Conservancy has some conservation easements on ranch lands that they still allow cattle to graze on--certainly an organization dedicated to conservation wouldn't allow destruction on their lands
I have read Diamond too. Diamond presents some interesting and valid points. His Montana focus is on the Bitterroot; he owns a vacation home there. He also tends focus on environmental destruction as a cause of societal collaspe. First of all, I don't agree with the factors he states led to environmental destruction in Montana and interestingly enough, he minimizes his contribution to the Bitterroot's destruction.
Ranching and logging were traditional industries in the Bitterroot. Investigate the history, both cultural and environmental, of the Bitterroot and you will see that the destruction there has not occurred from environmental damage from long time ranchers but instead from the increasing environmental pressure and damage from the influx of people like Diamond, who just MUST have their vacation home there, and it always MUST be smack dab in wildlife habitat. I wouldn't exactly call him or those similar environmental responsible.
Now consider the total environmental impacts of those huge and not so huge vacation homes and subdivisions . First off, how about all the resources the McMansions take to build and the footprint they leave on the environment and for what--to be used a few times a year by a few people. Tell me how that is responsible for the environment. Most of these same people who claim to be so ENVIRONMENTAL are a JOKE. I look at them and laugh at their hypocrisy, especially since many ranchers I know are actually responsible land stewards being called bad guys by these PSEUDO-ENVIRONMENTALIST McMansion owners and others that move here with no understanding and respect for environment.
Logging also gets a bad reputation, sometimes undeservedly. Diamond makes it sound like we've destroyed our logging industry through overcutting. Logging didn't stop in Montana thorough environmental destruction, logging was effectively halted because much of the timber is found on Forest Service land and virtually every FS timber sale ends up in appeal. Again, I may not agree with every timber sale but to stranglehold a whole industry because you don't want ANY trees cut is ridiculous. There are situations where cutting timber would help the overall environment, not harm it. No one wants to see destructive forest fires and in the past, yes the forest cleaned itself through fire. But this is not the past, humans have encroached upon the forests and built houses right where these cleansing fires should take place (especially those pseudo-environmentalists). Yet no one wants to lose their home to a fire. It is a catch 22--they want to live in the woods, yet they don't want logging, even to clean up the beetle-killed dead and dry standing timber and when a fire starts in their neighborhood, they want you to try to protect their home when it is all but impossible at times to do much of anything once a fire starts rolling.
This lack of true environmental understanding and accompanying pseudo-environmentalism are things that I find so distasteful in many of those coming here to Montana. Subdivisions, McMansions, etc. have cause much more environmental damage than logging or ranching ever have. Diamond, despite having a vacation home here, looks at it from an outsider point of view. His opinion is that Montana is kept alive by outside money and if Montana were an isolated country, it would collapse. I agree that currently, Montana is being bought and sold by outside interests, leaving us in economic disaster. However, if Montana were its own country, with the lessons we've learned, we would kick out the huge companies that have left environmental problems for us to clean up, and do it ourselves--more responsibly since it is our home. Plus we could put a moratorium on the number of people moving here and eliminate that environmental disaster.
I have been reading what people have been saying and now i feel badly that i posted a message asking about apartments in livingston.
I travel around a lot and i like living in different places... i dont have loads of money and i like to keep life VERY simple. i am usually in it for the scenery..thats my big love... fresh air...sunshine and the scenery...
i had no idea people would be so angry about it. that explains why i most likely wont get any response to my post about apartments in livingston.
well... ok .... i have to say all this is very interesting.
We tend to do the same thing you are doing...so don't feel bad. It's not that people don't want to answer you out of meaness, apartments are not really prevelent in the smaller cities. You may have to look for a duplex or a house. If an apartment is what you have to get you may have to look in a bigger city or look in the local paper.
This is a terribly simplistic view of Montanans, mining and ranching that shows little understanding of the natural environment.
People in Montana DO care about the land. We do look at the impacts of mining, ranching and logging.
Mining has left behind many messes in Montana that the mining companies now refuse to acknowledge as their responsibility. Mining companies, for the most part, promised in the past to clean up after themselves but instead, left huge scars behind and now refuse to clean up; many of those that previously didn't mind mining have become jaded and distrustful of mining companies. I think we've learned our lesson from it. We most recently voted against legislation that would allow cyanide heap-leach gold mining.
Cattle ranching is not always destructive and there are many responsible land stewards among ranchers. In fact the Nature Conservancy has some conservation easements on ranch lands that they still allow cattle to graze on--certainly an organization dedicated to conservation wouldn't allow destruction on their lands
I have read Diamond too. Diamond presents some interesting and valid points. His Montana focus is on the Bitterroot; he owns a vacation home there. He also tends focus on environmental destruction as a cause of societal collaspe. First of all, I don't agree with the factors he states led to environmental destruction in Montana and interestingly enough, he minimizes his contribution to the Bitterroot's destruction.
Ranching and logging were traditional industries in the Bitterroot. Investigate the history, both cultural and environmental, of the Bitterroot and you will see that the destruction there has not occurred from environmental damage from long time ranchers but instead from the increasing environmental pressure and damage from the influx of people like Diamond, who just MUST have their vacation home there, and it always MUST be smack dab in wildlife habitat. I wouldn't exactly call him or those similar environmental responsible.
Now consider the total environmental impacts of those huge and not so huge vacation homes and subdivisions . First off, how about all the resources the McMansions take to build and the footprint they leave on the environment and for what--to be used a few times a year by a few people. Tell me how that is responsible for the environment. Most of these same people who claim to be so ENVIRONMENTAL are a JOKE. I look at them and laugh at their hypocrisy, especially since many ranchers I know are actually responsible land stewards being called bad guys by these PSEUDO-ENVIRONMENTALIST McMansion owners and others that move here with no understanding and respect for environment.
Logging also gets a bad reputation, sometimes undeservedly. Diamond makes it sound like we've destroyed our logging industry through overcutting. Logging didn't stop in Montana thorough environmental destruction, logging was effectively halted because much of the timber is found on Forest Service land and virtually every FS timber sale ends up in appeal. Again, I may not agree with every timber sale but to stranglehold a whole industry because you don't want ANY trees cut is ridiculous. There are situations where cutting timber would help the overall environment, not harm it. No one wants to see destructive forest fires and in the past, yes the forest cleaned itself through fire. But this is not the past, humans have encroached upon the forests and built houses right where these cleansing fires should take place (especially those pseudo-environmentalists). Yet no one wants to lose their home to a fire. It is a catch 22--they want to live in the woods, yet they don't want logging, even to clean up the beetle-killed dead and dry standing timber and when a fire starts in their neighborhood, they want you to try to protect their home when it is all but impossible at times to do much of anything once a fire starts rolling.
This lack of true environmental understanding and accompanying pseudo-environmentalism are things that I find so distasteful in many of those coming here to Montana. Subdivisions, McMansions, etc. have cause much more environmental damage than logging or ranching ever have. Diamond, despite having a vacation home here, looks at it from an outsider point of view. His opinion is that Montana is kept alive by outside money and if Montana were an isolated country, it would collapse. I agree that currently, Montana is being bought and sold by outside interests, leaving us in economic disaster. However, if Montana were its own country, with the lessons we've learned, we would kick out the huge companies that have left environmental problems for us to clean up, and do it ourselves--more responsibly since it is our home. Plus we could put a moratorium on the number of people moving here and eliminate that environmental disaster.
I'm not from Montana and never plan to live there. But, I am greatly attached to Southern Oregon, where I've lived for the majority of my life, and hate to see what 'progress' is doing to the community. Crime has absolutely gone up over the years, and rapidly getting worse (compared to it being non-existant 10 years ago). But at the same time, a lot of these people move hear because they want a better life for their families and themselves, so I can't blame them for what they want. Whether they're bad or good people, they want a better life just like everyone else, including me.
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.
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.
WOW! i just read this ....
