Sie müssen Brand Viagra nur bei derviagra apothekeViagra Brand ist für jene Patienten nicht angezeigt, die eine andere Medizin gegen

Cialis is cheaper than brand pills, and you can always afford normal treatmentcialis onlineCialis online simply place your order, use your credit card to pay for your pillscialistaking erection pills to support your compromised erectile function (you will not have to take Cialis for the rest of your life.There is only one place to play from Online Casinos.casinoPlay Online Slots.Usually the recommended dose is 50 mg Viagra.ViagraViagra 100mg

Land Ethics- An Idea of the Past or a Solution for the Future?

by Yvette on November 2, 2009 · 3 comments

in Philosophy,Urbanism

Yvette, as many of you know by know, is interning with us. This is her second post (catch up with the first). Read it and grace her with some of your expertise and ideas in the comments.

With every year that passes it seems like more rich farmland is being converted into sprawling residential developments forcing food to travel farther and farther to our dinner plates and as a result increasing the carbon footprint. When you live in the suburbs you are almost as likely to see deer, skunks, and possums on the road as you are other drivers because their habitat is slowly disappearing. There are millions of car dependent communities across the country and with this dependency comes wider roads and highways along with massive parking lots significantly reducing groundwater recharge. Where are our land ethics?

As children we are taught about the ethical treatment of human beings but what abut the ethical treatment of land? We are dependent upon land resources for survival yet as a society we have lack an appreciation and admiration for it.

Aldo Leopold championed the idea of land ethics. Land ethics is a perspective of ecological planning. It is a way to view man in relation to the environment. Land ethics should hold a particular standard which maintains the beauty, and high standards of environmental consciousness because it is immoral to set inferior criterion.

Our minimal value of land is largely due to the fact that man views himself as separate from nature. He sees himself as an all-powerful being with no relation or dependence on the world around him or her.

A large part of our disconnection from nature is that we spend so little time in our natural environment. We spend 90% of our day indoors away from grass, trees, flowers, animals, and all the other pleasant amenities nature has to offer. Our water is piped though the walls and seems to almost magically appear on demand. We can call on any natural amenity with such ease and as a result we forget that water actually came from a natural resource. When we are hungry we do not need to pick tomatoes or butcher a cow, we simply have to enter a supermarket that will supply us with endless options of food to satisfy our nourishment or indulgence.

If man begins to immerse him or herself with nature we will begin to reconnect with our environment. Reconnecting with nature by growing your own vegetables or even taking a few moments out of the day to appreciate natural beauty will help to create a lifelong relationship filled with love, admiration, and respect.

The clock is ticking and with every passing day we become more entrenched in global warming. The sea levels are rising as our quality of living is lowering. Could land ethics lead to the solution of our environmental worries? Is the issue of land ethics even a reality or was Aldo Leopold off base? Do you feel connected with nature? Do you feel you or those around you appreciate land and treat it with respect?

Please comment, I would love to hear what you think!

If you enjoyed reading this post I can promise you'll love our new writing over at Postgreen Homes. Yeah, we know that's the same thing your favorite band said and their new album is nowhere near as good as their early stuff, but seriously, we are actually still getting better.

There also isn't much conversation to be had here . . . at least not with us. So come on over to the Postgreen Homes Blog and tell us what you think of our new(ish) digs and crazy ideas. We will be sure to tell you what we think of your opinion.

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

1 ed November 2, 2009 at 5:08 pm

As a student of Architecture I am glad to be apart of the “green” movement. It’s about time we begin to recognize the impact that the 1950′s and 60′s sub-urban sprawl has had on our environment as well as our society. This idea is a failed experiment and we have to change the mentality of the world inorder to save it. Our over consumption of the natural resources the earth has provided has left us in an age of deterioration of the planet. We are killing our planet with the choices our parents made and now it’s time we nourished the earth and use it’s resources to the best of our ability and sparingly.

2 Rita November 3, 2009 at 10:35 am

I live in farm country and it is not urban sprawl that is casuing farmers to sell out to developers. The sad truth of the matter is that price control, market control and corporate control have prevented most suburban framers from making a decent living. Repeatedly I see situations where farming at best becomes a breakeven business where the spouse and children need to go out and get city jobs just to keep the farm from being a loss.
That’s really a terrible situation. Perhaps instead of each election day (which is today) instead of voting for millions of dollars in land preservation we vote to allow the price of milk go up a few cents and vote for farmer subsidies so that we can keep this part of American alive and healthy while at the same time preserving productive land and businesses that actually puts local food on our tables.

3 tom toolbag November 4, 2009 at 5:50 pm

Why should we use land? When it comes to farmland, it’s like everything else. GREED. I live in Illinois and there are 27 million acres of farmland. The average age of farmers is right at 60 y/o. The majority of farmers in Illinois work 200 days or more OFF the farm, and get MORE THAN HALF their income from off the farm. There are 1.9 million farms today natiowide, down from 8.8 million after WW2, and 1/2 of all farmland will change hands from the current owner in less than 15 years.
Consider this. Some farmland here has tripled in per/acre price in 25-30 years, but grain prices are the same, except recently have inched up because of inflation. Livestock prices are the same with pork drastically lower. Seed, fertilizer, equipment and taxes have all risen though. Farmers don’t have a choice but to chase money(subsidized crops) just to survive. Ag subsidies are just a way to buy votes and channel money to banks and Wall Street. Look at the latest farm bill, politicians wanted to cut it bank, because the bang-for-the-buck that it has for votes is nill. One thing they kept was crop insurance subsidies, the premiums that are paid by the gov’t. Why? Because the premiums goes to Wall Street. THEY CAN SUBSIDIZE SOMETHING ELSE THAT RETURNS FAR MORE VOTES NOW.
If you have to subsidize a business or sector, are they artificially “propped up” or in other words, is the demand there? Where is all the subsidy money going to? Banks! One small change in the tax code allowed farmers to offset taxes by buying equipment, so you now have massively inflated equipment prices, both new and used, not to mention the majority of the purchase price is financed. This is ON TOP OF their annual operating loans, that eats up around 40% of profit yearly.Go to AG Online, it’s a web-site of a farm magazine and click onto the talk button for the message boards
and read some of the issues that are “discussed” there. If you can get past the “Obama is a commie-socialist” crap, you can see the disgust and get an idea for the problems and issues that they face now. Ironically, health issues are a major problem in the farm communities because of access to, and cost, and a lot of farmers and/or their wives have to work off the farm for health insurance, but they think that universal health-care is an “Obomination”. Then again, every time politicians have kicked them in the teeth, it’s been done by the very ones they support… republicans. Just look at the 1980′s, with their dear “RONNY” Reagan, and remember the crisis he put them through, and the AG. Sec. was from 25 miles from where I grew up, John Block, yea the same farmer that went BANKRUPT! The oppress, then find a solution or give-a-farmer-a-bone trick works every time. It’s a form of indentured servitude. Oppress, then give them a little money to survive, and constantly threaten to take that money away. IT’S DISGUSTING!
What’s this got to do with land? Well it explains how it is currently being used. Although the american diet isn’t grain-based, 70% of corn grown goes to feed animals that we consume as a meat-based diet. Supposedly it is a sign of how advanced our society is, and an indication of of the staus of a countries’ advancement. Buuuuuuut…..heart disease and related deathes are the leading cause of death in our country.
Why not grow our “food” in greenhouses where it is more efficient and a far more controlled environment? Know any empty manufacturing buildings sitting around that could be converted onto a greenhouse?

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: