Max More wrote:
> At 11:13 AM 3/10/99 -0500, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >
> >It is an excellent idea. The "Extropic Earth" movement in my opinion,
> should work as a synergizer to encourage industry to invest in such
> projects, perhaps it could push for such regs, where if, say someone want
> to build a dam that threatens a species like the snail darter, they must
> construct habitat for the species elsewhere to compensate, just as many
> developers do now with wetlands. I know advocating government regs is
> anathema to most on the list, but it is how the current system works.
>
> This is not the *only* way the system works and, despite some people's
> attempt to paint me as statism-friendly, I would be strongly opposed to
> encouraging any such regulations. In fact, I would support lobbying efforts
> to abolish the EPA.
How about state level environmental agencies? How about the Army Corps of Engineers control over any damp spot of land under the justification that it is a 'waterway' (under that justification, any game trail should be under the control of the highway department. "Hey mr. rabbit, where is your driver's license?")?
> One other way that is already being used is best exemplified by the Nature
> Conservancy. I was a member some years ago and should look into renewing
> (after checking out what they've been up to). In contrast to groups that
> look to government to force people to preserve areas of land unchanged, the
> Nature Conservancy raises money then *buys* the land and sets it aside so
> that it is not built upon. I presume this could sometimes actually bring in
> a profit to the NC, if they charged a fee for hikers, limited camping
> activities, etc.
I don't like the fact that the NC has been involved in the efforts in NH and VT to shut down all logging operations just because one specimen of a non-native bat species which is endangered was found in bat caves on private property (one in VT and one in NH, which sounds kinda fishy to me). Its forcing logging companies to give away the townships they own to the conservation groups, and long time tenant leaseholders, like my family, will lose their leases when these out of state groups take over the land.
Its basically a strategy for city slickers to steal their own game preserves, and get free cabins (ours) to boot, while excluding the locals who were on the land previously. Some of them came by a couple years ago to try to talk the local camp owners into joining their group. We all told them to take a hike.
I'm working on forming a Leaseholders Conservation Association in the township our cabin is in, so that when the paper company gets pressured into giving up the township, we'll have primacy to take control of the town.
> >An idea I had for private species recovery would to possibly make a
> lottery system,
> > where people can buy as many tickets they want, voting for the species they
> > want to see brought back. When some magic number of dollars is reached,
> > the ticket selected as the winner decides which species 'wins' the
> >dollars for its reintroduction.
>
> I think this kind of idea is exactly the sort of constructive response we
> should be making (*in addition to* showing that the environmental problems
> are not as bad as many make them out to be, and that in many respects we're
> making steady progress). Before you can bring back species, you need a DNA
> sample (though eventually, with enough computing power, we should be able
> to reconstruct the probably genetic configuration of lost species from
> related ones). I haven't heard what they have been up to lately, but
> several people have talked about projects to preserve tissue samples of
> endangered species. Gregory Benford wrote about the LifeArk Project (or
> similar name), and the Foresight Institute talked about the Bioarchive
> Project. Anyone know what became of these? Once the ExI web site changes
> (explained in the Exponent that I'll be putting up very soon) are underway,
> there should be a section for information on projects like these.
>
> Any more ideas for what to call this approach? "High Tech Free Market
> Environmentalism" is a mouthful. "Extropic Earth" excludes off-planet
> ecologies. Maybe simply "Extropian Environmentalism"?
I'm not too concerned with off planet ecologies at the moment, and using the Extropic Earth name will help dilute the radical influence of such groups as 'Earth First' (as much as I respect their dedication and fervency, no matter how badly directed). Once we discover an exo-ecology, we can address conserving it. Extropic Earth also, to me, exudes a homey, "we are all in this together" quality that should inspire the joiners to get evangelized about applying extropic concepts to environmental practices.
Coming up with a detailed strategy of extropoesis using extropic concepts like my re-animation lottery should be a priority, and have it published and distributed to the more rational environmental groups as position papers.
Mike Lorrey