Destination Resorts And Global Warming - Lizbeth Adams, Seattle

[Sent to the members of the Senate Rules Committee:]

I am writing again to express my strong support of SB 30 as it was originally conceived, and to ask you to throw the full weight of your power AGAINST the development of the Metolius River wilderness area. There are many powerful arguments that can be and have been made against the destruction of this pristine and irreplaceable piece of nature. My argument hinges upon the impending crisis of global warming and upon your responsibility as elected officials to make policies and establish precedents that will begin to reverse this catastrophic climactic course on which we have found ourselves.

In the context of global warming, it goes without saying that building 3500 homes to which people will commute long distances every day is an act of grave irresponsibility. Add to that the destruction of trees to make way for those houses and the crime becomes more serious. Then consider the destruction of wildlife habitats, pollution of watersheds, and disassembling of ecosystems, and the project becomes frankly inexcusable. Building a bunch of houses in order that a relatively few number of people may benefit financially simply does not provide adequate cause for obliterating this beautiful and precious area.

The Metolius is one river in one state in a large country on a very large planet. It could be argued that the fate of this little piece of paradise is of no great consequence to the world as a whole and that it is fatuous to cry "global warming!" when considering the impact of such a small area.

But this is exactly where the destruction must stop and where a new and necessary model of caring for and preserving our planet must be implemented. How can we ask China to stop building coal-powered electrical plants if we the United States are unwilling to take steps to clean up our own air and water and develop alternative energy sources? How can we ask India to exhibit better stewardship of this planet if we are unwilling to modify the patterns of gross energy consumption and waste that contribute so clearly to the poisoning of our atmosphere? And how can we expect the federal government to create policies with teeth if they have no evidence of concern or compliance at the local level? This IS an area that can be controlled. This is an area where we and you can make a difference. And as our elected officials, you not only have the power to start creating intelligent and transformative laws and policies, you have a responsibility to do so. We do not stand a chance of reversing global warming unless we all devote our individual and collective efforts to the task. I ask you to set an example and create a model for positive moral treatment of the environment. Please preserve the Metolius.

Lizbeth Adams, PhD
Seattle, WA