Field of choices

 

“And even environmentalists who oppose both projects agree that with annual park visitation expected to double to 10 million by mid-century, more beds and infrastructure are needed.” This next-to-last sentence in the informative “State of the Grand” (HCN, 5/4/16) fades into a disturbing whimper without challenge. It implies and allows no imagined alternative to the presumption that there is no end in sight of the desire for consumption. A Field of Dreams inversion: Because they will come, we will build it. Is it so easy to accept the ideology of development — “more is better” — as an accommodating truism? Consider a “Field of Choices.” There are many worthy models of how visitation and access is limited to preserve treasured places, enhance habitat for animals and plants, and reduce destructive impacts on land and water. Call it “Meander of the Grand.”

Douglas Beauchamp
Eugene, Oregon