Coal divestment a start
A Jan. 26 BDN article discussed the partial divestment from coal by the University of Maine System. Anyone who saw the campaign would understand firsthand how passionate Mainers are about preserving our environment. People are becoming more concerned about how climate change will affect them in the future.
Maine has seen a large increase in precipitation rates and the endangerment of some land and aquatic species. These are only some of the negative effects that climate change causes, and if Maine cannot reduce the rate of growing temperatures, then we are bound to experience other effects. Residents of Maine already want to see change, and if the state can work towards reducing environmental effects even more, they will become a model that other states could follow.
One of the largest contributors to climate change is greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. Even though a decent amount of Maine’s electricity comes from renewable sources such as water and biomass, the state still has large investments in fossil fuels and resources that degrade the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan has worked to dramatically decrease the emissions that power plants give off during production. Supporting this plan and following its guidelines is the most effective way that Maine could reduce its environmental effects. Power plants are the largest contributor to climate change, and Maine needs to deal with these problems directly at the source if it wants to see its own beauty remain unchanged.
Cameron Goodwin
Orono
Asking for directions
What level of repression and pride must columnist Sarah Smiley possess to refuse to ask directions of strangers, preferring to wander aimlessly, thus wasting time and making her children late for their activities (BDN, Feb. 15)?
Since my early 20s, I have traveled the world, mostly alone, before the invention of GPS and cellphones, and I have enjoyed the most amazing encounters with strangers of whom I have asked directions. I’ve learned far more about a place and its people by asking for directions than I’d ever find in a tourist brochure. To this day when traveling, I rely upon a map and the odd encounter with people, rather than a GPS system barking distracting orders in the car.
Juxtaposed above her column on the jump page was columnist Erin Donovan’s, in which she mentioned asking for directions from filling station attendants. Between the two columnists, I would vote Donovan as way more cool than Smiley. Donovan has the ability to not take herself so seriously that she’s afraid to look foolish. That is a very cool quality in a person, and one that I personally admire.
Kathleen Rogers
Ellsworth
National forest not park
The lengthy debate concerning economic development for the Katahdin region appears to be focused on the creation of a federal entity in the region. Converting tens of thousands of acres of working forestland into a national park/national recreational area is being highlighted. However, there is still substantial resistance against this kind of land-use conversion. While there are many who resist all federal interference in private land ownership, others are concerned primarily about future wood supply and its effects on existing and potential manufacture of a multitude of forest products.
A land-use model exists in New Hampshire that contains many of the elements needed to help satisfy both sides of the Katahdin region debate. It is the White Mountain National Forest. Much public confusion exists concerning the federal status of this national forest. A substantial number of the estimated 2.9 million annual visitors to the White Mountain National Forest actually think, if even for short periods of time, that they are in a national park. Scientific forest management, including timber harvesting, is public policy in all national forests, while the policy for the management of national parks strictly forbids the removal of trees for commercial purposes.
The momentum for a federal entity near Millinocket must be directed to the process most likely to keep jobs and create additional jobs. Clearly, a national forest is more likely to accomplish this goal. A national park with a restrictive land-use policy, including no commercial forestry activities, falls short of maximizing employment opportunities.
Robert M. Frank, Jr.
Hampden