What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
76 Comments
- Akaji, on 10/11/2007, -21/+74Dugg for trying to get yourself buried.
- gordonm, on 10/11/2007, -13/+43I thought about digging you up, to spite you, but then I thought about it further, and just blocked your useless ass.
- PhantomBantam, on 10/11/2007, -0/+26I love the nature conservancy. Brilliant example of the private sector doing its thing.
- burkinaboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18See a great New York Times article covering this story @ http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/nyregion/19adirondacks.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
FTA: "Eventually some parts of the property being sold — which has been closed to the public since Ulysses S. Grant was president — could be opened for limited public recreational use, though that has not yet been decided." I'd love to go hiking in land that's been left in a natural state for 130 years! - SilentSpyder, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14Build in and up, not out.
- coldphoenix, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12@right
I sure hope that was sarcasm there. - redrock34, on 10/11/2007, -10/+22That place needs a Walmart!
- diggduggjoe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11I can imagine him running. He is not the type to let the Constitution stand in his way.
- coldphoenix, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12I know what you meant bigboomer, but the way you said it just made you sound snobby and stuckup.
- Tabris, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Because that's the government doing what it's supposed to, letting private entities do their thing. Why should the government prevent them from buying that much land?
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7The Adirondacks are beautiful.
If any of you ever get the chance to, go. - Ellsass, on 11/05/2008, -0/+6@silentspyder
"If they do make it for recreational use, I hope they don't pave anything, dirt paths if anything. And if anyone wants to trek into it, they gotta do it the hard way, Lewis and Clark style."
Dirt paths might actually help conserve it. If people are left to their own devices, they might think they're Indiana Jones and haphazardly slash through brush with their machetes, starting campfires that spread into forest fires, and generally make a mess of things. Paved roads would be bad, yes, but a simply dirt path to guide people along the same routes would go a long way to keeping things intact. - hasslinthehoff, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7WTF are you talking about? The Nature Conservancy doesn't "preserve" the lands like the Forest Service, which runs roads right through sensitive habitats and preps forests for free logging by the logging industry. This is the Nature Conservancy, which uses forestry science practices and ecology to keep forests intact and preserves ecosystems from damage. They are probably the only organization I would trust to preserve habitats and forest ecosystems. They don't whine and file injunctions. They just buy the ***** land and do it. That's my kind of organization.
- SilentSpyder, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9If they do make it for recreational use, I hope they don't pave anything, dirt paths if anything. And if anyone wants to trek into it, they gotta do it the hard way, Lewis and Clark style.
- thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Hopefully they will manage it well and not try to turn it into a preservation. Trying to preserve land "exactly as it is" is one of those things that's impossible. And sometimes its even destructive to the area that's being "saved".
- jeffiek, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Another hole shot in the theory that we need government to protect the envirionment.
- aahpandasrun, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Adirondack Park is MASSIVE. It's in upstate New York and is around the size of New Jersey.
Google Maps Image:
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o186/aahpandasrun/adirondack.jpg - tritiumpie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Well I know where my next $110 tax-deductable contribution is going. :-)
And if a million other digg-ers care to do the same, we can hopefully get the loans paid and free The Nature Conservancy to do this again... and again... and again... and protect the last shreds of truly wild places from urban sprawl, deforestation, you-name-it. - rhabd0mancer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4"tax roles"
Jesus Tap-dancing Christ, you are a moron. - amillion3, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7Conservation of our natural resources is always a good thing!
- noodlez, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4site isn't down, its just dropping some connections
- m00dc0ntr0l, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Except when by doing so you drive up the price of lumber and the use of more fossil fuels to go and retrieve lumber from places even further flung than Upstate New York -- see the pictures of the amazon that the Nature Conservancy couldn't buy (but we ultimately bought by building our homes):
http://centripetalnotion.com/2007/03/12/22:31:33/ - ewonder, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3$62.11 per acre, I want in on that action!
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah, entire towns. Factories even. It's still an amazingly beautiful place. They've taken measures to fight further development at every turn, so when you drive between the towns you really get a sense of what the area looked like 100's of years ago ...the same!
- funkytaco, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3The Adirondacks are beautiful and great for skiing. I'm glad it's being protected!
- gadimus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In Canada trees eat people.
- iDragonFly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm in.
- euunog, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The site was very slow for me; I think it is going.
MIrror: http://www.nature.org.nyud.net:8090/wherewework/northamerica/states/newyork/press/press3018.html - xSEED, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2good
- PhantomBantam, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2We don't really care what your real name is.
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Also, don't worry, yet another Native American tribe will take New York State to court and try to challenge some treaty from the 1600s signed with the French and just end up building yet another casino, this time in the Adirondacks.
- SourWorm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://www.nature.org.nyud.net:8080/wherewework/northamerica/states/newyork/press/press3018.html
- thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I was just stating what I HOPED they would do. Jeeze... learn to read a statement... not read into it your own bias.
- euunog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://www.nature.org.nyud.net:8090/wherewework/northamerica/states/newyork/press/press3018.html
- iDragonFly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This is very happy news.
Thumbs up Nature Conservancy! - aahpandasrun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I think it's time for duggmirrormirror
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+175,000 for 3 acres in winnipeg. but thats in a "place thats gunna be crazy developed in 10 years"
- TroubledMind, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Actually the Native American's were barely in the Adirondacks, they only went in there sometimes for hunting, there were never permanent settlements, they were mostly restricted to the Mohawk Valley
- SilentSpyder, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1but they could or their sons could.
- SilentSpyder, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I heart NJ
- Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Oh look, private conservation.
- burkinaboy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Works now @ http://duggmirror.com/environment/161_000_acres_protected_from_development_in_New_York_hi_res_photos/
- reeftool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This seems like a good thing. I'm an Adirondack Park resident and not far from this area. Finch has kept most of that area closed off for years and this may open it up a little more for recreational use.
- MothBoy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Who lives around the area? A favorite trick in many parts of the country (if you are filthy rich) is to buy large spreads and then surround yourself with tens of thousands of acres of "conservation" land unavailable for public use. It gives them a nice cheap and enormous buffer that they don't have to pay for (except for the contributions to conservancy groups).
- Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Looks like someone broke out their thesaurus to spin the description.
- JesseJ, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1and then Bush confiscates it and cuts down every tree and makes the whole place into an ass rape factory. And no-one does anything.
- Apreche, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4I can't be the only person who would rather have buildings than trees.
- lafindumonde, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Well done. In fact, Adirondack means "bark eater," a term derived from the exiled natives sent to the ADK's to die. Along the route of starvation, many were said to have eaten the bark off the trees in an attempt to survive. 1.
- astanhope, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is such a good thing. Public conservation is better. Why wouldn't everyone support keeping ANWR preserved as is and spare it from oil extraction development? It's the same thing.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I know someone down in Florida with 75,000 acres. They haven't touched it in years and have never sold any.
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 