Waiting for the Snow to Fall Analysis Section

I have been feeling for a while now, but trying to ignore, that ski resorts are kind of hypocritical. People go to them to enjoy the great out doors, but a ski resort by nature is destructive to the environment. The land has to be developed to even have a ski resort. Although some ski resorts use alternative cleaner energies, many do not. People don't want to have to work for that awesome run when they could much more easily ride the ski lift. We live in this society where people want things for free, and at first it can seem like some strategies make things come easier, and they do for a little while, but eventually you do have to pay up. Sometimes it's hard to see, but there is always some sort of price.

Whenever I read about sacred sites needing to be protected I completely agreed, but I feel like people need to see more places as sacred than the ones that for some reason have become known as sacred. Just as we value all people we must value all life and all forms. Every life form is sacred, not just the San Francisco Peaks. I mean that would be a lot more complicated to enforce in our current society, but it is a view that more people need to take on.

It is super lame that all of the organizations that are supposed to protect the environment do the opposite. I guess that's what happens in a capitalist society, or maybe its a conspiracy... or both... who knows. The only way to beat it is from the people though. People have to stand up for what they believe in and have confidence in themselves. Thats why things don't change, because people don't believe in themselves enough to think they could ever make a difference so they go on leading their stereotypical lives. Its also kind of creepy how people can feel alright with themselves when they make a huge selfish effort that destroys another people's values and culture...

Good luck world!

Final Proposal

The people of Nepal who are some of the least responsible for global warming are going to be directly effected by the consequences. Many of the glaciers in Nepal are expected to be gone within the next sixty years. Currently the glaciers are retreating at three to six feet every year. The glaciers provide water for irrigation and agriculture. With increased amounts of snow melt, the top soil is becoming eroded, making for less fertile land and flooding. In the mountains, as the glaciers melt, glacial lakes increase in volume and can exceed the capacity of their natural dams resulting in glacial lake outburst floods. These floods can wipe out entire mountain villages.

If the Nepalese want to survive climate change, they need to take immediate action throughout the entire country; unfortunately, the government has undergone some very recent major violent change, leaving it less stable than desirable. This is a country that was ruled by a monarchy for most of its history. Now, it operates as a multi-party republic, and the government hosted its first elections in 2008. Although this may appear to be progressive, the process was a violent and chaotic. The change began by the murder of The King and most of the royal family by one of the princes who then killed himself. Following the deaths the country split into many view points but the most powerful were the Maoists (who acquired their power mainly through indoctrination and violence) and the traditionalists who believed in the monarchy.

If the world doesn't want Nepal to be destroyed, it must first understand what the climate will do to the region. We must then understand what action needs to be taken in the country, as well as globally. Finally, we must understand what action can realistically be taken based on the stability and power of the Nepalese Government.

References:
New Nepal: The Fault Lines by Nishchal Nath Pandey
Darkening Peaks: Glacier Retreat, Science, and Society
Journeyman Pictures videos from You Tube
Plan to do more research using databases such as EBSCO

Waiting For The Snow to Fall Intro

So this weekend my Environmental Ed class went down to the South Fork of the American River for a pretty fabulous trip. On our first day there we explored "Pioneer Town" and heard one of the guides there talking about the history associated with the Gold Rush. I never really understood the process of gold mining before this weekend, but now that I have a better understanding I don't understand the things people go through to get their hands on certain... things. I don't understand how we prioritize and put value to objects or services. Gold basically forms in tiny open spaces between granite and quartz... so its almost like this cruddy but shiny substance. The whole process can be pretty degrading to the landscape as well as people's health. One of the ways of separating gold from other material involved using mercury. People value gold, which can literally make them sick, more than preserving a landscape that in the end could provide health to the people who take care of it...

How does this relate to a ski resort in Arizona? In terms of value. First of all it doesn't even sound like this place could naturally sustain a business in the first place. Since the environment doesn't produce enough snow to actually run a resort, the business wants to use reclaimed water to make snow. This water has chemicals in it from the process, which then will seep into the environment, potentially (and most likely) effecting people's long term heath. Not just the Native People's health, but possibly even tourist's and costumer's health....

Why are people so stupid?! ahhhh

Once again we see people putting more value on something that doesn't make any sense than on their own health.

And of course the health (physical, mental, spiritual) are much more immediate and eminent to the people who are Native to the land. I think things happened kind of similarly to those indigenous to the land around the American River.

People need to get their priorities strait. Stop doing things that don't make any sense, and start thinking about things that do make sense. Spraying poo water on a sacred mountain to make it snow where it doesn't snow doesn't make sense. Digging for something shiny that makes you sick doesn't make sense either.

Working with the land and natural patterns to create healthy and respectful human beings, things like permaculture, that makes sense.

Get real world. Please. Thanks.



Oh, I noticed an ordering in a sentence that made me think: "Leading the way is the Save the Peaks Coalition, along with the Sierra Club, Flagstaff Activists Network, Center for Biological Diversity, Grand Canyon Trust, as well as numerous Native American tribes opposed to the expansion plan." It kind of bothered me for a second that the Native American tribes were last in that sentence, but then I realized the order was probably written in terms of impact each group had, which is really sad. The people who are being effected the most have the least power in fighting, which makes them last in the sentence. I want them to be able to be first in that sentence, but the reason they are not is why we have this whole conflict in the first place. Yea, kind of redundant. Thats how my brain works, lots of circles.
aiight. im done. peace.

Final Ideas

So I've been thinking about my final paper, and at first I wanted to do the Zapatista Movement because I saw a souvenir Zapatista doll that my friend bought for her dad in a gift shop in Chiapas... or Oaxaca I can't remember.

But then after reading about climate change and glaciers melting I started thinking about Nepal because I'm going there, and I found a book about melting glaciers in mountains and it said that Nepal is going to be especially vulnerable to this situation because of the lack of organization in their government. I knew a little bit about the monarchy being overthrown... and then I asked Zanto what I should do and she said the maoist party in nepal.... so I researched and Maoism and Nepal in our library and found this book called New Nepal: The Fault Lines, and its all about the unstable structure of the Nepalese government, and so far it seems really interesting. So I think I want to do that as my project. Shaky Nepalese Gov't? Political Instability in Nepal? I don't know exactly how to word it because I am still learning about it.

It relates to our coursework in how it was inspired. It was inspired by the article about Tajikistan. It has to do with why unequal effects of global warming are especially unequal. The people of Nepal will be hit especially hard by global warming if the government isn't able to stabilize and start working toward important goals of human rights as well as begin implementing strategies for global warming adaptation.

It relates to social sustainability in the area of people deciding for themselves. The government has undergone these monumental changes because the people want representation. Under the caste system many nepali people were under represented and when the maoists came, they pledged a system that would bring greater equality; however, the maoists strategies are violent and the system is dated. Mao was a corrupt leader. Maoism and communism to me ring two very different bells and strategies. The old government, the monarchy is not a system that can keep up with the new ideas of the world. The monarchy and maoism were the main forces in Nepal. This is about where I've gotten up to in my research so far.

But this problem addresses social sustainability in the area of communication and listening to the people. The people's voices are lost between the two powerful forces.

So far, I've looked at a book called Darkening Peaks: glacier retreat, science, and society; New Nepal: The Fault Lines; and a lot a lot a lot of youtube videos. 

Really interesting stuff. really complicated issues.

Thoughts on Social Sustainability

So what is social sustainability? I think a big part of it is letting the people speak for themselves. This means really good listening, and communication. I think social sustainability has a lot to do with truth. So what does truth mean? I think truth has to do with meaning what you say as best as you understand it. Which comes back to communication, but it has to do with trying one's best at understanding a complex situation. Actually, in math (sorry I used to be a math nerd), the truest solution is the one in its simplest form, which is actually really interesting to think about in terms of social sustainability.....

There are some simple concepts that are socially sustainable: Fairness (equality) is one of them. How to make something equal, well that becomes pretty complex, when one takes into consideration existing societal structures, complex natural cycles, etc. Unequal effects of global warming is not fair. Rich people eating while poor people starve is not fair.

Social sustainability has to promote a healthy environment because without a healthy environment, we are dead.

Social sustainability has to be adaptable to change. Basically it should follow the principles of permaculture :)

Social Sustainability = Sustainability = Life (that equation can be switched around because people aren't the most important in my view... I'ld rather the people go and the earth stay rather than the earth go and the people stay, personally, but I'm going on a tangent)

Death of Environmentalism

I think the problem with systems is that they often don't leave room for adaptation. Actually, we always kind of deal with this issue: the tradition vs. the youth. The healthiest forms of... i don't know what to even call it... but the healthiest things... leave room for new ideas. Like how the constitution is a living breathing document... I don't know how great an example that was but what I am trying to say is that its not sooo bad that environmentalism might be dead.

The article spoke about how we always try to make the environment into something separate from humans, and it is completely part of us. We are part of the environment the environment is part of us. People slowly are beginning to realize this. And since it an important step to improving the environment, if traditional environmentalism can't get on board with that, it won't continue being beneficial, it will actually probably be more harmful. In fact, at times the article talked about things where it seemed like the environmentalist party was trying to harm themselves.

Environmentalism isn't even necessarily a great word for the cause because it makes its seem like the environment is a separate issue. So maybe its time for a new name that is more suiting to the problem. An idiot proof name that doesn't allow people to think its a separate thing.

Communication is a huge issue. Words have a lot of baggage tied to them, and the baggage isn't necessarily the definition. We need to learn to communicate what we truly mean, which is hard to do sometimes. 

Global Warming Effects Those Who Contribute to it the Least

This article was definitely powerful to read. Especially when I read about how Tajikistan's "people emit less than 1 tonne of carbon dioxide per head, compared to nearly 20 tons by citizens of North America." Yet they are carrying the the brunt of the burden of Global Warming. Tajikistan is a country with an agriculturally based economy, and the 2-4 degree temperature rise effects these kinds of people the most severely. In the united states we have a lot of the technology to at least temporarily cope with these kinds of problems, but in agronomic nations it's not easy to have access to these technologies for financial reasons and especially when the weather is disrupting your source of income. Its just not fair that these people have to pay the consequences for our mistakes/ignorance/insensitivity half way across the world.
The weather is really important. I remember a conversation I had with someone when I went to Mexico who was telling me how these pathetic guys were going to try to pick me up by talking about the weather, and how stupid that was because the weather is always "beautiful." Of course this person meant it in a different way.... and I still think that's a dumb way to pick someone up....... hmmm it depends on how you're talking about it....
The weather is important to talk about because it affects people's survival. In an industrial and developed context we undermine it because we are so detached from our sources of life. And now that we have affected it so drastically we need to be thinking about it all the time because its affecting us.
We have to start adapting. We need a sense of urgency. We don't have that sense, at least it doesn't seem so among the people I mostly know. I think apathy and self insignificance is the new international pandemic.
I really liked some of the ideas the article mentioned. I love passive solar thermal control. I feel like it was using a lot of principles of permaculture. Permaculture is great because its all about being self sufficient and using principles of nature for growth.
I didn't completely understand the parts about money being put into global warming because I don't know how much government money is put into other things. I would like something to compare it with.
The part about the glaciers melting reminded me of time I spent trying to do some volunteer work in a town near Cuzco. I was supposed to be installing clean burning stoves in rural communities and helping to make water filters. Then I found out from one of the volunteers that the glacier supplying water to the community was expected to melt in 5 years. Definitely made my work seem futile, but people need to think about the big picture as well as the little picture.
I wish we could all just start over, but thats kind of impossible, we have to find a solution that goes with what we have and move on towards different ways from there.
Good luck world!