all-encompassingly

hungry, hungry hippies!

they're coming to get you. about 9000 hippies gathered to a remote part of the uinta mountains this past july. they do it often, at least every summer. the hippies are mad because the government is restricting their freedom to assemble by asking them to get permits and pay fines for destroying vegetation, etc. i agree with the hippies that government restrictions are annoying. but at the same time, i sympathize with the voiceless environment. we've all seen the pictures of the aftermath at woodstock. it looked like a strip mine.

it is too bad there's no place for the hippies to gather. the way i see it, they have three choices: they could (1) meet in smaller groups, (2) pay to have the area restored, or, if all else fails, they could (3) rent out one of those gigantic marriott hotel conference rooms for their drug-induced orgies. they could have some potted plants and dirt brought in to help create the right woodsy ambiance.

but the problems won't just disappear:

So many cars, and so much foot traffic, has trampled vegetation and left dusty or muddy places that could become erosion problems. The Forest Service hopes to negotiate a plan for Rainbows to do re-seeding and rehabilitation, and to pay for it. [source]

KSL estimates that taxpayers will be picking up a $ 1/2 million dollar tab from the hippies antics in the woods this july alone.

because we're fair and balanced, check out this site: NYrainbow.org some of the pictures may be offensive (or at least interesting) but the article represents the hippie viewpoint. in my opinion, the article is an example of writing that is pro-whatever coming off making the whatever sound stupider than if they'd not said anything. for example, the hippies claim their first amendment rights: "1st amendment! 1st amendment!" okay, does that really mean 20,000 people have the freedom to assemble wherever, however? and if it does, does it mean "even in protected natural forest areas?" because those didn't exist when the first amendment was conceived. at that point, everything outside of town square was still "injun country." i'm all for less government, but in this case, everybody would get screwed as the swath of grazing hippies moved across the continent like a glacier, eating everything in its path.

so, in conclusion, this is multiple-use conflict at it's worst, and i am upset. i can't ride my mountain bike on certain protected trails, but hippies can turn the valley next to that protected trail into CHERNOBYL II. what gives? where's the love?

Posted by travis at September 16, 2003 01:07 PM | TrackBack