> The latest "Inlander" from Spokane reports two items of interest to
> Vision 2020, especially those who heard Dan Kemmis speak last month:
>
> * The city election next month will have a $500,000 bond issue for
> open space, to purchase land conservation easements on "cornerstone"
> properties identified in the city open space plan. Imagine a city that
> actually has an open space plan!
That is rather progressive for a western city, though such plans
are common back east.
I'm reading a book called "Hope for the Land" by Charles Little.
He talks about open space planning. He says that justification
for open space is often found in 3 arguments, none of which he
finds completely satisfying:
1) Open space should be preserved because it saves money
(actually costs less than development when the *full*
cost of services are considered)
2) Open space should be preserved for ecological reasons
3) Open space should be preserved for recreation purposes
He comes to conclusion that open space should be preserved because
it embodies special "places" in the minds of people. There is a
history (often ancient) to the land that is worth preserving.
The aesthetic matters. He says we don't need any grand, overriding
rationale to justify open space preservation. It is pleasing (and special)
to most most people and that is justification enough for preserving
it.
-- Greg Brown (gregb@uidaho.edu) Computer Services Adjunct Assistant Professor, College of Forestry,Wildlife,& Range Sciences University of Idaho Moscow, ID 83843 (208) 885-2126 Fax: (208) 885-7539