 |
RE: [RC] weed free - David LeBlancBarbara said: I can also tell you firsthand that doing a lot research and presenting facts doesn't always work, either. The anti-(whatever) people often will NOT accept facts as proven by research. Sure, but you've got better odds if you do have the research. Plus, there's the factor of who did the research, what their agenda was, and who funded it. So here's what you do - you fund real research done by respected people in a good university. Best case is that you find someone to take on the research who your opponents have used previously and respect. Get it published in a respected peer-review journal. Then others, who may have the opposite agenda, will try and replicate the research. If the first research is solid, even the people who don't like you have to agree. If not, then we learn more. They have an agenda, they make their living off that agenda, because there is a lot of federal and private money put into being "anti-" and they don't want to lose their money. I am not being cynical when I say this; this is based on personal and family experience. That's just the way the world works. Always someone with an entrenched interest, whether it's just they've made their minds up, so no use bothering them with facts, or they're interested in their wallet. So we have to plan on that, counter it, and not believe that merely being right is enough. Remember that the people who would like to keep us off trails will say the same things about us. That said, we may as well at least try to present our facts based on research. But if we are up against people who believe that a man on foot should be the only one to enter an area, you may do all the research you want because that is what they believe (or say they believe) and please...don't confuse them with facts. You're right - but there's a lot of people who are willing to listen to reason. First we win those over, then we can work on the rest. If indeed the facts are on our side, then we're in a lot better shape. So right now, we're having a debate along the lines of: "Keep horses out because they cause erosion and spread weeds." "No they don't." "Do so, too" This obviously isn't going to get us anywhere. The conversation I'd much rather have is: "It's a myth that horses significantly spread weeds. Here's what really happens [fill in blank]. Erosion can be a problem if the trails aren't well built, but we'll help out with that and make sure we're not damaging things." While there are elements of the environmental movement who are completely beyond reason, the people who really get things accomplished in terms of really improving our environment (as opposed to making noise and theatrical stunts) are driven by science. They have to be, because they're up against entrenched interests funded by multi-national companies with billions of dollars in revenue. We can and should use the same techniques to forward our cause, and we need to find and build on common ground with these groups instead of insulting them and calling them 'greenies' and such. I do know something about this from real experience. My own research led to changes that stopped millions of tons of air pollutants per year, improved fuel efficiency, and the solution was reached with the EPA and the US auto manufacturers cooperating to find a solution. The EPA news release is here: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/8df5e230d6ef12248525701c005e0d28/8f e4d7d91eafa23d8525646b006991da!OpenDocument No amount of emotional arguments could have accomplished this - it took real research and a lot of hard work. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|