Environment in the 70s; Sample

This is environment in the 70s a presentation of the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University. A cross-section of environmental problems facing the world in the next decade. Now here is a professor of wildlife science and series moderator Doug Gilbert. Thank you. Welcome to environment in the 70s. Our guest today is Dr. Lawrence F. Hamilton. Larry is professor of Forestry and conservation in the Department of Conservation in New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell. Dr. Hamilton will be questioned by a group of graduate students from the Departments of conservation and environmental education also at Cornell. Our panel consists of Jim Fazio Mike Smith and Chris White. Our subject for discussion is land use planning. And Larry I'm going to ask the first question really what do you mean by land use planning. Doug I presume that if anything characterizes our society today

it's change. Change is taking place in extremely rapid rate. We have many new options and our technology is providing us with these and many new pressures on the limited resources that we have. And so people are thinking about changing what they're doing and this to me is land use planning if it involves an area of land. As a public agency build a school here or a road or leave it as a natural area. As an individual shall I continue to grow corn or will I grow something else as a sort of priorities thing in other words for the land that we do have available. Yeah it's trying to adjust to these changes and to these pressures and take a crystal ball and see what the best options are for the future I hope. Ok fine now with that background we'll turn to the student panel in the first question will come from Mike Smith. Doctor Hamilton what agencies actually do this land use planning. Well my guess not only agencies it's individuals I think everybody's doing it. Anybody who

has a talk about land use planning rather than personal planning. Anybody that has a chunk of that outdoor real estate is faced with these new options and new pressures and is trying to adjust his stewardship and his goals. As these pressures mount and as these new options open up agencies to the control land and much of our land area and water is administered by public agencies state and federal and they're having to do this to keep up with the changing demands of society. So I'd say any agency that or any individual that has some kind of jurisdiction or even advisory capacity will be doing land use planning. Next question Chris what are the criteria used by these agencies in setting up their their planning. I wish I knew Chris sometimes it seems they don't have any serious kind of fly by the seat of your pants. I have my own little outside and it seems to me as I read some of the

better planning going on that this would be a capsule lated version of it. I would think the best kind of planning might involve three conscious or subconscious steps. The first thing would be to consider the sky's the limit Here's a chunk of landscape or a chunk of water scape. What are we going to use it for in the future. It's used now for junk car lot or it's just sitting out there kind of wild and undeveloped. It may be sitting there are highly developed. What are we going to exist in the future and I think we ought to take the wraps off at least in the initial stages and say anything's possible we with our technology we can you know convert an area outside the studio here though it's got snow into a pineapple farm. It may be an SDF gorilla training center or a retirement home for old broken down professors and or a rocket launching site here in downtown if that. I think this way

we don't shackle our imagination to what has gone on in the past. And I think this is the major stumbling block to planning we've taken existing land use map and say OK we're going to have more of the same. So this theoretical thing first then of course there are constraints there are laws that say you can't do this and you can't do that these could be changed. There are also religious constraints and cultural constraints and the fact we don't have expertise maybe in this area to grow pineapples all of these things limit this choice to what might be called the possible range of choice. But the woman I really I deal with most and I think you do too would be the practical range of choice in which the determinants of land as a natural body come in here we're talking about climate and vegetation and soils and the wildlife on it. These have something to say about how land and water should be used. These are the ones I like to do well. All right Jim you have a next question.

We often hear the term multiple use. You know sometimes it's used almost with religious reverence. I think our audience would like to know of just what this means. And my question is is multiple use something that we should use on all land. Well it's not like us full of medicine it's not like a prescription. Jim I really have trouble using this as a guiding principle in land use planning and yet it's a good philosophical approach. I view it in two ways. One way would be to have more than one use on one small unit of land for instance where the concept grew up is on the national forests and in some of the Western national forests where our mighty leader here Doug Gilbert has grown up and worked. It is possible to raise beef and timber on the same

acre. And get a greater net social benefit off that acre than if you grew timber alone or if you grew beef alone. On the other hand multiple use can be looked at as if you take a larger area devoting each unique part of the landscape to that which it is best adapted to and this may be a single use. But overall on the big area you've got a high quality recreation site and here recreation is the almost single use. And over here it may be timber production here or maybe a high rise apartment or something like that. Overall you have multiple use. And I'm not sure I think each area depending on these natural constraints will tell us at least suggest to us what we might use this that would be fission and safe and pleasant for man's habitation. You're listening to environment in the seventies. Our special guest today is Dr. Lawrence S. Hamilton. Larry is professor of Forestry and conservation and now the questioning will

continue with Mike Smith went to Hamilton with the tremendous growth of our cities this urban sprawl so-called becoming so much more dominant today would land use planning be particularly important in this area. I think you're right Mike this is probably where it is most critical. This is the new frontier of America and changes in land use are occurring there with more be will during rapidity than anyplace else. And I think we're being just as reckless with our resources on this new frontier as we were on that old frontier in the West where we made made many bad mistakes in this development scramble. Yes I think the cutting edge of urban areas is extremely critical one for land use planning because it we just can't seem to get ahead of it. And do something rational it's just happening like Topsy it's growing. Chris you have a question. I've heard an awful lot about developing here and

changing this and putting pineapple farms and so forth isn't a realistic choice. Just leaving certain areas of land alone. Well if you could yes you know the question. Yeah. Do you think you're right. Chris this is one that I think is becoming more and more important certainly in any land use planning. One of the options is to have the good grace and the good sense to keep our hands off and not do anything with it. This is becoming recognized more and more I think. We had a recent study conducted in our department by one of our graduate students of a plan for the development of the Upper Missouri River which 11 alternatives were proposed by the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation. One of these was no development. This is the first time it has ever shown up. Our analysis indicated incidentally that no development was of greatest benefit to the nation. Larry isn't there a great deal of conflict upon occasion of the various

proposed uses of land in the economic arena for example it's a lot cheaper to put this highway here than it would be to put it there where you might have conflicts of other use of the land is going to be used for the highway. You know I think I think this is true. Part of the economic saying as you well know Doug would be how long your horizon is a lot of short run economics would dictate to a certain alternative. But if you consider the long run. And all of the costs and some of these costs are difficult to put dollar signs on why. Certainly there might be another alternative indicated. And also I don't think we are in an affluent society need to always consider with an economic yardstick. There are other values. One other point I think you'll agree on this that when this land is gone when it's used up that's all there is you know. All right Jim you have a question. What would you have done a far as the major problem in the area of land use planning is there

any one thing that you can single out. I may be biased. Jim I want to I feel is the greatest is the one I keep. Fighting force to get more ecological input into the planning decisions that most of the decisions about land use are being made by the engineers and subdivided politicians and other kinds of people that are not really aware of some of the ecological relationships that occur out there on any chunk of land or water that there's things going on there and when we change use we interrupt this. So I think the major job is to get more ecological input get foresters and agronomists and hydrologists and biologists into the planning at an early stage at the planning table. Larry the $64 question how are we going to do this. Well I think it's coming with people reacting to plans that are ill conceived you know when senior citizens chain themselves to

trees to stop highway when the people stop a freeway along an urban waterfront in mid construction as they have done when the vigilante groups of young people go out and pull up surveying stakes. You know it's a reaction of the public that something is wrong with our planning and and I think this is the thing that's wrong that certain values are not being recognised and many of these are ecological. Mike you have a question. What role do you see in the future there from the news playing do you think we're going to be able to get more ecologically based decisions on the public taking a more active role in the planning. You know I see a great deal of encouraging sign in this Mike. On the national and state and even local level Chris White and I were at a meeting the other day which they're hoping to set up an Environmental Management Council on the county level I think this kind of thing would help because this will be working with the planning board. We have a new environmental protection agency on a national level we have you know all kinds of

activity that be speaks a greater awareness of this ecological flak that was generated around Earth Day and has been growing in America I don't think is a passing fancy I think this is here to stay. Well you know it's awfully good to talk to another optimist. I think that we have to be optimistic about this problem of the environment and land use planning you know I gather you are optimistic. Yeah I really am. After fighting a what seems like a losing battle for a long time I think there's some hope. I'd like to thank all of you. I'm sorry but that's all the time we have for questions. Our expert today has been Dr. Lawrence as Hamilton. Larry is professor of Forestry and conservation in the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell. Our topic has been the land use planning. This has been an environment in the 70s a Communication Arts production in

cooperation with the Department of Natural Resources at the New York State College of Agriculture statutory college at the state university of Cornell University. The openings expressed by our guest today are not meant to represent any official policies or recommendations of the Department of Natural Resources the state college of agriculture or Cornell University. This is environment in the 70s a presentation of the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University. A cross-section of environmental problems facing the world in the next decade. Now here is a professor of wildlife science and series moderator Doug Gilbert. Thank you. Welcome to environment in the 70s. Our guest today is Mrs.

Constance cook Mrs. Cook is representative to the New York State Assembly. She's now serving her fifth consecutive term. She's chairman of the Education Committee very active on the Ways and Means Committee and she's also a member of the health committee. Mrs. Cook will be questioned by a group of graduate students in the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell. Our panel consists of Mike Smith Jim Fazio and Katie Redmond. We're going to have rather a controversial subject so now I think I'll exercise my prerogative and ask the first question Mrs. Cook now that New York has liberalized its abortion laws. There you see a national trend developing. Well I think there has been a national trend for some years. The New York liberalization was simply a part of that every As I understand it in almost every state legislature proposals have been made. It's been a very current issue in the last campaign in states outside of New York. Way

more than here. It will come up as vital issues in several of the Midwestern states this winter I've been asked to participate in some of the efforts to arrive at an understanding of this problem. Mr Cook was very much active in attracting national attention by her strong support of the successful abortion legislation in New York last year. And now we will turn to our student panelists and the first question will be asked by Jim. Jim thank you. I think that more and more conservationists and other people that are who are concerned about the environment are beginning to realize that one of our biggest problems is overpopulation in fact. Some say that overpopulation is the very root of the problems that we face in the environment. No. First of all do you agree with this. And secondly is abortion an effective population control method. Well to answer your first question I suppose I do agree in a sense at

least if we are going to a new kind of life that Americans look forward to and expect to have. That is the a nice home an automobile a boat and so on. Then obviously we haven't got enough people to do it that way. There is an alternative though that I think we always have to keep in mind. Maybe we could change our style of living as far as a second can. Question Is abortion an appropriate method of population control. In my opinion I don't think so. Now it has been successful we all know that in Japan and Hungary in a few other European countries. But I have both as a woman. I just simply cannot see abortion as the way you control population. I think we simply must move towards contraception in much more effective way than we have in the past. Thank you Mrs Cook and now we will go female to female. Katie would you like to ask the next question.

From what I understand even legal abortions are quite expensive. If it costs as low as say $200 isnt this discriminating against the poor. Yes it certainly IS THERE MIGHT way more expensive than they need be because we still have a great deal of artificial barriers set up by hospitals by Medical Society regulations and so on. Things are changing and breaking down and I think we will very soon come to the point where. Legal abortions will be much available lower cost they are available under the Medicaid program but even there in many cases Medicaid allowed among does not cover the total cost. I think we have a great deal of public education involved here that if any woman is thinking of an abortion she has to ask for it curly very early in her pregnancy. This is the primary factor in keeping the cost down. Mike we'll turn to you know you mentioned before that you didn't believe that abortion was a good method of regulating population control that we should get more into the area of contraception.

What would you say is being done not only in the work but across the nation to emphasize this to the average joe public. Well I think that the federal government has been rather quietly established a fairly substantial program. And leaving it to the states to administer as Washington does and I think generally speaking very properly so the money there's quite a bit of money available for programs and contraception both for the education and the actual services. Now I think it behooves every state to get going on this to get some laws adopted that will allow this to be put into effect. Properly. You're listening to environment in the 70s our special guest is Mrs. Constance cook Mrs. Cook is representative to the New York State Assembly and now the questioning will continue with a question from Jim Fazio. Well since we're talking about abortion so I know that in this last election you were reelected