No headline

At the recent water resources meeting, a man asked, “What is the definition of sustainability?”

That is easy enough to look up. In Mirriam-Websters’ dictionary it is being “… able to used without being completely used up or destroyed.” In Wikipedia, it is linked to ecological sustainability, among other things, to the Green movement: “... the activity does not ‘use up’ or otherwise destroy any of the life forms or resources which exist …”. “The concept of sustainable development is derived most strongly from the 1987 Brundtland Report,” which was commissioned by United Nations’ Secretary General de Cuellar. The concept made it into the UN Agenda for the 21st Century/Sustainable Development (1992), the Wildlands Network and the Convention on Biological Diversity, etc.

The goal is to “… reorient food consumption towards diets that are less resource intensive …” How? Livestock is considered an unsustainable resource. Land use that serves human needs (golf courses, ski runs, sports fields) are unsustainable and need to be eliminated.

The guilt and shame aspect of the movement pleas for “… equitable and sustainable development …” — code words for bringing down the American standard of living to that of the developing world. Instead of raising their standard, it is deemed easier to lower ours. Water control and food control is the easiest way to destroy a people (Look at Soviet Georgia after World War II). The time for citizens to demand their opinions be followed is now.

JEREMY CONLIN

Cocolalla