LETTER: Tree-huggers should look inward before complaining
The recent letters to the editor regarding the trees cut down on campus are a study in hypocrisy and misplaced priorities. No one writing to decry the loss of three trees in an out-of-the-way corner of campus has mentioned all of the paper being used to print thousands of copies of their letters. They do not seem overly concerned with the old-growth trees that were cut down to build their homes, furnish their apartments or even those cleared to make room to grow their coffee. Perhaps they should have been consulted about those trees too?
If Facilities Planning and Management did not ask for the public's opinions on these trees, perhaps it was because the plans to build the new band field in that location had been public knowledge for months beforehand, because the Daily had already run a story detailing the plans or perhaps because, well, they're three trees in a seldom-visited part of campus. The university does not run a full-page advertisement or buy TV commercials every time a landscaping change is made, and it is ridiculous to expect them to. We have a representative system of government precisely because it is too inefficient to ask everyone's opinion every time something needs to be done.
Instead of focusing on these trees, perhaps we should look at the bigger picture. We could get rid of the band, and save the land, save money and save innocent cotton from destruction for the production of shirts and uniforms. We could end football games, thereby saving fuel and protecting our precious turf from trampling. Or maybe it would be best to shut down the university all together. We could save tons of paper, acres of land and boatloads of state money that could be better spent rehabilitating our vaunted and iconic prairies.
The fact of the matter is that any human endeavor, be it higher education or a marching band, takes land and resources, and those always come at the expense of nature. There was plenty of notice that this was going to happen, and plenty of time to start a petition drive to save our trees . with paper from someone else's forest, of course.
Jacob Epstein
Freshman
Chemical Engineering
If Facilities Planning and Management did not ask for the public's opinions on these trees, perhaps it was because the plans to build the new band field in that location had been public knowledge for months beforehand, because the Daily had already run a story detailing the plans or perhaps because, well, they're three trees in a seldom-visited part of campus. The university does not run a full-page advertisement or buy TV commercials every time a landscaping change is made, and it is ridiculous to expect them to. We have a representative system of government precisely because it is too inefficient to ask everyone's opinion every time something needs to be done.
Instead of focusing on these trees, perhaps we should look at the bigger picture. We could get rid of the band, and save the land, save money and save innocent cotton from destruction for the production of shirts and uniforms. We could end football games, thereby saving fuel and protecting our precious turf from trampling. Or maybe it would be best to shut down the university all together. We could save tons of paper, acres of land and boatloads of state money that could be better spent rehabilitating our vaunted and iconic prairies.
The fact of the matter is that any human endeavor, be it higher education or a marching band, takes land and resources, and those always come at the expense of nature. There was plenty of notice that this was going to happen, and plenty of time to start a petition drive to save our trees . with paper from someone else's forest, of course.
Jacob Epstein
Freshman
Chemical Engineering
Copyright © 2009 - Iowa State Daily