4 ms·
The plan alone worries me greatly for the wildlife in Alaska, it's one of the world's last refuges for untouched nature and the last thing we need is to send an
by ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
The plan alone worries me greatly for the wildlife in Alaska, it's one of the world's last refuges for untouched nature and the last thing we need is to send any sort of human traffic in that direction.
If I were the richest person in the world I would probably buy up as much land as possible and keep civilization away from it. Keep it wild for future generations.
- meric 15y agoI thought you had noble intentions when you said "... last refuges for untouched nature and the last thing we need is to send any sort of human traffic in that direction.". but when you mentioned "...for future generations.", turned out not.
- timerickson 15y agoPerhaps he meant for future generations to admire from a distance?
- meric 15y agoIf only. (Humor always turns into something else online. Oops.)
- ChrisNorstrom 15y agoYes I meant to save the wildlife for future generations to admire not to bulldozer and pave over. In the US we have 30% federal owned land reserved for things like parks and wild life areas but a lot of it is areas that no one really wanted (desert) or areas where there aren't any people anyway. Future generations shouldn't have to travel to another state to get to a nature reserve.
- hugh3 15y agoAlaksa is really really big. Rail lines aren't really all that wide. Compute the fraction of Alaska and Siberia's land from which you'd be able to see or hear the trains going past and it's... quite small.
- wisty 15y agoA road or railway can impact quite a large area, due to fringe effects. It can cut migration paths. The most valuable nature reserves are the ones that are completely untouched, and a long way from any human activity. On the other hand little islands urban forest are just a waste of real estate (and a great source of wild animals on roads). Wildlife "corridors" may be a useless waste of space, or incredibly useful ... I'm not too sure. I guess it depends on how the animals use them. Hopefully won't do too much damage, though. As you say, Alaska is really big.
- Turing_Machine 15y ago"Alaska is really really big." Indeed it is. http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/ded/dev/student_info/images/akoverus.jpg http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/ded/dev/student_info/images/... (yes, this is in correct scale).
- hugh3 15y agoSlightly over half the size of Western Australia!
- Tsagadai 15y agoThere is no such thing as "untouched nature". Humans have been almost everywhere on the planet since the late 19th century (exploration of polar regions, deserts and submarines). There are hundreds of thousands of native Alaskans who have a problem with your idea that no one ever lived there.
- ChrisNorstrom 15y agoTrue. But native Alaskans don't pave everything over with malls and parking lots. ========= Also you can't have a rail line that goes on for thousands of miles without any maintanance stations, rest stops, etc... I'm worried that small towns will pop up along the route, as more trade occurs along the route the towns will grow and then the shit hits the fan from there.