# Desert Protection plan



## Jentortmom (Mar 27, 2009)

I was reading this article, and it got me thinking what would I do. Initially I said the I would go for the torts, but maybe they could work something out to do both. The torts have already been effected enough as it is, could we really do both. Could they put solor panels up without harming the torts? I'm still up in the air on this one. What would you choose??

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-desert27-2009mar27,0,3252665.story

Feinstein's desert protection plan
A proposal by Sen. Dianne Feinstein could pit those who want to preserve desert land against those who want to use it for solar and wind energy projects.
March 27, 2009


Ã‚Â» Discuss Article 
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has done a lot of admirable work protecting California's wild desert lands from development, but her latest plans for the Mojave threaten to split the state's environmental community and could stall clean- energy projects whose construction should be among the nation's highest priorities.

Feinstein is working on legislation that would designate hundreds of thousands of acres of desert land as a national monument, which would put them off-limits for solar and wind energy projects. That could result in a green- versus-green confrontation, pitting those who want to protect the desert ecosystem against those who believe renewable-energy projects are a vital part of the struggle to avert catastrophic climate change. 

But that's a false dichotomy. According to the U.S. Energy Department, enough sunlight hits a 100-square-mile portion of the Nevada desert to power the entire country, if it could be harnessed. The Southwestern desert is vast, and it should be possible to both protect key habitat for threatened species such as the desert tortoise and build huge solar arrays from California to Colorado. 

The desert ecosystem is a terribly fragile one. Though it often looks like nothing is growing there, the desert is actually teeming with life -- life that subsists on a very delicate balance. We strongly support Feinstein's goal of protecting the desert, within reasonable bounds. Those include a recognition that global warming, if unchecked, will be far worse for all the world's species than a few solar power plants. 

Even more controversial than the siting of renewable-energy projects is the construction of power lines that would be needed to carry the electricity to urban centers. Often, these lines must pass through communities, parks or other wild lands, leading to opposition from residents and conservationists. Builders of these projects must continue to do everything possible to minimize the environmental damage, but state and federal officials should seek to reduce red tape and speed their construction.

We'll withhold judgment on Feinstein's monument proposal until she actually produces it -- the senator is still studying which lands to protect in a swath between the Mojave National Preserve and Joshua Tree National Park. The decision-making process presents a welcome opportunity for dialogue about balancing the need for renewable power with the need to conserve sensitive lands. 

Yet perhaps it's possible to love the desert too much; if we go too far in protecting it from solar development, those wide arid spaces promise to become a lot wider in the scorching future.


----------



## Candy (Mar 27, 2009)

I'm for the tortoises. Candy


----------



## Yvonne G (Mar 28, 2009)

There's got to be other places they can put up solar panels besides the desert. Here in Fresno, the folks at our University put them up in the parking lot. Now the kids can park in the shade. They can make arrangements with Cal-Trans and put them up all along the freeways. I'm sure they can find other spots for solar panels. How about near all those wind machines in the hills?

Yvonne


----------



## Laura (Mar 28, 2009)

If they can put up the solar panels without harming torts.. then it is also protecting them, as Im sure there will be no tresspassing and no motor vehicles allowed inthe area...


----------



## Yvonne G (Mar 28, 2009)

And if the college kids here can drive and park under them, what harm would it cause the desert other than the original traffic problem while under construction. Its not so shady under them as to kill off any plant life, and they would be up high enough to not be in the way of the animals. I guess there's a lot more I need to know before I can make an informed decision.

Yvonne


----------



## Jentortmom (Mar 28, 2009)

Thats whats been going through my head, I need more information.


----------



## -EJ (Mar 30, 2009)

My first question is how the solar panels would adversly effect the habitat of the tortoises?

It's like the wind turbines... they have a minimal impact.

As to the solar panels... even if they are placed on the prime habitat... they might actually have a benefit... allowing the tortoises to be out when they normally could not... providing shade.

Keep in mind the sun moves and the shade is not constant so I would think the forraged plants are not effected... think about it.



jenrell23 said:


> I was reading this article, and it got me thinking what would I do. Initially I said the I would go for the torts, but maybe they could work something out to do both. The torts have already been effected enough as it is, could we really do both. Could they put solor panels up without harming the torts? I'm still up in the air on this one. What would you choose??
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-desert27-2009mar27,0,3252665.story
> 
> ...


----------

