Wednesday, October 9, 2013

A Lawsuit for a Lake



The article, “A Balancing Act Around Lake Tahoe”, by Rick Lyman was posted on The New York Times website on October 6, 2013.

This article focuses on the concerns of environmental groups, particularly the Sierra Club, regarding the development around Lake Tahoe.  The plan, which met the standards of both Nevada and California’s political leaders, allows for the construction of a few taller buildings and possibly the expansion of casinos, ski resorts, and other spaces around the lake.  

The Sierra Club is filing a lawsuit because they worry that much more development will occur than is proposed in the plan.  As Laurel Ames, a co-chairman of the Tahoe Area Sierra Club’s conservation committee says, ‘“All we want is that the lake be the first consideration when making developmental decisions.”’

Ames is clearly not feeling as if the two states are looking at the big picture.  Her, along with the rest of the Sierra Club, believe that the effects on Lake Tahoe are not being considered as they should be.  

Already, construction is sacrificing the clarity of the lake.  Runoff from neighboring roads and developments have been causing a steady decline in the lake’s clarity over the last 40 years.  Although this rate has been flattening out recently, this possible new construction can only make the clarity of the lake decline even further.  

This article connects to one thing in particular that I learned so far this year in biology: water pollution.  After watching The Lorax, as a class, we discussed the meaning of the movie.  We decided that the moral was to avoid pollution.  The three main kinds of pollution are water, air, and land.  Runoff into the lake from construction, as described in the article, is one example of water pollution.

I can also connect to this article in another way.  It reminds me of a field trip my class and I went on in fifth grade.  We visited the Merrimack River, where we learned that the runoff and waste coming from the textile mills had contributed immensely to the pollution of the river.  We compared samples of the polluted water to clean water.  This proved how much of an effect pollution can have on a body of water.  

My opinion on the issue of whether or not to develop the area surrounding Lake Tahoe is undecided.  I believe there are pros and cons to both options.

If they did choose to develop around Lake Tahoe, there could be an unfortunate consequence: the destruction of a large, prominent body of water through pollution.  This could take away much of the money that the two states make through tourists visiting this beautiful region.  At the same time, there may be rewards.  The expansion of the places in a close proximity to the lake could greatly add to the amount of tourists who travel there.

If they do not develop in this area, they will be able to protect the lake from possible negative repercussions.  Although they do run the risk of missing out on the previously mentioned benefits.

It is definitely a mixed bag and I can understand both sides‘ perspectives on the issue.  

4 comments:

  1. This is a really well written report, and also very informational. After reading it, my opinion is that as much development as possible should be stopped in the areas around Lake Tahoe, and all other major lakes.We all know what happened to the Charles river when we developed the land around it, and the same fate may await lake Tahoe, if we don't establish effective environmental laws and stop this construction. Your connection to The Lorax helped to put this problem into context , and I also liked how you weighed both the pros and cons of development. You showed both sides of the story, which is what a reporter should do.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good job! Your blog post was very informational with a lot of details throughout it. By reading your blog post I understood the problem going on in Lake Tahoe. I agree with your opinion on whether or not they should develop around Lake Tahoe. It could be bad for the environment but it could help them bring in more tourists. The Lorax connection you made helped me realize more what the problem was about. Also your connection to the fifth grade field trip because I also remember going on that. Overall great blog post!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought you did a great job on this blog Lily! I think you explained very well what this article was about and showing both the advantages and disadvantages to more construction around Lake Tahoe. It seemed like you were interested this article and whether or not you agree with the environmental groups like the Sierra Club. I agree with you that the benefits of the construction could help gain a lot of money for the area, but also that they need to keep in consideration the damage they could be doing to the lake. I think you made two great connections that I hadn’t even thought of while I was reading. I think that many connections to the story of The Lorax can be made throughout this article, and the fifth grade field trip can be related to this article as well because it was all about how construction can contribute to water pollution. In class, we have also talked about how mercury and other POP’s from industries have polluted water sources and have become a problem, and they don’t want this to become a problem in Lake Tahoe.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really liked reading this! I thought it was a good idea how you made a reference to the movie that we watched in class. You did a really good job explaining the article and I liked how you tried to use both perspectives on the situation. I also thought it was a very good idea to use the field trip in your article, as well! The title was also very catchy and caught my attention. Really good job, Lily!

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.