The Natural vs. The Free

Our discussion today about zoning restrictions and the changes we would make to them was interesting to me, not because of what the laws are but because of how people thought changing them would help. Some people were interested in restricting home size, regulating square footage based on yearly use, or encouraging (forcing) second home owners to rent out their homes during the off season. These suggestions prompted Onno to remark, "Oh my god you guys are practically Marxists!" We laughed but he was pretty on point. The biggest problem with "preserving" the wilderness of the Adirondacks is that there are people there who have rights and needs that involve using the land and the resources it provides. Kicking those people out would be ludicrous – many have had family there for generations – but how is a state supposed to govern a people who have true need for land that the state has sworn to protect at every turn? There is no democratic or republican answer to this because there is no democracy or republic that can answer all the questions. Each resident – permanent or migratory – of the park has an opinion on how it should be used, who should be allowed to do what... and there is no answer that will ever make everyone happy. So the choice is boiled down to WHO to make happy and who to ignore and let down. "How many people are affected by this choice?" "Will this help the economy or just bring in 'outsiders' to take much-needed job?" "Do you follow the voice of the people who live here, or the companies that will spend money?" These are questions that the state can't answer, let alone a class of college students.