Forest Maps

One of the many things that I have loved continuously since I was little has been maps.  I love maps of any kind ranging from road maps to topographical maps to nautical maps (not as much).  It could be that part of my love for maps is intertwined with my love of traveling.  Ever since I was little, I used to love to track our trips on a map as we were driving.  The spacial relationship between where we were in the larger world to how it tracked on a piece of paper was fascinating to me.  At times is was definitely discouraging if we were driving through a large state like Virginia and it would seem to take forever to travel just an inch on the map, but it was still fun.  One of the parts I loved was seeing what was around us that we couldn't see from the road, the towns or major cities that we would skirt in an effort to avoid traffic, or just a mountain range that we would be driving by that only a portion of which could be seen from the car.  Whatever piqued my interest in maps when I was little carried on into my years as an adult.  Even now, with the advent of GPS, smart phones, and cars that tell you where to go, I prefer my paper map (or at least a map without directions on my phone).  I prefer to track where I am headed on a map and then just go.  I can find the circuitous routes if I want, the ones that meander through the back country or I can find the most direct route possible.  In either case, I am in control of where I am going and don't have a phantom navigator mechanically telling me where to turn or when I missed a turn.  That inevitably leads to greater frustration for me.  That love of maps transfers to my time off the roads and in the woods as well.  I remember a few years ago I was planning to hike the Quinnipiac Trail in Connecticut, about 26 miles in all, and before I ventured out, I had a topographical map printed of the trail area just so I could see exactly where I was going and track my progress.  It was like I was a little kid again.  These days, with technology, I still love to look at maps, even online, which is what brings me to my topic for today, forest maps.  As I was perusing the New York Times online, I decided to check out their series on climate change to see if there was anything new there.  While there were a few good articles, I feel that for me to talk about them would be like beating a dead horse, pointless. 

I did, however, find a somewhat interactive world map on forests and their coverage in different countries.  Most of us know about the integral part that forests play in absorbing carbon from the atmosphere and I thought it was quite interesting to see the current forests as they are, how much has been lost over the past decade or so, and what the ancient forests of 8000 years ago looked like.  For those of you who are now interested to see for yourself, here is the link.  One thing that was extremely fascinating to me, which I didn't think would be the case, was to see how forested New England currently is.  Most of the forests were wiped out for farming in the 17 and 1800's, however, after the farmland was abandoned, the forests grew back and now in some areas exceed the density of the forests as they were a few hundred years ago.  Out of all the United States, the New England area (which includes New York and parts of Pennsylvania for forests) is now the most heavily forested area in the United States and one of the most integral areas for carbon absorption.  For me, I always thought of the West coast being more heavily forested, especially in the mountain regions, yet compared to what the East Coast has to offer, the West pales in comparison.  The only difference may be that the West Coast still has some untouched forests whereas the entire Northeast region of the United States is fractured forests meaning that it is interrupted in many areas by roads and small towns.  Regardless, I think that the heavily forested Northeast region is one of the major factors in my never wanting to move out of the region.  The forests in the Northeast region extend north into a good portion of Canada creating what I would deem as the third heavily forested region in the world after South America and the rain forests there and the tropical rain forests in central Africa.  It appears that to really experience untouched forests that aren't fragmented, one has to travel to either of these two regions to see them.  Outside of South America and Africa, virgin forests are hard to come by.  There is a depressing side to the map on forests and that is to see how much forest we have lost just over the last decade or so.  There is still the issue of excessive logging and deforestation and that is unlikely to change drastically anytime soon.  We can hope for the alternative, but with populations increasing and building materials still necessary, logging will continue for quite some time. 

In any case, my love for maps continues, in any way, shape, or form.  The one aspect of technology and maps that I absolutely love is that at any point, I can pull out my phone and look at maps, anywhere, anytime.  I love to find roads that I have never been on and see if I can somehow get myself onto those roads in the course of my travels.  That is the other part I love about New England; almost any road you travel on will lead you somewhere.  While there are a good number of dead ends, they are outnumbered greatly by little meandering roads that look as if they lead nowhere, yet can take you on a journey that you will never forget.  There are not that many gated communities or housing developments as compared to other parts of the country and a dirt road is never far away, if only you know where to look.  I just wish they identified those dirt roads on maps so I can find them and travel them.  But beyond simply maps on the phone, there are other avenues that I enjoy following.  If I am really ambitious, I pull up Google Earth and see any part of the world.  There is something about Google Earth that is extremely appealing to me.  I love to pull up a section of the Earth that I have traveled to and see if I can track where I have been from satellite images.  It is much harder than you think, yet it is possible.  There are great differences when it comes to looking at a road map on paper versus satellite images pieced together to form what is essentially a much larger map of the Earth as it is.  But in any case, I just mainly just wanted to share the interactive map on the New York Times today for any other map lovers out there.  If anyone comes across any other cool maps, feel free to share them as I will most likely enjoy looking at them!

Opinionation Station

I don't know if its a current trend or if I am just starting to notice it amongst people more, but it seems that a lot of people are extremely opinionated.  I know, not exactly a revelation, but let me explain a little more as I myself have a tendency to be opinionated.  I guess what I am noticing more is not that many people are opinionated, but more that they are inflexible in their opinions, unable to look at the broader picture with an open mind and consider the fact that their opinion might in fact be wrong.   I will be the first to admit that I fall victim to this at times, especially when I believe strongly in something.   However, I also make a conscious effort to look at the broader picture and not just focus on one narrow aspect of a belief to drive my opinion.   I don't know if its the fact that anyone with an opinion these days can find someone or something to support that opinion and therefore believe more strongly that it is the one and only way something should function, proceed, act...or if its just that people are unwilling to entertain other ideas that may fly in the face of everything they believe.  For the latter, I myself have trouble entertaining an idea or alternate opinion if my beliefs are extremely strong about something and if the other avenue is radically different.  Yet, most of the time I find it within myself to at least open myself to the notion or thought and explore it at least briefly disregarding it.  What I have come to realize, and am still working on accepting, is that there is not just one way of doing things, nor is there just one correct opinion.  Yet, I run into a lot of people who feel that their opinion is the only one that counts, the only way to look at things, and that anyone or anything that flies in the face of their opinion and beliefs is wrong.  Which raises the question of at which point do our opinions become beliefs?  I think I will leave that question alone for now and tackle that another day, perhaps.  I have found that by attempting to talk to these people, some of them friends, is pointless, at least when it comes to discussing an opinion of theirs or mine that may be contentious and divisive.  Yet, I also have friends whom I can get into a contentious discussion with over differing opinions and in the end remain friends and perhaps have tweaked our opinions a little through our discussion. 

 

There aren't many friends of mine with whom I can do this.  That isn't to say that most of my friends aren't opinionated, they are, its just that most of my friends are not willing to entertain alternate ideas to their opinions or beliefs.  Even if they can entertain alternate ideas, often times they find it hard to back up their own and discuss them in a meaningful way that will lead to greater understanding amongst both of us.  Perhaps that is why some of them don't want to entertain other opinions or ideas; because their own aren't solid enough.  Perhaps that is why many people don't want to entertain other ideas and stand behind theirs is if it is the only one that matters.  All I do know is that I sometimes wish people were a little more flexible and open when it comes to discussing opinions and ideas.  I find it very disconcerting to get into a discussion in which differing opinions are brought up only to have my opinion outright rejected as if it doesn't matter.  It doesn't happen very often, but when it does, I push back, try to engage in a discussion in which both opinions are laid on the table and a middle ground can be reached, yet often times the conversation ends with an agreement to disagree and there is no further discussion on that topic.  There is one friend of mine in particular who I don't talk to often enough that I can get into a discussion about our sometimes radically differing opinions and push each other to consider why we have the opinion we do and why we believe what we do.  Most people I talk to shut down if a discussion reaches the point of trying to explain our beliefs and opinions in a meaningful way.  Perhaps it is just my philosophical background that likes to question things, get into the deeper meaning of things and explore why people do what they do, believe what they believe and hold the opinions that they do.  This friend of mine is also a philosopher at heart and perhaps that is the reason that we can go where we go in our discussions.  I find it takes a great deal of security in one's self to go down that road, exploring our beliefs in a way that sometimes makes us question if in fact we are correct in the opinions we hold and the beliefs we espouse.  Its not an easy road for often times we find that we are wrong or that we don't have the basis for a belief or opinion that we thought we did.  Yet going down that road leads to a greater self awareness and understanding of who we are and why we do what we do. 

 

Any chance I get to travel down that road of personal inquisition, especially through conversation with a friend, I take it.   We can't travel down that road alone for if we do, it is harder to question our own beliefs and truly see if we are at fault or if we need to tweak our opinions and beliefs.  If we question ourselves, we will arrive at the answers we want, not the ones we need.  It isn't until we engage with someone else and have them bring out those tough questions that sometimes seem to erode the very basis of our self that we can really get to a deeper meaning of who we are and what makes us tick.  I think that perhaps part of why people are so much more opinionated these days and less willing to flex on their opinions and beliefs is that there is a lack of desire to dig deep and see what underlies those opinions and beliefs.  Perhaps there is a fear that their opinions and beliefs are unsubstantiated and wouldn't hold up in a rational discussion.  Or perhaps it is just the fact that a little self exploration is too hard and exposing for them to want to go through.  Whatever the case may be, I think we could all do with exploring why we hold the opinions we do and what is the actual basis of those opinions.  Going further, perhaps we could all do with a little more flexibility when it comes to discussing differing opinions.  There is never just black and white.  There is a whole gray area in between any opinion that warrants discussion, a little introspection, and perhaps a little tweaking of our own opinions.  There is a lot involved with opinions and I purposefully left it a little vague because to talk about anything in particular in a general setting such as this would be akin to opening a can of worms.  Not that I don't like opening that can of worms, its just that its Monday and those worms can wait.  I just wish people would be a little more open and flexible sometimes when it comes to opinions.  That's all. 

Bogus Gun Control

We here in Connecticut are on the verge of having the strictest gun control laws in the nation signed into effect.   They go far beyond anything currently in effect and have the greatest impact on those who are law abiding gun owners.   Here in Connecticut, it is an extremely touch subject as just a few months ago we dealt with the Sandy Hook School shooting that took the lives of 26 people, most of them children.   The act of violence in and of itself was horrendous and affected many people.   It took me almost a week to return to normal after the fact and I didn't even personally know anyone related to the incident.  I cried and I grieved just like many in our state did.  Yet, even immediately following the shooting, I never placed the blame on an inanimate object that was utilized to kill.  I don't own any guns, yet I one day hope to, not for target shooting or home defense; I don't even want to carry a pistol around to protect me during the day.  The only reason I would buy a gun would be to go hunting, not for sport, but for food.  No, I wouldn't be using high capacity clips that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition because as most people know, you don't go hunting with large clips, ever, and if you do, you don't deserve to be hunting.   The ban on clips larger than ten rounds is perhaps the one aspect of the gun control legislation that I actually support.  Outside of that, I believe it is all a bogus effort to try and put people's minds at ease.  While it may placate some individuals, it won't solve any problems.  It does nothing to solve the large issue of illegal gun violence, more often perpetrated by criminals on the streets using either stolen guns or ones bought on the black market.  This legislation will do nothing to curb that trend which in the end results in a much larger loss of life than the Sandy Hook tragedy.  Are we to say that just because 26 children died in a nice quiet community in Newtown, those lives somehow mean more than all those lost in the inner cities in Connecticut due to drive by shootings, accidental shootings, or other means?  Any loss of life is horrendous, no matter where or how it happens, and my biggest concern is that we are wasting time going after the wrong aspect of gun control, controlling guns for mostly law abiding citizens who would never dream of using their guns for anything other than target shooting, hunting, or in the rare case, home defense. 

 

The biggest argument that people might have for gun control is that if Adam Lanza, the shooter in the Sandy Hook tragedy hadn't had large capacity clips, he wouldn't have killed as many people.  Yet, on the same day in China, a man took a knife and killed 22 people.  I ask, what's the difference?  While enacting strict gun control legislation should we also consider putting a ban on knives?  Following that logic, any "weapon" should be heavily regulated and have laws against it, so how about the utility knife?  The common theme in both the killings in Sandy Hook and China is not the weapon used, but the issue that both men were dealing with; mental health.  Even with the added emphasis on mental health included in the law being signed into effect, not nearly enough is being done to address that side of the issue.  Does anyone seriously think that if Adam Lanza didn't have large capacity clips that he wouldn't have committed the tragedy?  I highly doubt it.  I don't think it would have mattered one bit if he had large clips or small clips.  Even with a ten round clip, the amount of time it takes to change that clip is minuscule.  A skilled marksman trained in weaponry could change a clip in a second or less.  That means even if he wasn't skilled in changing clips, he still could have changed the clip in under 5 seconds, hardly enough time for people to react between bullets being fired at them.   Most people wouldn't even notice the pause between bullets while the clip was being changed.  So how is this law going to change anything besides making it harder to buy guns of any kind.  And lets not forget the one minor detail that most lawmakers have forgotten in all of this.  They are saying that everyone who owns a larger capacity clip must now register it.  Yet, no clip has a serial number on it that is unique to that clip.  How are they going to track who registers them and who doesn't?  This bill was rushed through due to high emotions and lack of thought and in the end will do nothing to curb the violence. 

 

A better measure that the legislature could have taken would have been to re-open mental health hospitals and perhaps put more regulations on doctors and psychotropic medications which are a much bigger catalyst than guns.  If you look at any of the mass killings, nearly every single person was on a psychotropic medication of some sort which severely alters your mental state.  Yet no attention is being paid to that end.  Why?  Because the pharmaceutical industry has its hands deeper into the pockets of politicians than the gun lobbyists.  No one wants to talk about mental health for fear of offending someone.  Well, maybe its time we started offending some people and brought that issue to the fore front of the discussion.  If Adam Lanza had been getting treatment in an institution rather than just popping his meds at home with no oversight, then perhaps we could have averted this tragedy before it happened.  Yet we jump to the guns.  Perhaps if people around the Lanza family had brought their concerns about Adam to his mother and other doctors, he could have been treated more effectively to the point where he didn't feel the need to grab a bunch of guns and go kill 26 people.  The more we focus on guns, the more we lose sight of the real issue at hand here, mental health.  My wife, who is a high school teacher, does not support this gun law, and I don't either.  She does not want a pistol in the house or any sort of weapon other than a rifle or a shotgun for hunting, and I agree with her.  Yet we both feel this law goes beyond protection to an infringement of rights.  Anyone who agrees with this law needs to look beyond the mere aspect of guns, get over their fear of them, and start to look at the broader picture.  Yes, the tragedy in Newtown was horrific.  I would never wish that upon anyone and my heart broke for those families as did many hearts in Connecticut.  Yet, to say that this legislation will solve anything is like speaking out of your ass, only shit comes out.