A swath of rock columns is visible from Massai Point in Chiricahua National Monument/NPS, Katy Hooper
A U.S. congresswoman introduced legislation Tuesday that would promote Chiricahua National Monument in southern Arizona to a national park.
Rep. Martha McSally of Arizona submitted the two-page bill, dubbed the Chiricahua National Park Act, in hopes of changing the 11,985-acre monument’s designation but detailed no other amendments to the site or how it’s managed.
“During the 100th anniversary of the National Park Service, I can think of no better way to recognize Chiricahua’s unique, historic landscapes, and I’ll continue to work to pass this legislation into law,” Rep. McSally said in a release.
The monument, 120 miles southeast of Tucson, preserves an array of balanced rocks, pinnacles, and hoodoos, scenic Bonita Canyon, as well as the historic Faraway Ranch. In 1976, Congress designated all of the park except for the road corridor as wilderness.
“Having had the opportunity to hike Chiricahua and even fly over it in an A-10 many times during training, I know first-hand what a national treasure it is,” said Rep. McSally, who served 26 years in the U.S. Air Force.
McSally noted grassroots support from many local officials and governments in Arizona and New Mexico, and that nearby communities would see a boost in tourism and jobs.
“The City Council feels so strongly about this effort, we passed a resolution unanimously in support, which doesn’t happen very often,” Sierra Vista Mayor Rick Mueller said in a release.
“Southeastern Arizona businesses welcome this significant opportunity to strengthen the local economy through increased tourism in Cochise County,” Mary Tieman, executive director of the Sierra Vista Chamber of Commerce, said in a release.
Comments
Human naure might be, but I haven't experienced much of that.
"And no Lee, if 50% of the students are failing, its [sic] not the students that have a problem."
Yes, it is. For example, look at Mr. Wilson's use of grammar. The National Park Service, etc., does not "ran" the national parks; it "runs" them. Ran is the past tense of run. I therefore question Rep. McSally's decision to establish a national park no "average" American will be able to spell.
Today, the average "student" in America is on his or her smart phone [sic] nine hours a day--and learning nothing, from what I see. So, the next time you blame us teachers for failing the students, please look in the mirror before you press send.
Engliish Teacher- Do 50% of your students get an F on your exams? I doubt it.
No, their parents would scream, but yes, 50 percent sometimes deserve an F. They don't read; they complain about every assignment, but again, they know their parents will take it out on me. Homework? If they can't finish it in under a minute, they can't be bothered. I can just imagine, if Donald Trump is elected president, what will happen to the English language then. He is barely speaking at the fourth-grade level, just about where my high-school seniors are speaking now.
If they deserve the F, they should get it. Period.
Trouble is, it's much easier and better suited to conservative agendas to blame schools and teachers than it is to place responsibility where it actually belongs -- with students and parents in most cases. But perhaps that's part of the new American "human naure."
However, I doubt very much that 50% of English Teacher's students receive F grades. I'll bet that ET is doing all he or she can possibly do to engage and encourage even the most reluctant and lazy to do better. But as they say, "You can lead a student to a book, but you can't make him read it."
In the meantime, this proposal to turn Chiricahua into a national park smacks of election year pandering.
Nice idea. Wrong reason.
Consider this observation from Peggy Noonan this morning:
"This year I am seeing something, especially among the young of politics and journalism. They have received most of what they know about political history through screens. They are college graduates, they are in their 20s or 30s, they're bright and ambitious, but they have seen the movie and not read the book. They've heard the sound bite but not read the speech. Their understanding of history, even recent history, is superficial. They grew up in the internet age and have filled their brainspace with information that came in the form of pictures and sounds. They learned through sensation, not through books, which demand something deeper from your brain. Reading forces you to imagine, question, ponder, reflect. It provides a deeper understanding of political figures and events."
"Everyone in politics is getting much of what they know through the internet, through Google searches and Wikipedia. They can give you a certain sense of things but are by nature quick and shallow reads that link to other quick and shallow reads. Sometimes subjects are treated in a tendentious manner, reflecting the biases or limited knowledge of the writer."
"If you cannot read deeply you will not be able to think deeply. If you can't think deeply you will not be able to lead well, or report well."
As a professor, I never gave 50 percent of my students Fs, because yes, I encouraged everyone to read. And it was still the age of reading, after all. In other words, all of my colleagues gave me their support, and I in turn gave them mine. If you didn't read, you were going nowhere fast, and there was no way to work around it.
When EC says (claims) that the teachers are to blame, he forgets that now everyone works around it, starting with the parents (themselves on the internet) who think that junior is doing just fine. Well, junior isn't, at least not in the public schools, where the average reading level has been stuck at fifth grade since at least the 1990s.
It is no wonder that our political discourse is a mess, whether about the national parks or the future of the country. In a democracy, discourse relies on nuance. All we have today is charges. It is far easier for anyone to make a charge than to understand cause and effect. Why do we stand for it? I think Peggy Noonan is right. It is because, having forgotten how to read, and instead bending to 24/7 "news," we're exhausted. "Everyone is tired, and chronologically tired people live, perilously, on the Edge of Stupid."
Nine hours a day on the internet is too much, even if it is The Traveler. Yes, think of the Centennial we might have had if everyone had read a book.
Bravo, Alfred. Bravo!
(And Peggy Noonan, too.)