[AZ-Observing] Re: I-17
- From: "Stanley A. Gorodenski" <stan_gorodenski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: az-observing@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 18:23:49 -0800
As promised, I am back with what I found out regarding the efforts in
the early 1980's to get counties and cities to adopt dark sky ordinances.
In the early 1980's Dr. Crawford and another individual did a lot of work with
counties and cities (over the whole state, not just the southern half) to
encourage lighting ordinances. Not many others individuals were involved with
the effort. The other individual did most of the actual field work involved in
the outreach efforts.
Dr. Crawford and his associate were able to reach most all counties and cities
but not all due to lack of time. The State and Governor were also approached.
ASU was involved in a study of the fiscal impact of astronomy to the state
about this time and a report was published. The study found a clear and large
impact , and that astronomy is a high tech clean "industry". There is now a
clear need for an updated version of the report for all locales, which could be
a chance to educate many about the pluses of lighting ordinances.
Prescott and Prescott Valley were approached. Most of the communities were
quite receptive and most, something like 50 overall, actually passed an
ordinance. It was not found that communities felt this was a gimmick, and
apparently this might have been true for Prescott Valley as well.
Stan
Stanley A. Gorodenski wrote:
>And what makes it worse is that I was told (I don't remember who told me
>its been so long) that when the Tucson astronomers were going around
>Arizona in the 1980's to encourage municipalities and counties to adopt
>lighting ordnances, when they approached Prescott Valley and one of the
>astronomers mentioned astronomy is a money making industry in Arizona
>(or something like that) they took it to mean that someone was making a
>buck off it and refused to go along. I don't know if they now have a
>lighting ordinance. I should know since I am only about 5 miles from
>this hell of light pollution. Maybe someone can verify or correct my
>tale about Prescott Valley
>Stan
>
>Ken Reeves wrote:
>
>
>
>>As far as where is the next major development taking place, it already has
>>and it's called Prescott Valley, which is probably adding much more light
>>pollution to the Cherry Area than any other subdivision.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>--
>See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
>send personal replies to the author, not the list.
>
>
>
>
>
--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
send personal replies to the author, not the list.
Other related posts:
