Popper editorial brings more questions

EDITOR'S NOTE -- The following comment was received via e-mail in response to the weekend editorial "Poppers need to go beyond the obvious."

Having read the Gazette's editorial regarding the Poppers, I am left with a variety of questions.

First and foremost, has the writer ever bothered to read the Poppers' initial article titled "The Great Plains: From Dust to Dust" where the Buffalo Commons metaphor was first introduced? If so, why the inaccurate statement that the Poppers' premise was "it might be best to turn the land back to habitat for large buffalo herds"?

Their premise, in fact, was that it was in the nation's best interest to step in and do SOMETHING due to the population loss crisis in the region. Buffalo habitat was offered as a suggestion to bring tourism dollars to a region that, through natural causes, was going to lose the bulk of its population anyhow.

The metaphor "Buffalo Commons" took on a life of its own in the minds of the ignorant who never bothered to read the original article. Unfortunately, there were far more who didn't read the Poppers' article than those who did. It is sad to see that two decades after it was published, the Gazette continues to perpetuate this misnomer of the Poppers' thesis.

(Incidentally, having attended the Poppers' meeting in McCook 20 years ago, I must say that it was far closer to deserving the label "community embarrassment" for area residents' behavior than it was for the almost self-aggrandizing mention the Gazette seems to recall it with)

Also, how can the Gazette observe "the people of the Great Plains have adapted quite well to the changes which are taking place."

If this were true, non-urban counties in Great Plains states from North Dakota to Texas wouldn't be losing population! This loss reached 35 percent from the 1990 to the 2000 census in some counties and is especially evident in the young adult population. The very reality of the demographics disavows the Gazette's claim that the region has adapted and, if anything, demonstrates a key part of the problem facing Great Plains communities -- a feeling of apathy toward meaningful change.

Contrary to the Gazette's opinion, the people of the Great Plains have done little to adapt. Federal rural policy remains synonymous with agriculture policy despite the fact that more and more non-farmers live in these communities. Rural communities have not stood up to demand a change however -- in part because rural Great Plains communities are inherently resistant to change.

It is almost ironic that a region of the nation first populated by pioneers willing to take a chance for the sake of earning a living has, in just a few short generations, become a region that clings so steadfastly to tradition that it is today trying to live in a 21st century world using the economic model and machinery of the early and mid-20th century.

Young people are leaving rural communities in droves, meaning the population of rural counties is increasingly aged. This elderly population clings tight to tradition, frequently voting against amenities such as parks, schools and community recreation facilities that could be used to attract new people into the community. Often the justification "we got along fine without it" can be heard.

Unfortunately, people have greater freedom of movement in the modern age. If rural communities of the Great Plains aren't willing to build or offer such amenities, communities or cities elsewhere will.

Other times we hear this elderly population complain that it is too expensive to construct such facilities. Given that the alternative might be the end of the community in just a generation or two, isn't it expensive to NOT build them?

We can get along without it? Not in today's world.

The number one thing people look for when moving to a new community is "a nice place to live." The number one reason young people who move away from rural counties into urban areas gave for doing so was because there was "nothing to do" in the region they grew up.

Look around your communities. How much improvement is being done to make it a "nice place to live" for today's young adults? Are your recreation facilities geared for today's youth and young adults, or the people who were young adults a half-century ago? Are your concerts and community programs tailored toward the youth and young adults?

When outsiders attempt to change things in rural communities, they are often greeted by the attitude "if you don't like it here, you can leave." Well here's a newsflash -- they are leaving, and in a hurry. The challenge for rural America is to lure them back, and we're losing that battle in a big way.

Rural communities are the last to receive the benefits of technological innovations, placing them at a consistent disadvantage with their urban counterparts when it comes time to attract business enterprises. High speed internet, common in cities for years and considered a key for successful entrepreneurial endeavors, is still absent from many rural Great Plains communities. Again, many communities don't cry out in demand for improvements like this because they don't recognize the need for them.

So in closing, perhaps the Gazette is overlooking the reason the Poppers continue their doomsday talk. For many of the communities in the region, doomsday is exactly what will happen in a generation or two if they don't recreate the mindset and the economic machinery upon which their communities depend.

The solution is not for the Poppers to come up with. It is for each of our communities to come up with. We hold the solution, but we as a region collectively and continually fail to search within ourselves for it.

Paul Revere is not hailed as a nuisance for warning that the British were coming but not picking up a firearm to ride into the battle. Neither should Frank and Deborah Popper continue to be scorned for trying to warn the Great Plains about an impending danger.

In fact, if the region would set aside its tendency to scoff at outsiders, it might just see the Poppers have been right all along and perhaps its time we started to act on their words.

-- The Poppers' original article is available online at http://www.planning.org/25anniversary/planning/1987dec.htm