KVIE Public Television – Channel 6, Cable 7, KVIE-DT – Where You Get Your PBS

Here’s a sampling of information broadcast on Through the Roof Aired addressing affording housing issues, co-housing, etc. up in the Central Valley.

New Valley: Through the RoofAired: Saturday, June 30 @ 6:30 pmIn the second installment, the issue of housing in the Central Valley is the camera’s focus. New Valley: Through The Roof will investigate where the growth is directed. With prime agricultural land often the target, can the Central Valley keep its viable agricultural economy or will farmlands be relinquished to housing development? Also, the problem of housing the urban and rural poor is compounded as the race for affordable housing speeds up. What opportunities are open to farm workers who are searching for a small portion of the American dream? What can the urban poor do to find an adequate home in valley cities strapped by weakened economies? Developers are seeking guidance as they search for ways to supply high-density dwellings in urban centers from Redding to Bakersfield. Plus a look at what it’s like for middle-income families trying to find the home of their dreams, which often turn into nightmares.This edition will include interviews with, among others, Tim Coyle, Sr. of the California Building Industry Association based in Sacramento; Carol Whiteside, President of the Great Valley Center based in Modesto; Jean Ross, Executive Director of the California Budget Project; Don Harris, Founder of the Nehemiah Corporation of California; as well as produce farmers from the Natomas area attesting to the decline of farmland to development; and agricultural workers in Fresno county.Sprawl:Sprawl — a verb, dispersed development outside of compact urban and village centers along highways and in rural countryside. The issue of sprawl is impacting every facet of Central Valley society at every economic level. Fueling the sprawl frenzy is a population that has grown eighteen percent since 1990 and is projected to balloon from five million to 12 million by 2040. At the eye of the storm surrounding sprawl is how and where to house the new and future residents of California’s great Central Valley. It’s the California dream: a home of our own, where young families can expand and escape the frustration and overcrowding of our cities.Many urban centers are crumbling from neglect and loss of supportable infrastructure while suburbs spread, overtaking fertile farmland. The California Building Industry Association claims we’re providing about half the housing we need for the growth the state is experiencing. According to Tim Coyle, Sr. Vice President of the association, efforts to curtail unchecked growth by rebuilding in urban centers are hampered by restrictive permitting costs and litigation issues. The “not in my backyard” syndrome halts many developments before they get started.Not every dream can accommodate a single family. Jean Ross, Executive Director of the California Budget Project also decries the lack of affordable multi-family housing. She claims a lack of apartment housing is locking out thousands of lower income families.Affordable Housing:In this segment we’ll review one of the strategies involved in trying to find a home in this competitive and increasingly pricey market. Hear from couples that have been pounding the pavement and finally found a home at a price they could afford. Greg Paquin from the Gregory Group in Folsom shares information about the Central Valley market and where the pockets of affordable homes still are. Paquin says despite price increases, there are positives and Central Valley is still a great place to buy.Jan Wilson of Kimball Hill Homes talks about new developments, Bay Area families looking for a better deal, waiting lists and how to get ahead of the game. Local realtors share what they believe anyone looking for a home in this market should know and what it may mean to you as their neighbor. Don Harris, the founder of the Nehemiah Corporation, a program that helps assist first time homebuyers, explains why this housing crunch could signal an opportunity for truly innovative housing and urban revitalization. The increasingly tight housing market has been a widespread topic for discussion.In this segment we’ll explore how challenging it can be purchasing a home in the Central Valley. Until recently, qualifying for a home was the most difficult aspect of the home purchase experience; however, that has changed. In today’s market buying are experiencing lack of supply and high demand coupled with fierce competition. KVIE’s Melissa Crowley will share her first-hand experience navigating through lotteries, sale releases, and bidding, which is now all too common. Realtor Susie Kuwabara offers advice on how to stay ahead of the game. Market analysts will share their perspectives on why the Valley is a good deal.Urban Housing:Nearly half (49%) of renter households spend more than the recommended 30% of their income toward shelter. This segment focuses on the issues facing urban housing including the lack of availability for low and middle-income families. In this segment, we also take a look at the amount of unused land available in the urban areas and interview Architect David Mogavero, who has built numerous award-winning developments around downtown and surrounding areas, for his insight. Mogavero is an environmentally conscious architect who is active in developing in-fill lots and turning them into affordable middle and low-income housing units.He has also built co-housing units such as the Southside Co-Housing Development near downtown Sacramento. These units were erected in a redevelopment area and are helping their neighborhood recover from years of neglect and lack of resources. Now, twenty-five families live, work, and raise their children together in these eco friendly homes. Many are close enough to walk to work, but they also share utilities, cooking responsibilities and keep a watchful eye on the surrounding neighborhood.This segment will also explore a few of the issues surrounding the Section 8 housing voucher program. It is estimated that over 371,000 families are on a waiting list for Section 8 assistance. This number is more then three times the actual number of California families receiving assistance at 104,133 (CA Budget Project Report). Typically, we’ve found in our exploration of this issue, that many low-income families, who are in urgent need to use their voucher, cannot secure housing within a reasonable period of time. Additionally, in many cases, it can take years to secure affordable housing or to locate a voucher friendly landlord.Compounding the availability shortage for Central Valley families are Section 8 recipients from the Bay Area, who have no choice but to flee cities, where affordable housing is practically nonexistent, and seek refuge in the already stressed Central Valley affordable housing market. We’ll talk with Don Harris with the Nehemiah Corporation who is diligently working to build additional housing units in an effort to satisfy the increased demand for accessible housing.Farm Worker Housing:

KVIE Public Television – Channel 6, Cable 7, KVIE-DT – Where You Get Your PBS

 

American Farmland Trust: Resources – The Future Is Now – Ideas for Change

Thinking about the development of a sustainable mixed use community and potential locations. This is looking at the area of Vallejo and some of the issues arising that necessitate the preservation of some of the best farmland in America.

“Ideas for ChangeThe destruction of another 900,000 acres of Central Valley farmland is not inevitable. Neither are its implications, from a potentially crippling loss of agricultural capacity to more traffic congestion and air pollution, and a degraded environment in general. There is a window of opportunity remaining for the Valley to fulfill its unique potential as a diverse mix of cultivated, natural and built environments, rather than as just another California region characterized by undistinguished and costly urban sprawl. But, as we have seen, the time to bring about meaningful change — is now.Potential Farmland Savings from Immediate ActionIf public officials and other community leaders begin immediately to change the land use plans, policies, rules and incentives that shape development, a significant amount of farmland can be saved. The chart at the right [click on it to enlarge] shows what can be accomplished if action is taken in the near future to increase the efficiency of development in the Valley.If land use patterns in the Valley do not change, the combination of urban and rural ranchette development will consume another 900,000 acres. A relatively modest increase in the efficiency of urban development — taking the Easy Path — would save 238,000 acres of farmland (red area on chart), 42% of what will be lost by the year 2040 if curent trends are allowed to continue. During the next decade, the number of people accommodated per urbanized acre would have to increase from an average of 8 to less than 12 people per acre, and reach about 17 people per acre by 2025 — less than the average in coastal Southern California today. An additional savings of about 204,000 acres (orange area on chart) could be achieved by reducing the size of new rural ranchettes from an average of 4 to 1.75 acres (or by reducing their number by two-thirds). The total loss of farmland would be cut in half, saving around 440,000 acres. If 70% of the land saved were high quality irrigated cropland and the remainder rangeland and less productive land — for saving the best land is and eqully critical objective — it would also save roughly $550 million (in 2002 dollars) in annual agricultural production capacity.How to Do ItTo minimize the loss of the Valley’s best farmland, many challenges must be met. And there is no one-size-fits-all policy prescription. It will take some experimentation to find effective solutions for each community. Nonetheless, there are some common challenges each community should try to better understand and some universal solutions that they could apply as appropriate to local circumstances. [1]Challenge:Uncertain Boundaries Between Urban and Agricultural Land Uses Potential SolutionsIn many communities, farmland is viewed simply as open space waiting to be developed, and agriculture as a temporary use of it, rather than as an irreplaceable resource for an essential industry that requires long-term stability to prosper. Many city spheres of influence are much larger than required to accommodate future population growth, and their boundaries can be changed almost at any time, as can both city and county general plan designations of land for development. These uncertainties contribute to what has been called an “impermanence syndrome” that encourages land speculation (driving land prices above what agriculture can afford) and discourages long-term commitments of land to agricultural use (like Williamson Act contracts). Under the circumstances, one cannot blame farmers for wanting to keep all their land use options open. But this desire merely helps perpetuate the cycle of uncertainty that could ultimately undermine the agriculture industry itself. The uncertainty also affects developers (at least those who are not betting that they can get the rules changed in their favor). Neighbors who are surprised by changes in rules to accommodate a development project are more likely to oppose them politically and in court.”

American Farmland Trust: Resources – The Future Is Now – Ideas for Change

 

Does Obama Support Infanticide?

Obama: Bill unnecessarily burdened doctors with … babies; Update: AOL Hot Seat poll added

posted at 7:43 am on August 21, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

{I just caught this on AOL, which usually seems so pro choice. So it was interesting to read an analysis of the twisted reasoning that Obama puts forth to cover his stance on infanticide. Being a debator for years one can appreciate rhetoric, but I appreciate integrity and those who are straightforward in their opinions even if I disagree with them. It’s better to know that someone is your enemy than if they are a wormtongue.
Here’s the transcript and a bit of the analysis from AOL. Wow, how did this slip through their liberal filters?

“Yesterday, a YouTubed audio snippet of Barack Obama’s defense of his vote against the Illinois state legislation that required medical providers to give normal life-supporting medical care to infants born alive during an abortion appeared on several blogs. Neither Allahpundit nor I could determine the legitimacy of the clip at the time.  After all, AP had just inveighed against Think Progress for Dowdifying John McCain on the draft, and it hardly seemed fair to propagate a potentially similar edit job on Obama.  Guy Benson did some research on the quote and discovered that not only did the audio come from the Chicago Tribune, Obama had made similar remarks in the Illinois legislature.

Here’s the audio alone, without the musical overlay:

I suspect that doctors feel that they would be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations, and that essentially adding an additional doctor, who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments, is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.

Guy also found a similar passage in the transcripts of the Illinois legislature. On pages 32-34 of the April 4, 2002 session, Obama debates the bill on the floor of the state Senate. He says essentially the exact same thing as he did in this audio passage above, but with a little more detail:

[T]he only plausible rationale, to my mind, for this legislation would be if you had a suspicion that a doctor, the attending physician, who has made the assessment that this is a nonviable fetus and that, let’s say for the purposes of the mother’s health, is being — that — that labor is being induced, that that physician (a) is going to make the wrong assessment and (b) if the physician discovered, after the labor had been induced, that, in fact, he made an error, and in fact this was not a nonviable fetus but, in fact, a live child, that the physician, of his own accord or her own accord, would not try to exercise the sort of medical procedures and practices that would be involved in saving that child.

Now, if — if you think that there are possibilities that doctors would not do that, then maybe this bill makes sense, but I — I suspect and my impression is, is that the Medical Society suspects that doctors feel that they would already be under that obligation, that they would already be making these determinations, and that essentially adding a — an additional doctor who the has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.

Now, if that’s the case –and — and I know some of us feel very strongly one way or the other on that issue — that’s fine, but I think it’s important to understand that this issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if these children are being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure they’re looked after.

This passage is really remarkable for the willfully obtuse nature of Obama’s arguments. By the time this debate took place, Jill Stanek had already revealed that doctors weren’t providing medical care to infants born alive during abortions, at Christ Hospital, and a subsequent investigation proved that other abortion providers also abandoned such infants to die.  That was the entire reason for the debate.  Obama acts as if this is some curious academic hypothesis.

Instead of addressing the actual issue of infanticide, Obama twists it into a protection for abortion.  He frames his own hypothetical as an abortion “for the health of the mother”, but the circumstances of the mother’s health has no bearing at all on whether a live infant should receive medical care.  How would treating a live infant threaten the health of the mother?

And finally, as the original audio notes, the remainder of Obama’s opposition rests on the “burden” of calling in a second physician to make an independent determination of the birth.  The bill created that “burden”, a procedure which would take very little time at all, precisely because the doctors at Christ Hospital and elsewhere threw live infants away with no oversight at all.

Nowhere in this argument does Obama say, “I oppose this bill because of its companion bill,” the lame argument that has surfaced over the last 48 hours from Team Obama.  He doesn’t talk about the bill’s supposed unconstitutionality.  Moreover, during the presidential campaign, he said he would have supported the federal bill even though it had all of the same supposed flaws Obama argued against in this passage.

Obama protected infanticide in order to protect abortion on demand.  There simply is no other explanation except abject stupidity, and this passage proves it.

Update: Did Obama protect infanticide? Take the AOL Hot Seat poll:

 

Dalai Lama and John McCain – jameswagner.com

This is probably one of the strangest photos I have ever seen of the Dalai Lama with a political leader. Does it strike you as strange? The following are not my comments, but go along with the photo.

“two cult leaders, getting along famously

Why does this photo of McCain’s meeting yesterday with Tenzin Gyatso not surprise me? But then, maybe it really should have surprised me:

“I hate the gooks,” McCain said in 2000. “I will hate them as long as I live.”

This trip down memory lane was brought to us by Eyeteeth.

Dalai Lama and John McCainLama_and_that_other_old_guy.jpgtwo cult leaders, getting along famouslyWhy does this photo of McCain’s meeting yesterday with Tenzin Gyatso not surprise me? But then, maybe it really should have surprised me: “I hate the gooks,” McCain said in 2000. “I will hate them as long as I live.”This trip down memory lane was brought to us by Eyeteeth.

Dalai Lama and John McCain – jameswagner.com

 

NewsDaily: Dalai Lama fears Chinese push in Tibet after Games

August 13, 2008. Continuing to follow the interaction of the Dalai Lama via the International press regarding the Beijing Olympics which he skillfully uses to continue to pressure his agenda. He expressed his fear about what China will do to Tibet following the Games. It seems that the Dalai Lama serves a strangely good cop/bad cop role for China’s foreign relationships. Interesting to watch his rhetoric and utilization of “skillful means” in his political/religious dealings with foreign governments and the press. Some suggest that he is a skillful double agent for the Chinese government.

“He said that there was a risk … that immediately after the Games a million Chinese will settle in Tibet to further dilute the Tibetan population,” said Jean-Louis Bianco.Critics of China say it is flooding Tibet with Han Chinese who could swamp its distinctive culture, particularly since the opening of a railway link to the region in 2006.China denies this, citing huge economic development and great efforts to preserve Tibetan culture. It says only a small number of Han live permanently in Tibet.The Dalai Lama is on a two-week visit to France, mostly focused on religious commitments. His meeting on Wednesday with the legislators was the only political item on his agenda.”He gave us very worrying information about the situation in Tibet, speaking of arrests, torture, summary executions and a reinforcement of the Chinese military presence through new barracks,” Bianco told Reuters just after the meeting.At a press conference earlier, the Dalai Lama reiterated his support for the Beijing Olympics.Asked to comment on a domestic row in France, where critics accuse President Nicolas Sarkozy of caving into Chinese pressure by declining to meet him, the Dalai Lama said Western leaders were right to nurture warm ties with China.”They should not isolate China. They must bring China into the world community and create genuine friendship,” he said.China has accused the Dalai Lama’s followers of seeking to derail the Games by orchestrating unrest across Tibet in March and subsequent protests that disrupted the Olympic torch relay in several countries. The Dalai Lama denies this and has appealed to Tibetans not to protest during the Olympics.

NewsDaily: Dalai Lama fears Chinese push in Tibet after Games

 

NewsDaily: Dalai Lama: China mistreating Tibetans during Games

August 16, 2008. The latest critique from the Dalai Lama on the Beijing Olympic Games arose during his meeting with French Legislators. I don’t think he’ll be attending the Olympics in China anytime soon.

“Unfortunately the Olympic spirit is not being respected at all by Chinese officials in Tibet,” he said in an interview on France’s TF1 television, when asked if the tradition of an Olympic truce was being respected.”There are restrictions on the circulation of information, very strong censorship,” he said.”Civilians are often arrested, violently tortured to the point where they die. It’s really very, very sad,” he said.The Dalai Lama is on a two-week visit to France, mostly focused on religious commitments. He has made few political comments but he criticized China’s actions in Tibet at a meeting on Wednesday with French legislators.The visit has triggered a domestic row in France, where critics accuse President Nicolas Sarkozy of caving into Chinese pressure by declining to meet him.On Saturday he met Sarkozy’s challenger in last year’s presidential election, Segolene Royal, who said she intended to visit Tibet.Foreign activists have staged a number of protests in Beijing to highlight what they say is repression of Tibetans in the Himalayan region but the Dalai Lama has appealed to supporters not to disrupt the Games.(Reporting by Sophie Louet; writing by James Mackenzie; Editing by Jon Boyle)

NewsDaily: Dalai Lama: China mistreating Tibetans during Games

 

Beijing Olympic Games: Dalai Lama calls for boycott of opening ceremony – Telegraph

It’s fascinating to read of the Dalai Lama’s political interaction with the British government about the Beijing Olympic Games back in May. Here’s a short excerpt from the BBC’s coverage on his visit with British Prime Minister Brown.

“In the interview with the BBC , the Buddhist spiritual leader, 73, said of the Olympics’ opening ceremony: “Right from the beginning I fully support about the Olympic Games. Meantime I have also made clear the world takes this opportunity to remind the Chinese government about poor record on human rights, religious freedom and environment. The Chinese leadership should pay more attention.”Asked whether politicians and others should attend the opening ceremony if invited, he said: “[If an ] individual feel [that is] the best way to remind them [is] not [to[ attend, don’t do it.”But he qualified that: “If they feel to talk, to meet with Chinese leaders, that’s more effective, then go there.”On the question of where his meeting with Mr Brown is to be held today, the Dalai Lama said: “From my part there’s no differences, so long as the meeting [takes place]. So perhaps I think [with] our meeting, the Prime Minister I think, is becoming more spiritual minded.”He accepted the Prime Minister did not want to receive him at Number 10 for “economy reasons”.The Bhuddist spiritual leader, 73, said he was fully committed to a “middle way” of bringing greater autonomy for Tibet, but said he did not want the disputed province to break away entirely from the Chinese state.Asked what exactly he wanted for Tibet, he replied: “We are not seeking separation. It is in our own interest to remain within China.”“Defence and foreign affairs should be carried by central [Chinese] government but the rest of business – education and environment, religious work – should be handled by Tibetans themselves. That’s meaningful autonomy.”He said he thought the Chinese leadership “should take a more liberal way, a more open way, to look towards Tibet.”

Beijing Olympic Games: Dalai Lama calls for boycott of opening ceremony – Telegraph

 

Dalai Lama invited to Games opening ceremony: rights group | Asian Political News | Find Articles at BNET

It might be surprising to you, but did you know that the Dalai Lama was invited to attend the Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony?  Check it out.

Dalai Lama invited to Games opening ceremony: rights groupAsian Political News, May 26, 2008 * E-mail * Print * LinkHONG KONG, May 21 KyodoChina earlier this year invited Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama to attend the Olympic Games opening ceremony, a China human rights watchdog said Wednesday.The Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy said the Dalai Lama’s nephew, Khedroob Thondup, confirmed that a senior Beijing official in February contacted him to extend an invitation to the Dalai Lama to participate in the ceremony.The statement issued by the center said Chow Mei-Li, the wife of Khedroob Thondup, also confirmed that the invitation came before riots broke out in Lhasa in March. The center did not say whether the Dalai Lama has accepted the invitation or whether he will attend the ceremony.Violent protests that began on March 14 in the capital city of western China’s Tibet Autonomous Region were followed by heavy-handed tactics of riot control by paramilitary police forces.China claimed 18 civilians and a police officer were killed in the riots but nongovernmental organizations put the death toll at over 200.Facing international pressure calling for a dialogue with the Dalai Lama, Beijing sent two senior officials to a one-day meeting with two envoys from the Tibetan government-in-exile behind close doors earlier this month. Both sides reportedly expressed their stances in the meeting and will meet again soon.Neither the government-in-exile nor Beijing’s Olympic Games organizer could be reached for comment.COPYRIGHT 2008 Kyodo News International, Inc.COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning

Dalai Lama invited to Games opening ceremony: rights group | Asian Political News | Find Articles at BNET

 

Polish Olympic Weightlifter Makes Tibet Protest in Beijing

Polish Olympic Weightlifter Makes Tibet Protest in Beijing

It’s interesting to follow how the Free Tibet Movement is attempting to make it’s point during the Beijing Olympic Games as the PRC is keeping a tight lid on any public demonstrations which they claim are not in keeping with the spirit of the Olympic Games according to NBC Evening News.

Posted on August 18th, 2008 by cold mtn in General

Yesterday, the weightlifter Szymon Kołecki, shaved his head in a gesture of solidarity with Tibetan monks, before competing and winning a silver medal.

He told a Polish sports news outlet:

“This haircut is from this morning. I can’t directly say why I did it. It’s connected with certain things that the Olympic Charter forbids. But I will say that it’s symbolic.”

On March 20th this year, a week after the Chinese government brutally suppressed peaceful protests in Lhasa and sparked a country-wide uprising, Kołecki said:

“Unless the Chinese regime becomes more moderate, I’ll compete with my head shaved in a gesture of solidarity with the Tibetan monks.”

Head-shaving was one of the suggestions the Athlete Wanted campaign made to athletes as gestures of support for Tibet at the Olympics. In Poland, the campaign was carried out by the Inna Przestrzeń Foundation’s Tibetan Programme, as part of which Polish athletes were contacted directly as well as via the internet. More on the campaign in Poland here: http://ratujtybet.org/Pekin_2008/

Following this year’s dramatic events in Tibet, Kołecki also said:

“I am outraged by what’s going on in Tibet. When I read about it, I can hardly believe I’ll compete in a country that bloodily suppresses street protests and persecutes people who don’t agree with the party. I can’t believe the Chinese have launched an immense operation to block Lhasa.” He continued, “This month in Beijing is a chance for the world’s biggest audience to see how China persecutes the Tibetan people.”

“Until August 17th, I’ll be focused chiefly on my participation in the contest. But after that I’ll keep my eyes wide open and if I see something worrying, I’ll surely not look away.”

Thanks to Tibet Watch in Poland for the translated information.

 

Giant Dragon in China~13 miles long to serve as symbolic structure celebrating 60 anniversary of the PRC

 The other day I was talking with my friend Samuel about the symbolism being conveyed during the Beijing Olympic Games. He mentioned that they are promoting the Dragon as their national symbol. After seeing this article I am convinced he was right.

Giant dragon to save city from sand, then accept advertising job

These days, Shanghaiist is rarely surprised about anything that happens in China. However, we did think that this news story did come from a little out of left-field. A Henan-based investor group is constructing a 21-kilometre (13 mile) long metal Chinese dragon as a tourist attraction. The dragon’s body forms a nine-metre (27-foot) high wall running along a ridge-line, with the dragon’s head rising 10-metres (30-feet) above the surrounding land. This project plans to cover the metal structure in 5.6 million pieces of white marble and gilded bronze to form the dragon’s scales which Xinhua reports should be “symbolic of the country’s 56 ethnic groups”. The dragon construction is planned to finished by 2009 to mark the 60th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. The investor group states that advertising space on the giant serpent also will be sold and tourists can pay to have their names and other messages inscribed on the walls of galleries located inside.

All of this sounds super-tacky to this little Shanghaiist.

So where is this monster located? In the Shizu Mountain National Forest Park, just outside the Henan capital, Zhengzhou. National Forest Park… hmm.

Not surprisingly, there is a little controversy. The (forever-blocked) BBC News reported that there are moves to stop this incredulous construction situated on top of the Shizu Mountain National Forest Park due to environmental concerns. Here’s an excerpt of their story.

The Henan Environmental Protection Agency says it has sent a team to investigate the project that started without the necessary environmental assessments, Xinhua news agency reported.

“If the project fails our assessment, we will order it be stopped or the demolition of the completed part,” an unidentified official with the administration was quoted as saying.

An online survey showed more than 90% of respondents disapproved of the dragon, Xinhua said.

“The planned dragon is like an expressway which will damage vegetation, affect the landscape and destroy the local ecological system,” Wu Mingzuo, director of Henan Ecology Society, was quoted as saying.

“Shizu mountain is a symbol of Huangdi, the Yellow Emperor, who is considered the earliest ancestor of China,” the Shanghai Daily quoted Dai Songcheng, director of the Henan institute of culture, as saying.

“Such an immense structure on the mountain top is disrespectful to Huangdi.”

Shanghaiist also believes this is a little disrespectful to the concept of a National Forest Park as well. However, there is the suggestion that the dragon structure could help minimise the impact of sand storms on the nearby capital. USA Today’s Weather blogger had this to say about the concept.

The weather connection is that the 13-mile long dragon sculpture could help protect the city from the tremendous sandstorms that blow in from the north each spring. Located south-east of the Gobi Desert, the city of Zhengzhou is apparently quite vulnerable to sandstorms. Although the sculpture doesn’t seem that tall in the photo, it may very will be high enough to protect the city. Sandstorms rarely rise more than 50 feet above the ground, in contrast to duststorms, which can rise much higher in the atmosphere.

Henan’s capital Zhengzhou sounds more and more like a bit of a wacky place to hang out in. Apart from building giant dragon sand breaks, the fun-loving residents of Zhengzhou have been up to quite a number of activities recently like giant face sculpture competitions and organising baijiu-influenced nude runs for the sake of the environment. Oh, then there’s the odd student hullabaloo, and don’t try and be a HIV/AIDS activist there either, you might embarrass someone.