I appreciate Kevin Lyles’ letter “Check your facts,” which was a response to my letter, “Destruction of Nature.” As the main purpose of my letter was to stimulate thought and communication on the the issue of nature conservation, it has apparently succeeded.

I would like to say, for clarity, that I am well aware of the facts which Mr. Lyles so eloquently explained.

That I am currently pursuing graduate work in journalism may belie the fact that I have a B.S. degree in biology (granted,, only a 3.8 GPA). I spent four enjoyable years studying the flora and fauna of Ohio, which is very similar to that of Iowa.

In my present job, I am in the field several times a week photographing lowa wildlife, so I am well aware of what is present and what isn’t. I also can respect and appreciate the aesthetics of the ISU campus.

But, to hear Mr. Lyles tell it, you would think every plant quits blooming on June15.

The ephemeral wildflowers of spring are indeed beautiful. And while many of these delicate flowers were long gone at the time of the landscaping which I observed, there were still several plants either blooming or soon to bloom, like wild morning glory, birdfoot trefoil, and white mandarin, to name just a few.

Many of these flowers, characteristic of disturbed grassy areas, are not the prettiest or most noticeable of flowers. What made the scenic area west of the memorial union unique and especially beautiful was its wild quality, not as cosmetic as the rest of the landscaping on campus.

My difficulty stems from the fact that people like Mr. Lyles believe nature can or should be landscaped.

Sometimes, when you have a good thing, it is best to just leave well enough alone and let nature take its course.

Landscaping is often cosmetic, and upon closer inspection, the real depth and beauty of nature is lost by such endeavors, in my opinion. I was only suggesting that the facilities planning and management department could have used a more delicate approach in their landscaping endeavors.

On a final note, I submitted my correspondence in the form of a letter to the editor rather than as a piece of journalistic reporting. My letter was, admittedly, based on emotion and gut reaction, as many letters to the editor are. That I am currently a journalism major is immaterial. If I were not a journalism major, but just a concerned citizen, would that make a difference?

While I did not do any journalistic research on the event per se, I did carry on several conversations with others who shared my concern. It was from these conversations which I developed my ideas.

Joe Leonard

Graduate student

Journalism and mass communication