Mt. Konocti, the “breathing mountain,” appears to be up for grabs.

It is, of course, not a “thing” that can be simply bought and sold – though humans pretend it to be so. Original inhabitants recognized it as a “relative” – like a grandfather or grandmother – imposing and worthy of respect beyond the usual sacred place that needs its space and solitude to fulfill its responsibilities to the earth.

Its nature and attributes, responses and communications may not easily be perceived but that does not mean they are not occurring. As with any living being, any kind of manipulation or domination implies unintended consequences.

There are other places in the world that we recognize as sacred – Bethlehem, Mecca, Bear Butte, Everest, Stonehenge, Nani Waya. Each of these places has its special recognition, protections and agreements for preservation. Each has inspired people to expound upon its “sacred quality.”

But people often talk out of both sides of their mouths. Take Everest for example. Every guide and climber that has ever gone there has felt its power and been willing to acknowledge its “sacred quality.” Yet the mountain of trash they have left there in their personal quests to “conquer it” belies their good intentions and exposes their first commitment – to themselves.

Domination has been the theme of western society. Using horses as an example – they perceive the horse’s agreement to be ridden (often achieved by a forceful coercion) to be an indication of human superiority when it is instead a simple collaborative agreement. Each species shares itself with the earth.

The mountain has chosen its co-inhabitants through time. Human beings may have a reason to go there – but that reason is best known by the native peoples who have a long relationship and communication with it. They know the restrictions and circumstances that govern the mountain’s relationship with humanity.

Before additional discussions occur to discuss acceptable uses and inevitable abuses are held, native people need to come together to formulate a proposal representing the needs of the mountain. The purposes of humanity have enough spokesmen.

Just because we can “open” the mountain does not mean we should. What is the nature of this compulsion to put our footprint upon all of creation?

My own opinion is that the mountain is like a spiritual leader and needs space and solitude to represent creation for all life forms. My wife says it more simply: Opening it to the public “is a bad idea!”

James BlueWolf lives in Nice.