tvashtarkatena

Making a state friendly to pot smoking gays is good for the economy - and therefore good for all of us.

Or this Bubbles?...

This Bubbles?...

So much for the border fence idea...

Love some of what's happening in WA state.

If that's just your first year here I'd say you've pretty much got the hang of it.

Might i recommend girth hitching the rope around the OP's testicles to reduce the frequency of leader falls in the first place.

"I'm a Mormon"

Dawg blew his initially valid point with his typical bluster, as uzhe. Hence, he got the treated like the buffoon he is. Whining's easy. Doing something substantive about it is quite another matter.

I think both the NHPA and WA work OK. Compare us to other countries and we've got some pretty good Wildernesses here. Contradictory laws are the norm and just part of a functioning democracy. I'd like to see organizations like Wilderness Watch pick some of its battles more carefully, with some sensitivity towards local custom and sentiment and more relevance. They also need to upgrade their ethics. They lie too much. Perhaps they've got more donations than they know what to do with. That could be fixed. Beats shooting each other to decide these things, or not bothering to have any preservation at all.

All policy wonkishness and wanking aside, I've never met anyone who has visited one of our Lookouts in 30 years of trapsing about the Cascades and not loved them. I'm sure there probably are some, but they are few and far between. As for what Montanans and Oregonians think of our Lookouts from afar...who gives a rip? That, in my view, is where the real justice lies.

It's also interesting to note that the Wildnerness Act is not the only statute out there. The National Historic Preservation Act requires restoration and renovation of historic structures. These are sometimes in conflict. The Green Mountain Lookout Case will probably fall on whether or not the choppering constituted 'rebuilding' (not required by NHPA, or 'renovation and stabilization' (required and allowed by the Wild. Act). Since the Lookout was rebuild by hand (allowed), and renovated and stabilized by chopper (allowed), I'm guessing the ruling will be in favor of keeping it...but ya never know how it will be decided until its decided. Complicated world out there....

As always: Less swagger, more facts.

I could come up with more, but it's pretty clear that renovating (not rebuilding from scratch, however) the Green Mountain Lookout using choppers is allowed, given a large body of precedent. Devil's in the details.

Sorry, man. Your oversimplified misunderstanding of the Wilderness Act and its application is apparent in Wilderness Watch Versus Mainella, one of many lawsuits that confirms the allowed use of motorized vehicles for official use in Wilderness Areas under the Wilderness Act (in this case, ground vehicles): Full text of decision here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1296539.html Excerpt: "16 U.S.C. § 1133©.  Thus, aside from exceptions not relevant here,4 the statute permits the use of motor vehicles and transport only “as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this chapter.”  Id." At issue in this case: The ruling confirmed the gubmint's right to use vehicles as necessary for maintenance, but not to transport tourists.

And, while mechanical/motorized recreation is not allowed in Wilderness Areas, other uses of mechanical equipment: mining (when grandfathered in), weather stations and other scientific equipment, etc., clearly are. Reading the actual legislation and its applications before commenting is great advice. One should heed it before issuing it, however.

Anyway, back on topic. As a radio controlled chopper pilot (good thing you can pick those things up for 19.95 now) and paraglider pilot with 10 minutes of flight time under my belt, I can say with some authority that helicopters don't typically land when picking up loads off of mountain tops. Such cargo flights do not, therefore, violate the Wilderness Act. Off topic again...RE: Self Rescue Machismo: most experienced climbers are well versed in both the philosophy and techniques of self-rescue...but few wave off a hovering rescue chopper when lying on a ledge with a broken femur.

Yet another out of stater pontificating about a place they know nothing about. We don't fuck goats here. We just give them golden showers.

Just a guess, but I think the concern might be hitting an eagle and nearly the speed of sound and destroying the blade and possibly the entire wind turbine. Expensive.

Too many dicks on the dance floor....

I don't vote for the party of fascism, Bone. You know that. The GOP...and that would be Ron Paul's party, put those riders in the NDAA. Naughty Obama for signing it, but naughtier GOP for crafting it in the first place.

It's pointless to argue the definition of what is and is not a police state. Much more productive to recognize some very real problems: - that we incarcerate far more of our population than any other society, that our police are now systemically trained to employ a once size fits all, military style violence way too often and way too harshly, and that we are now handing over law enforcement to the military, whose mission is to kill and destroy, not enforce laws. Given that America owns 40% of the world's weaponry, that's a very real problem indeed. The more Americans that become aware of how far out there we are on this psychopathic spectrum, the better. In my experience in talking with the public about these issues, most aren't.

Your posts cause me to truly believe that you're a moron with a tiny bag of unspecific cliches and a case of excessive ball drive that would put a lab with down's syndrome to shame.

Good laws, like the Wilderness Act, are broadly enough written to be adaptive to local sentiment and custom. The law becomes reality - lookouts, grazing, hunting, or none of the above, on a case by case basis through use, argument, and LOCAL adaption. Because of this process, locals should and DO get more say in the policies regarding their nearby Wilderness Areas, even if that law is federal. Locals SHOULD resent and fight a one size fits all mentality regarding the Wilderness Act: such an approach is the very antithesis of the letter and spirit of the law. Rather, it was wisely crafted to respect regional custom, sentiment, and history. We Washingtonians overwhelmingly LOVE our historic lookouts - and the Green Mountain Lookout, built in 1933, should be treated no differently Desolation, Hidden Lake Peak, Three Fingers, or any of the other lookouts that are unquestionably allowed by the Wilderness Act and that, simply put, belong here. Why, then, has a 'me, too' advocacy group like Wilderness Watch fabricated such a ludicrous narrative regarding the Green Mountain Lookout to garner out of state support (anyone who actually knows anything about our lookouts would immediately recognize their propaganda as laughable) for its patently frivolous law suit? I suspect its because their staff needs a paycheck. Pick a battle absolutely no (locals) want to fight, one that will promises to last a good long time, fabricate a bullshit conspiratorial narrative about secret gubmint skulduggery that panders to your ideologically extreme, kooky base, hire a out of state attorneys, and you're off to the races. Right out of the GOP playbook, actually. Real environmental advocacy organizations have better things to do with their donors hard earned money. Anyone wanna bet how Wilderness Watch ranks in terms of administrative overhead costs versus effectiveness?

'Would' costs but a word.