NEW WILDERNESS

[erik]

read about it here

 

a couple weeks ago there was a debate about wilderness designation and the interpetation of it. some people stated that it was concrete and that only the most extreme views of it were correct. well reading through the article i noticed that the deforrest service even stated that the defination is 'elastic' and differs per interpetation.

 

i hate always being right......(set up off viktors podium now)

[Cpt.Caveman]

"Designate" some place as wilderness to get more people there. I like the part about making some areas wheelchair accessible. I am not discriminating but damn I dont see too many people in wheelchairs out in the mountains except for that dude who whined about not having wheelchair accessible crappers at muir.

[jimmyleg66]

You wanna see some wilderness? Open the veggie crisper in my refrigerator.

 

[ 08-01-2002, 01:42 PM: Message edited by: jimmyleg66 ]

[SEF]

The map in the article would appear to exclude the Index climbing areas from this proposed wilderness, but that is not entirely clear. My understanding is that the ownership of the Town Walls is mixed and some is within the State Park system. It would of course have to be USFS to be considered.

 

Anyone know the details? Darryl?

[erik]

SEF,

 

there to upper town and most of the other crags are park of lake goodwin state park. the lower town is owned by a private individual whom gives access. there was action being taken to purchase theland for the state park, but i believe that it has been part on hold because of lack of state park funding.

 

i know wilderness designation would require no mechaincal activty in i think like 80 years, so index town walls would not qualify. also as i am sure yo already know there are roads above and behind the formation that makes up the town walls. so it would not qualify.

 

index rules!

[Greg_W]

What I don't get is why the Mayor of Index thinks that tourons are going to flock to the area once it is designated a "Wilderness." If people aren't flooding there to see the "pristine" alpine setting now, why would they after the designation?

 

F'ing politicians. F'ing Sierra Club

[plexus]

It's an election year guys. Of course they are going to make areas that have been clearcutted, mined out and not even close to the criteria for wilderness protected. Politians read their polls, they know that people want to protect the environment.

 

But locking up forest land will at least save it from being made into those friggin' cloned condo/townhouse/rat cage developments .

"We don't need the muthas, let the muthafu**as burn!!"

[Fairweather]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman:

"Designate" some place as wilderness to get more people there. I like the part about making some areas wheelchair accessible. I am not discriminating but damn I dont see too many people in wheelchairs out in the mountains except for that dude who whined about not having wheelchair accessible crappers at muir.

---

The reason that handicapped guy threatened to sue the NPS about the toilets/access was because they gave him so much SHIT about using his "mechanized" snowpod in designated wilderness. Took him over 2 years to get "approval". .....Maybe the NPS had to check with The Sierra Club to see if it was OK.

[Norman_Clyde]

I saw that guy's mechanized tracks on the Nisqually and upper Wilson in 1999. They went up some slopes you'd think would be very tricky for any hand-driven "mechanized" device-- you had to be impressed. To hassle this guy for use of such a device makes about as much sense as prohibiting camming devices, or even hand-driven water filters, because they're too mechanical for wilderness. (Oops, I'd better shut up before someone gets ideas.)