Wild Sky Wilderness

[Stefan]

There is no Index Galena road beyond the 6 mile mark, that's the problem. And b/c it most likely will not be able to be rebuilt in the same spot, it may need to move up the moutain. Right before the bill got passed, the boundery line was moved again in order to make a buffer for the possibility of the road moving higher. After the environmental impact study, we'll know if that boundery moved enough. The next meeting I go to is May 1, during which we will also discuss the Beckler road improvement/rebuilding possibilities.

 

Thanks, I did not know they were considering moving the road much more uphill.

 

At least there is some progress on changing the road.

[archenemy]

The "progress" is going to take approximately five years.

 

I can't state clearly enough that the road is no longer there. It is completely gone. There is no moving or changing. It has to be totally rebuilt as there is nothing left. I am amazed each time I see it.

[ScottP]

Thanks....where is Mt. Baring?

Right there.

 

 

[archenemy]

Thanks....where is Mt. Baring?

 

[AlpineK]

Don't help him. He needs some practice using the search function on the computer.

[ScottP]

Is his perceived annoyance a valid reason to illegitimaize a legitimate question? Let's say it was Muffy who asked that question. Would she receive the same vitriolic response?

[archenemy]

No, because Muffy isn't a fucking idiot.

[ScottP]

Oh, it all makes sense to me now.

[archenemy]

That's because you qualify for the IQ test.

[AlpineK]

Given that Kev has a computer he has access to a wide variety of information. I'm actually helping him use the tool he has right in front of him.

[archenemy]

Somehow I doubt Kev has a tool in front of him.

[AlpineK]

Good point.

[archenemy]

or no point, as the case may be

[ScottP]

That's because you qualify for the IQ test.

No, it's because I also am a fucking idiot.

[EWolfe]

There.

 

That's better.

[mattp]

When you guys get tired of slagging on each other, I'm curious what everybody thinks about the Wild Sky. Like Mr. Mo, perhaps, I have mixed feelings about it myself.

[archenemy]

What mixed feelings do you have? I certainly harbor some good and bad feelings toward the whole thing myself. But then, I am directly affected by it, so I might have a little more grumbling than the next guy.

[mattp]

I have always been in favor of preservation and I think it is extremely cool that we have such an extensive corridor of Wilderness and surrounding public lands that are managed in a fashion similar to designated Wilderness stretching from I-90 to the Canadian border and beyond.

 

With regard this region - what we know as the North Cascades and the North Central Cascades - I don't know what kind of overall recreation planning or wildlife management survey or habitat inventory efforts may have taken place and my impression is that any planning, survey and discussion of the preservation of this region as a whole has been on a limited and often ad hoc basis. And I don't really know how this particular piece fits into the whole.

 

This new Wilderness will help broaden the protected area adjacent to the Henry M. Jackson Wilderness. To the extent that this protects the area from logging or other threat, or if it makes the region a more viable habitat for our animal friends or whatever, I'm totally psyched (unless it becomes a breeding ground for those creatures that like to chew climbing ropes and stuff and they fan out to take over Darrington).

 

However, as a formally designated Wilderness the area will be forever barred to any trail development unless current policies change. The area has almost no trail access at present so as a direct result of this designation activities that I see as appropriate for this area such as hiking, fishing, climbing, or even mountain biking will be severely limited. In the case of mountain biking, it will be barred outright. I really don't know what the potential for these activities in this particular area really was, but like Mo I wonder if those who will be most directly affected by this designation really understand what it means.

[archenemy]

I, too, am happy to see more habitats protected (although I don't consider managed logging as a threat, I do agree that much of our land is under too much stress to stay healthy).

 

I sort of think that your first concern, the ad hoc management, attenuates your second concern--outlawing activities. If they don't patrol it, they won't ticket it. Of course, this still causes issue for law abiding citizens.

 

Having tootled around in this area a bit, I am happy to say that one can indeed hike, climb, and fish in the area as is. However, there is a great deal of wildlife, generally the kind people don't like to run into. I wonder what would happen to this wildlife if we were to build trails, have a bunch of people back there, ride bikes and whatnot back there. I bet you the first person who gets fido killed by a big cat will throw a fit and have a million signs put up (like those ridiculous signs at Smith. Come on!).

 

I didn't used to feel like this, but the older I get and the more I see the more I think its fine to have land set aside that is simply not that accessible. If you can get through the land on your own two feet, well, more power to you. If you can't, tough shit. I know that may sound elitist or uncaring or non-inclusionary, but that's the direction I am starting to go in.