Guiding in Wilderness Areas and the Wilderness Act

[JasonG]

FW posted this up on another thread and I found it interesting:

 

The Wilderness Act 1964: Section 4c - Prohibition of Certain Uses:

 

Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act. . .

 

I'm guessing that there is some sort of court decision defining "commercial enterprise"? Obviously guiding is prevalent in Wilderness areas (and isn't hidden from the NPS or USFS), so I was curious how that fit in with the above portion of the Act.

[mountainsandsound]

Could "commercial enterprise" refer not to the guides in the wilderness, but to a building or other physical location where the enterprise is based?

[genepires]

not an expert. but building on the above post, maybe commercial enterprise referenced is just the ones that are not conducive to wilderness environmental protection. Mining, logging and resorts are of this type. Guiding can be seen as being allowed since it is not obviously a hinderance to wilderness.

 

With more free time, it would be good to read the rest of that particular code. There could very well be a section 4c.1 that allows certain types of commerce and fixed structures. The definition of commerce enterprise could very well be defined and exclusions in the remaining parts omitted by the ... in the quote.

My only experience with these kinds of codes are the electrical codes and there generally exists exclusions and exemptions to every ruling.

[genepires]

alright maybe I was being lazy earlier but I found this further down in the section 4c

 

(6) Commercial services may be performed within the wilderness areas designated by this Act to the extent necessary for activities which are proper for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the areas.

 

If I read this right, it allows mtn guiding as well as horsepackers, hunting/fishing guiding and other support activities. as long as they don't instal permanent fixtures.

 

I would be willing to bet that FW read this part of the code and failed to include it in his discourse cause it does not support his view. Once again throwing gas on the flames to make the world into his desires.

Edited November 2, 2013 by genepires

[ScaredSilly]

As said above the phrase refers to commercial structures. There have been some interesting law suits over what is a permanent structure. For instance, yurts can be set up during the winter season. However, not only must they be taken down in the spring but they must be removed from the wilderness area. In the past some land managers allowed the yurt flooring to left not in place but taken up but left in wilderness. Law suits followed and the FS lost.

[Fairweather]

A good call out--except for the part about deliberate manipulation of facts. The portion I cited was 4c: "Prohibition of Certain Uses." The subsection you cite is part 6 of 4d: "Special Provisions." This portion also says things like the following:

 

(2) Nothing in this Act shall prevent within national forest wilderness areas any activity, including prospecting, for the purpose of gathering information about mineral or other resources, if such activity is carried on in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment...

 

and this:

 

(4) Within wilderness areas in the national forests designated by this Act, (1) the President may, within a specific area and in accordance with such regulations as he may deem desirable, authorize prospecting for water resources, the establishment and maintenance of reservoirs, water-conservation works, power projects, transmission lines, and other facilities needed in the public interest, including the road construction and maintenance essential to development and use thereof, upon his determination that such use or uses in the specific area will better serve the interests of the United States and the people thereof than will its denial; and (2) the grazing of livestock, where established prior to September 3, 1964, shall be permitted to continue subject to such reasonable regulations as are deemed necessary by the Secretary of Agriculture.

 

Shall we equate guiding with mining, reservoirs, and power transmission lines?

 

My "worldview" as you put it, sees guiding as a legitimate activity within designated wilderness. And I think the manner with which the language in 4c has been applied to roads and "permanent or temporary structures" by groups like the NCCC is a bunch of bunk. But if the language in 4c is upheld as stand-alone law, unmodified by 4d, then it must stand alone for the prohibition of guiding too, no? This is how one of my environmental attorney friends said she would argue it anyhow--from either side.

 

The post I put up re guiding on the Ptarmigan Traverse was meant to kind of throw up a flag on what could happen if things get out of control because the outdoor press has deemed a certain part of the Glacier Peak Wilderness Area the "holy grail" of hiking. There has already been much discussion about wilderness boundaries, exempt corridors, and guiding activities in the now-enclosed Muir corridor--and some of the concerns are legitimate.

[genepires]

sorry, I took your posts as that you were anti-guiding in wilderness. My apologizes for mis-speaking.

 

 

 

[Fairweather]

sorry, I took your posts as that you were anti-guiding in wilderness.

 

 

 

Only when I can't get my backcountry overnight permit because the quota area is loaded up with guided parties.

[JasonG]

Thanks guys. I guess I could have done some research, but this was more educational in the end. Like the tidbit about yurts!