Wilderness outrage

“July 10, 2006
By Dale Rodebaugh | Herald Staff Writer

"A Forest Service proposal to allow the use of helicopters, four-wheel vehicles and poisoned bait against predators in wilderness areas - a tweaking of existing policy, according to the agency in Washington - is an affront to the meaning of wilderness and the beginning of systematic slaughter of wildlife, say environmental and carnivore-protection groups"

Your tax dollars at work.

Full story”

“I got this from the other side and thought it was worth bringing up here.

More from the story...

"APHIS, which has used other names in the past, has a very long and nasty history that goes way back," Petersen said. "Its primary role is predator control for the livestock industry. It's almost totally for sheep ranchers."

By any name, the federal predator-control agency has killed and poisoned wildlife, including bears and eagles, that are a functional part of the ecosystem, Petersen said.

"Now they're proposing to use ATVs and dirt bikes in the wilderness, allow aerial gunning and let helicopters land," Petersen said. "It's an offense to the character of wilderness and a danger to human beings. No one wants to pack 20 miles to have some guy on a dirt bike or ATV come roaring up. This is just the beginning of bad things they can do for other reasons."

Cattle deaths attributed to predators are a tiny fraction of the number of head produced, Keefover-Ring said."
last edited: 7/10/06 9:51:11 PM”

“Simple and less expensive solution is to 'buy-out' the leases to graze in and near the wilderness areas. By all means, the wilderness areas should be left alone except for the occasional hiker.”

“Soak them in honey and tie them to claw marked trees.”

“I think they need to build Wal-Marts smack dab in the middle of those forests, so all the ATV/dirtbikers can buy stuff and get snacks more conveniently.”

“Right-O, SB...

How about staking them out next to an ant hill? [VBG]”

“http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2006/07/11/news/regional/019d33d18367d42a872571a70072f6f0.txt

These too.”

“So why is it such an outrage to have to share the wilderness with someone other than the occasional hiker? I can understand the building of roads and parking lots and dirtbike tracks and helicopter "hunting" being outrageous, but what about hunters and fisherman and limited grazing? What's wrong with an occasional dirt-bike or snowmobile? Can't there be any balance at all?”

“OCCASIONAL my ass”

“The balance occurs in all the non-wilderness areas which is most areas, meaning from light to heavy engineering.

Concrete and plowed cropland are examples of heavy engineering and approximately 1/3rd. of the eco-productive world is now subject to heavy engineering. A large percent of the rest is subject to light engineering leaving very little wilderness.”

“"Can't there be any balance at all?"

If this was for a rescue I may have different feelings, but to to allow them to kill what they consider predators for cattle is not sufficient reason....especially when it involves shooting them from choppers and running ATV's in areas that are set aside for foot traffic only.

The ranchers should figure the additional cattle loss ratio ratio as payment for not having to use private land and all the costs that would entail.”

“What's wrong with an occasional dirt-bike or snowmobile? Can't there be any balance at all?”


No, there can't. Dirt-bikers & those who rely upon loud, polluting machinery for their entertainment have no FKIN$ clue what the environment or "leave no trace" philosophy is all about. They are part of the "it's all about ME, ME, ME" crowd", IMHO. They have a record of polluting, destroying, and by their mere noise-making, gas-belching presence, make enjoying the wilderness difficult, if not impossible, for others.

In short, they suck.

Read an example of what they did below, this area of the Sierra is now closed / off-limits to most because of the (#&^#%$@ caused by these jerk-offs, oops, I meant to write these jeepers, funny how they're so similar, isn't it? JEEPERS - JERKOFFS HMMMM??



Spider Lake Closed Again (2005)
The Rubicon Trail Famous Spider Lake Closed Once Again

Citing the need to protect natural resources (in other words resource damage), the USDA Forest Service Eldorado National Forest has closed Spider Lake (again). Last year it was closed for human waste and possible fecal coliform getting into the lake. This year (2005) it is closed for motor vehicle damage to vegetation and resources around the lake. Further, the Forest wants to ensure no motor fuel/lubricants get into the lake from people camping too close to the lake with their vehicle. You can still walk/camp near the lake. You just can't have your vehicle within the closure.

Once again, we face the same issues of no one really doing much about the damage or problems, other than Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR). Nothing has been done by El Dorado County or the USFS to really manage the trail or fix the problems they have found.

Certainly the USDA Forest Service has done nothing to fix the issues on their land (the closure area). In spite of persistent FOTR requests to camping sites, designated access and other management of the area around Spider Lake, to date, nothing has been done.
last edited: 7/12/06 7:56:21 PM”

“Hey Steve, Just as a discussion point, I don't think this is a "fuego" thread at all. This may be a "sensitive" subject to some, but it isn't religeon or politics, it's really a subject that I want EVERY backpacker / wilderness advocate thinking about!

It affects EVERYONE who enjoys the outdoors. I vote we move it over to "chatter" to expand the discussion.”

“Yea, I thought about that but I figured a couple folks would make this a left/right issue.

Perhaps I was being over cautious.”

“"Perhaps I was being over cautious.”

Nah, you were just being too much a "nice guy". If someone wants to make this a "right/left" issue instead of what it is, that's his/her problem, I believe it's important enough that we should shine a light upon it! :)”

“That's reft-light.”

“Sure it's a Fuego thread.
Read the definition.

"All political and religion threads should be placed under Fuego."

The first post bringing the Gov (Forrest Service) into play made it instant political.
last edited: 7/12/06 8:37:27 PM”

“Well then in your case reft- lite.”

“It can certainly be looked at as political in some respects, I just think that, overall, it's more about the wilderness, our environment, etc., than it is about politics. I'd hate to see it turned into a political issue.


"The inter-agency agreement was written in 1993 and renewed in 1998 and 2004. The revisions currently proposed would eliminate a provision requiring case-by-case approval of the regional forester for predator elimination and allow the use of aircraft and motorized vehicles in killing coyotes, mountain lions and bears"


I don't think most people on this board, as an example, righties or lefties, would support these changes.”

“"All political and religion threads should be placed under Fuego."

"The first post bringing the Gov (Forrest Service) into play made it instant political".



I suppose if all you have is an opinion, you could make almost everything political ;-)

The ability to see both sides of any argument is a requirement for common sense.


Not much common sense any more...LOL

Note: this comment is not necessarily directed at SS ;-)
last edited: 7/12/06 9:38:40 PM”

“Areas designated Wilderness should be just that wilderness. I have no problem sharing the wilderness with hunters and fishermen. I walked the woods hunting decades before I walked the woods as a hiker. In areas designated for vehicle use I have no problem with their responsible use. I own a ATV and enjoy spending time in the woods ridng my ATV. Trails that are designated multiuse are for that purpose. The key is just as we hikers should practice is responsible use and care. Cattle grazing in the wilderness is a issue that should be well regulated. If the cattle put too much burden on the ecosystem then their number should be kept in check. The owner of cattle that range government lands should have to accept the risks that comes with cheap graze land. All hunting rules on public lands should be equal for all hunters. If they want to hunt in a nonmotorized area they should use muscle power. No special rules for any particular group.”

“Exactly ,Driver.”

“People with little common sense dislike following 'rules' that are designed to make things better for all.

Note: this comment is not necessarily directed at mtnsteve ;-)”

“There seems to be a pretty good balance in Northern CA on the issue of sharing the wilderness. We have areas where cattle range, but for the most part the impact is minimal. Lassen Park had some problems with cattle, but that was where an owner would not keep up his fences and the cows disrupted several sensitive areas. This had gone on for years until the new management finally got fed up with it.

The Trinity Alps get lots of hunters. I have found that those that you find in the backcountry are courteous and well mannered.
Occasionally you will find a couple jerks that were dropped off by guides for a few days.

We had a guy that was caught with his ATV on a section of the PCT trail that was in a wilderness area. Her was given his ticket and when he went to start it to leave the ranger asked him what he was doing...the guy look a little confused and said "I'm leaving now"...the ranger explained one more time that it was illegal to use his machine in the wilderness. When the guy asked what he was supposed to do, he was told to pack it out.


It took awhile, but he did...piece by piece.
last edited: 7/13/06 8:09:48 AM”

“Hey Steve, Just as a discussion point, I don't think this is a "fuego" thread at all. This may be a "sensitive" subject to some, but it isn't religeon or politics, it's really a subject that I want EVERY backpacker / wilderness advocate thinking about!

It affects EVERYONE who enjoys the outdoors. I vote we move it over to "chatter" to expand the discussion.”
wanderer
8:06:09 PM
7/12/06

This is all about POLITICS, since the conservatives in this country want to open our wilderness lands up to mining, logging, go-karts, or whatever. Do you think this would even be entertained under President-Elect Gore, NEVER!”

“BB, for the millionth time, please take your broad-brush & stick it where the sun don't shine. You're constant over-generalizations are utterly disgusting & repulsive.

I happen to be conservative on some issues, but I also coinsider myself an environmentalist. I certainly don't want to open our wilderness to logging, go-karts, etc. In fact I'm probably way more opposed to mechanical, polluting noisemaking machinery in the wilderness than most who post here, including the libbies.”

“Isn't it odd that those with ultra-conservation views are considered libbies by many.

Oh, I know, those who label conservationists as libbies think we are calling for more government control and expense, but its kind of the opposite because it will cost nothing to leave the wilderness just the way it is, it costs a lot to manage grazing programs.”

“I'm a naive weirdo, for some reason I don't necessarily think every issue is exclusively a Right-Wing / Left-Wing political issue. On this board it's almost like you can't choose an Arctyrx backpack over a Granite Gear backpack without it being a Republican / Democrat, rightie-leftie debate.”

“Yea, those lefties are so closed minded.”

“I'd like to point out that in the pemigawessett wilderness area in the White Mts, there is a bike rack at the border of the wilderness and the regular national forest for folks to park their mountain bikes, I haven't been by it yet in the warm months that there weren't a few in it. Folks can respect the wilderness rules, if they understand the concept of respect in the first place.”

“I have to laugh when I hear that all conservatives want to open wilderness areas to defacing operations, whatever they may be. I am a conservative. Always have been. I lean libertarian on alot of topics but I am more conservative than liberal. I do not want certain wilderness areas opened up for mining, motor vehicle use etc. That being said I think that some wilderness areas can be used on a limited basis for things other than hiking and camping. I do not believe areas such as the GSMP should have more roads or mining activity in them due to the fact that in that part of the country wild areas are shrinking and any that are left need to be preserved. Life should never be so fast paced that you can't drive around wilderness areas in order to preserve them.”

“Maybe we need a new survey that tabulates, through gear choice, what your political leanings are.”