Death to Glacier NP

“If it wasn't bad enough that BP mag. did the the article on how Glacier was the best backpacking place last fall, now USN&WR runs a vacation set with, you guess it, Glacier as is lead a article. And even quotes BP. Over kill, Glacier will be a good place to avoid for the next few years.”

“I agreee. I was disappointed to see that BP highlighted one of my favorite local places too, Lusk Creek.”

“That sucks!!! Come hike the Canadian Rockies with me instead... :o)”

“The primary attractees will undoubtedly be windshielders (car people). Glacier's backcountry is vast, and can provide plenty of solitude for even the "casual" bp'er.

For instance, as popular as Yellowstone is, there are still several majestic waterfalls that are so isolated that they are as yet unnamed...

Plus, at the rate of fuel increases, I would suspect that an appreciable number of vacationers will opt to stay closer to home - at least for this coming summer...”

“gojo is right. did 10 days in gnp last summer and had plenty of solitude. going again this summer. if you plan properly you can get real alone. same way in yellowstone. most of the visitors do the car/camping thing if that and backcountry hikers see hardly anyone.”

“Thats the same story for Yosemite. There's a lot of fuss over how to control the crowds in the Valley, but if you hike past 6 miles away from any of the trail heads, then you can enjoy pure solitude.”

“In an area where the control has gone beyond permits and quotes, to assigning camp sites, I just find the articles by BP and USN&WR in poor taste. A place that is felt to need that kind of control, adding another thousand or so people to the backcounty, plus the multitudes that will day hike or just drive around I find irresponsible.”

“More food for the bears!”

“(Insert my standard federally protected wilderness verses national park diatribe here.)”

“Geeezzzz, Is that all?
I thought maybe Georgie Bush was gonna cut funding for OUR national parks......
.....stay tuned nature lovers!”

“I have to disagree with you TT. The more ppl we can get out there to see what needs saving and protecting, the more funding and grass-roots support natural areas will attract. This, combined with educational pamphlets on LNT practices, the wildlife and fauna attributes and interactions, and detrimental cost to our future generations of NOT having saved large natural areas is what it's all about. Without these, including as many ppl as we can get "out there", is what it's gonna take to multiply U.S. protected acreages in the next many decades.

It must be understood that a side effect of popularizing natural wonders can have detrimental effects on some locals. AND it also must be understood that control measures have to be implemented and ENFORCED in order to properly (or semi-properly) protect them. However debated limited permits and park entry costs are, these are enevitable control measures to reduce impacts on our most susceptible of natural jewels.

If I am unable to gain access to some areas due to lack of money or lack of time, I do feel rejoiced in that MANY, MANY more areas of natural beauty are at my beckon to explore, free of charge. And I rejoice in that my future holds my greatest abilities toward protecting MORE U.S. wildlands.

I feel that we need the sources of information about incredible natural areas like BP'er Mag and USN&WR, and many more! Get ppl educated the best we can on protection and recreation use (not snowmobiling, ORV'ing, or jetskiing), get them "out there", and allow them to experience the exhilaration of a bear, or a skunk, or a waterfall, or even a moldy stump. This is where the magic spark lies in future protections of the wild, get Americans "out there", and DANG many of 'em if we can is my grandest wish. There's a time and place for everything, including Republican contemporary thought, but not on wilderness protection, and on the environment as a whole.

Zat a soap box or whut!!??

and do pardon the many spelling mutations that have no doubt occurred, hehehe”

“Huh???
I don't think its bad for more people to "know" the wonders of our PUBLIC(socialist) lands.

I thought maybe from the thread title that the Republickin's were going to sell off Glacier NP or some such sh!t.

The more wild land set aside the better.
After all only rugged, tough, badasses like ME can hold any hope of reaching the remote places without a powered conveyance.”

“Tom, you buy the land, and I'll walk on it. I expect that you'll be giving an extra big donation to The Nature Conservancy this year. Or are ya just going to give a big fat chunk of money to ol' Uncle Sam and hope for the best?”