I am here alone tonight perusing the many offerings of the internet and just came across a website called "TakeBackUtah". Which begs the question who are we taking it back from?
As a public lands manager I try and stay as objective as possible and to recommend decisions on Americas public lands that are both beneficial to those who own the land (all US citizens) and to the land itself. I try not to let my personal biases affect my job. I truly believe there is room for everyone, the West is huge. But when I see outright misinformation being used to further an agenda I can't sit by. I tried to comment on the following article on their website but could not. So I will do it here on my little read blog, but maybe it will help me feel better.
You can read the whole article mistakenly called "The Truth About Wilderness" at takebackutah.org. I will just post the parts that I find particularly erroneous. Quotes from the article are italicized.
“Wilderness” is the word radical environmentalists hide behind when they are trying to close public lands to recreation
Why is everyone that has a different opinion a "radical". I think it is an attempt to divide and create the "us versus them mentality" that all sides use. It always amazes me to see how much common ground exists if people can just get over labeling and categorizing each other. I am guilty of it too. Oh yeah, and Wilderness does not close public land to recreation.
How does the designating wilderness apply to recreation? Wilderness prohibits uses of the land including, permanent or temporary roads and structures, the use of motor vehicles, and the landing of aircraft.When applied to types of recreation, wilderness areas prohibit full-size 4x4’s, side-by-sides, quads, snowmobiles, dirt bikes, motor boats, airplanes, helicopters, motor coaches/homes, house trailers, toy haulers, mountain bikes, sometimes horses (often a diaper is placed on the horse to catch harmful fecal matter), generators, any type of motorized equipment (i.e. drills, pumps), and some camping equipment (if it is motorized or mechanical).
True, Wilderness designation generally prohibits motorized and mechanized transportation (however many airstrips exist within Wilderness where they existed prior to designation) and motorized equipment. I like how the author lists every kind of motorized transportation she can think of so I will do the same. When applied to recreation Wilderness is open to day hiking, backpacking, nature study, canoeing, kayaking, rafting, inflatable kayaking, rowboats, climbing, bouldering, mountaineering, horseback riding, horse packing, mule packing, llama packing, goat packing, dog packing, dog sledding, rifle hunting, archery hunting, muzzle loader hunting, spear hunting, fly fishing, bait fishing, backcountry skiing, cross-country skiing, snow boarding, snowshoeing, and camping. To name a few, I think my list is longer than hers. Wilderness does not prohibit horses, some areas of public lands (outside and inside of wilderness) that receive very heavy use have put restrictions on horse use. In all my backcountry travels I have never seen an area prohibit horses or require a diaper.
Analysis reveals that almost all recreation is barred (except hiking and backpack camping) and contradicts the provision in the statute that states, “to preserve the land for the purpose of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.”[8] The following is an analysis of each component of that provision to demonstrate the limitations wilderness designation places on public lands.
Case law that tests the provisions of the Wilderness Act have shown that recreation refers to only hikers or backpacking into the wilderness area.[9]
Again, there are numerous forms of recreation allowed within Wilderness (see list above). the only form of recreation not allowed are those types dependent on motors (or mechanized such as bikes).
The only historical use would be if there is rock art (pictographs or petroglyphs). Remember there isn’t suppose to be any permanent structures so if there is any early settler dwellings the agency might remove them, and it is unclear how Anasazi or Fremont dwellings will be addressed.
Wrong, historical and cultural resources are protected under federal law and are considered an important part of Wilderness. The subtle (or not so subtle) assertion that Anasazi ruins will be removed from Wilderness is completely misleading and I don't think the author even believes it.
Clearly, you can see why designating public lands as wilderness is not preserving it for future generations. Instead, it is taking it away from most Americans except a minority group of recreationists, the hikers. A small group of radical environmentalists have continuously manipulated the public and large contributors into thinking that creating wilderness preserves land. It is becoming more and more evident that their “wilderness campaign” is propaganda. It is now easier to see that their true agenda is claiming public lands for themselves. It is time that it is known that they are not the superior group of recreationist they think they are, they are not the elite. The majority has as much if not more right to use public lands. Hikers are only one small group of people who use public lands. Previously mentioned are all of the many groups that are being barred from wilderness areas and other federally managed lands. It’s time to make our views known!
Wow, this paragraph is all over the place hard to follow any logic here. Designating Wilderness does preserve land in as natural a state as possible, that is the point. Apparently my four boys think they are "superior and elite" when I take them into Wilderness areas and they didn't even know it. "A small minority" of people enjoy wilderness? I wish that was the case. Wilderness Areas are overrun with people who love Wilderness. I just waited 6 years to get a float permit for the Frank Church because so many people love that place and what it means to them. Todd and I counted over 100 people hiking out of the Lone Peak Wilderness a few years ago, people love wilderness.
These pseudo arguments are so old and tiresome. The amazing thing about Wilderness is that while it allows for many forms of recreation that is not the only purpose. These are areas where we as a rationale, thoughtful people have said (through a democratic process) "This place is special, it is different, here we will not bring our structures and our roads and our motors, here we will let be so that these systems will continue to be wild and not controlled, here we will bring our children to show them what the world used to be, and what it can still be."
There is room for all of us. There are hundreds of thousands of roads and trails open to motorized use and where appropriate they should remain open for those that like motorized recreation, but we need big wild places to escape these modern conveniences as well and we need to not be so selfish that we think our own recreational uses (both motorized and non-motorized) are more important that the survival of species and wild places.
As a public lands manager I try and stay as objective as possible and to recommend decisions on Americas public lands that are both beneficial to those who own the land (all US citizens) and to the land itself. I try not to let my personal biases affect my job. I truly believe there is room for everyone, the West is huge. But when I see outright misinformation being used to further an agenda I can't sit by. I tried to comment on the following article on their website but could not. So I will do it here on my little read blog, but maybe it will help me feel better.
You can read the whole article mistakenly called "The Truth About Wilderness" at takebackutah.org. I will just post the parts that I find particularly erroneous. Quotes from the article are italicized.
“Wilderness” is the word radical environmentalists hide behind when they are trying to close public lands to recreation
Why is everyone that has a different opinion a "radical". I think it is an attempt to divide and create the "us versus them mentality" that all sides use. It always amazes me to see how much common ground exists if people can just get over labeling and categorizing each other. I am guilty of it too. Oh yeah, and Wilderness does not close public land to recreation.
How does the designating wilderness apply to recreation? Wilderness prohibits uses of the land including, permanent or temporary roads and structures, the use of motor vehicles, and the landing of aircraft.When applied to types of recreation, wilderness areas prohibit full-size 4x4’s, side-by-sides, quads, snowmobiles, dirt bikes, motor boats, airplanes, helicopters, motor coaches/homes, house trailers, toy haulers, mountain bikes, sometimes horses (often a diaper is placed on the horse to catch harmful fecal matter), generators, any type of motorized equipment (i.e. drills, pumps), and some camping equipment (if it is motorized or mechanical).
True, Wilderness designation generally prohibits motorized and mechanized transportation (however many airstrips exist within Wilderness where they existed prior to designation) and motorized equipment. I like how the author lists every kind of motorized transportation she can think of so I will do the same. When applied to recreation Wilderness is open to day hiking, backpacking, nature study, canoeing, kayaking, rafting, inflatable kayaking, rowboats, climbing, bouldering, mountaineering, horseback riding, horse packing, mule packing, llama packing, goat packing, dog packing, dog sledding, rifle hunting, archery hunting, muzzle loader hunting, spear hunting, fly fishing, bait fishing, backcountry skiing, cross-country skiing, snow boarding, snowshoeing, and camping. To name a few, I think my list is longer than hers. Wilderness does not prohibit horses, some areas of public lands (outside and inside of wilderness) that receive very heavy use have put restrictions on horse use. In all my backcountry travels I have never seen an area prohibit horses or require a diaper.
Analysis reveals that almost all recreation is barred (except hiking and backpack camping) and contradicts the provision in the statute that states, “to preserve the land for the purpose of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use.”[8] The following is an analysis of each component of that provision to demonstrate the limitations wilderness designation places on public lands.
Case law that tests the provisions of the Wilderness Act have shown that recreation refers to only hikers or backpacking into the wilderness area.[9]
Again, there are numerous forms of recreation allowed within Wilderness (see list above). the only form of recreation not allowed are those types dependent on motors (or mechanized such as bikes).
The only historical use would be if there is rock art (pictographs or petroglyphs). Remember there isn’t suppose to be any permanent structures so if there is any early settler dwellings the agency might remove them, and it is unclear how Anasazi or Fremont dwellings will be addressed.
Wrong, historical and cultural resources are protected under federal law and are considered an important part of Wilderness. The subtle (or not so subtle) assertion that Anasazi ruins will be removed from Wilderness is completely misleading and I don't think the author even believes it.
Clearly, you can see why designating public lands as wilderness is not preserving it for future generations. Instead, it is taking it away from most Americans except a minority group of recreationists, the hikers. A small group of radical environmentalists have continuously manipulated the public and large contributors into thinking that creating wilderness preserves land. It is becoming more and more evident that their “wilderness campaign” is propaganda. It is now easier to see that their true agenda is claiming public lands for themselves. It is time that it is known that they are not the superior group of recreationist they think they are, they are not the elite. The majority has as much if not more right to use public lands. Hikers are only one small group of people who use public lands. Previously mentioned are all of the many groups that are being barred from wilderness areas and other federally managed lands. It’s time to make our views known!
Wow, this paragraph is all over the place hard to follow any logic here. Designating Wilderness does preserve land in as natural a state as possible, that is the point. Apparently my four boys think they are "superior and elite" when I take them into Wilderness areas and they didn't even know it. "A small minority" of people enjoy wilderness? I wish that was the case. Wilderness Areas are overrun with people who love Wilderness. I just waited 6 years to get a float permit for the Frank Church because so many people love that place and what it means to them. Todd and I counted over 100 people hiking out of the Lone Peak Wilderness a few years ago, people love wilderness.
These pseudo arguments are so old and tiresome. The amazing thing about Wilderness is that while it allows for many forms of recreation that is not the only purpose. These are areas where we as a rationale, thoughtful people have said (through a democratic process) "This place is special, it is different, here we will not bring our structures and our roads and our motors, here we will let be so that these systems will continue to be wild and not controlled, here we will bring our children to show them what the world used to be, and what it can still be."
There is room for all of us. There are hundreds of thousands of roads and trails open to motorized use and where appropriate they should remain open for those that like motorized recreation, but we need big wild places to escape these modern conveniences as well and we need to not be so selfish that we think our own recreational uses (both motorized and non-motorized) are more important that the survival of species and wild places.
My radical elitist wife and children enjoying designated Wilderness on the California coast
4 comments:
Well said, have you thought about a career in politcs. I loved your list of allowable recreation!!!
Your final paragraph was awesome, You are an amazing guy, I admire your passion!!!!!!!!!!
Only thing that would make this better is if your response to each point would have started out with a dwight statement
FACT: people who don't like wilderness are hosers
FACT: Schrute Beet farms ARE wilderness
FACT: Each year thousands of non elitist motorboaters die due to rabies contracted from tree hugging granola eating subaru driving sandal wearing, longhair, wolf loving hippies.
Nice commentary!
I only wish I could have heard this rant in person. Amen brother.
Post a Comment