— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Rich Carlson”
Geez, Ram. Sounds a bit elitist. Wilderness is for everyone, but you must be physically fit to > enjoy it – to even SEE it. > Not accessible by car, 4X4, ATV, dirt bike, RV, mountain bike, horseback or wheel chair. > Closed to the elderly and handicapped. Of course it will also be closed to anyone deemed > irresponsible (as decided by one elitist group), which will of course include hunters, boy > scouts, etc.
Nah, nah, nah. I never said outlaw these other motorized sports. I just don’t want them overrunning everywhere. To have a place where there is real depth of wilderness, one needs some real land put aside. Not all the land. Room for everyone, but without this legislation, there won’t be any place that really qualifies soon. I ain’t no Stiles!! ;-)
As for the eldery and the handicapped, many places are already put aside. More? Fine by me. The National Parks provide this in essentially every park.
To have real wilderness put aside does NOT preclude, exclude or just plan being rude to…. any of these other groups. All these groups are served now. Lovely if all can into the future.
kesscokim
I believe “they” is the University of Utah rather than National Forest Service? I know they did (or do?) use it as a reasearch natural area or something like that.
> Thanks for the update. I didn’t know that hunting had been closed in Red Butte. It was a > sore point with me in the past, that I couldn’t hike there, because they (the National > Forrest Sevice?) wanted to keep it pristine, but then it would open to hunters for the deer > hunt.
nat_smale
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, stephencpace@… wrote:
Red Butte in Salt Lake has been closed to hunters for at least 10 years– I > used to hunt it on my mountain bike. I’d go in with a trespass permit if I > could draw one but without a gun and when the rangers would come to bust me > I’d tell that my deer hunting method involved throwing rocks. They do let a > few Audibon types in for the Christmas bird count and it seems like every 5 > years or so they open it to hiking for one day in June. > SCP
Thanks for the update. I didn’t know that hunting had been closed in Red Butte. It was a sore point with me in the past, that I couldn’t hike there, because they (the National Forrest Sevice?) wanted to keep it pristine, but then it would open to hunters for the deer hunt.
Nat
nat_smale
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, stephencpace@… wrote:
Why is closing some land to off trail use in Boulder Co. such a big deal. > In Salt Lake, literally right in the middle of town, 5000+ acres of Red Butte > Canyon is 100% permanently closed to everybody except a few researchers. If > you go into the canyon you get fined, period. It doesn’t seem like such a > big hardship. There are lots of other places to go. I personally like the > idea that there’s some pretty much pristine habitat left on the Wasatch, even if > I can’t go into it. > SCP
40% of all city owned open space seems like a lot, and would be a big deal to me if I lived in Boulder. Also, Red Butte Canyon is kind of an odd example. While closed to hikers, it is for some reason open to hunters during the hunting season. Some years back I hiked with my family in the lower canyon up to the gate where it is closed to hikers. We saw a number of hunters proceed through the gate.
Nat
mike_dallin
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “mike_dallin” wrote:
One point of clarification on HCA’s: you can get a permit to enter HCA’s, but you must apply in advance and supply a valid reason to enter them, and the permits must be approved by a ranger.
M
Kurt
–I agree Bruce, well said Mike!
– In Yahoo Canyons Group, “bruce silliman” wrote:
Very wonderfully put Mike and it proposes a balanced approach. As > the saying goes, “be careful what you ask for, because you might not > like what you get”.
bruce from bryce
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “mike_dallin” And somewhere in the future, us canyoneers WILL be next.
Absolutely true, and worth repeating.
Here in Boulder, we have a world class system of open space (public
lands owned at the county/city level). The lands include a lot of
mountain hiking, with trails, awesome views, the works. A while > back
someone came up with the idea of HCA – Habitat Conservation Areas,
which means areas that are completely closed to ALL humans, from
climbers to the lowly hikers, except on pre-existing trails. Want > to
step off the trail, even 5 feet, for lunch, to visit an overlook > or to
get a good camera angle? Sorry bud, that’s a ticket.
HCA’s don’t just cover a few sensitive areas. A full 40% of
city-owned open space lands are HCA’s. That’s 40% of the land the
local taxpayers paid for, closed. The areas included good climbing
and bouldering, too. Closed.
A few local environmental groups supported the idea. The sad > part…
the idea was also (and is still) supported by no less than the > Sierra
Club (in their defense, with reluctance… but they still > officially
support the HCA concept).
Don’t think it will go beyond off roaders? Think again. Look for
more regulations, fees, permit system and quotas coming to public > land
near you.
Environmental groups should be embracing ORV’ers, at least the > ethical
ones who follow Stay the Trail and Leave No Trace principals. Help
them do what they, and land managers can’t – educate, police and
enforce existing regulations vs the small percentage who are
destructive when they ride. Many ORV’ers I know are very
environmentally conscious. It’s too bad both sides have to fight > so
much. They have more in common than most think.
M
>
bruce silliman
Very wonderfully put Mike and it proposes a balanced approach. As the saying goes, “be careful what you ask for, because you might not like what you get”.
bruce from bryce
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “mike_dallin” wrote:
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Koen” wrote:
And somewhere in the future, us canyoneers WILL be next.
Absolutely true, and worth repeating.
Here in Boulder, we have a world class system of open space (public > lands owned at the county/city level). The lands include a lot of > mountain hiking, with trails, awesome views, the works. A while back > someone came up with the idea of HCA – Habitat Conservation Areas, > which means areas that are completely closed to ALL humans, from > climbers to the lowly hikers, except on pre-existing trails. Want to > step off the trail, even 5 feet, for lunch, to visit an overlook or to > get a good camera angle? Sorry bud, that’s a ticket.
HCA’s don’t just cover a few sensitive areas. A full 40% of > city-owned open space lands are HCA’s. That’s 40% of the land the > local taxpayers paid for, closed. The areas included good climbing > and bouldering, too. Closed.
A few local environmental groups supported the idea. The sad part… > the idea was also (and is still) supported by no less than the Sierra > Club (in their defense, with reluctance… but they still officially > support the HCA concept).
Don’t think it will go beyond off roaders? Think again. Look for > more regulations, fees, permit system and quotas coming to public land > near you.
Environmental groups should be embracing ORV’ers, at least the ethical > ones who follow Stay the Trail and Leave No Trace principals. Help > them do what they, and land managers can’t – educate, police and > enforce existing regulations vs the small percentage who are > destructive when they ride. Many ORV’ers I know are very > environmentally conscious. It’s too bad both sides have to fight so > much. They have more in common than most think.
> M >
stephencpace@alum.mit.edu
Red Butte in Salt Lake has been closed to hunters for at least 10 years– I used to hunt it on my mountain bike. I’d go in with a trespass permit if I could draw one but without a gun and when the rangers would come to bust me I’d tell that my deer hunting method involved throwing rocks. They do let a few Audibon types in for the Christmas bird count and it seems like every 5 years or so they open it to hiking for one day in June. SCP
**************************************Check out AOL’s list of 2007’s hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
stephencpace@alum.mit.edu
Why is closing some land to off trail use in Boulder Co. such a big deal. In Salt Lake, literally right in the middle of town, 5000+ acres of Red Butte Canyon is 100% permanently closed to everybody except a few researchers. If you go into the canyon you get fined, period. It doesn’t seem like such a big hardship. There are lots of other places to go. I personally like the idea that there’s some pretty much pristine habitat left on the Wasatch, even if I can’t go into it. SCP
**************************************Check out AOL’s list of 2007’s hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
mike_dallin
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Koen” wrote: > And somewhere in the future, us canyoneers WILL be next.
Absolutely true, and worth repeating.
Here in Boulder, we have a world class system of open space (public lands owned at the county/city level). The lands include a lot of mountain hiking, with trails, awesome views, the works. A while back someone came up with the idea of HCA – Habitat Conservation Areas, which means areas that are completely closed to ALL humans, from climbers to the lowly hikers, except on pre-existing trails. Want to step off the trail, even 5 feet, for lunch, to visit an overlook or to get a good camera angle? Sorry bud, that’s a ticket.
HCA’s don’t just cover a few sensitive areas. A full 40% of city-owned open space lands are HCA’s. That’s 40% of the land the local taxpayers paid for, closed. The areas included good climbing and bouldering, too. Closed.
A few local environmental groups supported the idea. The sad part… the idea was also (and is still) supported by no less than the Sierra Club (in their defense, with reluctance… but they still officially support the HCA concept).
Don’t think it will go beyond off roaders? Think again. Look for more regulations, fees, permit system and quotas coming to public land near you.
Environmental groups should be embracing ORV’ers, at least the ethical ones who follow Stay the Trail and Leave No Trace principals. Help them do what they, and land managers can’t – educate, police and enforce existing regulations vs the small percentage who are destructive when they ride. Many ORV’ers I know are very environmentally conscious. It’s too bad both sides have to fight so much. They have more in common than most think.
M
Steven Jackson
If horses are allowed in wilderness areas than in reality anything that can travel on single track should be allowed. Before anyone tries to claim I don’t know what I’m talking about be aware my cousin and I own 14 head of horses! As well as break horses for friends and relatives. We take them everywhere and 2-4 horses can tear up a swath of dirt as fast as a dirt bike and faster than mountain bikes! The mountain bikes by quite a bit another area that I am an avid participant! Spidey p.s. In muddy conditions it’s even worse!
kesscokim kesscokim@yahoo.com> wrote: > Not accessible by car, 4X4, ATV, dirt bike, RV, mountain bike, horseback or wheel chair.
All wilderness areas I know of are open to horseback unless they are in a watershed which banned horses which wasn´t because it was wilderness, but city water supply.
Anyway, there is a great program for access via wheelchairs for those interested. I contribute every month directly by payroll deduction. It´s still in it´s infancy, but if anyone is interested, here it is:
http://www.wildernessonwheels.org/
As far as the elderly, my grandparents hiked into the wilderness areas well into their 80´s and are still avtivist of some environmental groups.
Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Mail. See how.
kesscokim
> Kelsey is a memeber of SUWA? Here’s an interesting position for SUWA on guidebooks:
Yes. So are some other guidebook authors.
Brando
“— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “kesscokim” wrote: > Mike Kelsey is a member of SUWA. He often refers to the “radical > branch of SUWA”, not all of SUWA.”
Kelsey is a memeber of SUWA? Here’s an interesting position for SUWA on guidebooks:
“Within conservation groups, where-to-go journalism has become a contentious issue. While organizations like the Sierra Club sell trail guides, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance will not endorse any guidebook. The decision apparently came after a SUWA official allowed his (Kelsey’s) accolades to be printed on the back of a guidebook. The book revealed details of several little-known hiking destinations in Utah’s San Rafael Swell.
“We have not actually come out yet and started burning guidebooks,” says SUWA’s Scott Groene, “but given our goals of trying to protect the land, we felt we had to adopt this policy to be consistent in our position.”
taken from: http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=1258
– almost back to lurkdome
kesscokim
> I can’t remember which of his books it was in, but the term was > “environmental fruitcakes” and I don’t believe that SUWA was > specifically singled out, but it was clear that they would be included in the group.
Mike Kelsey is a member of SUWA. He often refers to the “radical branch of SUWA”, not all of SUWA. I believe he really likes their stance on ATV´s and such, but the thing that he doesn´t like is those members who want to put hiker limits and permits in certain areas (Paria Canyon, Coyote Buttes, Subway, etc) and he doesn´t like the bolt choppers, at least in certain canyons.
I can´t speak for him though, though he is a friend, but anyone can contact him directly.
gajslk
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Steve Newcomb” wrote:
> I’ve only been to the Moab area once and I don’t have much desire to > return. We took a Mt bike ride to Gemini Bridges.
I go to the Moab area all the time. I have been for 25 years. I have no trouble getting out and seeing nobody at all for three or four days in a row during either the Jeep Safari or the mountain bike festival. All you need to do is be willing to walk a bit. Neither Jeeps nor bikes are ruining Moab for me other than the Disneyland type atmosphere in town. I stay out of town and am quite happy. If you don’t know an area, it’s hard to avoid the crowds. This applies to a lot of places, such as Zion or Lake Powell. A little bit of work is well rewarded.
Gordon
kesscokim
> Not accessible by car, 4X4, ATV, dirt bike, RV, mountain bike, horseback or wheel chair.
All wilderness areas I know of are open to horseback unless they are in a watershed which banned horses which wasn´t because it was wilderness, but city water supply.
Anyway, there is a great program for access via wheelchairs for those interested. I contribute every month directly by payroll deduction. It´s still in it´s infancy, but if anyone is interested, here it is:
http://www.wildernessonwheels.org/
As far as the elderly, my grandparents hiked into the wilderness areas well into their 80´s and are still avtivist of some environmental groups.
gajslk
I can’t remember which of his books it was in, but the term was “environmental fruitcakes” and I don’t believe that SUWA was specifically singled out, but it was clear that they would be included in the group. I actually consider myself an environmentalist, but it really makes me mad when groups misrepresent(lie about) things to push their agenda. Yes, I have been to SUWA presentations. Yes, they do spin(misrepresent, lie through omission and implication) things. No, I don’t want to get into an argument about it, which was why I made the oblique reference in the first place. No, I didn’t make a fuss at the presentation or invite Steve out into the parking lot. Yes, I did put on the asbestos jacket before I hit the send button. No, I’m not going to read any replies to this. Yes, I may have to join Brando in self-imposed exile. No, it doesn’t bother me.
Gordon
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “adkramoo” wrote:
— In Yahoo Canyons Group, “gajslk” wrote:
I agree with Kelsey’s> assessment of SUWA,
Where does he express this opinion? What does he say? > R >
bruce silliman
Hey Spidey, don’t take this as a direct attack upon yourself, but in February 2006 it was reported that Americans had a negative 0.5% savings. Too much credit card debt for high tech gear is driving people into their homes and not the outdoors (and I don’t mean a GPS, new wetsuit, rappel device, etc.) Life is spent on the internet, with XBoxs, watching TVs and the those infernal cellphones that can do everything, except brew coffee.
When I grew up we started our little savings account in the 4th or 5th grade. But now kids only know that a bank provides money for mortgages, yup sub-primes. They think that Dad is an unlimited source of ‘moola’ and if that is not the case, they can probably get their own credit card from any respectible banking company despite being only 15 years old.
Those early lessons in savings have provided me a stable income where I do not worry about when or where I can take a trip. Nothing to do on Turkey Day I never hesitated when accepting a chance to drive down to Zion and back for a one daycanyon.
Free and easy credit will be the ultimate destruction of the lifestyle our parents worked so hard to provide us.
While I fully understand what you are saying I believe the ultimate choice rests clearly in each person’s grasp — it is just a matter of priorities.
bruce from bryce p.s. photos and TR forthcoming on Engelstead
To: canyons@yahoogroups.comFrom: stjalliance@yahoo.comDate: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:43:35 -0800Subject: Re: [from Canyons Group] Most likely a farewell post back into lurkdome
Aaah it’s probly all a mute point any way. Oil prices are over 98$ a barrel before long the only outdoors or wilderness any of us will be able to afford to see is our own backyards, and maybe the local city park. You know as long as it’s within a gallon or so of home. Then once a year we’ll splurge and go a full tank from the house Right! Figure out how to get home when we get that far!adkramoo adkramoo@aol.com> wrote: — In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Rich Carlson” wrote:
Geez, Ram. Sounds a bit elitist. Wilderness is for everyone, but youmust be physically fit to > enjoy it – to even SEE it. > Not accessible by car, 4X4, ATV, dirt bike, RV, mountain bike,horseback or wheel chair. > Closed to the elderly and handicapped. Of course it will also beclosed to anyone deemed > irresponsible (as decided by one elitist group), which will ofcourse include hunters, boy > scouts, etc.Nah, nah, nah. I never said outlaw these other motorized sports. Ijust don’t want them overrunning everywhere. To have a place wherethere is real depth of wilderness, one needs some real land put aside.Not all the land. Room for everyone, but without this legislation,there won’t be any place that really qualifies soon. I ain’t noStiles!! ;-)As for the eldery and the handicapped, many places are already putaside. More? Fine by me. The National Parks provide this inessentially every park.To have real wilderness put aside does NOT preclude, exclude or justplan being rude to…. any of these other groups. All these groups areserved now. Lovely if all can into the future.Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
_______________ You keep typing, we keep giving. Download Messenger and join the i’m Initiative now. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGLM
Steven Jackson
Aaah it’s probly all a mute point any way. Oil prices are over 98$ a barrel before long the only outdoors or wilderness any of us will be able to afford to see is our own backyards, and maybe the local city park. You know as long as it’s within a gallon or so of home. Then once a year we’ll splurge and go a full tank from the house Right! Figure out how to get home when we get that far!
adkramoo adkramoo@aol.com> wrote: — In Yahoo Canyons Group, “Rich Carlson” wrote: > > Geez, Ram. Sounds a bit elitist. Wilderness is for everyone, but you must be physically fit to > enjoy it – to even SEE it. > Not accessible by car, 4X4, ATV, dirt bike, RV, mountain bike, horseback or wheel chair. > Closed to the elderly and handicapped. Of course it will also be closed to anyone deemed > irresponsible (as decided by one elitist group), which will of course include hunters, boy > scouts, etc.
Nah, nah, nah. I never said outlaw these other motorized sports. I just don’t want them overrunning everywhere. To have a place where there is real depth of wilderness, one needs some real land put aside. Not all the land. Room for everyone, but without this legislation, there won’t be any place that really qualifies soon. I ain’t no Stiles!! 😉
As for the eldery and the handicapped, many places are already put aside. More? Fine by me. The National Parks provide this in essentially every park.
To have real wilderness put aside does NOT preclude, exclude or just plan being rude to…. any of these other groups. All these groups are served now. Lovely if all can into the future.
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.
Steve Newcomb
I truly sympathize with Harvey H. and his frustration with the impact motorized vehicles of all types have on undeveloped landscapes and enjoying nature. As Ram recently wrote there are times when you just have to take a stand and say no more.
Most people understand there is a certain character to the wilderness state of nature. An act was created in the 1960’s in the U.S. to specifically protect this character in areas deemed worth preserving. It’s worth reading to understand what people are fighting for.
A Statement like “enjoy ethical off roading while you can” is simply wrong. All off roading is unethical except in rare areas that specifically allow it, and very few on this forum would find these areas enjoyable to spend any time around. The term “outdoors” is misused to the point of confusion. It’s used for everthing from walking out the back porch to wandering in a wilderness area. I think most people on this group think of the wilderness more than developed recreational areas when they think outdoors, and in particular when talking about protecting or preserving an area. But I could be wrong.
What is being fought is the creation of new roads and trails, calling a once used path a road, the desire by many to drive to whatever destination they choose bringing whatever they want and with little concern to other people’s experience, both present and in the future.
I’ve only been to the Moab area once and I don’t have much desire to return. We took a Mt bike ride to Gemini Bridges. We passed many routes that were signed as closed, all of them with fresh ATV/4WD tire tracks going in. What education are we talking about, reading? We passed a sign from a local ATV club stating the rights to outdoor travel AND the responsibilities that go with it, with the warning of losing access. No question most there understand their rights, but the responsibility and consequences part is all lip service. No evidence of any type of enforcement. Sadly, enforcement is mostly non-existent due to the choice at the national level not to fund it. The 30-40 minutes I sat looking at the bridges I watched numerous ATV parties arrive, take a quick picture and then chat with each other oblivious of the surroundings. They weren’t looking at their surroundings. They could have been standing in someone’s backyard. A large 4×4 came all the way down the 1/4 mile or so path from the road and parked just uphill from the bridges. A kid maybe 6 or 7 cranked up the radio in the truck and most of the people thought that was funny.
My experience that day visiting Gemini Bridges was actually worse than if I had never seen it. In other words, I would have rather never been there at all than to experience what I did because it has left a very negative feeling with me. If that is what others think an “outdoor” experience is, the ability to bring along any and all conveniences from home and to bring it as close to a natural wonder as possible, they don’t understand what nature is. See Act above.
As far as impacting other people’s experience, motorcycles and ATVs have a large impact on the soundscape. Engine noises are not part of nature and they do affect wildlife. Many people seek outdoor natural environments to get away from the noise of cities, a lot of it caused by vehicles. The noise from these vehicles can travel for miles and as soon as you hear it, you think of development, not nature. After they repaved the Catalina Hwy north of Tucson it has become a joy ride for street bikes to race up and down it. You can hear them from many canyons in the front range and it takes away from the experience in the canyons. Their “outdoor” enjoyment infringes on many more by way of the noise. I would go further and state riding a loud motorcycle through a forest on a paved road is not an experience in nature. It’s a man made experience of which one part is related to nature. Once again, read the Wilderness Act.
The amount of won-ton destruction going on in forest lands outside Tucson and Phoenix is truely heart breaking. It has nothing to do with education. Entire hillsides eroded to bare dirt/sand. Once one hill track is no longer challenging or becomes insurmountable, another one is formed right next to it. The way I see it, once a person invests $20,000 – $40,000 AFTER the purchase of the truck upgrading its off road capabilities and to outdo their buddy, they aren’t going to be satisfied driving it along a forest road. I know no one on this group is advocating this “outdoor” activity, but it comes with any motorized access to undeveloped areas. That is one reason people trying to preserve the natural outdoors experience turn to the Wilderness Act and closure.
I disagree with people who try to frame this issue in polite terms or as an educational problem. It comes down to a fight between people who want to develop undeveloped areas, to benefit from the economic development and those who want to keep undeveloped areas as pristine as possible, to truly experience nature as well as provide this opportunity to future generations.
In addition, past generations were not such great stewards of the land, of protecting it from human development. It is just that their numbers were so few. As the population explodes in the West the problems will get much worse. It’s frustrating and sad. I don’t see any improvement until the federal government starts funding realistic enforcement budgets. And there will likely be a lot more destruction before (if) this ever happens.
Steve Newcomb Tucson, AZ
P.S. To relate this somewhat to canyoneering, erosion caused by access into and out of canyons is a major problem of the activity in terms of impact on the environment. Efforts by Rich, Tom and others to organize projects to address problem areas is a start in the right direction, but more needs to be done. I’m not against closing areas to canyoneering if impacts caused by the activity threaten the natural character of the area.