We've been on Angels Landing and if you don't want your name on a rock plaque up there don't go peering over the edges without a rope. It would appear he was just a kid and I'll bet he or one of his buddies did something stupid. Let's not do anything stupid.
But with regard to Behunin Canyon... What is Shawn thinking? Rapels of up to 160 feet? Will we be ready by the time we do that last day hike? I hope so. One note here... the guy was hiking by himself. Stupid in my book. We all need to depend on each other to be safe and make it our unscathed (did I spell that right?)
Laters, Will
Monday, August 23, 2004
Zion 2004: Gung-Ho Viewpoint
I’m ready for the long rappels. You can die from a 50 ft fall just as easy as a 160 feet. The same amount of vigilance needs to be practiced. Personally, I more worried about the effects age has had on my 41 year old frame this year, mostly caused by leading a fairly sedimentary life behind a steering wheel and computer screen. For some reason all joints ache more, muscles take longer to heal etc. etc. Being the oldest out of the group has it’s – disadvantages. I will not be making high jumps down or stupid leaps. A good steady pace is in order for me. Did you see the Zion news page I posted on the web?
Roy
Roy
Friday, August 20, 2004
Environmental Politics II
Mack, that's a very thoughtful reply and I agree this is a political tennis match and sure as hell shouldn't be. As a federal park, Yellowstone belongs to the nation at large--not only the local citizens who just so happen to benefit from the tourism industry it drives. Local input should be solicited and accepted as you say, but ultimately as a Nat'l Park (the first one too--well over 100 years of Federal management) it should have the stewardship it deserves (contrary to those 'Wise Use' nut jobs all over the west, our Nat'l Parks ARE to be preserved--we're not talking about a nat'l forest or BLM land) and protected from petty politics. Just because there has been 'historical' use of snowmobiles in the park doesn't mean its not a bad idea--remember my stories of Yosemite's FireFalls and feeding the bears at the valley dump? Two incredibly bad ideas, but still took some good science and a well-reasoned argument to convince everyone.
that's my main problem with congress and this administration--how they're able to ignore the latest and best science (public opinion as well--check any gallup poll on the environment as an issue topic) and still deny it is beyond me... today's number of 'concerned scientists' groups against the dubya-led administration is longer than it even was for Satan himself, James Watt!!
kirk
that's my main problem with congress and this administration--how they're able to ignore the latest and best science (public opinion as well--check any gallup poll on the environment as an issue topic) and still deny it is beyond me... today's number of 'concerned scientists' groups against the dubya-led administration is longer than it even was for Satan himself, James Watt!!
kirk
Environmental Politics I
Kirk, this issue, I'm afraid, is a canary in a coal mine for our national park service. It reflects the undercurrent of the current administration and it's subconscious support of all things business.
Let face it, snowbike were wide open during Reagan-bush, cut back then banned during
Clinton, brought back and now all at record numbers during W. Bush. This undoubtedly
points to many other shifts in policy and practice that will change our national wild spaces.
And, in my opinion, it sucks.
Now, the untold story, based on a conversation I had two years ago with a double tour ranger at Yellowstone: the real driving force behind the snowmobile movement is the park contractors who benefit from winter guests at the parks lodges and concessions. The numbers of winter visitor drops drastically when no snowmobiles are allowed, mainly for reasons of transportation. Even though there are snow cats that bring people in to the park in the winter, many rooms are vacant. With the snowmobile crowd comes stops at the hotels and beds filled. So, Xterra, who has the Yellowstone contact right now, would hate to loose that 'guest service' that snowmobiles provide. And they quietly support the poor independent snowmobile operators outside the park in their effort to save their 'only means of income', probably by lobbying at the highest levels.
By the way, all those poor operators also have other incomes like fishing guides, wildlife tours, and a whole host of other tourist trappings outside the park.
That being noted, I believe there is enough land for combined usage and the State of Nevada proves it. We don't need snowmobiles in Yellowstone Park, there are millions of acres of public land in Wyoming and Idaho with arguably better resources (for snowmobiling) than the park. The only problem is, there are not millions of paying customers waiting to sign up for a ride outside the Park. So, what the real issue is, of course, is not the use of the park, but the access to the visitor market. Just follow the money. And as usual with any American debate we are forced to endure the sound bite sharp ends of 'loss of only livelihood' vs 'disturbing the gentle
nature of our National Park'. Neither is faithful.
I believe in local input for land policy, but it must be uncontaminated local opinion and not be influenced by outside business interests. Honestly, I would support whatever decision the local park ranger made for the use of the park as long as it was not biased by politics.
Shawn
Let face it, snowbike were wide open during Reagan-bush, cut back then banned during
Clinton, brought back and now all at record numbers during W. Bush. This undoubtedly
points to many other shifts in policy and practice that will change our national wild spaces.
And, in my opinion, it sucks.
Now, the untold story, based on a conversation I had two years ago with a double tour ranger at Yellowstone: the real driving force behind the snowmobile movement is the park contractors who benefit from winter guests at the parks lodges and concessions. The numbers of winter visitor drops drastically when no snowmobiles are allowed, mainly for reasons of transportation. Even though there are snow cats that bring people in to the park in the winter, many rooms are vacant. With the snowmobile crowd comes stops at the hotels and beds filled. So, Xterra, who has the Yellowstone contact right now, would hate to loose that 'guest service' that snowmobiles provide. And they quietly support the poor independent snowmobile operators outside the park in their effort to save their 'only means of income', probably by lobbying at the highest levels.
By the way, all those poor operators also have other incomes like fishing guides, wildlife tours, and a whole host of other tourist trappings outside the park.
That being noted, I believe there is enough land for combined usage and the State of Nevada proves it. We don't need snowmobiles in Yellowstone Park, there are millions of acres of public land in Wyoming and Idaho with arguably better resources (for snowmobiling) than the park. The only problem is, there are not millions of paying customers waiting to sign up for a ride outside the Park. So, what the real issue is, of course, is not the use of the park, but the access to the visitor market. Just follow the money. And as usual with any American debate we are forced to endure the sound bite sharp ends of 'loss of only livelihood' vs 'disturbing the gentle
nature of our National Park'. Neither is faithful.
I believe in local input for land policy, but it must be uncontaminated local opinion and not be influenced by outside business interests. Honestly, I would support whatever decision the local park ranger made for the use of the park as long as it was not biased by politics.
Shawn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)