An article in the local newspaper (Palm Springs area) said the BLM has closed 142,000 acres and many popular hiking trails here in the desert area in order to protect the Bighorn sheep. the paper interviewed many people involved with enviro groups and while they said the sheep needed protection, almost all of them cried foul at the BLM, saying if they closed some land then they should open up some for their use, sounds familiar???????? Also in the same paper, land closed in the desert area here in the Palm Springs area is going to be opened up to legal OHV use by the BLM. Areas in consideration for this are 4 areas: 1)Windy Point/Whitewater, 2)Indio Hills, 3)The area next to the I-10 where the big hill is, and 4)the Iron Door ( north of the I-10 where you turn off to go to Glamis on the 86).
[ 10-01-2002, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: zim1and2 ]
Hell Zim, You're going to start hearing a lot of smack from blu now wanting to know if those are legal riding areas.
of course they're not legal, that's why they're closed. Do you have a link to the newspaper? I would like to read the article--if not maybe you could scan it for us? Is that the Press Enterprise?
Yes, all of those areas are closed to OHV use now, the BLM is thinking about opening 1 up for legal OHV use. The article is in the Desert Sun (Palm Springs area) I will try to link to it or scan something. There have been big articles all last week about enviro stuff, OHV stuff, land development stuff
quote:What, the enviro's want land closures mitigated because they lost the ability to use the land as they see fit?
the paper interviewed many people involved with enviro groups and while they said the sheep needed protection, almost all of them cried foul at the BLM, saying if they closed some land then they should open up some for their use, sounds familiar????????
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
For the closed hiking go to web page http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories/l...033442474.shtml
Hikers will be banned from certain valley trails for the first time if a proposed trail management plan to protect endangered peninsular bighorn sheep is adopted.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management?s draft hiking plan would close popular trails like Bear Creek Canyon and Guadeloupe for nine months a year to keep hikers off sensitive lambing habitat and away from summer watering holes and grazing locations.
A dozen trails would be closed for the first six months of the year for lambing season and another five would be closed during the summer.
The plan would also block all public access to 142,000 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in the two mountain ranges for the first six months of each year. The closure would shut down dozens of casual trails that have been worn into the hills above many valley cities. Such trails need to be closed because they are near sheep watering holes and feeding areas.
"Just on the face of it, it looks like they?re ending hiking in the spring," said Palm Desert resident Eric Baecht, a member of the Coachella Valley Hiking Club and the Sierra Club. "They?ve increased the number of trails we have to stay off, but I?m not sure what to think about it because I?m in favor of protecting the bighorn."
To ease the impact of the closures, the BLM is proposing to add replacement trails that would be open all year at the base of both mountain ranges, said Rachelle Huddleston-Lorton, a Palm Springs-based wildlife biologist for the BLM.
Also, the closures would be phased in over nine years.
The plan, which is coming under fire from some local hiking groups, will be folded into the Coachella Valley Multi-Species Plan, a valleywide plan to protect 27 at-risk species, including bighorn sheep.
A final trails plan is due some time in 2003, after the public gets a chance to comment.
Released at the end of May, the draft trail plan is getting mixed reviews from the people who use the valley?s 300 miles of trails.
For equestrian Ray Barmore, there is no doubt that the plan -- which would close 55 miles of trail in the spring and up to 25 miles in the summer -- goes too far.
"We just created the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument and now, during the beautiful times of the year, people are going to have to look at it through binoculars," said Barmore, a member of the Coachella Valley Trails Council and a member of Desert Riders, a Coachella Valley equestrian group.
"Yes, sheep are having problems, but I don?t think it?s ever been (the fault of) trail users," Barmore said. "How many sheep have the hikers and horses ever killed?"
The closures are needed because the trails -- many of which were built illegally -- cut through the places where sheep give birth to their lambs, drink and find food, said Eddy Konno, a wildlife biologist for the California Department of Fish and Game.
"People say that we?re closing down all the trails, but that?s not what we?re trying to do," he said. "We?re trying to close the trails that have the most impact."
Quite different from voluntary closures that have been in place on 11 valley trails for the last two years, the new plan is the result of more than 25 years of studying the bighorn?s day-to-day habits, said Huddleston-Lorton.
"We have to ensure recreational opportunities for the public while also providing recovery for bighorn sheep," she said.
The BLM needs to make sure it follows through with its proposal to create new trails in sheep-safe locations, both to keep people away from the sheep and to give hikers an alternative place to go, said Joan Taylor, local conservation chairwoman for The Tahquitz Group of the Sierra Club.
"These could be very popular trails because they would connect the cities from one end of the valley to the other," Taylor said. "They need to be funded and implemented."
Perhaps the biggest concession to the hiking community is the plan?s proposal to allow two days of hiking per week on the Art Smith and Boo Hoff trails, two popular trails that wildlife biologists would like to see closed.
Under the proposal, the two trails would be open from Jan. 15 to Feb. 15 and from May 1 to June 30, keeping hikers off the two trails when nearly nine out of 10 lambs are born in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains, said Huddleston-Lorton.
"We went from the wildlife agencies wanting no hiking (on those two trails) to a proposal where there are hiking opportunities year-around," she said. "We?ve come a long way from that dead-locked position."
Some members of the hiking community have been won over.
"They?re walking a tight-rope between recreating and protecting the wildlife," said Philip Ferranti, the Palm Desert-based author of local hiking guide "100 Great Hikes In and Near Palm Springs." "They really have to walk a very fine line to placate all of the users, and they?re doing a good job."
Realizing that hiking in the valley is becoming more popular, the authors of the plan want to add new trails at the base of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa mountains over the next decade. Except for one trail that would link the La Quinta Cove with Palm Desert, all new trails would keep to the valley floor to stay out of sheep habitat.
Including 175 miles of trails in the two mountain ranges that won?t be affected by the closures and an estimated 50 miles to 100 miles of trails elsewhere in the Coachella Valley, there will still be plenty of hiking opportunities if the restrictions are adopted, said Katie Barrows, an author of the plan.
"We wanted to make sure that we are still able to work on recovering the sheep but also allowing people to use the trails because we have more and more people wanting to use them," Barrows said. "We think we have something that will work."
for the OHV potential opened land use go to web page http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories/l...033434079.shtml
The motorcycles and four-wheelers often heard buzzing around the Coachella Valley don?t have a legal right to be there, but a new proposal by a local federal agency would change that.
Although off-roading routinely occurs at several local spots, there has been no legal place for enthusiasts of the sport to ride locally since the Windy Point area was closed for environmental reasons in early 2001.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management is proposing to create a location for off-roading in its California Desert Conservation Area Plan, a plan the agency is currently in the process of amending. The plan is due out in October.
Four potential locations have been identified, including one in the Windy Point area, said Elena Misquez, associate field manager of the BLM?s Palm Springs office.
"That one probably won?t work for environmental reasons," Misquez said, referring to concerns over the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard and the Coachella Valley milkvetch that caused the popular area to be closed in 2001.
"A location in the Mecca Hills is our preferred alternative because it doesn?t have endangered species issues," she said.
Off-roading enthusiasts say they need to have a legal place to go play.
"People need a place to go locally -- that?s the bottom line," said La Quinta resident Ralph Sargent, president of the Desert Side Tracs 4x4 Club, a local off-roading group whose members say they drive in designated areas only.
"The tendency of some (off-roaders) is to go off across the desert," Sargent said. "A designated spot would definitely help keep people out of the areas where they?re not supposed to be."
But off-roading is not an appropriate activity in the valley, both because it damages valuable land and because it creates dust that would add to the valley?s air quality problems, said Joan Taylor, local conservation chairwoman for The Tahquitz Group of the Sierra Club.
"The answer is enforcement, not opening up new areas," Taylor said. "It?s very destructive."
In addition to Windy Point and the Mecca Hills, possible sites that the BLM is considering include the Indio Hills near Sky Valley and the Iron Door area near the intersection of Dillon Road and Interstate 10 in the east valley.
[ 10-02-2002, 06:01 PM: Message edited by: zim1and2 ]
Hikers will be banned from certain valley trails for the first time if a proposed trail management plan to protect endangered peninsular bighorn sheep is adopted.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management?s draft hiking plan would close popular trails like Bear Creek Canyon and Guadeloupe for nine months a year to keep hikers off sensitive lambing habitat and away from summer watering holes and grazing locations.
A dozen trails would be closed for the first six months of the year for lambing season and another five would be closed during the summer.
The plan would also block all public access to 142,000 acres of bighorn sheep habitat in the two mountain ranges for the first six months of each year. The closure would shut down dozens of casual trails that have been worn into the hills above many valley cities. Such trails need to be closed because they are near sheep watering holes and feeding areas.
"Just on the face of it, it looks like they?re ending hiking in the spring," said Palm Desert resident Eric Baecht, a member of the Coachella Valley Hiking Club and the Sierra Club. "They?ve increased the number of trails we have to stay off, but I?m not sure what to think about it because I?m in favor of protecting the bighorn."
To ease the impact of the closures, the BLM is proposing to add replacement trails that would be open all year at the base of both mountain ranges, said Rachelle Huddleston-Lorton, a Palm Springs-based wildlife biologist for the BLM.
Also, the closures would be phased in over nine years.
The plan, which is coming under fire from some local hiking groups, will be folded into the Coachella Valley Multi-Species Plan, a valleywide plan to protect 27 at-risk species, including bighorn sheep.
A final trails plan is due some time in 2003, after the public gets a chance to comment.
Released at the end of May, the draft trail plan is getting mixed reviews from the people who use the valley?s 300 miles of trails.
For equestrian Ray Barmore, there is no doubt that the plan -- which would close 55 miles of trail in the spring and up to 25 miles in the summer -- goes too far.
"We just created the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument and now, during the beautiful times of the year, people are going to have to look at it through binoculars," said Barmore, a member of the Coachella Valley Trails Council and a member of Desert Riders, a Coachella Valley equestrian group.
"Yes, sheep are having problems, but I don?t think it?s ever been (the fault of) trail users," Barmore said. "How many sheep have the hikers and horses ever killed?"
The closures are needed because the trails -- many of which were built illegally -- cut through the places where sheep give birth to their lambs, drink and find food, said Eddy Konno, a wildlife biologist for the California Department of Fish and Game.
"People say that we?re closing down all the trails, but that?s not what we?re trying to do," he said. "We?re trying to close the trails that have the most impact."
Quite different from voluntary closures that have been in place on 11 valley trails for the last two years, the new plan is the result of more than 25 years of studying the bighorn?s day-to-day habits, said Huddleston-Lorton.
"We have to ensure recreational opportunities for the public while also providing recovery for bighorn sheep," she said.
The BLM needs to make sure it follows through with its proposal to create new trails in sheep-safe locations, both to keep people away from the sheep and to give hikers an alternative place to go, said Joan Taylor, local conservation chairwoman for The Tahquitz Group of the Sierra Club.
"These could be very popular trails because they would connect the cities from one end of the valley to the other," Taylor said. "They need to be funded and implemented."
Perhaps the biggest concession to the hiking community is the plan?s proposal to allow two days of hiking per week on the Art Smith and Boo Hoff trails, two popular trails that wildlife biologists would like to see closed.
Under the proposal, the two trails would be open from Jan. 15 to Feb. 15 and from May 1 to June 30, keeping hikers off the two trails when nearly nine out of 10 lambs are born in the northern Santa Rosa Mountains, said Huddleston-Lorton.
"We went from the wildlife agencies wanting no hiking (on those two trails) to a proposal where there are hiking opportunities year-around," she said. "We?ve come a long way from that dead-locked position."
Some members of the hiking community have been won over.
"They?re walking a tight-rope between recreating and protecting the wildlife," said Philip Ferranti, the Palm Desert-based author of local hiking guide "100 Great Hikes In and Near Palm Springs." "They really have to walk a very fine line to placate all of the users, and they?re doing a good job."
Realizing that hiking in the valley is becoming more popular, the authors of the plan want to add new trails at the base of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa mountains over the next decade. Except for one trail that would link the La Quinta Cove with Palm Desert, all new trails would keep to the valley floor to stay out of sheep habitat.
Including 175 miles of trails in the two mountain ranges that won?t be affected by the closures and an estimated 50 miles to 100 miles of trails elsewhere in the Coachella Valley, there will still be plenty of hiking opportunities if the restrictions are adopted, said Katie Barrows, an author of the plan.
"We wanted to make sure that we are still able to work on recovering the sheep but also allowing people to use the trails because we have more and more people wanting to use them," Barrows said. "We think we have something that will work."
for the OHV potential opened land use go to web page http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories/l...033434079.shtml
The motorcycles and four-wheelers often heard buzzing around the Coachella Valley don?t have a legal right to be there, but a new proposal by a local federal agency would change that.
Although off-roading routinely occurs at several local spots, there has been no legal place for enthusiasts of the sport to ride locally since the Windy Point area was closed for environmental reasons in early 2001.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management is proposing to create a location for off-roading in its California Desert Conservation Area Plan, a plan the agency is currently in the process of amending. The plan is due out in October.
Four potential locations have been identified, including one in the Windy Point area, said Elena Misquez, associate field manager of the BLM?s Palm Springs office.
"That one probably won?t work for environmental reasons," Misquez said, referring to concerns over the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard and the Coachella Valley milkvetch that caused the popular area to be closed in 2001.
"A location in the Mecca Hills is our preferred alternative because it doesn?t have endangered species issues," she said.
Off-roading enthusiasts say they need to have a legal place to go play.
"People need a place to go locally -- that?s the bottom line," said La Quinta resident Ralph Sargent, president of the Desert Side Tracs 4x4 Club, a local off-roading group whose members say they drive in designated areas only.
"The tendency of some (off-roaders) is to go off across the desert," Sargent said. "A designated spot would definitely help keep people out of the areas where they?re not supposed to be."
But off-roading is not an appropriate activity in the valley, both because it damages valuable land and because it creates dust that would add to the valley?s air quality problems, said Joan Taylor, local conservation chairwoman for The Tahquitz Group of the Sierra Club.
"The answer is enforcement, not opening up new areas," Taylor said. "It?s very destructive."
In addition to Windy Point and the Mecca Hills, possible sites that the BLM is considering include the Indio Hills near Sky Valley and the Iron Door area near the intersection of Dillon Road and Interstate 10 in the east valley.
[ 10-02-2002, 06:01 PM: Message edited by: zim1and2 ]
HMM, the links do not work. go to www.thedesertsun.com and click on "this weeks headlines" in the quick link section and then chose " hikers may have to yield to Bighorn" for that one or "recreational Quandary" for the OHV one. They will only be available until monday it says.
Did ya catch the part about the hiking trails being made illegally??? And what's up with "the closures will be phased in over 9 years"... after a year of notice and a chance for public comment...so lets get this straight...the hiking trails were made illegally but in order to close them, for what sounds like only part time.....a year notice is given and a chance for public comment....even though an endangered(?)species is at risk???? A live species, not a poisonous plant?????????????? BUT.....an area designated as a legal OHV area for years had tens of thousands of acres closed overnight??? And so far it's taken an army of people and thousands of dollars and studies to get any chance for someone to even consider opening it back up????????
Also, a week before this came out in the news, Daniel Patterson was on the local TV news here in the desert area saying that the Bighorn Sheep needed more protection....I think this is the most I have ever posted at once
quote:There you go Blu! lets hunt down those evil illegal hikers and bring them to justice!
Did ya catch the part about the hiking trails being made illegally???
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
I see this as a chance for Blue to prove to us he is true to the lands and not just another lost soul looking for a group to belong to.
From those articles, it appears the rules are different for eco-peeps vs. OHV peeps. Why? How is it possible that hikers have more rigts to public land then OHVers? hmmm.
Thanks Zim for posting this.
From those articles, it appears the rules are different for eco-peeps vs. OHV peeps. Why? How is it possible that hikers have more rigts to public land then OHVers? hmmm.
Thanks Zim for posting this.
Bluser, Why don't you drive the Ol' Nissan to the area in question, take some photo's of the environmental damage caused by these illegal hikers, post them on the board, and lets get something done about it! I mean it doesn't matter were the damage comes from right? Illegal use is illegal use right? Damage is damage right? If your really a soldier for the environment you should be heated about this issue! I mean your not just being a hypocrite right? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
quote:Is it possible that OHVers leave more of an impact on the land per user? Like 100x more impact!!!???
How is it possible that hikers have more rigts to public land then OHVers?
I read where a thousand acre canyon could comfortably accomodate 10-20 dirt bikers and leave a mess behind, or 500 hikers and you'd see very little evidence of their passage.
RIGHT. If you think that 500 hikers would leave "very little evidence of thier passage" you my friend are smokin some good sh**. You know just as well as I do that 1000 hiking boots will make more of a trail on a piece of land than 20-40 tires will. And besides that stop pulling numbers out of your ass!
"Is it possible that OHVers leave more of an impact on the land per user? Like 100x more impact!!!???
I read where a thousand acre canyon could comfortably accomodate 10-20 dirt bikers and leave a mess behind, or 500 hikers and you'd see very little evidence of their passage."
______________________________________________________________________
Take only pictures, leave only footprints.
If only that were true. How about LEAVE ONLY firepits, dead meadow grass from tent signatures, shallow slit trenches; dug up by rodents, with toilet paper spread everywhere, fecal matter in every nook and cranny; poisoned ground water, the ever present smell of urine, bug spray, sun screen, soaps, lotions, dinner scraps poured down animal burrows, soaking stinking feet in that cute little stream, decades-old fire pits loaded up with half burnt plastic, aluminum foil, and dehydrated food bags, hacked up dead wood conveniently stacked for the next hiker, suds in the creeks, bits of paper and wrappers, cigarette butts (yes, some hikers smoke), worn trails knee deep in the valley floors, piled wind breaks, local species forever indoctrinated to the habits and leavings of passer-bys, blazes hacked on the larger pines, trail cairns (how in the heck can you get lost with the obvious trials and forest service rusted metal signs or the wooden ones the size of doors?), cans, broken down stream banks from washing dishes and bathing, don't get me started on the equestrian messes, not to mention the visual unpleasentness of occupied campsites with clothes lines, sites with rearranged fallen logs and granite blocks to resemble family room furniture, broken down switchbacks from hikers shortcutting, helicopter wreckage from those tough hikers who get lost, too sick, or injured from stupid behavior and have to get flown out after they call for help on their cell phone (Mt. Hood) or 30,000 acre forest fires from lost hikers who light BONFIRES so they can be rescued because they went off trail and the cell coverage in the wilderness sucks (surprise, surprise), noise because some hikers can not stand the peace and quiet, sloppy campsites that invite animal marauders that can spread a backpack quite evenly over 2+ acres, enough odds and ends of equipment that you can hike in with nothing and come out fully equipped, etc, etc.
I've seen, smelled, sat on, and stepped in it all. Just thought I'd detail the "little evidence" that hikers have gone by here.
Dang! I left my camera on the summit!!
I read where a thousand acre canyon could comfortably accomodate 10-20 dirt bikers and leave a mess behind, or 500 hikers and you'd see very little evidence of their passage."
______________________________________________________________________
Take only pictures, leave only footprints.
If only that were true. How about LEAVE ONLY firepits, dead meadow grass from tent signatures, shallow slit trenches; dug up by rodents, with toilet paper spread everywhere, fecal matter in every nook and cranny; poisoned ground water, the ever present smell of urine, bug spray, sun screen, soaps, lotions, dinner scraps poured down animal burrows, soaking stinking feet in that cute little stream, decades-old fire pits loaded up with half burnt plastic, aluminum foil, and dehydrated food bags, hacked up dead wood conveniently stacked for the next hiker, suds in the creeks, bits of paper and wrappers, cigarette butts (yes, some hikers smoke), worn trails knee deep in the valley floors, piled wind breaks, local species forever indoctrinated to the habits and leavings of passer-bys, blazes hacked on the larger pines, trail cairns (how in the heck can you get lost with the obvious trials and forest service rusted metal signs or the wooden ones the size of doors?), cans, broken down stream banks from washing dishes and bathing, don't get me started on the equestrian messes, not to mention the visual unpleasentness of occupied campsites with clothes lines, sites with rearranged fallen logs and granite blocks to resemble family room furniture, broken down switchbacks from hikers shortcutting, helicopter wreckage from those tough hikers who get lost, too sick, or injured from stupid behavior and have to get flown out after they call for help on their cell phone (Mt. Hood) or 30,000 acre forest fires from lost hikers who light BONFIRES so they can be rescued because they went off trail and the cell coverage in the wilderness sucks (surprise, surprise), noise because some hikers can not stand the peace and quiet, sloppy campsites that invite animal marauders that can spread a backpack quite evenly over 2+ acres, enough odds and ends of equipment that you can hike in with nothing and come out fully equipped, etc, etc.
I've seen, smelled, sat on, and stepped in it all. Just thought I'd detail the "little evidence" that hikers have gone by here.
Dang! I left my camera on the summit!!
so how many hikers would it take to leave as much evidence of their passing as a dirt bike?
Of course dirt bikes and aTVs do more than just pass through an area. If there's even the slightest rise, they'll make a jump and a circle track back to jump again. This makes a very definite and long-lasting impact on Mother N. How many hikers would it take to make the equivalent impact?
Of course dirt bikes and aTVs do more than just pass through an area. If there's even the slightest rise, they'll make a jump and a circle track back to jump again. This makes a very definite and long-lasting impact on Mother N. How many hikers would it take to make the equivalent impact?
In the dunes, one hiker makes far more impact than one ATV. Even fat-ass Dan Patterson's hiking pictures show that footprints are much deeper than OHV tracks.
Bluesky opens pie-hole, inserts foot, doesn't notice. Moron.
Bluesky opens pie-hole, inserts foot, doesn't notice. Moron.
Your missing the whole point blue. The article is stating that even hiking is an unacceptable amount of impact. So it would seem that even you are going to be banned from use of public land. How does it feel?
quote:Whoop, there it is! Blu is to busy trying to justify his-her-it's way of life to admit that it's not only the OHV crowd that is having an impact on the environment! And I agree with Omnivore, THe Hiking crowd(i.e. Bluser) need to start practicing what they preach!
Your missing the whole point blue. The article is stating that even hiking is an unacceptable amount of impact. So it would seem that even you are going to be banned from use of public land. How does it feel?
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
Valkema is right, the hiking trails damaging the land are not the focus of the closures, the fact that the hikers are disturbing the mating and feeding efforts of a documented LIVE endangered species is the focus. Just like at Glamis, the focus is not the fact of the damage that ATV's are doing or not doing to the area, that is null and void since Glamis is a designated OHV area, but the focus is that ATV's may or may not be threatening a poisonous plant that is not even on the endangered list, is the focus. So saying that OHV's cause 100x more damage to the land is not a point in this case. Just as some believe (not proven) that 1 ATV can diminish the milkweed, it has been proven that just 1 person can cause the endangered Bighorn sheep not to mate or feed properly, therefore diminishing the species. Just 1 person.
When it come to endangered animals, just the presents of humans in the area can/will disrupt their daily/natural activity. Anyone who is a hunter understands the importance of positioning themselves downwind of certain animals. Certain fowl requires a hunters quiet and concealment. So bottom line, just the presents of humans disrupts both animal and bird life in their natural form.
As for the topic of “destroying” the environment, specifically land, it doesn’t matter if it is hikers, skiers, off roaders, etc. you/we are not really hurting the land. Nature has her own ways of controlling the environment, and land conditions by any number nature weather events.
Comparing hikers to off roaders and who has the largest impact on the environment, it really isn’t a question. It is human presents, “the hiker” who has the most impact on the animal and bird feeding, mating, and just surviving.
For those who are worried about footsteps on trails, or tires in the dunes, we should look at which terrain has the most to loose. Our deserts do have an element of plant life, however compared to wilderness areas, there is no comparison. It is like comparing a tide pool to oligotrophic waters.
Environment and politics are just one in the same. It is a noble concept to preserve the present for the future. Personally, I don’t care about a plant that may or may not exist a century from now. I am more concerned over the toxins and contamination of the soils we live on, or the water we drink for me, my children and someday my grand children.
I am not for closures, of wilderness trails or the desert. If we as a society continue to take pleasures away from us, and continue to contaminate of soil and the water table, why not just allow science and DNA produce humans in a lab that can be happy sitting at home painting flowers all day long.
As for the topic of “destroying” the environment, specifically land, it doesn’t matter if it is hikers, skiers, off roaders, etc. you/we are not really hurting the land. Nature has her own ways of controlling the environment, and land conditions by any number nature weather events.
Comparing hikers to off roaders and who has the largest impact on the environment, it really isn’t a question. It is human presents, “the hiker” who has the most impact on the animal and bird feeding, mating, and just surviving.
For those who are worried about footsteps on trails, or tires in the dunes, we should look at which terrain has the most to loose. Our deserts do have an element of plant life, however compared to wilderness areas, there is no comparison. It is like comparing a tide pool to oligotrophic waters.
Environment and politics are just one in the same. It is a noble concept to preserve the present for the future. Personally, I don’t care about a plant that may or may not exist a century from now. I am more concerned over the toxins and contamination of the soils we live on, or the water we drink for me, my children and someday my grand children.
I am not for closures, of wilderness trails or the desert. If we as a society continue to take pleasures away from us, and continue to contaminate of soil and the water table, why not just allow science and DNA produce humans in a lab that can be happy sitting at home painting flowers all day long.
Ocean1 is right on target with his points!
Delicate, endangered, or fragile are not synonyms for "sparse". The dune environment is not an incubator or a fertility zone. Whatever is living there blew in, rode in, or just got lost or distracted on the way through. The bulk of these plants' and animals' populations exist or existed elsewhere, although geologically nearby. The preservationists’ attempt to render a sparse locale, such as the Dunes, into a place of weakness and victimhood is a tug at the heart strings of their uninformed, inexperienced and emotion driven contributors and the politicians that suck up to the same crowd.
Maybe Mother Nature eliminated some species, which she has done to most species that ever existed on earth, but this remote corner, this way station called the Dunes, was overlooked? I don’t think Nature misses much. More likely she figured that the environment there will take care of the wayward population pockets. Maybe some plant, like the PMV, was pushed, eaten, infested, diseased, or evolved out of existence in its home habitat, but remains elsewhere, in pockets in the Dunes and elsewhere yet unidentified? Does that make it endangered or just an evolutionary anachronism? Is it endangered, because its in the Dunes, or is it really an invasive exotic that should eradicated or transplanted? Maybe its population is shrinking because it does not belong there and is dying out according to Nature's plan? But now the PMV is a political tool, a bludgeon swung by the preservationists, who probably know the PMV is naturally on the way out and will gleefully use just such information to further restrict reasonable human use of the Dunes.
Maybe the first PMV in the Dunes showed up as a seeds on the pack or garment of a native traveler? The droppings of a passing bird? Does that make it native or noxious? Invasive or indigenous? Exotic or local?
I stand on my premise that preservationists hold the state of nature on this continent, prior to European settlement, as the perfect environment. That Nature should have just quit with her evolving scheme at that very point. That preservationists believe everything done to the environment by the arriving human throng is a crime against this perfect setting. Of course such a belief is silly and very short-sighted. To believe that the world of your life time is the best world ever is certainly a good mechanism for mental survival, but it's not very realistic. To discount the vast inventory of past environments, global and local, and that countless diverse environments to come. Yes, many without trees, wolf puppies, or porpoise. To coin phrases, enviro-centric or enviro-ism?
Or they are really just a bunch of envious spoilsports who don't want anyone having any fun?
We are down from the trees, because Mom said it was OK!
Delicate, endangered, or fragile are not synonyms for "sparse". The dune environment is not an incubator or a fertility zone. Whatever is living there blew in, rode in, or just got lost or distracted on the way through. The bulk of these plants' and animals' populations exist or existed elsewhere, although geologically nearby. The preservationists’ attempt to render a sparse locale, such as the Dunes, into a place of weakness and victimhood is a tug at the heart strings of their uninformed, inexperienced and emotion driven contributors and the politicians that suck up to the same crowd.
Maybe Mother Nature eliminated some species, which she has done to most species that ever existed on earth, but this remote corner, this way station called the Dunes, was overlooked? I don’t think Nature misses much. More likely she figured that the environment there will take care of the wayward population pockets. Maybe some plant, like the PMV, was pushed, eaten, infested, diseased, or evolved out of existence in its home habitat, but remains elsewhere, in pockets in the Dunes and elsewhere yet unidentified? Does that make it endangered or just an evolutionary anachronism? Is it endangered, because its in the Dunes, or is it really an invasive exotic that should eradicated or transplanted? Maybe its population is shrinking because it does not belong there and is dying out according to Nature's plan? But now the PMV is a political tool, a bludgeon swung by the preservationists, who probably know the PMV is naturally on the way out and will gleefully use just such information to further restrict reasonable human use of the Dunes.
Maybe the first PMV in the Dunes showed up as a seeds on the pack or garment of a native traveler? The droppings of a passing bird? Does that make it native or noxious? Invasive or indigenous? Exotic or local?
I stand on my premise that preservationists hold the state of nature on this continent, prior to European settlement, as the perfect environment. That Nature should have just quit with her evolving scheme at that very point. That preservationists believe everything done to the environment by the arriving human throng is a crime against this perfect setting. Of course such a belief is silly and very short-sighted. To believe that the world of your life time is the best world ever is certainly a good mechanism for mental survival, but it's not very realistic. To discount the vast inventory of past environments, global and local, and that countless diverse environments to come. Yes, many without trees, wolf puppies, or porpoise. To coin phrases, enviro-centric or enviro-ism?
Or they are really just a bunch of envious spoilsports who don't want anyone having any fun?
We are down from the trees, because Mom said it was OK!
quote:I believe ocean1 has a very valid point. His point appear's to be based on knowledge of the subject and good old common sense! Something that evades the Bluser!
Comparing hikers to off roaders and who has the largest impact on the environment, it really isn’t a question. It is human presents, “the hiker” who has the most impact on the animal and bird feeding, mating, and just surviving.
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
You will never get Blu to practice what he preaches. Ive tried to get her to kill herself multiple times, since the earth cant support more humanoids. Right Blu??? Hypocrit..
RoostKing...
RoostKing...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.