Forum Index > Stewardship > chainsaws for trail maintenance in Wilderness?
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
timberghost
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333 | TRs

timberghost
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 6:09 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Wilderness definition in there stating untrammeled by man. There are many old logging roads within the Wild Sky which violate this statement in the Wilderness definition. untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6546 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 6:37 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
timberghost wrote:
Wilderness definition in there stating untrammeled by man. There are many old logging roads within the Wild Sky which violate this statement in the Wilderness definition. untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.

Lookup the definition of untrammeled,  it may not mean what you think.  It definitely doesn't mean untrampled, a common misconception.

Also Congress knew that some portions of Wild Sky contained old roads that have been closed / neglected to become trails when the bill creating wild sky was passed.  That doesn't change the wilderness act rules.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
timberghost
Member
Member


Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 333 | TRs

timberghost
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 7:01 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
That definition was taken from the wilderness act. Many of the objections to Wild Sky were stated because it didn't fit this right wrong or indifferent.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6546 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 7:38 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
timberghost wrote:
That definition was taken from the wilderness act. Many of the objections to Wild Sky were stated because it didn't fit this right wrong or indifferent.

???

Quote:
DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS
(c) A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his works dominate the landscape, is hereby
recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man
himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an
area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent
improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions
and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of
man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make
practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological,
geological, or other features of scientific, educational,
scenic, or historical value.

In terms of "untrammeled by man" it seems to me that allowing chainsaws make the goal of "untrammeled by man"  harder to achieve.   Trails or old roads that are now trails both allow easier access. 

Personally I think the borders chosen for Wild Sky make more sense than approach used for the Alpine Lakes where long swaths of Valley floor either side of a crummy road left out, many of those roads are now trails (e.g. the Taylor River Road is now a trail, the MF Snoqualmie is rapidly becoming a trail) 

Long term I think it would have been better to have drawn the borders lower down and closed the road right away.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9978 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 2:13 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
timberghost wrote:
That definition was taken from the wilderness act.

yeah... ???

The definition of "untrammeled" is the definition you will find in an orthodox dictionary of the English language, printed in book form.

There are no other definitions, and federal legislation does not change, alter, or redefine definitions of terms of the English language.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 14106 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 4:21 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Wrong words in statutes are defined by legislatures and Courts all the time.

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9978 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 4:23 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
The definition of "untrammeled" is the definition you will find in an orthodox dictionary of the English language, printed in book form.

There are no other definitions, and federal legislation does not change, alter, or redefine definitions of terms of the English language.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6546 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 4:44 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
Wrong words in statutes are defined by legislatures and Courts all the time.

That is true in general,  but not in this case.  Howard Zahniser made 56 revisions over a decade in writing the text of the Wilderness Act.  The choice of untrammeled was given much thought and debate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 14106 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 5:07 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
If it is in the Act it is defined by the legislature. Courts can redefine words and do all the time, example: all dictionaries define comprise as consist and consist as comprise, but in a patent they have very different meanings.

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6546 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 5:49 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
If it is in the Act it is defined by the legislature. Courts can redefine words and do all the time, example: all dictionaries define comprise as consist and consist as comprise, but in a patent they have very different meanings.

I think using patent law examples is not a great choice -- there is an entire "industry" built around exploiting weaknesses in the patent law as it currently exists.   A *HUGE* percentage of  patent law cases in the USA are filed in Marshall County Texas -- a county with a population of just 24,000 and a much lower than US average high school graduation rate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/business/24ward.html

In a case I was involved in -- once the defendants had the venue changed away from Marshall County to San Francisco -- where the jury pool has a lot more tech savvy people -- the plaintiffs settled very quickly and for a minute fraction of  their original claim of damages.

In any case -- on the issue of whether chainsaws *CAN* be used within a wilderness area -- the law has already been made clear by court cases -- They can, but only after the land managers go through a process to document that chainsaws are part of the "minimum tools needed to administer the area".

This thread is all about whether the rules should be changed to allow chainsaws to be used without going through the analysis required by both the Wilderness Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.   

Personally I think that is a bad idea on several fronts, not the least of which is that -- unless congress passed specific legislation allowing this -- the USFS or other land managers attempt such a change in process would certainly be sued by Wilderness Watch, the Sierra Club, etc and as the law has been interpreted by the courts previously -- they plaintiffs would be in a very good position to prevail.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 14106 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 6:20 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Wow talk about thread drift hockeygrin.gif I am intimately familiar with the Eastern District of Texas and have both visited and litegated there. It is popular not because the people there are rubes but because the Courts there have created a fast track system that hears cases years faster than the Northern District of California. The Judges there are very familiar with patent law and have special local rules it is a specialty court and is often preferred by both defendants and plaintiffs who prefer a speedy resolution.

As to the issue we are supposed to be talking about I do not have a strong position. The current rule seems to be working fine and there is little reason to change. In the current political climate I am wary of any change that could reduce environmental protection, slippery slope argument. Today chainsaws tomorrow ATV's and sleds tongue.gif

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6546 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 6:26 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant wrote:
As to the issue we are supposed to be talking about I do not have a strong position. The current rule seems to be working fine and there is little reason to change. In the current political climate I am wary of any change that could reduce environmental protection, slippery slope argument. Today chainsaws tomorrow ATV's and sleds tongue.gif

I concur -- I don't trust either the current administration or the current congress to fiddle with the wilderness act or the National Environmental Policy Act -- in rough form they seem more interested exploiting natural resources than protecting them for future generations.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 5412 | TRs

Kim Brown
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 9:45 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
This argument, and cockroaches, will be all that's left of earth in the end.

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 9978 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 10:11 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
The guy who insisted two members of this forum are paid by outside interests for posting on this site wrote:
"Courts can redefine words and do all the time..."

No, they don't.

Perhaps terms are defined within the limitations of the particular statute in which they are used, but courts and legislatures do not redefine the established definitions of standard terms in the English language. (Usually set forth in the front end of bills under "definitions".)

You're talking apples and oranges.

Sorry you're confused (again.)

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 14106 | TRs
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 28, 2017 10:29 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sorry, you are wrong courts define words and phrases all the time along with statutory intent.

You start by attacking me personally. I said that the persistent of the brown commenters in the stewardship forum can only be explained by their being trolls or sock puppets. The definition of sock puppet does not require monetary payment only that they are promoting an industry or point of view while representing themselves as something else i.e. A hiker.

Ad hom attacks have no place here.

Blocked because of the inevitable PMs to follow.

--------------
"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > chainsaws for trail maintenance in Wilderness?
  Happy Birthday Nancyann!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy