Forum Index > Stewardship > closing middle fork rd at dingford crk - in favor or not--speak your mind now
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
polarbear
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 3683 | TRs
Location: Snow Lake hide-away
polarbear
  Top

Member
PostSat Jan 12, 2002 10:57 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Hmm...mine only lacks the periscope.  biggrin.gif
I have a little nash rambler mountain car as well.

--------------
...and a window that looks out on Corcovado...  Corcovado Hill




civvybyfour.JPG
civvybyfour.JPG
 civvybyfour.JPG (6.1 KB)
File downloaded or viewed 1649 time(s)

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
Scrooge
Famous Grouse



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 6948 | TRs
Location: wishful thinking
Scrooge
  Top

Famous Grouse
PostSun Jan 13, 2002 2:00 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Three points:

- Brian (and company) - Gating the MFK at the Taylor River will not turn the valley into a wilderness. It has been used by miners and loggers and recreationists for decades. You can make the areas it leads to inaccessible; you can make trying to get there a boring grind (the MFK road will make a long, DULL trail); but it still won't be a wilderness.

- Paving the road to the Taylor River will have almost no impact on use. Check the roads up the North Fork Skykomish and the Beckler River. I don't believe the amount of use has increased as much as the local population. And as far as the MFK is concerned, there's really not going to be any more (or less) reason to go out there than there is now. You'll still get hikers at the Taylor River; fishermen scattered here and there - and yahoos everywhere.

- Closing the road at the Taylor River will have one significant impact. It will put more pressure on all those desirable areas that can still be reached in a day or a weekend: the Enchantments, Foss River, Miller River, Monte Cristo, the Teanaway ....... is that really what you want? Are you willing to accept that trade off?

What we need is better access to a wider variety of places, not less access to fewer places. You need people on your side. People in the early days of the environmental movement understood this. The Mountaineers published "Trips and Trails" 35 years ago, to get people of every possible level of interest and ability to get out and learn how great the outdoors really was - so that when the time came they would vote to protect it. And they did.

Now you think you've won. But you haven't. You're going to have to make believers out of every generation or they'll take it away from you. And every time they do you'll lose a little more - and never get it back.

So if you really want to protect the Middle Fork, you should be working to show as many people as possible what a great place it is.

--------------
Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you....... Go and find it. Go!
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
borank
Lake dork



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 494 | TRs
Location: Lynnwoot
borank
  Top

Lake dork
PostSun Jan 13, 2002 3:26 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I wish I’d been in town this last week!  Interesting debate.  Just a couple points to mull over…

You can also make the argument that huge chunks of the ALW are not actual wilderness.  At the formation of the ALW there were 4 zone designations - transition, semi-primitive, primitive, and trailless.  The division of these zones was ridiculously skewed to the trailless designation.  Now the FS has their feet held to the fire (by groups mainly outside the state of Washington) to manage the ALW to proper wilderness zone standards, virtually requiring reduction in access to comply.  The tools available to do that are few, but can be applied in a site specific manner.  Whatever additional ideas are discussed, the FS is mandated to comply on this issue.

When has improving facilities ever done anything to reduce access?  When has increased access ever brought reduced impact?  I’d say never – if you build it, they will come.  If they come, they’ll bring their junk, and leave it behind.  It seems wishful thinking that the plethora of cavalier individuals who couldn’t care less about the next person’s experience would suddenly grow a brain and stop dumping junk, or shooting up stuff, or generally acting out their IQ.

Trips & Trails and their ilk may have assumed a covering mantle of working to establish wilderness protection, but with that accomplished, the publications did not stop.  Their popularity has increased exponentially and is a significant contributing factor to the current overuse problems in the wilderness they helped establish.  They have brought their own house down on their head.
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
McPilchuck
Wild Bagger



Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 859 | TRs
Location: near Snohomish, Wa.
McPilchuck
  Top

Wild Bagger
PostSun Jan 13, 2002 10:09 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
A bit off topic but maybe not really:
Mighty nice looking 4x4s!  I have two myself. One being a 1962 Ford F-100 called Bull Moose (had it since 1975) , the other a 1987 Chev S-10 Blazer (panel) with 253,000 miles on it called Little Red.  Both are extreme climbers especially in snow with "real" chains on.  The ' 62 has gone places angels fear to tread...geared with a granny gear low (4 speed clutch).

--------------
in the granite high-wild alpine land . . .
www.alpinequest.com
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
Backpacker Joe
NWH Joe-Bob



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23223 | TRs
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
  Top

NWH Joe-Bob
PostSun Jan 13, 2002 12:21 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Thanks McP.  Those rigs are locked up front and back. They have ultra low tranfer cases (62, 92, 223 to one) the suspensions flex and the tires are big!  All the proper requirements for going everywhere.

--------------
"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide."

— Abraham Lincoln
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
Tom
Admin



Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 15952 | TRs

Tom
  Top

Admin
PostSun Jan 13, 2002 12:22 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Original posts are starting to disappear.  Please click here to continue the discussion in the new thread.  Apologies for the inconvenience.
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
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > closing middle fork rd at dingford crk - in favor or not--speak your mind now
  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