Sorry, have been very busy lately, and unable to invest much time in this thread right now. The response I would like to send would be well researched, with factual examples, but I just don't have the availability to do. Thank you for your response, it is worthy of a greater effort on my behalf, but it will have to wait.
Nathan, I'm sorry I ignored your questions about the California situation, and you're right, I'm not familiar with them and so would not comment directly. So, let me make sure I have this straight. They're closed to all entry? No hikers allowed? Because, otherwise, they're not closed.
Yes, in many areas that I have encountered, this is the case. From reading through this thread, it is my observation that California is really unique and aggressively hostile to my preferred activities.
You're correct again that I don't have children. However, I have nieces and nephews and have introduced all of them to nature and wilderness. I have also led numbers of children I cannot count on nature hikes, and have taught classes to numbers of children I cannot count, on tracking and animals and numerous other subjects. Introducing children to the outdoors is, in fact, one of my overriding goals as a volunteer. Does that carry any weight, or do I have to be an actual biological parent to satisfy what you're discussing?
I think your involvement with children and the activities you listed are highly commendable, but no, its not the same as being the parent.
A five-year-old doesn't need to hike "a few miles" to enjoy nature or wilderness;
Ah, here again your lack of familiarity with California undermines your argument. It's kinda a big State, and much of it is inaccessible without either hiking for considerable distances and elevations, or driving in using existing mining or logging roads. Kellymoe gave the example of the Inyo's earlier (the last photo I posted). It would be extremely arduous to go there if in fact, you had to walk.
I think you know that. And again, you're turning the debate to an anthropocentric one.
Yes absolutely I am. Unappologetically.
an⋅thro⋅po⋅cen⋅tric:
"viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and values."
Would you also agree that something that takes a little effort to achieve is more rewarding than something that takes little or no effort? What gives you a greater feeling of accomplishment, driving up a mountain or hiking up it? Would you also agree that something for which you have had to expend effort to achieve is more precious to you than something for which you had to expend little or no effort?
In California, the ability to drive TO IT is being jeapordized. I am all for hiking up the mountain, but let me cross the desert and foothills to get to it!
How many posts here, from both sides of the debate, have complained about abuse of existing 4WD trails, and the trash and illegal tracks that are epidemic in such areas? And you want to open wilderness to the same treatment? How is that protection? Do you honestly think spreading out the problem over more land will diminish it? <snip>You don't see many trail cleanups in wilderness areas, unless they've been subjected to illegal motorized access.
Yes, I do feel that the more areas allowed to recreate in, the overall impact is reduced. In the areas that I have seen closed, they were not abused or trashed prior to the closure, but the areas remaining open have become more worn, trashed, eroded, thrashed, defaced, etc... as the usage is abnormally concentrated to those few remaining areas. (the exception here is Rubicon, which is on the closure list, but has actually improved remarkably in recent years thanks to the efforts of FOR and similar groups, but that is a unique case and a poor example of general areas).
As for trail cleanups, again, in California your statement is not accurate. There are many clean up efforts. Hundreds of thousands of man-hours are donated each year by volunteer organizations in a desperate attempt to keep any access open, be it mountain bikers, off roaders, hikers, kayakers, etc... It is an all-hands desperate battle against Senators Fienstien and Boxer to stop them from closing the outdoors. By closing, I mean CLOSED.
Then I do not understand why we are having this debate. As far back as I can read, every comment you have made about wilderness has been derogatory. Truly, I don't understand. You opened the entire thread with the "2.1 million acres gone" comment. Not "2.1 million acres protected." Not, "2.1 million more acres of wilderness for me have love and passion for." If you're saying you have a passion for wilderness, but wish it all had mechanized access, then you don't have a passion for wilderness, because wilderness by definition has no mechanized access. If all you're saying is that you have a love and passion for wilderness and agree that it should be free from motorized travel, but think that the current acreage is perfect and shouldn't be increased or decreased, then all we're debating is figures.
What I want is for existing roads and trails to remain open for use. I want the areas they are in to be protected from development. I want them to remain as they are now (or improved via clean up efforts), but essentially preserved so that we can explore it and appreciate it.
Psalm 115:16
The highest heavens belong to the LORD,
but the earth he has given to man.
Kevin, 14 miles is studly. that's awesome. I've taken my son through the slots in Escalante, but I think the longest hike we had was about 4 miles (in deep sand!). We hike Yosemite every year, typically the northern region above Tuolumne Meadows. I have found
this book to be excellent for picking trails suitable to young kids. Last year we tried Glenn Aulin Falls, but at 11 miles it was just a bit too far for my youngest (age 5 at the time). We got within about a mile of it. Could hear the falls, but she was done. It was a long hike back. Other hikes have been more successful. If it's not a conventional trail, but there are rocks or slots canyons, they seem to have endless energy. Its the trudging up a long trail that bores and fatigues them.
