You are here

Public Will Get Opportunity in October To Comment On Sequoia, Kings Canyon National Parks Wilderness Plan

Share

How best to manage wilderness areas in Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks will be the topic for public conversation come October, when the parks seek input on preliminary draft alternatives for their Wilderness Stewardship Plan.

At a series of public meetings, the National Park Service will be seeking ideas and feedback about alternatives to address future wilderness management at the two parks.

Topics that may be addressed in the plan include: day and overnight use; permitting and quotas; party sizes; campfires; food storage; camping and campsites; human waste management; pack stock and grazing management; scientific research; natural and cultural resource management; maintenance of signs, trails, bridges, and other recreational infrastructure; administrative infrastructure; education and outreach; the extent to which commercial services are necessary to fulfill the recreational and other purposes of wilderness areas; and front-country support facilities.

Many of these topics were brought forward during the public scoping phase of the planning process that took place from April 11 to August 31 last year. The issue raised its head earlier this year when the lack of a wilderness management plan temporarily derailed the parks' ability to issue permits for pack trips this summer.

The problem was temporarily resolved when Congress intervened and sent legislation to President Obama that would allow the parks to issue permits for this summer's season.

To learn more about the process and how to comment on what the new plan should include, visit the National Park Service Planning, Environment, and Public Comment website and/or consider attending an upcoming workshop during the last two weeks of October to listen to a presentation by the National Park Service and meet with staff to discuss your ideas about alternatives or submit your comments.

The schedule for the meetings is:

Thursday, October 25, 2012

7 p.m.- 9 p.m.

Eastern Sierra Tri-county Fairgrounds

Patio Building

Sierra Street and Fair Street

Bishop, CA 93514

Friday, October 26, 2012

7 p.m. - 9 p.m.

Los Angeles River Center

California Building Atrium

570 West Avenue 26

Los Angeles, CA 90065

Monday, October 29, 2012

7 p.m. - 9 p.m.

East Bay Regional Parks

Redwood Regional Park

Richard C. Trudeau Training Center

Main Conference Room

11500 Skyline Blvd

Oakland, CA 94619

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

6 p.m. -- 8 p.m.

Visalia Marriott Hotel

Main Ballroom

300 South Court Street

Visalia, CA 93291

Comments

Closing Bear Paw meadows would close off backcountry hiking to the middle to older demographic that pay the bulk of the taxes that support the parks.

So, access should be based on who pays the most?


In previous articles, concerns were raised that Hispanics and young people did not visit the parks. The NPS was attempting through various programs to change that. The NPS is concerned if those demographics never visited a park, they wouldn't support funding the parks. So if the NPS is concerned with not peeving off those who are their bread and butter it would seem that closing access to wilderness to those in the prime earning and taxpaying years would be counterproductive.


The Wilderness Act does contain an exemption for commericial activities which are related to the recreational purposes of wilderness.

Section 4.(d)(7) "Commercial services may be performed within wilderness areas designated by this Act to the extent necessary for activities which are proper for realizing the recreational or other purposes of the Areas."

This provision is the basis for approval of outfitter and guide services within wilderness areas.


So if the NPS is concerned with not peeving off those who are their bread and butter it would seem that closing access to wilderness to those in the prime earning and taxpaying years would be counterproductive.

1) Wilderness isn't being closed to anyone. (One could equally argue that access is equally limited to those who can't afford the concessionaire's service.) 2) They're not going to stop paying taxes because of modifications to commercial use.


Being 76 yeas old I can only hike about 20 miles a day and a 30 mile overnight backpack is tiring. I can sympathize with those my age and older who can't do that any more but they had the chance while they were younger. Why deny younger generations the pleasures of the solitude on wilderness trails by adding mountain bikes. It wasn't that many years ago when we were saying parks were being loved to death. No one has the nerve to say that anymore for fear commercial interests including park concessioners will come down on their necks.


Roger, you are fortunate to be hiking at 76. Some of us didn't have the chance to backpack when we were younger. When you're starting out in your career there is little vacation time. When your children are young, hiking vacations are impossible. So facilities like Bear Paw Meadows serve a valuable niche. They aid in allowing those who appreciate wilderness to enjoy it. I don't see the backcountry camps like the High Sierra Camps in Yosemite or Bear Paw as being out of step with the purpose of the National Park System. There are things that are completely at odds with the purpose of the national parks which could be eliminated to ease congestion and return the parks to a mission of preserving and appreciating nature: (there are lots of them in Yosemite such as gift shops, bicycle rentals, rafting, the ski area, art galleries, and special events that have little to do with the park itself.)


I would make note of a few things relating to the section of the Wilderness Act regarding commercial activities relating to "recreational purposes". That section is supposed to mean such things as commercial guiding and educational activities. This means things such as guided hikes, rock climbing lessons, horse trips, mule packing, hunting or fishing guides, etc that have no permanent affect on the "wilderness characteristics" of the area. It can't possibly mean permanent commercial structures such as kitchens and employee housing. If it did, then commercial guides could apply to set up restocking or food preparation stations in the middle of wilderness areas.

I would also note that the definition of "potential wilderness addition" was never in the original 1964 Wilderness Act. The term 'potential wilderness" was attached to future legislation when NPS wilderness areas were defined.

The High Sierra Camps are very much "potential wilderness additions". The part of the original wilderness Act that talks about commercial activities relating to recreation doesn't mean that buildings can exist in fully designated wilderness areas. If a standard is that the wilderness designation means that potential wilderness must be converted to full wilderness at the first available opportunity (the NPS argument regarding DBOC at Point Reyes) then that would equally mean that the HSCs must be removed when the contract runs out or if the maintenance backlog requires excessive construction.


I think it's OK to complain about all that stuff in Yosemite Valley. However, I think it also needs to be understood that Yosemite Valley is not in a designated or potential wilderness area, and for practical reasons never will be.

The real question is about what is allowed in designated wilderness - especially commercial horse/mule guiding as well as other commercial activities. In addition to that, there are a few preexisting permanent commercial enterprises in potential wilderness areas, and the possible renewal of contracts is an important issue.

As these things are decided in SEKI, I think they will be precedents for how wilderness plans are decided in the future in other NPS areas. Something in my guts tells me that the Forest Service and BLM are going to choose their own path when it comes to wilderness plans.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.