Recent comments

  • Federal Judge Issues Scathing Opinion in Blocking "Concealed Carry" In National Parks, Wildlife Refuges   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Concerned and Anonymous No. 2, as the story pointed out, this ruling had absolutely nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment. It centered 100 percent on the duty of the Interior Department to consider the environmental ramifications of its actions.

    Anonymous No. 3, the past two NPS directors were not known to stand up to their Interior Department bosses. That's certainly understandable, albeit disappointing. It will be interesting to see who becomes the next director and how vigorous they are in defending the parks.

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Dave, as Kurt has said, the posts you'll see on Traveler fairly soon will address the NPS unit designation and redesignation issues in a more comprehensive and proactive way. Rest assured that we have some specific suggestions for improving and standardizing NPS unit designation. We assume that Traveler readers have also got some thoughts on this matter they'd like to share.

  • Federal Judge Issues Scathing Opinion in Blocking "Concealed Carry" In National Parks, Wildlife Refuges   5 years 26 weeks ago

    For the past 2 years we had to hear from the past NPS Director how great Kempthorne was. This is part of the evidence that he was no real friend to parks. What role did the past Director play in this? She certainly did not stop the rule. Couldn't she have insisted that it was not NEPA compiant?

  • Sections of Pacific Crest Trail Poached by Mountain Bikers; Could Problems Arise in National Parks?   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I personally do not see the problem of sharing the trail, particularly if there are feeder mountain biking trails coming into the PCT. There is very little incentive to stop at the end of a feeder trail, whether you are hiking or biking, but especially biking. Maybe trail officials should re-engineer the trail sections inbetween mountain bike feeder trails to solve the problem.

    Think on the bright side:
    1. National Parks are so far not affected thus far
    2. At least its not motorcross, ATV's, or snowmobiles sharing the trail

    I think hikers and bikers should just get along

  • Federal Judge Issues Scathing Opinion in Blocking "Concealed Carry" In National Parks, Wildlife Refuges   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Ya know... the bill of rights, specifically the second amendment is really fairly simple to read. I'm nor sure what about "shall not be infringed" is difficult to understand. I guess like "Thou shall not lie" and the nine other suggestions it's just an out dated concept in today's enlightened world.

  • Federal Judge Issues Scathing Opinion in Blocking "Concealed Carry" In National Parks, Wildlife Refuges   5 years 26 weeks ago

    This is absurd. You have the RIGHT to keep and BEAR arms. There is loads of data that show that allowing concealed carry has actually reduced violent crime... even as the budgets of law enforcement has declined, law officers decrease, job losses rise, cost of living rises, and poverty rises (all factors that typically cause crime to increase). There is loads of data showing that states and cities (and countries) that restrict lawful gun ownership actually see and INCREASE in violent crime! Why? For every 1 'gun related violent crime' (did the cop do the shooting?) there are dozens of cases where a firearm was used to save someone. I am sick of listening to the paranoid delusions of the Hug-a-Thug Anti-Gunners. If someone wants to commit a criminal or violent act, they will, no matter what laws there are. If all guns magically vanished, then they would use a kitchen knife, baseball bat, or load a Uhaul up with fertilizer etc etc. The difference, noone would be able to stop them because they would be powerless against them. I know a couple that were mugged and left tied to a tree in freezing weather without a jacket while camping in a national park. Fortunately that was all that happened to them, and we later found out that muggings were quite common in that area. While they aren't the gun owning type, they should have been able to exercise that RIGHT in order to protect themselves. I AM an environmentalist. You want to keep lead out of our parks? Do something about China. 30% of the lead in our surface water comes from smoke stacks at Chinese manufacturing plants. Whether lead bullets are stored in the trunk or stored at your side, really is not going to impact the environment in any which way at all. Absurd. If it is for 'the environment', why not go after the real threats our environment is facing? There are SCORES of them! Unless it has nothing to do with the environment at all.

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Interesting post, Frank, but your dreams of having a national park named in your honor are just that -- dreams. If you tried to use that name for your park, the Interior department would file charges on you for the fraudulent offering of federal services. Incidentally, there's been a lot of publicity lately about a national park trademark brouhaha at Hot Springs. You can read about it here.

  • House Fails to Pass Massive Lands Bill That Would Have Aided National Park System   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Congressional leaders have moved quickly on this, using some parliamentary maneuvers in the Senate and an agreement to avoid a filibuster to get the Senate to pass a revised version of the bill and send it back to the House. The procedures used by the Senate on this one mean that it will not be open to amendment in the House, and so passage should now be relatively straightforward:
    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/senate-passes-lands-bill-one-more-time/

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Bob Janiskee
    On March 18th, 2009

    I get your point(s), Beamis. However, with all all due respect, I will continue to believe that branding matters, and that having a designation system that makes sense is better than having one that does not.

    Does the National Park Service and the federal government maintain a monopoly on the use of the term "national park"?

    Here's a "what if?":

    Say I buy a few thousand acres of land. Maybe many thousands of acres. Or perhaps more likely (because that wouldn't happen without a heavily taxed windfall) a group of concerned individuals creates a non-governmental organization to acquire the property. What's to stop them from designating their property a national park?

    To digress: The federal government pretty much has a monopoly on open lands, what with the federal government's theft of Indian lands to turn over to the Dept of Interior and the Dept of Ag. But let's assume for this "what if?" that enough private land (or perhaps a privately owned sequoia or redwood grove) could be purchased and set aside for preservation.

    And what if I do get the windfall and purchase a privately owned sequoia grove and decide to call it, oh, I don't know, Frankonia Grove National Park? Will the federal government take me to court to ban me from infringing upon its "brand"?

    Certain NGOs (read: Nature Conservancy) have been highly successful at branding. Why should the federal government be the one to do the "branding"? (National parks are starting to sound more like cattle--a commodity--than land to be preserved in this discussion.)

    My point?

    A century of government monopoly and control of our natural treasures has endangered what it was supposed to protect. It's time for a change (and real change this time). Conservation trusts are not an experiment; they have a long track record of proven success. The federal government has a long track record of theft and mucking up natural ecosystems, and that same government is now on the verge of bankruptcy.

    I wrote it before, and I write it again, even more certain in its inevitability: "I look forward to the day I go home and see the sign: WELCOME TO CRATER LAKE NATIONAL PARK - A CONSERVATION TRUST".

  • Senators' Letter to Open National Parks to Concealed Weapons   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I spent 8 months driving around North America on a motorcycle exploring the multitude of diverse people and places this continent has to offer. I slept on the side of the road, whether that was in city, suburb, rural, or extreme backroads (aka four-wheeler trails). From Wisconsin to Florida to Southern California to Alaska to New Foundland to the East Coast. If there is one lesson I have learned it's that it only takes one use of a normally never used thing during an emergency of life and death to justify carrying it in the first place. It's a life changing experience, until you have it you cannot realize how powerful it is. I didn't carry a gun, but I did carry peppar spray (masquerading as a small fire extinguisher). A gun (or any weapon) is merely a tool, to be used for good or bad. The "bad" will always have a gun, why take away that right for the "good"? This age old question cannot be answered for a reason. I would love to believe we are in a society where there are no "bad" people but that is not yet reality. And as far as defense against wild animals goes, why would we willingly remove a tool that dramatically helped us become a resilient species? Unless of course you think humans in general are just a virus. Try reading the book " Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond. He won a Pulitzer prize with that book for a reason also. Good day.

  • Comment Now: General Gun Regulations for Areas Administered By the National Park Service   5 years 26 weeks ago

    People who have concealed weapons permits have already gone through background checks, and classes, which means the individuals who carry arent the ones who will be poaching, or anything else. I like to hike in areas where there are many illegal aliens, and smugglers( with AK47's I'm sure they will obey this idiotic ruling)., and you are infringing on my right of self protection. I also hike/camp in areas with bears and mountain lions, again you are infringing on my RIGHT of self protection. It is also MY tax dollars that help maintain these parks, and your salary. You need to worry about the criminals that are armed in parks....NOT law abiding ccw holders...

    Editor's note: This comment was edited to remove a gratuitous attack. Additionally, the Traveler is not part of the National Park Service and draws no funding from the NPS or, for that matter, any taxpayer.

  • Sections of Pacific Crest Trail Poached by Mountain Bikers; Could Problems Arise in National Parks?   5 years 26 weeks ago

    This is not surprising to me, but what might be surprising to you is that I'm an avid mountain biker. I'm in my 40's and ride with dozens of other riders, they're all nice guys, however they just don't care about the environment. All of them belong to a local MTB association whose mission statement says that it is dedicated to promoting the recreational use of mountain bikes on trails, in a safe and environmentally sound manner. This is far from the truth. There are illegal trails everywhere, in fact most of the trails were illegal when they were cut and there are areas of the parks bikers have ruined because they like to ride all over everything that might be fun.

    Most mountain bikers are out there to have fun, take risks/practice, and exercise. Not a bad thing unless it is at the expense of preservation for all to enjoy.

    I can only hope that people do not allow mountain biking in National Parks.

  • Federal Judge Issues Scathing Opinion in Blocking "Concealed Carry" In National Parks, Wildlife Refuges   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Following Kempthorne's logic, I'm wondering why the previous administration proposed allowing concealed weapons only in parks. Why not allow them in airports as well? After all, such a rule wouldn't authorize the USE of such weapons in an airport, just their presence.

  • Panoramic Photography, Or "How Do I Get All of the Teton Range in the Picture?"   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Mark- you can just copy and paste my text into a word processor to print it.

  • Panoramic Photography, Or "How Do I Get All of the Teton Range in the Picture?"   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I agree - treehugger that is a cool movie. I love QTVRs. Not to date myself, but I remember stitching these things by hand. Lots of math involved to make QTVRs in the old days.

    I had actually not realized that Canon's PhotoStitch could make QTVRs until I played with it a bit for this article. Now I have to try stitching my own...

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Nice comments Dave. This is a great start. We do have many great thinkers on this subject, such as Bob.

    rob mutch
    --
    Executive Director, Crater Lake Institute
    www.craterlakeinstitute.com

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Dave,

    Your point is well-made and a valid one. We've actually got something in the formative stages that more than likely will do just that.

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I agree that his point is we need clear guidelines and why. My point is the next step is to write an article with several steps to a possible solution. Suggest Guidelines and ask us to help promote. I feel Bob Janiskee and many who post here have a great insight to the solution. I am just suggesting that they start a forum in the right direction. The article is a great start. It is the second time I have read this and I am only pointing out the direction that might bring change. Don't just point out the problem---- point out a possible solution.

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    The essential point that Bob is trying to make here (as I see it) is that there must be CLEAR guidelines as to what the NPS is going to manage. Make it clear what can be a park and what cannot. The premise that Congress or politicians are innately going to mess things up is wrong. How parks are designated makes a BIG difference in how they are managed. Great write-up Bob.

    rob mutch
    ---
    Executive Director,
    Crater Lake Institute
    www.craterlakeinstitute.com
    Robert Mutch Photography,
    www.robmutch.com

  • Park History: Mammoth Cave National Park   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I found this page very helpful, i am working on an essay about mammoth cave. thank you for your great info!

  • National Park Quiz 46: Glaciers   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Ugh! I did not do well...chuckle. I went through it more for the informational value, however. Very informative and interesting. Good job Bob!

    Your weekly quiz should have a prominent link on the Traveler home page. It would draw in more people. Although, I know how easy it is to 'clog' up the home page with links. I'll have to mention this to Kurt.

    rob mutch
    ---
    Executive Director,
    Crater Lake Institute
    www.craterlakeinstitute.com
    Robert Mutch Photography,
    www.robmutch.com

  • National Park Designation is an Unholy Mess   5 years 26 weeks ago

    Bob,
    While I love your current and past articles on this subject, and agree it points out the problem, I think it would be more helpful if someone with your expertise and many who read and write here, would offer solutions or fixes. Then even if some consenses is formed, send it to a helpful congressman (if there are any). I am sure many here would jump on the band wagon to help promote a change if they can see why it matters.
    Dave Crowl

  • Congressman Seeks Stimulus Funds For Restoration Work at Gateway National Recreation Area   5 years 26 weeks ago

    The "developer," Sandy Hook Partners, has in fact committed to "design sustainable energy-efficient restorations." The architect working with SHP is Robert Kellner, AIA, a graduate of Arizona State University, with graduate research in solar and energy-conscious design. ASU has been a leader in this field, their program being featured a year ago in an episode of NBC’s Nightly News.

    School of Sustainability Featured on NBC Nightly News
    NBC Nightly News
    3/24/2008
    NBC visited Arizona State University in February 2008 to explore in depth the nation's first School of Sustainability. Their report aired nationally March 24, 2008, on NBC Nightly News. Interviews with students, professors, and administrators shed light on challenges facing this generation of students, opportunities that await graduates, and how ASU's School of Sustainability prepares students for the future.

    A link to that Nightly News program can be found at: http://sustainability.asu.edu/gios/news/archive.htm

  • Statue of Liberty May Once Again Open to Top   5 years 26 weeks ago

    I have always had an infascination with the Statue of Liliberty since I was a little girl. I am now 32 years old and I still have one till this day. It would be a life long dream of mine to actually travel inside the Statue of Liberty and to get a once in a lifetime opportunity to get to the crown of Lady liberty. This would be an ulimate experince for me to behold. Also this would be a cherishable event that I would truly cherish for the rest of my life. When it is determined that the crown is safe and it will be reopened to the public, I will be the first one in line. If it was an all day or night experience I would do what every it took to get to the crown. A true supporter of Lady Liberty.

  • Congressman Seeks Stimulus Funds For Restoration Work at Gateway National Recreation Area   5 years 26 weeks ago

    First, yes, if all the restoration of Ft. Hancock COULD be achieved with the stimulus package, bring it on.

    These are splendid structures, and in their own right are designated National Historic Landmarks. It is silly to challenge their significance, inasmuch as they independentally were designated NHLs -- with criteria equal to a national park in distinction -- with no questionable Congressional thumb on the scale. Ft. Hancock was already an NHL before the national park service came into the picture.

    If the national park service would fight for the Stimulus money, design sustainable energy-efficient restorations, and secure funding for modest continued maintenance, these buildings could be made available to a wide array of non-profit groups who's missions are similar to the park service's.

    Those non-profit groups would have had an incentive to support greater Stimulus funding for national parks; imagine, with the kind of leadership the park service once had, if energized supporters for Stimulus for Ft. Hancock was repeated hundreds of times on behalf of parks throughout the Country. But the chain of command has been stripped of energetic and imaginative people, and must be restored if the park service is ever to be ready again when the opportunities happen. None of the great work of the national park system could have been accomplished with the kind of passive leaders installed during the Bush Administration, which of course was the point. Those people are still there, and the fact the NPS could not fight effectively for full Stimulus funding really makes it all very clear.

    Second, as Water Witch rather gently points out, Congressman Pallone's behaviour has been not just craven, but destructive without being effective. A real Congressman would have made sure that the national park service absolutely understood the need for Ft. Hancock development to be fully included in the Stimulus package. But this is nothing new. Pallone NEVER fought effectively for funding for Ft. Hanock. All he did was undermine the efforts by the NPS to get funds any way they could, even though he reversed his support when donors came out against the project. Other New Jersey Members of Congress of his own Party are known to complain how poorly they regard Pallone's real contributions. Even if the park service leaders in new york/new jersey WERE motivated and able, why spend time with a major park project when the congressman there cannot hold up his end?? There are other fish to fry.

    Third, years ago the key staff person for the Washington Office for the national park service (who was reviewing the fund raising effort to make sure it complied with the highly complicated park service rules [IT DID]), argued that Gateway should just request the funding through the normal construction funding process. The park people at Sandy Hook/Ft. Hancock would have been delighted for Ft. Hancock to be the funding priority for Gateway, for the Regional Office and for the Washington office. The problem is, the Gateway managers were not paying attention to Sandy Hook. Nothing about Pallone encouraged them to make the New Jersey unit a priority. Susan Molinari had made sure the Staten Island projects at Ft. Wadsworth WERE priorities. Then-congressman Charles Schumer showed continued interest in the projects around Jamaica Bay in Long Island.

    The local Ft. Hancock park managers are doing the best they can, without the aggressive and imaginative support of their Congressman or the top brass for the new york/new jersey parks. The best solution WOULD be Stimulus funding, designed to minimize long-term maintenance. Without that, they need to push for funding from non-government sources. Pallone should demonstrate some leadership and decide to support one, or support the other.