Recent comments

Those left outside the process are not happy. Trade does not exist in a vacuum. Let's say one guy owns the water, your neighbor owns the boats, and you own the navigator schools, and assume that all are equally valuable. If your neighbor gives his boats to the guy who owns the water, tell me that doesn't have an adverse effect on you as the owner of the navigator school since one guy now owns 2/3 of the resources in the trade equation. When you realize that trade never happens on equal footing, that there is never any assumption of fairness in "free trade," then a lot of other people get affected when two other people make a deal (and that gets exacerbated the more resources owned by those making the deal).

When Bechtel builds a road to a mine because they were sold the rights, who and what is still hurt? A lot of people, animals, and land who had nothing to do with the deal but are still affected by it.

Theft and larceny is the lot of governments and private individuals alike all based on the lie of entitlement.

For more on where I'm coming from an anti-capitalist, anti-authoritarian perspective, read John Locke, Yellowstone, and the Dogma of the Right to Private Property.

Jim Macdonald
The Magic of Yellowstone
Yellowstone Newspaper
Jim's Eclectic World

Jeremy Sullivan wrote: "It brings up an interesting argument, one that I'd love to see continued in additional stories and comments on this site and around the web, which is, what is the role of wilderness?"

That's a very big discussion indeed. There are plenty of people, I imagine Scott Silver would be one of them, who would argue that any intrusion of modernity into a wilderness degrades the wilderness itself. I actually find it hard to argue against that position. It boils down to the more core question, is wilderness a museum or a park? In the way that it's managed in the U.S., it's in some difficult-to-define gray area in between.

I attended an interesting symposium at San Francisco State University called Redefining Wilderness. The attendees and panelists tried to tackle just such questions. Of course, there are never going to be any really clear-cut answers. I hopew they offer it next year -- I make sure you and Kurt are invited.

As for PLBs, my own opinion is totally conflicted. Putting on my responsible journalist hat, I agree with Doug Ritter that PLBs probably are the best available technology to summon search and rescue services, and it would be irresponsible of me not to report that. Putting on my wilderness advocate hat, I'll argue that PLBs (and similar technologies) allow people to get into the wilderness without the skill and preparedness that would otherwise reduce the likelihood of ever needing a rescue, and that the more frequent appearance of SAR and mechanized assistance like helicopters destroy what wilderness is supposed to be.

Steve,
If I may, let me point readers to part II in your series called 'Counting Up Essentials'. I like the discussion you have with Doug Ritter about these P.L.B.'s and whether they should be included in a list of essentials to toss in a backcountry hiking pack -- especially if you choose to hike solo. I think Doug felt pretty strongly that a PLB should be included in the pack.

I haven't had an opportunity yet to confirm this morning, but I've heard that the Oregon State legislature is considering (or has passed) legislation requiring climbers on Mt. Hood to carry these things. Search and Rescue spent a lot of time on that mountain this past winter. I think S&R is less concerned about the meaning of 'wilderness' at this point, and more concerned with the well being of their volunteers.

It brings up an interesting argument, one that I'd love to see continued in additional stories and comments on this site and around the web, which is, what is the role of wilderness? I have a feeling the answer was fairly clear when the Wilderness Act was created in '64, but that the lines have been severely blurred with the introduction of hand held electronics like cell phones, PLBs, and even consumer grade walkie-talkies which have the ability to reach beyond the boundaries of wilderness and call for help.

One thing that seems to be driving these more and more frequent call-outs of rescue services is the media romanticism of extreme sports. These media portrayals reduce the public's perception of the risk of the less extreme activities. People don't feel like they need either the training, the skills, or the all-around preparedness because they've got a way to summon a rescue.

Is it still a wilderness if you can make the equivalent of a 911 call from there? Some might convincingly argue, it's not.

A couple of years ago I was on a day-hike with the forest superintendent of the San Bernardino National Forest. He had his radio with him, and during our hike, he had to weigh a difficult decision: Some climbers had injured themselves on the way to San Gorgonio Mountain. They weren't in immediate danger, but it was later in the day, and rescue teams on foot or horse might not get there until dark. They only had a second-hand report on the conditions of the climbers from other hikers who had come down already. The forest superintendent had to decide whether this was enough of a life threatening emergency to justify violating the wilderness act and allow a helicopter into the wilderness. The issues of legal liability and the potential for bad press finally pushed him in the direction of approving the helicopter. I never found out later whether is was really necessary.

Every time someone is made safer in the wilderness, not by their own skill and preparedness, but rather by the use of extraordinary rescue operations using mechanized equipment, it makes that place less of a wilderness.

Beamis, I know there's a little bit of larceny and greed in all of us, but were not talking about the parks being part of the stock market or the New York stock exchange. Were talking about a feasible price system within the parks that fits the needs of every visitor. The parks should never be used for some type of football scapling to the highest bidder. Geez, this is all about money, and not enough about taking poverty inner city kids (example of have nots) to enjoy these beautiful crown jewels called the National Parks. However, your point of view is interesting.

i agree with beamis. who in their right mind would pay that much for a campsite in a national park? let someone voluntarily do it if they want. it's not so much a widespread problem at this point, it's a blip on a highly topical blog. and frankly, the park service wastes enough of its budget mucking things up, like that totally lame new visitor center at arches, to try and regulate small things like people auctioning off their campsites on ebay. if we're going to worry about this, then let's just forget about unimportant things like stopping the spread of invasive species, declining interp program budgets and rising entrance fees because they already get so much attention anyway. (use your sarcasm detector here)

Beamis...capitalism also breeds pathetic consumptious greed! The parks are not pawns to enhance the pockets of the greedy. We learn to share not exploit!

The problem is you can't tell the honest person (intended to use the reservation, something came up) from the dishonest person (grabbed a reservation knowing full well they weren't going to use it with the intent of reselling it). Since there's no way to sort these people out, you shut it all down. If the government did that -- for example if they auctioned off the last 5 campsites for each day and made more money in line with higher demand -- people would be screaming that it's unfair.

-- Jon Merryman

Happy thought for the day: Mount Rainier will one day resolve the whole issue, wiping out every bit of construction under millions of tons of debris on its slopes and taking out several towns downstream when the flow of water and rock and mud and trees races toward the ocean, squashing all the people and their belongings like little bugs. And then we'll wonder why we ever built anything anywhere near it.

-- Jon Merryman

Mr. Evenson,

Thanks for response. I'm sure you've had to entertain a fair number of these kinds of inquiries. Sorry I wasn't more specific.

Not sure if this qualifies as "ecologically sustainable fashion", or perhaps this was that "educational component" you spoke of:
http://media.sfweekly.com/923164.36.jpg

Here's a nice shot of the "guests" preventing damage to park resources. How thoughtful of them to care. I guess hanging on the bars is considered "compliance with the permit agreement"?
http://media.sfweekly.com/923159.36.jpg
http://theblight.net/gallery/alcatraz/PICT45557.jpg
http://theblight.net/gallery/alcatraz/PICT45904.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1355/568153623_62455e0815_b.jpg

Toilet for a stepstool?
http://theblight.net/gallery/alcatraz/PICT44362.jpg

Climbing on the furniture?
http://theblight.net/gallery/alcatraz/PICT46035.jpg

Please tell me this mattress and bed and the destroyed feather pillow was brought over by the "artists" and not property of the National Park Service:
http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/photo/c49/0e8/c490e88d-1a0c-401a-9fce-364c31ed9b15
http://theblight.net/gallery/alcatraz/PICT46128.jpg

Some quotes in the news that particularly bothered me:

<><><>
Word got out, and by 9 p.m., hundreds more invited friends of friends were ferried onto the island, (Prem) Kumta said. That was both a good and a bad thing. "It was a last-minute thing to ferry over hundreds of extra people," he said.
<><><>
"It's a culture. We all kind of know each other. Here are these ugly little cars that kind of grow on you." So did the party -- even if it was hard to see people's faces through the bad lighting and cigarette smoke, and track down the various events in the maze of rooms and deal with the crowded bar and lack of snacks. (And a snafu with the return ferry scheduling).
<><><>

And this gem from some idiot's blog (bigbaadwolf.blogspot.com):
<><><>
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 Scion Exprescion: Alcatraz Island, SF
Last Saturday I went to the Scion Exprescion party on Alcatraz. Got there early with Sleazemore and we hung out on the island running around, smoking, laughing, watching people set everything up. Once the party started things got crazy; fashion show in the shower room, rave and a few bands played in the dining hall, cabaret performance in the hospital, art show upstairs. Thanks to Scion for paying for everything. Thanks to the dude who hooked up some E so I could snort on the rock. Thanks to Irene from Real World Seattle for surviving Lime Disease and making it to the event, she is still looking fierce as ever - f*** that dude who slapped her (he didn't make it to the party).
<><><>

I'm not surprised that these people didn't follow the rules as you laid it out for them. Hundreds more people than agreed to as well. I know you have an official statement to stick to, but I find this whole thing a disgrace. I hope you'll reconsider issuing permits for such events in the future.

-- Jon Merryman

Gary---I'm glad you're also a free market capitalist. Happy July 4th!