should the wilderness act be gutted

**BFD** · 12-12-2017, 08:19 PM

we have the congress and president in place to do it, should we?

**Mazderati** · 12-12-2017, 08:23 PM

Define gutted.

**riser4** · 12-12-2017, 08:23 PM

or c) expand the wilderness act.

**MagnificentUnicorn** · 12-12-2017, 08:25 PM

Was this meant for poliass?

**Alaskan Rover** · 12-12-2017, 08:29 PM

What an asinine question. There isn't ENOUGH designated wilderness land in Alaska as it is. And the jackass in the whitehouse and the equally stupid republitards in congress are ALREADY trying to rape as much of the land as possible.

Sen. Murkowsky takes after her dad Frank as a serial environmental rapist. I hope she falls on ice and hits her pin head.

Never took you for a conservatard, BFD. Why the change?

And where is the poll? It doesn't show up on the TGR Mobile version.

**BFD** · 12-12-2017, 08:36 PM

by gutted I mean open to all users including motorized.
I am a huge believer in wilderness there is no change. The mountain biker thread got me thinking that maybe most people are opposed to it as it limits their access. I could put it in polly ass but I was hoping to get a wider sample group.

**TAFKALVS** · 12-12-2017, 08:41 PM

No, but I think we should make it easier to access and use the non-wilderness. It shouldn't take a ski area 20+ years of litigation to build a new chairlift. It shouldn't require a NEPA study to fix a washed out road.

And I'm against bikes in wilderness. I'd actually like to see a reduction in wilderness trail maintenance for that matter. Just let it be.

**Mazderati** · 12-12-2017, 08:44 PM

Doesn't Wilderness already allow hiking and horseback riding? That's not zero impact. And bicycles are not motorcycles or ATVs.

**ACH** · 12-12-2017, 08:45 PM

Generally speaking, I favor status quo. That said, the recent addition of Boulder/White Clouds was disappointing for me, IMO it represented Fed overreach and pissed a lot of people off that have otherwise supported the concept.

**hatchgreenchile** · 12-12-2017, 08:50 PM

No - leave it be.
It's not about "zero impact". It's about leaving a small percentage of public lands only accessible by putting one foot in front of the other.

**Alaskan Rover** · 12-12-2017, 08:57 PM

I would like to see Turnagain Pass as a designated Wilderness Area.

The number of snowmachiners scurrying all around when I'm trying to snowshoe is dizzying.

**riser4** · 12-12-2017, 08:57 PM

Expand it to cover the whole planet. Humans are fucked and the sooner they are banned the sooner something better can evolve.

**stuckathuntermtn** · 12-12-2017, 08:58 PM

It's not a very small percentage. Not around me, anyway.

**riser4** · 12-12-2017, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by hatchgreenchile

No - leave it be.
It's not about "zero impact". It's about leaving a small percentage of public lands only accessible by putting one foot in front of the other.

I am all for 'no footprint' areas.

**MagnificentUnicorn** · 12-12-2017, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by hatchgreenchile

No - leave it be.
It's not about "zero impact". It's about leaving a small percentage of public lands only accessible by putting one foot in front of the other.

What about sitting on a horse? I'm sure most of the horse people don't make sure to use only 'certified' weed free hay/grain. In areas where there are 'horse camps' in Wilderness there is significant damage. They also trash trails if the tread is wet and soft.

**TAFKALVS** · 12-12-2017, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by AaronWright

What about sitting on a horse? I'm sure most of the horse people don't make sure to use only 'certified' weed free hay/grain. In areas where there are 'horse camps' in Wilderness there is significant damage. They also trash trails if the tread is wet and soft.

I think horses should be banned too. Another side effect of horses is the trail goes from needing to be a small 1' wide tread to an 8' wide by 12' high corridor with a 4' wide trail beaten down to moon dust and loose rock. I'd rather share wilderness with bikes than horses if I think about it that way.

On the flip side I'd be okay with snowmobiles accessing wilderness in the winter, since they aren't impacting the ground and vegetation anyways.

**ACH** · 12-12-2017, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier

I think horses should be banned too. Another side effect of horses is the trail goes from needing to be a small 1' wide tread to an 8' wide by 12' high corridor with a 4' wide trail beaten down to moon dust and loose rock. I'd rather share wilderness with bikes than horses if I think about it that way.

On the flip side I'd be okay with snowmobiles accessing wilderness in the winter, since they aren't impacting the ground and vegetation anyways.

Agree on the horses, the sleds, not so much (this from a life long sleadneck currently in between sleds).

**MagnificentUnicorn** · 12-12-2017, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier

On the flip side I'd be okay with snowmobiles accessing wilderness in the winter, since they aren't impacting the ground and vegetation anyways.

That's debatable around here. I see plenty of damage to vegetation and soil from snowmachines here because of our shallow snowpack.

**hatchgreenchile** · 12-12-2017, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by AaronWright

What about sitting on a horse? I'm sure most of the horse people don't make sure to use only 'certified' weed free hay/grain. In areas where there are 'horse camps' in Wilderness there is significant damage. They also trash trails if the tread is wet and soft.

I think the horse "problem", if you want to call it that, is taking care of itself. Fewer and fewer people will own them in the future.
I don't think there's anything to gain by pointing fingers at horse riders.
Are they following the rules? No clue. Assumptions are always fun, just like assuming that all hikers are perfect little stewards of LNT.
Here in ColoRadBro, I have seen 4 horses/alpacas in the wilderness, so that's where this is coming from...

**riser4** · 12-12-2017, 09:08 PM

There should be wilderness areas where humans can enter only if they are completely naked and bring absolutely nothing with them. Primitive camping only. And no film crews either. This is serious, not some fucktard disreality show.

**TAFKALVS** · 12-12-2017, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by AaronWright

That's debatable around here. I see plenty of damage to vegetation and soil from snowmachines here because of our shallow snowpack.

That's true. Still less abuse than your average boy scout troop or horse camp though

**Mazderati** · 12-12-2017, 09:08 PM

Plus noise, smoke, chemicals, and impact on wildlife.

**Norseman** · 12-12-2017, 09:10 PM

Nevermind

**ACH** · 12-12-2017, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Mazderati

Plus noise, smoke, chemicals, and impact on wildlife.

this

Originally Posted by Norseman

But wilderness isn't all about impact to vegetation. It's also about having a sacred refuge, places deliberately hard to access, free from the noise and annoyance of redneck fucks riding two-strokes hither and thither.

And this

**Tye 1on** · 12-12-2017, 09:35 PM

I voted, but that's not my final answer, not that it means a fkn thing...

I'm an asshole about keeping what wilderness we have as it is. And basically for only three reasons: for the opportunity for solitude; the heritage aspects of taking a grandkid in to essentially the same experience that the granddad had; and as a place that all people know is going to stay protected and ready for their solitary, heritage experience, whether they ever get there or not.

And what we have is awesome. In 1964 the Wilderness Act designated for the highest protection we give public lands over nine million acres. Subsequent designations have added ten times that amount of land, to around 110 million acres today.

That's awesome, and enough. In my dream world the pols would have a beer and whiskey after work in DC and agree that nobody would push for any more acres designated, or for any areas to be stripped of the designation. Call it good.

Ya, i'm sure that will never happen but why not think about solutions instead of polarized positions.