• NAXJA is having its 18th annual March Membership Drive!!!
    Everyone who joins or renews during March will be entered into a drawing!
    More Information - Join/Renew
  • Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

(CA) Rep. Thompson revives wilderness land bill / when is a "road" a "road"??

Ed A. Stevens

NAXJA Member
NAXJA Member
(CA) Rep. Thompson revives wilderness land bill / when is a "road" a "road"??

The election year posturing for wilderness has begun. Please note
the statement: "no current legal roads -- for example some of those
that cross the King Range -- will be closed if the wilderness act is
approved." A quick review of the maps of the proposed area indicates
that there are numerous roads. The key phrase is "legal roads".
Even though there are "roads" in the area, the Forest Service does
not classify them as 'system roads". Hence, the roads exists on the
ground; however, by definition, they do not exist as they are not
"legal roads".

So, when is a "road" a "road"??

April 1, 2003

By CLARK MASON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

More than 300,000 acres of Northern California federal land would
be designated as wilderness under legislation re-introduced last week
by Rep. Mike Thompson.

The Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Act covers more than a
dozen of the most remote and scenic parts of Thompson's sprawling
district, including the Lost Coast area of Humboldt County.

Parts of the King Range in Humboldt County, Mendocino National
Forest, Cache Creek in Yolo County, Snow Mountain in Lake County and
the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel River in Mendocino County would be
designated as wilderness under the proposal.

The bill is consistent with a companion measure introduced last week
by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-San Francisco, who noted the Lost Coast
boasts the longest stretch of undeveloped coastline in the lower
48 states.

The twin bills also would protect more than 20 miles of the Black
Butte River in Mendocino County as a wild and scenic river.

Thompson, D-St. Helena, and Boxer introduced similar legislation last
year, but it expired before being voted on.

Thompson aide Ed Matovcik acknowledged that it won't be simple to get
the legislation approved this year in the Republican-dominated
Congress.

"With the focus on the budget and international affairs, it will be a
challenge to get the attention it deserves," said Matovcik."But we'll
be trying."

Thompson said with increasing population growth and development
pressures it is critical to protect these "phenomenal natural areas."

Environmentalists said several endangered species, including the bald
eagle, Sierra Nevada red fox and Chinook salmon will benefit from the
wilderness act.

Wilderness designation prohibits any development or commercial
activities. Oil drilling, road building and logging are prohibited
in wilderness areas. Hiking, horseback riding, hunting, fishing,
cross-country skiing and canoeing are allowed, but off-road vehicles
and mountain bikes
are not.

There is expected to be some opposition to the proposal from mountain
bikers and off-road vehicle enthusiasts. But Thompson legislative
aide Jonathan Birdsong said no current legal roads -- for example
some of those that cross the King Range -- will be closed if the
wilderness act is approved.

Thompson and Boxer plan to introduce bills soon that would add the
wilderness designation to even more federal lands inNorthern
California that are outside his 1st Congressional District.

Overall, Boxer wants to protect 2.5 million acres of public land in
California, including those in Thompson's district.
 
That has been one of my pet gripes about this "roadless initiative" since the day it began -- the fact that they can take a tract of land that has had roads and Jeep/wagon trails on it literally for 100 years or more, and with a stroke of a pen declare it "roadless." But declaring it roadless doesn't erase the road from the ground, doesn't undo any of the environmental impact that the road has had for the entire period it existed, and doesn't address the fact that once you stop maintaining an existing road, it may (probably will) begin to erode, and will do more environmental damage than leaving it a "road" and allowing an occasional Jeep to drive on it.
 
Back
Top