longri wrote:John Dittli wrote:
The question is, is excluding hikers from Half Dome justified?
Actual, no; the question was "is removing the cables from Half Dome justified". It has now been established (several times) that removing the cables excludes no one, it merely changes the form of access. As someone once said; "if you can get up Half Dome on the cables, you are physically capable of climbing it without" or something like that. Or, when you close two lanes of the freeway, it doesn't exclude anyone. As far as I know "Cable walkers" are not a represented or recognized user group.And yes, there is justification both in the Wilderness Act and the Organic Act to remove the cables. But it is, and would be, arguable.
But to also address the question you keep referring to; "is excluding hikers from Half Dome justified?". No, that is why no one has ever suggest "excluding hikers" or anyone else from Half Dome or any other peaks for that matter. Though there are circumstances where this could be suggested.
Is there justification to
reduce the numbers of hikers, the answer is yes. There is also justification in both the Wilderness Act and the Organic Act (also arguable). These are the tools used to currently reduced numbers on Half Dome and and in many other areas throughout the Wilderness System.