Sierra National Monument Project | High Sierra Topix  

Sierra National Monument Project

Grab your bear can or camp chair, kick your feet up and chew the fat about anything Sierra Nevada related that doesn't quite fit in any of the other forums. Within reason, (and the HST rules and guidelines) this is also an anything goes forum. Tell stories, discuss wilderness issues, music, or whatever else the High Sierra stirs up in your mind.
User avatar

Sierra National Monument Project

Postby limpingcrab » Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:47 pm

A group wants to change Sierra National Forest into a National Monument. What are your thoughts? I'll start by saying I'm opposed. I don't see what, exactly, needs to change?

http://www.sierranationalmonument.org/



User avatar
limpingcrab
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:38 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby evilgenius32 » Mon Apr 13, 2015 10:32 pm

Interesting that there is nowhere on their site to contact them directly without endorsing them. There's a clear difference between the forest and parks, and I think that difference in regulation is crucial in offering separate unique services to all users. Changing the forest to a monument will essentially eliminate all the services offered by the forest service, since the only difference -correct me if I'm wrong- between a park and monument is who creates it. I don't think this movement will gain any steam judging by their lack of real info on the site.
User avatar
evilgenius32
Topix Acquainted
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:29 pm
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby RoguePhotonic » Tue Apr 14, 2015 6:06 am

I would be opposed also. A national forest is a huge multi use land. When something becomes a national monument or a park it becomes much less so. It basically gives the boot to everyone except hikers. It's the sort of move that creates allot of animosity in so many other groups towards hikers and general environmental groups.
User avatar
RoguePhotonic
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:52 am
Location: Bakersfield CA
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby Wandering Daisy » Tue Apr 14, 2015 7:06 am

I also am not in favor of this. My experience is that changing to National Monument only ends up raising fees to get in, keeping dogs off trails, restricting recreational use, no hunting, more rules, less local control and input and actually more development disguised as "visitor experience improvements". I like the current mix of national parks and forest lands that currently exist - it offers something for everyone. I hope this proposal goes nowhere.
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Junkie
 
Posts: 2606
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby ndpanda » Tue Apr 14, 2015 11:51 am

Wandering Daisy wrote: My experience is that changing to National Monument only ends up raising fees to get in, keeping dogs off trails, restricting recreational use, no hunting, more rules, less local control and input and actually more development disguised as "visitor experience improvements".


I am dead set against this proposal for exactly these reasons. It's worth remembering Edward Abbey's references in Desert Solitaire to working as a ranger at "Arches National Money-Mint."
User avatar
ndpanda
Topix Novice
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:07 pm
Location: Lundy Canyon
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby AlmostThere » Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:12 pm

Since the Republicans are trying to push through legislation designed to shift more control of national parks to local entities, this should be an interesting tectonic shift.....
User avatar
AlmostThere
Topix Fanatic
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 4:38 pm
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby maverick » Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:30 pm

Evilgenius32 wrote:

Interesting that there is nowhere on their site to contact them directly without endorsing them.


Here is a group opposing the sierra national monument:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/916364548384667/
HST= Wilderness Adventurer who knows no bounds, except for their own imagination.

Have a safer backcountry experience by using the HST ReConn Form 2.0, named after Larry Conn, a HST member: http://reconn.org
User avatar
maverick
Forums Moderator
Forums Moderator
 
Posts: 8028
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 5:54 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby dave54 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 8:39 pm

Not only unnecessary, but a bad idea. The existing matrix of public and private lands has a spectrum of allowable management activities. Private timber companies with intensive management to wilderness with almost no manipulation and everything in between. Vast extents of the Sierra Nevada forest needs vegetation management and timber harvesting. Every science based organization agrees timber harvest levels needs to increase. The Sierra Nevada National Forests are only harvesting about 5% of annual growth now, and in some areas there is more old growth now than ever existed historically (to the detriment of other seral stages important to a healthy forest). The Nature Conservancy actively manages its lands, including clearcutting where appropriate, and no one asserts they are evil greedy capitalists. National Wildlife Refuges are aggressively manipulated, to the point of terraforming. The Forest Service no longer harvests timber for the sole purpose of selling timber; since about 1990 all harvesting is designed to benefit multiple resource values. In this drought many have noted the well known practice of increasing water yield by decreasing timber density -- a practice known to the Chinese circa 2500 BC and the Middle East at least 1000 BC.

All this would end with a monument designation.

Some people are stuck with the outdated and erroneous mindset all forest management activities are evil.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Log off and get outdoors!
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
User avatar
dave54
Founding Member
 
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:24 pm
Location: where the Sierras, Cascades, and Great Basin meet.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby Alcy » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:17 pm

no hunting


Ok, does anyone here hunt? Is no hunting really a policy in all monuments? From what I read hunting is allowed in both Carrizo Plains and Giant Sequoia National Monuments and is regulated by the state dept of fish and game. Carrizo Plains does not allow lead bullets due to preying Condors, which seems reasonable. Why do people jump to conclusions?

Please see the video put out by the "STOP" the monument crowd: "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3R-lSiVO18". They advocate their pre-existing agenda (prior to the monument proposal) of tearing down 75% of the forest with the motivation of getting more water into Lake Millerton, the logic being that trees just simply drink too much of the water, so of course get rid of the trees. Interesting "discussions" on the Facebook page for the monument group can be found at https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sierra-N ... 94?fref=ts

and you'll see some of the faces there are associated with the movement to build Temperance Flat Dam. I give the monument crowd credit for running an open facebook page as opposed to the STOP crowd which is invite only.

Nonetheless, I have my own concerns, primarily, will open camping be allowed in the monument and will OHV usage be allowed? The forest is huge so I would expect that both of these activities should be allowed. For example, Carrizo does allow open camping in certain regions.

Most disturbing, is the recently passed senate bill SA-838 which would allow states to sell off wilderness areas to the state for development. I for one do not want to see the Ansel Adams Wilderness sold off to the protest group that made that video.
User avatar
Alcy
Topix Novice
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Location: Fresno
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby seanr » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:34 pm

Building off the above post and others, I'm pretty sure Sequoia NM is pretty dog and dispersed camping friendly after the change over from NF. As far as cutting trees in drought as a historic practice, that had long term negative consequences when overdone. It seems like a lot of hot air on both sides maybe not worth my time until there is some clarity, sense of direction, and real action. Can anyone list changes that actually occurred after Sequoia NM designation and changes that are proposed in the Sierra NM idea? It seems like lots of OHV use is still allowed near Sequoia NM in the southern Sierra.

Have I noticed changes needed when visiting Sierra NF? No, not really. I see a lot of complaints on HST about lack of regulation enforcement in Dinkey Lakes Wilderness. I didn't appreciate lots of loud target shooting at all hours when trying to camp near Hooper Diversion Dam (Florence area) the past two Labor Day weekends.
User avatar
seanr
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 9:46 am
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby evilgenius32 » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:52 pm

From what I can tell, the only viewpoints that have Facebook pages or websites are the radicals to both ends. But that's to be expected, only those who truly care about an agenda will push it. It kind of reminds me of the Hetch Hetchy Dam removal, a lot of passion and reason, but will it ever get done? This is such a large undertaking, it makes me wonder if anything like it has succeeded in the past (by the past I mean the last 75ish years, after the boundaries were set in place). If not, why would an agenda succeed now? We can argue about whether conservation or preservation is more important, but what are the odds that a major upheaval of the forest system will even happen, probably not very high.
User avatar
evilgenius32
Topix Acquainted
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:29 pm
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Re: Sierra National Monument Project

Postby limpingcrab » Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:53 pm

Sounds like everyone has covered all the main points I was going to make so I won't add anything redundant.

I joined the Stop the Monument facebook page. It's a wide spectrum of people ranging from those wanting to shoot people and staple the second amendment to their corpses all the way to liberal folks who see the necessity of selective thinning. Neither side of the debate seems very organized.

As far as Giant Sequoia National Monument, the only change I noticed after it was converted from a National Forest was the restriction of snowmobiles to designated trails. I have a cabin near Grant's Grove so I'm up there a lot and can't think of anything else off the top of my head... However, Monuments vary widely in rules and regulations because there's not necessarily a strict set of guidelines so it's hard to tell how SNF would changed were it to become a monument...
User avatar
limpingcrab
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 8:38 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Next

Return to The Campfire



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest