longri wrote:
It's exclusionary now because the cables already exist.
Ultimately it's about drawing lines. One could draw them more or less restrictively, including or excluding different groups with different skills, aptitudes and lifestyles. What is the purpose of the National Park?
I'm sure there are plenty of hikers who could learn to climb Snake Dike or a route next to where the cables used to be but not all of them have the inclination or the time. They could hire Yosemite guides but the numbers that could be accommodated each day would be restrictive. And the cost would be prohibitive for some.
Just because something "already exists", doesn't make removing it "exclusionary". Precedence have already been set regarding the removal or discontinued use of many such facilities throughout the Sierra. Closing the Tunnel air strip in the Golden Trout Wilderness, closing of roads over Morgan Pass, Mt Gibbs and elsewhere. Really the list goes on.
The fact that people can't fly their planes or drive their cars into these places does not inherently "exclude" them (as long as they are able to walk or ride a horse). The same of course can be said of removing the cables on Half Dome.
To answer your question about "What is the purpose of the National Park?" The Organic Act was drilled into me every spring for over a decade during seasonal training, I still remember it: What is the purpose of the National Park?
"to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife
therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such
means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
But that's just the NPS mandate, on top of that is The Wilderness Act that overlays much of Yosemite including Half Dome, it is much more restrictive.
As far as excluding "different groups with different skills, aptitudes and lifestyles", those are for the most part personal choices, as are "have[ing] the inclination or the time" to gain the skills to climb mountains. For example, I have chosen not to learn to scuba dive, so I won't be exploring the underwater world of Virgin Island National Park. Nor would I expect an "atmospheric tube" allowing me to walk down there.
Of course there are some exceptions, specifically those that are physically impaired, and there are special programs to assist those truly in need. But even then, there has been paraplegic: assents of ElCap, trans Sierra skis and a winter descent of the Bloody Couloir to name a few. So no, sorry, removing the cables doesn't "exclude" anyone. If you can get up there via the cables, you can get up there without if you have the incentive.
Would removing the cables decrease the numbers? Yep. Are the numbers already being decreased through "artificial" means by the NPS? Yep. Do the numbers need to be reduced to comply with the Organic and Wilderness Acts? Yep. Do the cables need to be removed to comply with the Wilderness Act? Arguable.
National Parks and Wilderness Areas, cannot be, nor should they be, everything for everybody. But they should and do, offer something for everyone.