Good News For Wilderness Lovers

H

hollowdweller

Joined
Sep 22, 2003
Messages
13,182
This puts 37,000 more acres in the Mon National Forest in my home state to where it can never be logged or strip mined:thumbup:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate has voted to move forward with a bill setting aside more than 2 million acres in nine states as wilderness.

The 66-12 vote during a rare Sunday session marks an early partisan showdown that has threatened to derail pledges by Senate leaders to work cooperatively as a new administration takes office.

The bill is the largest expansion of wilderness protection in 25 years. It has bipartisan support and would include California's Sierra Nevada mountain range, Oregon's Mount Hood, Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado and parts of the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia.

The Senate vote limits Republican stalling tactics and enables the bill to move forward. Senate approval is expected later this week.
Click to expand...


http://kob.com/article/stories/S738925.shtml?cat=504

I'm really happy about this one. Some of the land has coal reserves and I was really worried about some of my favorite places being strip mined:mad::thumbup:
 
That is outstanding. Im glad to hear that. The land needs to be here for our grandchildren to explore, as untouched as possible. :thumbup:
 
Good news for some, bad news for all taxpayers. According to the story on Yahoo this bill contains $4 billion in pork.

I'm all for wilderness areas and I don't want to turn this to a political discussion, but sometimes when you dig deeper a bill/law doesn't look quite as good as it did on the surface.
 
BlackHills said:
Good news for some, bad news for all taxpayers. According to the story on Yahoo this bill contains $4 billion in pork.

I'm all for wilderness areas and I don't want to turn this to a political discussion, but sometimes when you dig deeper a bill/law doesn't look quite as good as it did on the surface.
Click to expand...

Still looks good to me but would be better w/o the add ons:thumbdn:

Maybe some of it will get stripped out.
 
Good news.
Looks like Michigans Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore is going to be designated as a Wilderness too.

Good news for some, bad news for all taxpayers. According to the story on Yahoo this bill contains $4 billion in pork.
Click to expand...

I'm going to get taxed to death anyway. I could think of worse places to spend it. ;)
 
Rupestris said:
Good news.
Looks like Michigans Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore is going to be designated as a Wilderness too.



I'm going to get taxed to death anyway. I could think of worse places to spend it. ;)
Click to expand...

Exactly, I love the UP more than anywhere else on earth.
 
In the Adirondacks, the land that has been labeled "forever wild" and cannot be logged, is pretty much dead territory. Controlled logging is not bad for the environment if done properly. New growth is good for wildlife.
 
troutfisher13111 said:
In the Adirondacks, the land that has been labeled "forever wild" and cannot be logged, is pretty much dead territory. Controlled logging is not bad for the environment if done properly. New growth is good for wildlife.
Click to expand...

True. Deer and turkey love timbered areas, but even in the area that is now wilderness where I go there's lots of game, deer and almost every time I go backpacking I run into bear hunters running their dogs.

What we don't have a lot of because most of what is now Nat'l Forest was logged in the early 20th century is really big trees. There's some really nice Old Growth up on Mylius Trail on Shavers Mt in the Otter Creek Wilderness and also some really nice in the area approaching Gaudineer Knob also in the Shavers Mt area.

Not sure about other areas but for us this will give us more deep woods and protect the trout streams more.:thumbup:
 
Rupestris said:
I'm going to get taxed to death anyway. I could think of worse places to spend it. ;)
Click to expand...

cmdionne said:
Exactly, I love the UP more than anywhere else on earth.
Click to expand...

"Pork" means stuff attached to the bill that has nothing to do with the main purpose of the bill. This bill, for example, has $3.5 million to help celebrate the 450th birthday of St. Augustine, Fla., in 2015. Politicians wrangling and bargaining with each other to get 'favors' like this has been the norm for quite some time.

That being said, "wilderness protection" and "space exploration" both have root passwords to my wallet.
 
hollowdweller said:
True. Deer and turkey love timbered areas, but even in the area that is now wilderness where I go there's lots of game, deer and almost every time I go backpacking I run into bear hunters running their dogs.

What we don't have a lot of because most of what is now Nat'l Forest was logged in the early 20th century is really big trees. There's some really nice Old Growth up on Mylius Trail on Shavers Mt in the Otter Creek Wilderness and also some really nice in the area approaching Gaudineer Knob also in the Shavers Mt area.

Not sure about other areas but for us this will give us more deep woods and protect the trout streams more.:thumbup:
Click to expand...

We have mostly big trees, and very little new growth. There is less than one deer per square mile is some parts of the ADK's.

Protecting the trout streams is good though:thumbup:
 
If the bill was passed 66 to 12, why would ONE think the Republicans are tying to defeat it. More Republican bashing. :barf:
 
Last edited:
Kat013 said:
"Pork" means stuff attached to the bill that has nothing to do with the main purpose of the bill. This bill, for example, has $3.5 million to help celebrate the 450th birthday of St. Augustine, Fla., in 2015. Politicians wrangling and bargaining with each other to get 'favors' like this has been the norm for quite some time.

That being said, "wilderness protection" and "space exploration" both have root passwords to my wallet.
Click to expand...

Understood. Pork will always be part of our legislative process, but I don't mind as long as I get something for it, ie. protection of land in the UP
 
HornyToad said:
If the bill was passed 66 to 12, why would you think the Republicans are tying to defeat it. More Republican bashing. :barf:
Click to expand...

I think the article is misleading, apparently only a few republicans were against it:

From what I can discern republican Tom Coburn, a republican threatened to filibuster it, he managed to prevent it from passing the last time it was up for a vote.

This time it got 66 votes which was enough to cut off debate and prevent a filibuster.

It is my understanding that Pres Bush (a republican also) said he would sign the bill.

Seems the original article I posted wanted to play up the partisan acrimony.
 
Shuts off even more land except for those young enough and fit enough to get into it. It's discriminatory to the disabled and not needed. Not everyone who wants to use the land wants to do it with a knife and flint.

As far as the ladening with pork, I guess a lot of you don't pay taxes. Is it ever enough?
 
CSG said:
Shuts off even more land except for those young enough and fit enough to get into it. It's discriminatory to the disabled and not needed. Not everyone who wants to use the land wants to do it with a knife and flint.
Click to expand...

I do:thumbup:;)
 
hollowdweller said:
I think the article is misleading, apparently only a few republicans were against it:

From what I can discern republican Tom Coburn, a republican threatened to filibuster it, he managed to prevent it from passing the last time it was up for a vote.

This time it got 66 votes which was enough to cut off debate and prevent a filibuster.

It is my understanding that Pres Bush (a republican also) said he would sign the bill.

Seems the original article I posted wanted to play up the partisan acrimony.
Click to expand...

Colburn has lately been filibustering a whole lot of legislation. He is fundamentally against the way that we are practicing government spending, and is trying to make a point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top