Gimmmie a break GOVT. gone amuck [again]

[Bald Cypress]

If you have never been there, Yosemite is unbelievably beautiful. For them to even think of removing the bridges that have stood for 80 + years is simply outrageous. After counting, I find about 27 other road bridges and five dams along the Merced. Removal of the three bridges under consideration will do NOTHING to return the river to it's natural state.

PLEASE write the Interior Dept. Your congress critter and senator. This cannot be allowed to happen.



The first link I posted did not work. Just type in Yosemite Bridges and you should get the info.

here is another. http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-new ... nder-siege


All of the stories are about the same.

[michaelwpayton]

That link doesn't seem to work... at least not for me.

[danlott]

http://www.statesman.com/life/travel/historic-bridges-of-yosemite-valley-under-siege-2412717.html?cxtype=rss_ece_frontpage

[TJinPgh]

Raise enough of a ruckus and they will likely ask you to stop.

Choose not to and i'm sure that will be happy to allow you to continue.

So long as you pay the new expression tax.

[Shadow Catcher]

What is the purpose of removing the bridges, really? Having just visited Yosemite and being appalled at the shear number of people and the stupid stuff they do I personally would like to see all vehicles banned from the valley and the plan to use rail revived. I would also like to see the Hetch Hetchy dam removed and that valley restored. Quite frankly we are loving our National Parks to death and I am more concerned for their preservation.

[GPW]

Don’t like Big Government? Use your Vote to get rid of them ... Term limits is the answer to limiting the power ... Public Servants , some have remained in office long enough to become “corrupted ” ...

[jstrubberg]

Unfortunately term limits just make the bureacracy supporting the politicians more powerful.

The answer is to vote and vote loudly. Tell the bums why you are putting them ont he street instead of back into office.

[Augie]

double post

[Augie]

If you have never been there, Yosemite is unbelievably beautiful. For them to even think of removing the bridges that have stood for 80 + years is simply outrageous. After counting, I find about 27 other road bridges and five dams along the Merced. Removal of the three bridges under consideration will do NOTHING to return the river to it's natural state.

PLEASE write the Interior Dept. Your congress critter and senator. This cannot be allowed to happen.



The first link I posted did not work. Just type in Yosemite Bridges and you should get the info.

here is another. http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-new ... nder-siege


All of the stories are about the same.

So you didnt do a very good job at convincing me your opinion is any more valid than removing bridges. Why dont you want them removed? is it just because they are 80 years old? Is it because they give you better access to a certan part of the park? Im inclined to agree with Shadow

What is the purpose of removing the bridges, really? Having just visited Yosemite and being appalled at the shear number of people and the stupid stuff they do I personally would like to see all vehicles banned from the valley and the plan to use rail revived. I would also like to see the Hetch Hetchy dam removed and that valley restored. Quite frankly we are loving our National Parks to death and I am more concerned for their preservation.

I love the Recreation areas of the US, either State or Federal, exactly because they are not developed. I dont like State or Federal Parks because they are built to allow easier access. I go to the wild to be in the wild not to be at a senic tournout with 100 other people looking at nature. No bridges to get people further into the park, less people. If the goal is restoring the river and the side effect is reducing the number of people in the interior of the park I for that 100%. I am no fan of big Govt but I see this not as govt doing something but more an activist group pushing to remove bridges and being successful.

[stumphugger]

Raise enough of a ruckus and they will likely ask you to stop.

Choose not to and i'm sure that will be happy to allow you to continue.

So long as you pay the new expression tax.

Nonsense. The USDA Forest Service was going to close many roads in Eastern Oregon around LaGrande. Those folks got organized and got it stopped. Note the word "organized." They didn't just complain on a website.

I thought politics was not allowed on this forum.

Right now the Yosemite thing seems to be at a draw--Historic Preservation VS Eviros.

I don't like National Parks. Too many rules. Too many tame wild animals out trying to get food from you. Traffic jams just to look at a common deer in the road.

I go hiking around on obscure National Forest trails. My dog and I are often the only ones on the trails. A few years ago, I backpacked down the Grand Canyon. No dogs allowed. You had to make reservations. You had to camp in the correct spot. If you stopped to take a nap and use your backpack for a pillow, a rodent would approach and try to chew its way into your pack. The farther down you got, the fewer the people. But it was still zoo like.

If you want to save the bridges, get organized. Write letters to park people, to Congress, to the Senate. Form a group. The enviros started doing this 30 years ago and are quite powerful now. You are behind so better get cracking.

[halfdome, Danny]

Having just visited Yosemite and being appalled at the shear number of people and the stupid stuff they do I personally would like to see all vehicles banned from the valley and the plan to use rail revived. Quite frankly we are loving our National Parks to death and I am more concerned for their preservation.

This kind of attitude upset me and others. Where in your plan does this fit?

"as a public park or pleasuring ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people"

Is the park just for the enjoyment of the preservationists or the public?
FYI: The plan from the 1960's was to shuttle campers to the valley by bus not rail.
So far that has not happened and I hope it never does or they will get a huge public backlash.
Not to worry as I was threatened (Ranger Rick) with a ticket because one wheel was on the dirt and not on the pavement of our campsite.
Since the 1960"s the park service has provided natural gas shuttle buses to persuade visitors to park their cars and ride the buses that come about every 10 minutes.
That plan is working quite well. We ride out bikes all over the park and do a considerable amount of hiking.

As far as the bridges go, we gave away or rights when the Merced was deemed a wild river of the world.
I guess we will have to swim across it hopefully not drowning n the process .
Danny

[NathanL]

If the interior department works like the department of agriculture you're wasting time. Here's a little story of my time with the US Forest Service under the Ag department. I have done some consulting with the US Fish and Wildlife Service which falls under the Interior department and I can say it's pretty much the same.

I'm not sure what's going on in this case but you can't really expect much out of the US Forest Service (under the USDA). I actually worked for the US Forest Service at one time. The reason they hired me on a season/temp basis was my "boss" was barred by federal court order from stepping foot on the lands of the US Forest Service for taking part in a $400k timber theft deal (he marked the illegal timber) so I was hired to go out on the forest and do his job while he oversaw the operation from his desk. Notice he was barred by the court system, not the US Forest Service.

They also got entangled in a court battle about harvesting timber and couldn't prove it wasn't old growth, which was really funny considering all the US Forest lands in TX were purchased during the depression from failed cotton farmers. I had pictures out of the archives of vast nothingness when they bought it and being planted by the CCC but they refused to acknowledge that and dropped the case. 15 years later the stands fell apart from lack of thinning and harvesting (loblolly won't live that long compared to other species) and a pine bettle outbreak pretty much killed the timber industry in 3 TX counties that took another 15 years to recover.

Of course my district ranger was a stand up guy, he never wore shoes because he claimed to be a male warlock and had to stay grounded to the earth at all times, a man in charge of 100 employes and a multi million dollar budget who went to congress to testify at budget hearings wearing no shoes.

Crack operation there were running there.

[markhusbands]

I'll offer my opinion, based on having lived in the Yosemite area and having spent a lot of time in Yosemite Valley.

The bridges they want to remove cause horrific floods and major erosion due to constriction of the river at those particular points. You'll notice that there is massive armament along some long river sections near these bridges due to the flow velocity under these bridges. Not every old bridge in Yosemite Valley does this.

When the banks are overtopped it costs a lot of money and can even threaten lives. I am fairly sure the bridges in question have been closed to vehicle traffic for years, and there are certainly alternative routes for foot travel. Yosemite NP spends a fortune on historic roads, bridges, and buildings, so don't pretend that these things have lasted for years and years with no maintenance.

Sometimes, the best, safest, and most cost effective choice is to remove an old structure, even if it is beautiful.

[Scooter]

Yes national park roadways and scenic overlooks can be crowded with tourists. But all the parks I've been to have ample wilderness areas for those of us needing to get away from tourists. You just have to be willing to work for it. Get out of your car and take a hike or something. Or go in the off-season. It's a great time to camp whenever kids go back to school.