People in the Queets, Clearwater, Hoh area are gun-shy of government land deals because of Uncle Sam's use of eminent domain in the 40's, i.e. the Queets valley homesteads. That being said I don't think that is what is happening here.

One problem I see is school trust lands not earning revenue for schools in the future if sold and turned into wilderness areas.

So I guess one question to think about is:

Do you mind paying x amount in levys for schools, and higher college tuition in exchange for protected headwaters? Maybe

I don't see the point of taking shots at loggers, we ALL have an impact!

I do believe people from the city should be able to enjoy these places because they belong to all of us. And I meet guys from the city with upturned noses because I'm fishing their river, and I shake my head and laugh to myself.

I do wish fishing was less about competition and more about enjoying these great places and the peace and quiet they offer.

Just my 2 cents.
Scott

Sorry, but those woods belong to everyone, even if people do live in Seattle or Manhattan.

My state has been dealing with issues like this for a long time. The wolf issue is especially prevalent. You might be familiar with it.

I've come to grips with the fact that some douche in NYC may never see some of the public lands I've been in or appreciate them the way I do, but he has just as much of a right to express an opinion on them as I do. It's a painful reality.

someone missed the sarcasm bus...

We've got 7 BILLION humans on this planet. 7 [censored] BILLION.

That will 9 BILLION in 2050.

I'm pretty much down with grabbing and protecting anything we can get. Whatever it costs now, it will cost A LOT more down the road.

+1

This really is the BIG picture.

40-50 yrs from now, no one is going to regret having set aside some wild places.

This debate reminds me a lot of the debate over Grand Teton NP.

A handful of Wyoming ranchers, miners and the Wyoming state gov. pretty much lost their minds when, with the stroke of a pen, T Roosevelt established the Teton Forest Reserve.

Then a few years later they wake up to the fact that John D. Rockefeller had purchased most of the land in the Jackson Hole valley and wanted to give it to the Feds under the condition that it be established as a NP.

Wyoming freaked, even threatining to succeed. They rose such a stink that to this day Wyoming is the only state in the Union where a President cannot create a National Monument or Forest without Congress's approval. At the time it was the greatest land grab and threat to freedom ever concieved.

From Wikipedia: The mineral extraction industry and travel and tourism sector are the main drivers behind Wyoming’s economy. The Federal government owns about 50% of its landmass, while 6% is controlled by the state. Total taxable values of mining production in Wyoming for 2001 was over $6.7 billion. The tourism industry accounts for over $2 billion in revenue for the state.

So I gotta agree with those who think that Yocals deciding how to use Federal and State owned lands is pretty much a death sentance to said lands! I wonder if the residents of Wyoming would rather have the Feds control 50% of their landmass or the miners to control 50% of their land mass??

Pretty good vision for a couple of yahoo's from Manhattan! One of whom was a rancher himself!

+1000

40-50 years fron now we probably won't even be allowed to fish for steelhead.

Exactly what i don't want. That's why this bill makes good sense now.

...as long as we can recreate on them, it's a good thing.

shut it all off to everyone but the wilderness hikers, and they might as well not exist.

Ive read about half.... I bumped into a blog on this subject and it also has some information regarding proponents and opponents and scheduled meetings. Sorry, if its a repeat.

U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray have announced their support for a plan that would add 130,000 acres of land to wilderness areas in Olympic National Forest, designate 23 rivers as “wild and scenic” and open the door to adding 20,000 acres to Olympic National Park.


This map shows areas proposed for public wilderness, park and river designations. / Click on image for full map (PDF 10.6 mb).
As I describe in a story in today’s Kitsap Sun, the proposal is based on a plan put forth by a coalition of 10 conservation groups called Wild Olympics.

Connie Gallant, chairwoman of Wild Olympics, told me that the group has been working with stakeholder and community groups to consolidate support on the Olympic Peninsula. Quoting Gallant’s statement on the website:

“Over the past two years, Wild Olympics has been reaching out to Peninsula communities to build support from diverse local voices, listen to concerns and get feedback on our draft proposal. More than 4,500 Peninsula residents have signed our petition, and nearly 200 Peninsula businesses, farms, faith leaders, hunting and fishing groups, elected officials, conservation and civic groups support Wild Olympics.”

It is not obvious that wilderness is a true water issue — the focus of this blog — but Bill Taylor, vice president of Taylor Shellfish Farms, is fairly convincing:

“The two largest shellfish hatcheries that supply seed to the West Coast industry are located on Hood Canal. Well over 150 jobs are provided in Hood Canal alone by the industry, not including the indirect jobs such as processing, sales and shipping. By protecting Olympic Peninsula forest and river watersheds, we ensure clean and safe water so that shellfish companies can continue to grow and further benefit the economy and ecology of Washington state.”

The above is one testimonial on the Wild Olympics website, which also includes statements by Bremerton’s Mike Hank of Veterans Conservation Corps, Mayor Michelle Sandoval of Port Townsend, Sequim author Tim McNulty of Olympic Park Associates, Hoodsport’s Ron Gold of RG Forestry Consultants, Aberdeen’s Roy Nott of Paneltech and Gardiner’s Dave Bailey of Greywolf Fly Fishing Club and Trout Unlimited.

Wild Olympics was started by Olympic Park Associates, Olympic Forest Coalition, Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society and North Olympic Group – Sierra Club. Added later were Washington Wilderness Coalition, The Mountaineers, Pew Environment Group, Sierra Club, American Rivers and American Whitewater.

To counteract the work of the Wild Olympics Campaign, Dan Boeholt of Aberdeen founded Working Wild Olympics, because he does not believe wilderness designations will be helpful.

“We’re arguing that if you put these lands into wilderness, it will restrict public access,” Boeholt told me. “There are miles and miles of roads that would be affected.”

Dicks and Murray say they will propose specific legislation after listening to the public. These meetings have been scheduled:

Port Townsend: Dec. 1, 5 to 7 p.m., Chapel Building, Fort Worden State Park Conference Center.

Shelton: Dec. 2, 5 to 7 p.m., Shelton Civic Center, 525 W. Cota Street.

Port Angeles: Dec. 3, 3 to 5 p.m., Museum at the Carnegie, 207 S. Lincoln St.

Hoquiam: Dec. 4, 3 to 5 p.m., Central Elementary School Library, 310 Simpson Ave.



Read more: http://pugetsoundblogs.com/waterways/#ixzz1enWG9ENe
http://pugetsoundblogs.com/waterways/

This proposal... either the original WO package or the Dicks-Murray compromise will affect specific individuals in negative ways, no doubt.

From a "greater good" standpoint, however, either proposal advances the greater good.

There will always be whiners. Not a lot of good in this world anymore, know what I mean.

Some whine about whiners and not enough good in the world.

BUMP

What's the current situation with this campaign?

What's with Kingfever bumping old threads without adding anything?

What's a bump?

Dude, either set the hook or get off the boat!