A few bad motors
Dear Editors,
The destructive vandalism of the road closure at Middle Mountain is really a shame, because it will most likely result in moving the closure farther from the Weminuche Wilderness boundary. This will indeed inconvenience a few folks who might not want to or be able to walk the mile or so to the overlook. This is only to be expected, however, when the notorious “few bad apples” refuse to play by the rules. It is up to the motorized community to educate and perhaps even to “rat on” those whose actions cause hardship for all. The Creepers Jeepers, who actually worked with the Forest Service to install the damaged fence and gate, have put up a $500 reward for the identity of the miscreants. Another needed change is to require clearly visible licenses on ATVs and other off-road-vehicles. When their anonymity is removed and they can be held accountable for their actions perhaps the irresponsible few will be a bit more respectful. Everyone has the right to enjoy their public lands but no one has the right to damage or destroy them.
– Veronica Egan, Great Old Broads for Wilderness
Safe passage
Dear Editors,
I was also attacked by dogs guarding sheep in the same place as Will Sands, about 10 miles west of Molas Pass as I hiked the Colorado Trail. I am an experienced hiker and was finishing up a solo through-hike of the Colorado Trail from Denver to Durango in mid-August 2011.
Dear Editors,
The destructive vandalism of the road closure at Middle Mountain is really a shame, because it will most likely result in moving the closure farther from the Weminuche Wilderness boundary. This will indeed inconvenience a few folks who might not want to or be able to walk the mile or so to the overlook. This is only to be expected, however, when the notorious “few bad apples” refuse to play by the rules. It is up to the motorized community to educate and perhaps even to “rat on” those whose actions cause hardship for all. The Creepers Jeepers, who actually worked with the Forest Service to install the damaged fence and gate, have put up a $500 reward for the identity of the miscreants. Another needed change is to require clearly visible licenses on ATVs and other off-road-vehicles. When their anonymity is removed and they can be held accountable for their actions perhaps the irresponsible few will be a bit more respectful. Everyone has the right to enjoy their public lands but no one has the right to damage or destroy them.
– Veronica Egan, Great Old Broads for Wilderness
Gutting our environmental laws
Dear Editors:
Everyone knows that we are in difficult economic times, but to target our natural resources which comprise approximately 1 percent of the federal budget is clearly an attempt to regress back to a time when raping the environment was an unconsciously acceptable practice.
Dear Editors:
Everyone knows that we are in difficult economic times, but to target our natural resources which comprise approximately 1 percent of the federal budget is clearly an attempt to regress back to a time when raping the environment was an unconsciously acceptable practice.
Feels a little like the days of Rachel Carson, and her book Silent Spring (1962) which led to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and also even though meeting with fierce denial from the chemical industry, led to a nationwide ban on DDT, the killer of bald eagles and many other raptor species.
The recycling of past destructive ideologies contained in the House Interior Appropriations bill (H.R. 2584) are illustrated by this same unconsciousness. One of a long list of items to be blocked by this bill would stop the EPA from implementing any recommendations from National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). NMFS has recommended simple mitigation measures such as no-spray zones of pesticides and herbicides around waterways to protect endangered salmon, this amendment would prevent EPA from implementing this NMFS recommendation.
The list goes on: Rider 755 would prevent the Department of Agriculture (USDA) from implementing its new departmental regulation on climate change adaptation. Climate change and variability will make farming harder to plan for and will make forest more vulnerable to invasive pests and wildfires.
Sections 118, 437 and 446 would cut the public out of decision-making involving our public lands by limiting access to the courts, decreasing the time and quality of administrative review, and reversing the results from inclusive public processes.
Wyoming Rep. Lummis included an amendment that would bar the protection of wilderness quality public lands, effectively saying “no more wilderness” (Sec. 124). This would leave millions of acres of wilderness-quality lands open to drilling, mining and off road vehicles.
There are many more sections and riders than I can list here, but as a nation, we cannot solve our financial problems by decimating the small amount of funding for the natural resources that we all enjoy and rely on. In addition, it is unacceptable for Congress to use this appropriations bill as an opportunity to take an axe to countless environmental laws designed to protect our water, air, public lands and wildlife.
We need Senators Udall and Bennet to vote down H.R. 2584 and stop this regressively mindless attack on our environment!
– Bob Kuhnert, Durango
– Bob Kuhnert, Durango
Safe passage
Dear Editors,
I was also attacked by dogs guarding sheep in the same place as Will Sands, about 10 miles west of Molas Pass as I hiked the Colorado Trail. I am an experienced hiker and was finishing up a solo through-hike of the Colorado Trail from Denver to Durango in mid-August 2011.
It was the scariest experience of the hike (really of any hike I have ever taken). As I was ambling along through the tundra on my way to a high saddle above the Cascade Creek valley I heard the baaing of sheep. I had passed by or seen four or five flocks of sheep with no problems on the trek and thought, “Oh how nice.” I spotted the sheep several hundred feet away on a hillside to my left above the trail. Then I heard and 4 saw a large white guard dog barking furiously at me. I picked up my pace and naively thought the dog would stay where he was and bark for a few minutes. He did not. He charged down the hill at me. I was really moving quickly by then, but the dog easily caught up and suddenly was right behind me, snarling, baring his teeth, and lunging at me. I was truly frightened. I turned toward him and fended him off with my trusty hiking poles and began walking backwards, carefully so I would not fall. Then a second dog appeared on the hillside and ran down ahead of me, cutting off my escape on the trail. I had to climb up the steep slope to my right while keeping the dogs at bay with my poles. They followed me snarling, barking and lunging for a good 1/4 mile. Finally, when I was totally exhausted, they retreated.
I later spoke to two other hikers who had encounters with this flock and the dogs. I have several suggestions. If these animals are allowed in the forest, they should be trained to tell the difference between people and hostile animals. The shepherd should be aware of how close the flock is to the trail and there should be regulations that require a safe distance from trails. The shepherd should respond when he hears the dogs barking. When moving the flock, there should be three or four people to control the dogs so they do not injure someone. If the dogs cannot be controlled, they should not be allowed in the forest. I am not opposed to sheep in the forest, but to introduce vicious dogs that could maim or kill a human to areas with popular and well-used trails is not acceptable. If I had fallen or not had my poles, I could have been that person.
The federal government issues the permits so has the power and obligation to regulate how the public land is used. Safety needs to be the first and most important consideration. I encourage anyone else who has had these encounters to contact Mark Stiles and Matt Janowiak at the San Juan National Forest office.
– Sandy Burke, Durango
– Sandy Burke, Durango