Here they come again: Greens want to grab more Federal land

[netcoyote]

This seems to get stirred up every few years. A group wants to expand the North Cascades National Park to include a lot of land along the Route 20 corridor. Harts Pass area is specifically mentioned. Never mind that this is one of the least used national Parks in the country, somehow the thinking is that locking more land up national park status will improve that situation.


http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019048690_park02m.html

[smg id=11665]

[buckfvr]

I believe we are approaching open season on greenies and  antis'...........

[Elkaholic daWg]

This seems to get stirred up every few years. A group wants to expand the North Cascades National Park to include a lot of land along the Route 20 corridor. Harts Pass area is specifically mentioned. Never mind that this is one of the least used national Parks in the country, somehow the thinking is that locking more land up national park status will improve that situation.


http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019048690_park02m.html

[smg id=11665]

NO surprise to me, and they will work their fat asses off to get more wilderness also.
 My question is this....Who do we as hunters have more in common with.....These greenie extremists, Or the four wheeler/ATV/Snowmobile crowd. Should be easy to see. join Blue Ribbon Coalition and SAWS (SAWS is free)

[huntrights]

Not being well versed in this issue, I would tend to ask the following questions:

Will there be greater restrictions on hunting in the proposed areas?

Is the proposed area taking away, or limiting access to prime hunting areas?

Will there be greater restrictions in the right to carry firearms in the proposed areas?

Are the proposed areas strategically planned to limit access to non-park areas?

What is the actual agenda of the American Alps Legacy?

What is their history?

Does it take an act of Congress to expand a National Park?


There are many questions that should be asked; these are only a few I just thought of.

I suspect that hunting opportunities will be negatively affected in the area, as will access to hunting areas that lie outside of the proposed areas.  Just a glance at the map seems to indicate a deliberate plan to limit access from the main vehicular travel routes into prime national forest areas.  If this is the case, we should start a mass letter writing campaign and exposure of what appears to be their subliminal agenda to limit access and hunting opportunities.  I believe these types of proposals are being pushed around the country; for example, another local one I believe is called “Wild Olympics”.

[fireweed]

I'm pretty familiar with the area and even once worked for the park here.  This is a total waste of time and money.  This land they are trying to "protect" is already protected!  It is either Nat. Recreation area or USFS land that will never be touched--even if it needs active management.  They  have run out of places that really need protection, so they are just adding paperwork, managment layers, and more regulation to land that is already off-limits.  What are they protecting it from anyway?  There is already no logging, mining, develpment, road building here.  The evils of Hunting, mt. Bicycles, walking dogs, maybe a snow-mobile in a few places.  That's it!  This proposal will make the economy worse as more recreation is pushed out.

[Knocker of rocks]

Not being well versed in this issue, I would tend to ask the following questions:

Will there be greater restrictions on hunting in the proposed areas?
Decidely yes
Is the proposed area taking away, or limiting access to prime hunting areas?
Again, yes
Will there be greater restrictions in the right to carry firearms in the proposed areas?
Hard to answer, because the right to carry firearms in NP's was liberalized in 2010
Are the proposed areas strategically planned to limit access to non-park areas?
I think not
What is the actual agenda of the American Alps Legacy?
Don't know.
Does it take an act of Congress to expand a National Park?
Yes

This proposal has been floating around for about a year.  Doesn't seem to be gaining a lot of traction, which is probably why it was taken to the Times.
 
Support seems weak, with the majority against it because of increasing regulations.  With is from reading a number of user forums.  As an example, here is NWHikers:
http://www.nwhikers.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7994404&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
 
 

[Knocker of rocks]

Thread from last years write up in the Everett Herald

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,84071.0.html