Wild Olympics

[coastal ghost hunter]

Over here in Jefferson county there is an act that the Liberals are pushing and it is backed by Patty Murray. This bill would potentially effect hunting land, Logging land, Christmas tree hunting, and firewood cutting. These people are telling the communities around here that the bill will not effect anything but just enforce the laws already at hand for logging and recreational firewood cutting. I worry that this bill will pass and us hunters and others who use the freedoms in the National Forest, will loose around 150,000 acres of land that will be swollowed up by National Park. Bad stuff. Give me your input or any facts I can use for the fight over here. Thanks

[X-Force]

I'll have to look into this a more. haven't heard anything about it. it looks like a big land grab like the ncnp expansion.

[coastal ghost hunter]

It just stresses me out because I hunt there and I don't need a discover pass and I never see people there.

[asl20bball]

It was my understanding that this new wildlife area is more of a road closure (like that of a wilderness designation) as oppossed to an expansion of the national park which would close down the new area for hunting. I can't say what the effect w/b regarding firewood cutting etc.  Either way I'm against it.

[bowbuild]

Then it wouldn't be all that far from them to try to extend the "park" next.

[snowpack]

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2014/01/17/protect-olympics-wild-places-murray-kilmer/
Sen Murry introduced a bill for Wild Olympics today.

[blackdog]

I am opposed. !20,000 +acres of wilderness on Forest Service ground, nearly every river on the peninsula becomes wild and scenic. It does not restore access to the Dosewallops, or to the "bridge to nowhere" on Sam's River. It rewards the bad behavior of the Washington DC and Wall Street special interests that now own our economy. Makes antigunners Dicks and Murray heroes with the antihunters. Yea I oppose this worthless Congressional piece of crap.

[blackdog]

http://exotichikes.com/the-end-of-the-olympic-national-parks-enchanted-valley-chalet/ This what wilderness gets us, paralyzed agencies and endless process.

[Elkaholic daWg]

I am opposed. !20,000 +acres of wilderness on Forest Service ground, nearly every river on the peninsula becomes wild and scenic. It does not restore access to the Dosewallops, or to the "bridge to nowhere" on Sam's River. It rewards the bad behavior of the Washington DC and Wall Street special interests that now own our economy. Makes antigunners Dicks and Murray heroes with the antihunters. Yea I oppose this worthless Congressional piece of crap.

As I did with the wild sky land grab. Those who sit at desks in Seattle , DC, or anywhere else just love to "protect" things and restrict access to others as  any good  nanny state would. They seem to NEVER get "enough".  This country would be better off if our POS elected morons would work on the real issues instead of imagining  new ones to throw  our (not their) money at.

 He added amendments to keep existing roads in place, enhance fire-fighting capability and assure protection for private landowners.
 A judge CAN take that out with the stroke of a pen.

 AND no editorializing in this fair and balanced reporting......
"Don’t hold your breath.  The bill goes to the House Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash.

Hastings has almost never seen any piece of federal land that he doesn’t want to log, or mine, or drill, or turn over to state or private ownership."


Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups and quit losing opportunity.

[bigtex]

Hastings has almost never seen any piece of federal land that he doesn’t want to log, or mine, or drill, or turn over to state or private ownership."

Actually Hastings is the prime sponsor of a bill that would create the Manhattan Project National Historical Park in WA and other states under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service. So he is not totally anti fed land management.

[snowpack]

 He added amendments to keep existing roads in place, enhance fire-fighting capability and assure protection for private landowners.
 A judge CAN take that out with the stroke of a pen.

I think the road thing is a trap.  They say the roads will stay for the creation.  But wilderness boundaries and wild scenic boundaries will run up to the road buffer zones.  So as soon as part of the road washes out it will be near impossible to repair/redirect even a small portion due to wilderness/WS rules, FS road budgets and all kinds of lawsuits the greenies will file.  So the USFS will just have to place boulders near the closest wide spot and however much road beyond is now shutdown.  I wouldn't put it past the greenies to stuff culverts with hay or duff to speed it up.

[Elkaholic daWg]

You know them well  

Hastings has almost never seen any piece of federal land that he doesn’t want to log, or mine, or drill, or turn over to state or private ownership."

Actually Hastings is the prime sponsor of a bill that would create the Manhattan Project National Historical Park in WA and other states under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service. So he is not totally anti fed land management.

That was a DIRECT quote of the PI story bigtex

[bigtex]

You know them well  

Hastings has almost never seen any piece of federal land that he doesn’t want to log, or mine, or drill, or turn over to state or private ownership."

Actually Hastings is the prime sponsor of a bill that would create the Manhattan Project National Historical Park in WA and other states under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service. So he is not totally anti fed land management.

That was a DIRECT quote of the PI story bigtex

I know I saw that after I posted. 

Hastings has introduced several bills to create the new NHP. He even added an amendment to the 2014 2014 National Defense Authorization Act to create the new NHP/

Due to failure of support from the Senate, the expected final 2014 National Defense Authorization Act does not include two House-passed amendments to the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act authored by Congressman Doc Hastings to establish the Manhattan Project National Park. A statement from Congressman Doc Hastings, Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, follows:

“I’m disappointed, but not deterred. To all the advocates for this Park: you’ve given great energy, enthusiasm and expertise to this effort to date, and I know that will continue until our goal is accomplished, which I am confident it will ultimately be."

http://hastings.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364192

[Knocker of rocks]

 AND no editorializing in this fair and balanced reporting......
"Don’t hold your breath.  The bill goes to the House Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash.

Hastings has almost never seen any piece of federal land that he doesn’t want to log, or mine, or drill, or turn over to state or private ownership."

Why Joel Connolly didn't resist his urge to editorialize and stick to a news piece is beyond me.  Very unprofessional in my view

[blackdog]

I'm not defending Joel but everything he writes is an "Editorial", his job title is "Editorialist". He does not like our hunting heritage and he is not a "reporter"! Please realize that he will never refrain from editorializing in his editorials.

[bigtex]

The whole 'Wild Olympics' idea has come along ways. At first it was a simple expansion of Olympic National Park, a lot of the locals were mad for numerous issues including loss of hunting areas. Then the next idea was that instead of having those lands added to the National Park they would be designated a 'National Preserve' which are National Park Service areas that allow hunting (I was in favor of this idea). So Olympic National Park would become 'Olympic National Park & Preserve'. And now we have existing USFS lands turned into a USFS Wilderness areas and the rivers turning into wild & scenic.

[Elkaholic daWg]

Be it hunters, snowmobilers, loggers, ORV'rs, miners.............People CONTROL is all they want.

[blackdog]

I still oppose this but we have dodged a bullet when the Park jurisdiction was removed. Those USPS rangers that I have met are bullies.

[ouchfoss]

Wild Olympics is a bad idea all the way around. They seem to think that this is something NEEDED when in fact there is nothing wrong with the proposed land in the first place.
I just read something the other day that talked about how horribly in debt the NPS is and the fact that they cant afford to keep certain places, trails and other things open so more than likely they will be permanently closed. 
I am %100 opposed.

[snowpack]

There was an article in the newspaper the other day saying that nature conservancy was trying to buy more land in the Queets and Clearwater area.  They have Paul Allen offering to match funds with them for purchases. 
I've heard they want to buy the land so they can sell it to the park as a 'willing seller'.  Then they can increase the size of the Queets corridor and start making a park corridor on the Clearwater too.
I don't know how much it matches with the new bill, but the old proposal had something to do with authorizing the park to buy up the willing seller lands. 

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I don't see more public land as a bad thing, as long as it isn't locked up in a park. Most private timberland in Grays Harbor County that  I grew up hunting has been turned into pay to hunt land. So more public land to hunt is a good thing in my eyes. It's one of the things I appreciate when I hunt the NE corner of the State, the national Forests over there. In fact the lock up of private land on the west side is the major reason I started hunting the NE corner three years ago. I know several others who have done the same thing.

Most who have weighed in so far on this thread are against Wild Olympics, but there are many sportsmen who are for it. Here is one group who is.

http://www.sportsmenforwildolympics.org/

[bigtex]

Wild Olympics is a bad idea all the way around. They seem to think that this is something NEEDED when in fact there is nothing wrong with the proposed land in the first place.
I just read something the other day that talked about how horribly in debt the NPS is and the fact that they cant afford to keep certain places, trails and other things open so more than likely they will be permanently closed. 
I am %100 opposed.

If this bill passes the land involved (for wilderness areas at least) is USFS land, not NPS land.

[bigtex]

I'd rather see land managed by the National Park Service as a National Preserve which is open to hunting (as once was proposed) then some private land that nobody can access or hunt on 

[Knocker of rocks]

There was an article in the newspaper the other day saying that nature conservancy was trying to buy more land in the Queets and Clearwater area.  They have Paul Allen offering to match funds with them for purchases. 
I've heard they want to buy the land so they can sell it to the park as a 'willing seller'.  Then they can increase the size of the Queets corridor and start making a park corridor on the Clearwater too.
I don't know how much it matches with the new bill, but the old proposal had something to do with authorizing the park to buy up the willing seller lands.

The land in question in the bill is all USFS lands, which no one is suggesting be sold to the Nature Conservatory, much less USFS->NC->NPS

[blackdog]

All the major rivers on the Olympic Peninsula would be designated W&S on the publically owned lands USPS and USFS. Another 125k of USFS would be declared wilderness. We gain no new access and restoring access to the Sams River bridge to nowhere would not happen. I believe we would never restore access to the Dosewallops if this legislation passes. This has no effect on restoring private land access.

[Knocker of rocks]

All the major rivers on the Olympic Peninsula would be designated W&S on the publically owned lands USPS

You sure about that?

[blackdog]

It is my understanding that Senator Murray does not allow pro-hunting or pro-gun advocates to even meet with her. You can make her hero if you want. 

[blackdog]

Sitka_Blacktail all of this land is currently available for hunting and fishing. This is nothing more than legacy building.

[blackdog]

United States Park Service silly!
 

[Knocker of rocks]

I don't see more public land as a bad thing, as long as it isn't locked up in a park. Most private timberland in Grays Harbor County that  I grew up hunting has been turned into pay to hunt land. So more public land to hunt is a good thing in my eyes. It's one of the things I appreciate when I hunt the NE corner of the State, the national Forests over there. In fact the lock up of private land on the west side is the major reason I started hunting the NE corner three years ago. I know several others who have done the same thing.

Most who have weighed in so far on this thread are against Wild Olympics, but there are many sportsmen who are for it. Here is one group who is.

http://www.sportsmenforwildolympics.org/

I don't think there is much in the way of purchases involved in this present bill, mostly it is an designation change of Federally held land,
(by the Post Office according to Black Dog)

[Knocker of rocks]

United States Park Service silly!
 

What's that?

Did you mean the  National Park Service?  Universally referred to as the NPS?

[npaull]

The more wilderness, the more wild and scenic river designations, the better. I'm 100% for it. And fishing and hunting are my biggest hobbies and passions.

[blackdog]

Ok ok NPS. Their are no land purchases now in the bill.

[blackdog]

I've had bad experiences with NPS rangers while hunting on USFS land so I may have a mental block with them.

[Knocker of rocks]

NPS Rangers are tools

[snowpack]

I've had bad experiences with NPS rangers while hunting on USFS land so I may have a mental block with them.

They seem to go through phases every few years.  Like you get three or four years and never see them outside of the park.  Then the next few years they are even helpful driving around USFS land and tell you where animals are.  Then you get a stretch where they hassle people about having maps/compasses and knowing where the boundary line is.   One year they were even driving behind the gates on DNR land and shooting into the trees to scare 'their' elk back into the park.

[bigtex]

I've had bad experiences with NPS rangers while hunting on USFS land so I may have a mental block with them.

They seem to go through phases every few years.  Like you get three or four years and never see them outside of the park.  Then the next few years they are even helpful driving around USFS land and tell you where animals are.  Then you get a stretch where they hassle people about having maps/compasses and knowing where the boundary line is.   One year they were even driving behind the gates on DNR land and shooting into the trees to scare 'their' elk back into the park.

NPS LE Rangers can be very different. You have your group that are basically like WDFW Officers and love to hunt, fish, etc and are basically game wardens working for the NPS. Then you have your group which you would call your typical "parkie" and don't want you to pick a flower.

Snowpack, I think one of the reason you see the different "phases" is because NPS LE has a very high turnover rate in WA. You don't see them staying in WA for very long. So chances are the LE Ranger you saw 4 years ago doesn't even work in WA now.

[blackdog]

I had one threatened to get a bulldozer and push our trailer into the brush while holding his hand on his pistol.

[Elkaholic daWg]

I don't see more public land as a bad thing, as long as it isn't locked up in a park. Most private timberland in Grays Harbor County that  I grew up hunting has been turned into pay to hunt land. So more public land to hunt is a good thing in my eyes. It's one of the things I appreciate when I hunt the NE corner of the State, the national Forests over there. In fact the lock up of private land on the west side is the major reason I started hunting the NE corner three years ago. I know several others who have done the same thing.

Most who have weighed in so far on this thread are against Wild Olympics, but there are many sportsmen who are for it. Here is one group who is.

http://www.sportsmenforwildolympics.org/

I don't think there is much in the way of purchases involved in this present bill, mostly it is an designation change of Federally held land,
(by the Post Office according to Black Dog)

This is from that site. Has anyone here actually read the Wilderness act? In black and white  it says this is NOT allowed.........  and you trust them?

And if they do manage to do it ,it will only take one  judge to change it or....
 Snowpack   
"I think the road thing is a trap.  They say the roads will stay for the creation.  But wilderness boundaries and wild scenic boundaries will run up to the road buffer zones.  So as soon as part of the road washes out it will be near impossible to repair/redirect even a small portion due to wilderness/WS rules, FS road budgets and all kinds of lawsuits the greenies will file.  So the USFS will just have to place boulders near the closest wide spot and however much road beyond is now shutdown.  I wouldn't put it past the greenies to stuff culverts with hay or duff to speed it up. "

[steen]

I vote no on anything new.  There are always hidden agenda things that are never mentioned and we lose every time.  They don't even have enough money to take care of the parks they have now.....and then increase them??? Just like someone else said, voting rights away.

[bigtex]

I vote no on anything new.  There are always hidden agenda things that are never mentioned and we lose every time.  They don't even have enough money to take care of the parks they have now.....and then increase them??? Just like someone else said, voting rights away.

This isn't a park

[Elkaholic daWg]

I vote no on anything new.  There are always hidden agenda things that are never mentioned and we lose every time.  They don't even have enough money to take care of the parks they have now.....and then increase them??? Just like someone else said, voting rights away.

This isn't a park

Understood. So are you saying there is plenty of money for USFS to  fix any washouts on these 2200+ miles of roads while dealing with the added red tape that Wilderness designation would bring about, Even though a hand picked judge would probably make it a moot point

[bigtex]

I vote no on anything new.  There are always hidden agenda things that are never mentioned and we lose every time.  They don't even have enough money to take care of the parks they have now.....and then increase them??? Just like someone else said, voting rights away.

This isn't a park

Understood. So are you saying there is plenty of money for USFS to  fix any washouts on these 2200+ miles of roads while dealing with the added red tape that Wilderness designation would bring about, Even though a hand picked judge would probably make it a moot point

No, I said it's not a park. That's all I said....