Human impact on Yosemite may be reduced
By Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times
YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK — Far humbler corners of America have faced a similar dilemma: How much human activity should be allowed in a natural setting that is also promoted as a tourist destination?
The National Park Service is proposing a significant makeover of Yosemite National Park that would change the way future generations of visitors experience the park, especially the seven-mile-long Yosemite Valley at its heart. The Park Service’s plan would restore more than 200 acres of meadows, reorganize transportation and reduce traffic congestion. To shrink the human presence along the Merced River, park officials are also proposing closing nearby rental facilities for bicycling, horseback riding and rafting, as well as removing swimming pools, an ice rink and a stone bridge.
As with most things related to one of the nation’s most beloved national parks, the plan has ignited fierce debate among environmentalists, campers, and officials in California and Washington.
Rep. Tom McClintock, a Republican whose district includes Yosemite, said at a recent House hearing that the idea of removing commercial facilities was meant to satisfy “the most radical and nihilistic fringe of the environmental left.” But some environmentalists said the plan did not go far enough in protecting Yosemite Valley and the Merced River, which flows through 81 miles of the park.
It’s a PARK. For the use of the people. As they limit the number of people who are allowed in, it’s usually the poorest who are denied. Sound fair to you?
Actually, Dogula, the intent is to reduce the blatant amount of commercialism. The poorest would benefit.
Bob- You are part of the pie in the sky problem. The poorest always get the short end of the stick. Reduce access to the park, and people that haven’t the time and luxury of pre-planning get screwed. This is a typical Sierra Club push, “I can use it, so lets keep the others out”!
How much human activity should be allowed in a natural setting that is also promoted as a tourist destination?
Hmmm………. Maybe this could be applicable to Lake Tahoe – with all the corporate development planned to bring in even more tourists.
@ John A: “allowed”? Allowed by whom? Who gets to decide how the rest of us use OUR private property? Please. Lake Tahoe is not a park, whether you think it should be or not.
And as I said before, parks are for the benefit of the people. Not for the special people the environmentalist lawyers and government agencies get to keep to themselves.
We are all worthy.
I have not been to Yosemite since 1991 when I bought my house in SLT, but I sure did enjoy river-rafting down the Merced and horse-back riding in the majestic surroundings. It would be a shame to eliminate these recreational opportunities.
Dogula – The first sentence was copied off the article …… not created.
You lost the point.
I was referring to the corporate development that continues to bring mass tourism in at this community’s expense.
My mistake, John A. I’d read the article the day before so didn’t re-read to see if your sentence was a quote. May I suggest quotation marks next time?
Sorry I went off on you when I should have been going off on the NYT!
Another day, another pile of dog poop.
If they want to limit people from Yosemite then I want to limit my tax dollars from funding their plan. This is total arrogance of the environmental movement. Make a Park not accessible to the people who pay for it. What could be a better way to see more of the park then to ride a bike, raft a river, and ride a horse. Sounds like a lot of memories made that the Sierra Club wants to take away. Nice job you bunch of big city attorneys who don’t go there anyway!!!!!
I’m just back from 10 days in the wilder parts of Yosemite. I’ve been going there for over 60 years, and I see unattractive signs of wear everywhere.
Six million visitors a year, and growing yearly, mostly in the summer, are loving the park to death.
Fragile wildlands wear out and need some protection. That’s the park service’s job.