Tahoe Sierra Club chapter wants wilderness protected
By Kathryn Reed
Peace, beauty, quiet, serenity, creatures, no machines, watershed.
Those are some of the reasons people at the Feb. 20 Tahoe Area Sierra Club meeting said they walk in the forest. And it is for those sentiments and others that this group wants to protect the wilderness.
Wilderness has a loose definition of being out in the woods, whereas wilderness area is a distinct region. In those regions – like Desolation Wilderness, Mount Rose, Granite Chief and Mokelumne – mountain bikes and snowmobiles are not allowed.
Bob Anderson with the Tahoe Area Sierra Club talks Feb. 20 about wilderness areas. Photo/Kathryn Reed
The Wednesday night meeting in South Lake Tahoe was supposed to feature Steve Evans, conservation director of the Friends of the River. He came down ill and in his place Fred Roberts and Bob Anderson, both members of the local Sierra Club chapter, spoke.
Roberts, who used to teach biology at Lake Tahoe Community College, said fewer people are experiencing their natural environment.
“We are losing every day to asphalt and social media and whatever forces there are that disconnect us from nature,” he said.
He also said how nature is disappearing and changing in various locations because of the bark beetle infestation, as well as because of climate change.
Roberts said it’s time to have a national conversation about the environment, adding, “We went through a presidential election and there was no mention of the environment.”
Locally, he advocated for the starting point of the Upper Truckee River getting a scenic designation.
“If we come together, we can leverage our power,” Roberts said.
Anderson, who is the group’s president and a member of the Tahoe Institute for Natural Sciences, picked up where Roberts left off. His talk focused on how the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit of the U.S. Forest Service is in the midst of reviewing comments to the Forest Plan update.
The Sierra Club actively lobbied for and still touts the desire that the Meiss Meadow area to become a wilderness area. This is the headwater of the Upper Truckee River.
“The U.S. Forest Service failed to identify and include in the alternatives an analysis of all of the wilderness-eligible land in the basin,” Anderson said. “There should also be a backcountry zone for mountain bikers.”
Alternative D in the Forest Plan would create 29,000 acres in the Meiss-Dardanelles area as a wilderness area. While the Sierra Club supported that idea, members also thought that alternative did not go far enough.
(The plan by the Forest Service should be released soon.)
The other designation the Sierra Club would like is to make the Upper Truckee River a wild and scenic river. This would take an act of Congress.
thought it was public land.not the land grabbing sierra clubs land. and if its only foot traffic they want then break a leg and walk out coyote bait.
Good on the Sierra club for fighting to preserve one of the world’s most beautiful areas.
Also, it’s a shame anti-wilderness folks (and gun lovers and tea partiers) are always so ANGRY! :)
william says: Last time I checked the Sierra Club represents some significant number of individuals (the Public) and they have articulated their views. Other stakeholders have also provided input on how they believe the public land should be designated/used.
The process is designed to then take all of the disparate ideas from all of the stakeholders make choices as to how best manage these lands into perpetuity. A key goal the USFS is required to factor in for these lands regardless of economic value/use or its recreational value/use is to conserve and enhance the conservation value of these lands. In the end few stakeholders will get exactly what they want.
Rick
GREENWASH
Good for the Sierra Club. This is truly positive work and easy to support. However, the timing of the meeting, the nifty press release and video are right out of Big Oil’s playbook. In the midst of a lawsuit that is drawing the ire of nearly everyone against the new TRPA plan, including environmental watchdog groups and US Senators, out comes the fluffy teddy of wilderness protection. Not one word at that meeting about the litigation that follows some 10 years of haggling to reduce the regulatory tangle at Tahoe?
It’s disingenuous and smears the good name and good work of the Sierra Club. Shame on the local chapter.
Wilderness designation, like wild and scenic, requires an act of Congress.
Mountain bikers are left out of wilderness areas where horses are allowed to stomp, trample, piss and crap at will. Look at all the great trails built by mountain bikers all over the place. Not one of them states pedestrians are not allowed that I know of. Some of these mtn bike trails are built to standards supposedly used by the Romans and still in use today. WAKE UP!, 1880 came and went, want to get rid of your water purification plant because it doesn’t conform to 1880s standards of earth?
Didn’t realize p*ss and sh*t are censored words, learn something new every day.
Snowboardbetter: you have one opinion regarding restrictions on mt bike use in wilderness areas, a view shared by many, but it is just that an opinion – it is neither right nor wrong.
The prohibition against mt bikes in wilderness areas is more then simply do they cause more or less damage or not. The prohibition is one more based on values (a prohibition against mechanical devices). That apparently does not match your values (or some others for that matter), but arguing about whether mt bikes cause less damage then horses or whether or not the mt bike community builds responsible trails is a small part of the larger question.
I too mt. bike and am not particularly concerned about bikes being prohibited from wilderness areas. I have plenty of places to ride and believe in establishing areas within these large landscapes that do in fact restrict certain types of economic extraction and recreational activity. This does not make me more right or wrong, simply I have a shared value with a fair number of others, a value that seems to resonate with enough people to create wilderness areas that do in fact push for said restrictions. If they interest or value wains for some reason, the expectations and use of these areas my change.
Rick
The USFS doesn’t listen to the Sierra Club because the Sierra Club speaks for the people. Instead, the USFS is intimidated by the Sierra Club’s constant threat of lawsuits.
I doubt the average Sierra Club member realizes what a negative impact the Sierra Club has had on public access. Instead, they get a newsletter with pictures of cute baby seals, coyotes, and maybe the sage grouse, and proceed to write another check without realizing what the money is actually going to (tying up the NEPA process in court and sucking the USFS dry).
Romie: The USFS is not intimidated by the Sierra Club. If that were true then they would always get their way which they often do not.
From my experience, most Sierra Club members understand what the parent organization and their individual chapters are all about.
I have no problem accessing most public lands so I haven’t a clue what you are referring to, unless you are indicating that some OHV use is restricted as are snowmobile use in some areas. But as a hiker and mt biker I find I have plenty of trails to do both activities.
Rick
Rick I have been in many, like dozens, of meetings where the threat of lawsuits is used as reason to not do whatever by FS reps. And the FS is wise to do that. The LTBMU gets a lot of funding from grants, grants have lives, so the Sierra Clubs strategy, effective strategy, is to tie up projects until the funding expires. That was almost successful with the angora fire project this past summer. Thankfully even the Nineth is sick of hearing from them.
My experience is that most Sierra Club members are relatively clueless about the complexity we deal with in Tahoe, and have no idea the wide ranging effects the strategy employed by the local members has on getting good projects implemented.
endless pressure, endlessly applied is how we fight for and win the Wilderness wars. we need more wilderness designations and we should not settle for anything less than all the roadless areas left in our country.
John I appreciate your thoughts. While it is true that lawsuits influence behavior, the FS is at risk of lawsuits from all sides (heard of the Pacific Legal Foundation or Sahara Club?), the Sierra Club is many one side and one group. I work in the industry and smart bureaucrats are aware of the threat of lawsuits but focus on preparing documents that meet the various standards. Sierra Club wins some loses some. The competing groups win some and lose some and in the end the agencies are pushed and pulled. You may get irritated when one side wins that alters what you think should happen and guess what the folks that think differently then you feel the same when their side loses.
Career FS employees plod along doing when the political appointees direct them to, in some cases they are aware their bosses are suggesting they do something that puts them at risk of losing a lawsuit, but are required to do it anyway.
Rick
Rick, “but it is just that an opinion”, horses stomp, trample, p*ss and sh*t at will is not an opinion, it is a fact in wilderness areas.
Walking is over rated. Not all people(the public) have the genes and or the health to walk on public land. It is public land?
Are there not enough trails to mountain bike on in the area? Do you really need to bike in wilderness, or do you just feel entitled to it and have no respect for sanctity.
snowboardbetter; you are conflating evidence and values. This is largely a values debate, yes hikers and equestrians affect the environment. There is some evidence in fact that mt bikers have no greater affect, in some cases, other cases a much greater affect. They (we as I also mt bike in Tahoe) tend to ride farther and much faster (sometimes way to fast for our own good) and management of mt bike trails requires some different mindsets and resources (rescues occur more often on mt bike trails). Therefore, it is values that has determined that mt. bikes should not be allowed in wilderness areas. If enough people argue for a different outcome (which so far they have not) then that might change.
As a well-known conservation scientist once said, “science simply informs debates of resource use, it does not dictate outcomes. Meaning decisions regarding trail users has to incorporate both evidence and values.
Rick
30yrlocal,
Yeah, I to hope someone good buys the Swiss Chalet. I’m hoping the Baumann brothers re-open it themselves. If they don’t, wanna’ go in partners on buying that prime piece of real estate?(just kidding, I don’t have THAT kind of money)
There are lots of cool eateries and places to go right here in the center of town. Mandarin Garden for chinese food, The new Blue Dog pizza on the corner of Sierra blvd and 50, Fat City for pizza or a great sandwich (and they both deliver), Keystone for books and records, Margaritas mexican restaurant, Scusas for Italian, Whiskey Dicks for drinks,(okay, on the last one? it’s not really suited for an ol’ geezer like me!) I know I’m leaving out alot of other places. Pete Lilly’s, Christensen car repair and a bunch of others. There is lots of stuff going on right here in the Sierra blvd. and hwy 50 area.
Someone here awhile back referred to the casinos as “The Core” of the town… Nope! It’s right here in the center of SLT.
Mark Twain once wrote about Tahoe and he said, “the fairest place the whole earth affords”, or something like that… He wasn’t too far off track!
Take care, Old Long Skiis
Rick, “mt. bikes should not be allowed in wilderness areas”
“The Sierra Club actively lobbied for and still touts the desire that the Meiss Meadow area to become a wilderness area.”
What is wrong with the “scenic river designation” or whatever that is? I’ve hiked Meiss Meadow, I thought a lot about how I will mtn bike it.
Just don’t want someone else imposing their values on me and grabbing MORE public land for wilderness areas. The hikers and horse riders have enough land that people who are the public(as in public property)cannot use. I used to live on a ranch and rode horses, I don’t like those horse people(at minimum) having the legal right to keep my mtn bike off public land.
“Just don’t want someone else imposing their values on me”
Right back at you. Your value is that you should impose your bike on trails. Well guess what.
Bikes affect hikers more than hikers affect bikes. We need places where we can hike and not worry about bikes. And there are tons of places where you can ride bikes.
Stop being so selfish.
I yield to bikes all the time, even when I don’t have to. But if I ever encounter you, you are going to have to lock up the brakes, unclip and deal with it.
Snowboardbetter:
We are a country of laws and what makes a civil society is complying with the laws. Try driving safely on roadways with no laws or rules and see how well you fare.
You clearly have a different opinion regarding Meiss Meadow then the Sierra Club, I suspect many others do, so fine articulate that and in the end, the USFS will make a decision which you may or may not be happy with. I for one, believe in following the rules and if it is deemed a wilderness, will not ride it; on the other hand, if it is not, and the mood strikes me, I may choose to ride it.
You do not get to pick and choose the laws with which you get to comply. You can voice a different opinion and you can work to change a law or decision you disagree with, but if you choose to break the law, I only hope you get caught.
Rick
The Wilderness act was a long hard fight and the law is the law. If you choose to disregard the law and the intent of the Wilderness act I too hope that you get caught if you just have to ride your bike in designated Wilderness. I worked for years as a back country ranger and I know for a fact that every person entering the Wilderness leaves some type of impact. When the Wilderness Act was passed there were no mountain bikes and the issue wasnt addressed. Its like the secone amendment. When it was added to the constitution there were no Automatic and semi automatic weapons with 1000round clips. That constitutional ammendment needs to be updated, just as the Wilderness act needs to be ammended to keep Mountain bicycles OUT!!! And maybe we need to add horses and people too. Just let the Wilderness be.
Rick,
“but if you choose to break the law, I only hope you get caught.”
Laws are a joke in the city of South Lake Tahoe and surrounding areas. PUBLIC LAND IS PUBLIC LAND, be happy with what you have if you like wilderness areas. I’m not the only person in the area by the show of public meetings that is burnt on some goody 2shoes narrow minded individual/s keeping relatively law abiding people with very little impact on the land off OUR LAND. With the economy around here the way it is, your economic situation may rely on the public being able to use public land in a competent manner. With all the private property violations, hacking, ect…. If laws were enforced around here, the criminally persistent government building will be shut down. That includes our public schools, at least 1 which has systemic, malicious, constant hacking.
nature bats last,
“Wilderness act needs to be ammended to keep Mountain bicycles OUT!!!”
Mtn. bikes are illegal in wilderness areas violating my right to enjoy public land that horses legally stomp, trample, p*ss, and sh*t on. Just remember when you go hiking and horseback riding in the back country, there is a pretty good chance a mtn biker made your experience better at no cost to you/a taxpayer. How many people out there volunteer time, materials, $s to public trails, I know many mtn bike riders that do, myself included in which we didn’t charge any fees so you could have a better experience.
thing fish,
“Stop being so selfish.” If anything, the hikers are selfish, not even close the numbers to where mtn bikers are allowed compared to hikers.
Are you serious? You aren’t entitled to be able to ride your bike everywhere. Deal with it. You should redirect your negative energy and volunteer to build trails.
Hey SnowboardBetter.com,
Thanks so much for the Super Website!!. That incredible video of some neighborhood kids from 5 years ago is just SO Awesome! I know you are absolutely correct about LTCC computer hacking causing your failure. The dog ate my homework too.
Join the reality based community man.
Snowboardbetter: Cannot even begin to respond to your manic rantings. Let’s see if I can paraphrase your lunacy – gov is dysfunctional and run by crooks (in your words) and so I may as well be as equally dysfunctional and illegal cause I want to be.
If you do not like how things work simply look in the mirror to find out the root of the problem. You and your ilk that advocate anarchy simply get what you preach.
I think I will stick with the moral and ethically correct position of complying with laws. It matches my upbringing and those values I choose to pass on to my daughter. It is what makes me a patriotic American. To purposely violate laws because you don’t like or agree with them, makes you intellectually lazy, a whiner, malcontent, anarchistic and frankly unpatriotic. I would be curious if you consider yourself religious.
Rick
snowboardbetter Im not sure why you think you are the missah of the back country. I have volunteered most of my life to keeping trails open in and outside of the Wilderness. You arent any one special. People all over the world volunteer their time and efforts to keep trails open and accessable for many different types of users. There are just as many equestrian groups that work on trails as snow boarders or mountain bikers so dont think you are some sort of unique entity. I guess if you plan on breaking the laws I just hope you get caught and have to pay the price. Its abusers like you that make a bad name for your Use of choice.