March 21, 2019

Cameron (Cam) Sholly Named Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park

*Editor’s Note* – Two items that need attention: First, it would seem that Sholly taking over the position of Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park is a step down from previous work within the National Park Service. Why?

The second issue is that in the following press release Congresswoman Liz Cheney was quoted as saying, “I’m pleased Secretary Zinke moved quickly to name Cam Sholly as the new Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park.” Perhaps while handing out pats on the back to Sec. Zinke for his quick actions to find a replacement for the superintendent he fired, Congressman Cheney should ask Zinke why it has taken a year and a half and still, we have no Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Press Release from the U.S. Department of Interior:

WASHINGTON – Today, National Park Service (NPS) Deputy Director P. Daniel Smith announced the selection of Cameron (Cam) Sholly to be the new Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park.

“As a veteran of the National Park Service, Cam has a track record of working with local communities and Tribes on important wildlife and conservation work and he’s overseen some of the park service’s most high-profile park infrastructure projects in recent years,” said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke. “Managing our National Parks is a responsibility and a privilege, and I’m confident Cam Sholly will do a fantastic job at Yellowstone.”

“Cam is a proven leader, who has successfully worked at every senior level in the National Park Service including assignments as regional director, associate director, and superintendent,” said Deputy Director Smith. “Most recently, he has overseen the completion of one of the largest public/private partnership projects in NPS history – the $380 million renovation of the Gateway Arch grounds and museum in St. Louis. Cam has built productive and valuable relations with communities, landowners, and local, state, and tribal leaders throughout his career, and I am confident he will continue shaping the right vision for Yellowstone’s future.”

“I am honored to have the opportunity to work with the extraordinary staff and partners at Yellowstone,” Sholly said about the appointment. “Exceptional work has occurred there over the past years because of the dedication of the NPS staff, partners, and communities. I look forward to continuing a positive trajectory for one of the greatest park in the world.”

“Cam has great experience and an understanding of what will make Yellowstone National Park a family destination for all Montanans and its visitors,” said Senator Steve Daines. “We discussed many critical issues facing the park service and I look forward to working with Cam. As a Gardner High School graduate I know he will bring Montana common sense to the job every day.”

“Yellowstone National Park is one of America’s most treasured parks. Together with Grand Teton National Park, Yellowstone is home to a wide variety of wildlife and stunning landscapes, and hosts of thousands of visitors each year. As Cam takes the reins as the incoming superintendent, I look forward to working with him to ensure Yellowstone remains a shining example of our national park system,” said Senator John Barrasso.

“I’m pleased Secretary Zinke moved quickly to name Cam Sholly as the new Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park,” said Congressman Liz Cheney. “Superintendent Sholly’s extensive resume and background within the Park Service will serve him well as he transitions into his new role. I’m looking forward to working closely with the Superintendent to keep Yellowstone one of the Nation’s most beloved parks.”

“Cam has a record of success that will help him manage the first of our nation’s national parks,” said Congressman Greg Gianforte. “Having worked with Cam, I know he understands the importance of being a good partner with neighboring communities. I am confident in Cam’s leadership and am certain he will do an (sic) outstanding job at Yellowstone.”

Since early 2015, Sholly has served as the NPS Midwest Regional Director, and he manages a team of 2000 employees, a budget of over $250 million, and the operations of 61 national park units spread across 13 states. Over the past three years, national parks within the Midwest transferred nearly 800 bison to state and tribal governments through a transparent and collaborative process. During his tenure in the Midwest Region, Sholly also has overseen several major planning processes, including the recent signing of the record of decision to reintroduce wolves to Isle Royale National Park. The region also supported efforts with states to develop wildlife and land management plans, including a plan to address Chronic Wasting Disease in elk populations in South Dakota. He has improved business processes in the region and collaborated with partners on a variety of complex and important park issues. In 2016, Sholly also established a regional Office of American Indian Affairs, to build stronger tribal relations across the region.

From 2012-2015, Sholly served as the Associate Director for Visitor and Resource Protection at NPS headquarters, where he managed a national portfolio that included wilderness stewardship, fire and aviation management, risk management, public health, ranger law enforcement, regulations, and the United States Park Police. As Associate Director, Sholly guided the development and implementation of a national employee safety strategy which has helped dramatically reduce employee fatalities across the bureau. He also approved new national policies for wilderness stewardship, law enforcement, wildland fire, and many other NPS programs.

From 2009-2012, Sholly served as the Superintendent of the Natchez Trace Parkway, overseeing NPS operations within a 444- mile, three-state corridor that includes 25 counties and 20 communities, with approximately 6 million visitors annually. In 2011, Sholly was named superintendent of the year in the Southeast Region for his sustained partnership and business planning efforts within the corridor.

Sholly’s other previous assignments include: Chief of Staff and deputy to the Associate Director for Visitor and Resource Protection; detail as Special Assistant to the NPS Director; and Chief of the Ranger Operations Branch in Yosemite National Park. Sholly is a U.S. Army veteran who served in both infantry and combat military police assignments. He was deployed to Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991.

Sholly has a Master’s Degree in Environmental Management from Duke University with curriculum concentrations in environmental economics and law and policy. He earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Management from St. Mary’s College of California, and is a graduate of the Harvard University Senior Executive Fellows Program.

In 2015, Sholly was awarded the Department of the Interior’s Meritorious Service Award for his executive leadership actions. He has been married for the past 21 years to Jill Walston Sholly. They have a high school-aged son.

Share

Nine Members of NPS Advisory Board Quit

*Editor’s Note* – Trump gets an “F” when it comes to making his nominations for key positions, especially with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, BLM and others. However, having 9 members of the National Park Service advisory board quit may not be such a bad thing. As a matter of fact, maybe it is time to disband this and other useless “advisory” boards because the purpose of their existence and the efforts they carry out are contrary to most everything American. For example, the NPS advisory board works directly and indirectly with certain programs within the United Nations to appoint certain parcels of land/historic sites for the purpose of a systematic ceding of control of such nominated lands (national monuments, parks, and historic sites) to the United Nations. I doubt this is what the majority of Americans want but I’m sure, due to their ignorance, they haven’t a clue about any of this.

BUT DON’T GO LOOK!

“Three-quarters of the members of a federally chartered board advising the National Park Service abruptly quit Monday night out of frustration that Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke had refused to meet with them or convene a single meeting last year.

The resignation of nine out of 12 National Park System Advisory Board members leaves the federal government without a functioning body to designate national historic or natural landmarks. It also underscores the extent to which federal advisory bodies have become marginalized under the Trump administration. In May 2017, Zinke suspended all outside committees while his staff reviewed their composition and work.”<<<Read More>>>

Share

The National “Nanny” Park Service

SUMMARY: The National Park Service proposes to revise the regulation that defines smoking to include the use of electronic cigarettes and other electronic nicotine delivery systems. The National Park Service also proposes to allow a superintendent to close an area, building, structure, or facility to smoking when necessary to maintain public health and safety.<<<Read More>>>

Share

Amended Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement To Address the Presence of Wolves at Isle Royale National Park

*Editor’s Note* – I brought to readers’ attention yesterday that environmentalists have petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Endangered Species Act protection for moose in Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and North Dakota. The regions of Michigan included in the petition involves Isle Royale. Does it make sense or is it irresponsible to introduced and perpetuate a wolf population on Isle Royale, the only real threat to the moose when at the same time petitioning the Feds to place the moose under Federal protection? You just can’t make this stuff up.

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) is amending its July 10, 2015, Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) and Management Plan for Moose, Wolves, and Vegetation for Isle Royale National Park, Michigan (Isle Royale). The NPS is revising the scope of the EIS to focus on the question of whether to bring wolves to Isle Royale in the near term, and if so, how to do so. This amended NOI describes a range of alternatives for bringing wolves to the Island.<<<Read More>>>

Share

GRAND CANYON CATTALO STATUS OBSCURED BY SCIENCE SHELL GAME

Press Release from the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility:

Washington, DC — The National Park Service is juggling the fate of a herd of hybridized bison marooned on the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, according to correspondence released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The agency has withdrawn a controversial report claiming these “cattalos” are wildlife “native” to Grand Canyon, a classification which would prevent their wholesale removal – an action supported by conservationists and the park’s own staff.

The decision on what to do with this orphaned herd, introduced more than a century ago for interbreeding with cattle, has been taken out of the park’s hands and commandeered by National Park Service (NPS) Headquarters. In 2015, Glenn Plumb, the NPS Chief Wildlife Biologist, issued a document called the “Grand Canyon National Park Bison Technical Assistance Report” which overrode the park’s previous stance that the hybridized herd is not native to the park but are exotic animals which should be relocated.

On March 17, 2016, PEER filed a legal complaint seeking the retraction of the so-called “Plumb Report” on multiple grounds, including that it flew in the face of available facts, ignored scientific literature concluding the opposite and violated NPS’s own data quality and wildlife management standards. NPS had 60 days to respond to the complaint. Rather than defend the Plumb Report, the NPS punted.

In a May 16, 2016 letter to PEER, John Dennis, the Chief Deputy Scientist for NPS, indicated the agency is working on a new “multi-authored scientific report …intended for peer-reviewed publication.” He adds that this new, as yet unrevealed, report is “superseding” the 2015 Plumb Report.

“This latest Park Service bureaucratic shuffle more resembles a game of three-card monte than a legitimate scientific effort,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that the NPS decided to discard the work of its own Chief Wildlife Biologist without explanation. “This new hide-the-ball report appears to be a nakedly political maneuver to avoid a credible and transparent scientific review.”

The stakes are high because the scientific question determines whether the cattalo stay or go: if they are native wildlife, by law they cannot be extirpated; if they are exotic, by policy they must be removed if they harm park resources – and the stagnant herd is unquestionably doing damage by killing rare plants, fouling springs and carving erosive trails into a very fragile part of the North Rim.

Dennis’ letter also declares that the issue of what to do with the cattalo herd, now grown to 800 animals, will be deferred to a “planned … bison environmental assessment.” These developments suggest that –

With the imminent exit of Superintendent David Uberuaga and his deputy, plus prior senior staff departures, Grand Canyon National Park personnel will play little role in this major, precedent-setting resource management decision within its own boundaries. At the same time, Glenn Plumb is being moved into Grand Canyon as its acting Chief of Science & Resource Management;

The NPS has predetermined the scientific issue of whether the cattalo are native by asserting the new unrevealed report has “fully satisfied applicable … processes and guidance”; and

The public involvement will be confined to short comments on an environmental assessment circuited for quick approval of the pre-selected NPS path – allowing state licensed hunters to pay for the privilege of “culling” this largely stagnant herd.

“The Park Service is desperate to create the illusion that these cattalo are some kind of mystery meat,” added Ruch. “There is no mystery that this is all about politics, not science, and that Grand Canyon will be the loser.”<<<More Information>>>

And, as is typical, when, as a government insider, when you really screw up, you get promoted. Daily Caller has that story.

Share

A Maine National Park Would Be Racist – a Place to Lynch Black People, Promote “White Privilege”

You can’t make this stuff up. It’s just too bizarre and perverted. However, the National Park Service Deputy Director for Communications and Community Assistance, Mickey Fearn, told the world that black people don’t visit our national parks because there are trees there and those trees remind them of lynchings – this according to Sultan Knish on his website.

The United State’s first national park was Yellowstone. It opened in 1872, a few years after the Emancipation Proclamation. Not that some lynchings of black people didn’t happen after the Proclamation but I doubt there were many in our national parks. So, it must be the trees that some within the administration of the National Park Service find offensive. That presents a real problem.

According to Knish, the origins of such nonsense came from a person who was denied tenure at U Cal Berkeley and this was because of racism, she claims, not failure to achieve according to academic standards of the university. Knish writes of Carolyn Finney: “These days she’s a diversity advisor to the U.S. National Parks Advisory Board. What wasn’t good enough for UC Berkeley is good enough for national parks. She is also the author of Black Faces, White Spaces. In it she claims that “oppression and violence against black people in forests and other green spaces can translate into contemporary understandings that constrain African-American environmental understandings.” Yessiree Bub! You betcha!

If Finney, and evidently Fearn, are representative of the direction the National Park Service is headed and the goals they intend to achieve, one has to seriously consider whether such below-the-dung-heap, brainless and perverted idiots should be part of any proposed national park or national monument like the ones being pushed in Maine. Why do we allow our tax dollars to be spent on such programs and the representatives of them?

While most of the debate in Maine has been whether or not the local residents want a national park in their back yards and whether it actually would hurt or help the economy, to this point I haven’t heard much talk about the psychological make-up of members of the administration of the National Park Service. I certainly hope others see such beliefs as far from normal.

We also know that President Obama appointed Roxanne Quimby, the individual who owns the land that she is determined to either make into a national park or a national monument, to the Board of Directors of the National Park Foundation.

Certainly I’m not remotely suggesting that Roxanne Quimby, because she wants a national park in Maine, is a racist or promotes the insanity of the individuals calling the existence of trees racism. One would have to be totally lacking in any brain matter at all to think that the establishment or existence of a national park, or any park for that matter, is somehow racially connected. What should come into question however, is the mental stability, along with real racism that may exist with the administrative structure of the National Park Service/Foundation.

It is one thing to call out legitimate racial issues and expose them for all the right and proper reasons. This is utter nonsense, that if brought to the forefront of any kind of discussions on race only a short time ago, would have resulted in straight jackets and institutionalization. Anyone who sees a tree as a threat to them due to “white privilege” and racism, don’t need education in racism, they need to be immediately removed from their influences within the National Park Service…for starters.

Knish further writes: “Influential figures in the National Park Service reject the fundamental idea of preserving natural beauty. They view a forest as a “white concept” full of scary racist trees. Or at least that’s what they claim.”

So what are we supposed to do with all the trees – at least those big enough to hang a person from? This, I’m sure, if agreed upon by the U.S. Government, should result in the immediate destruction of all trees and anything that tree might remind a sufferer of this syndrome of.

Knish further expounds of the diversion tactic of this nonsense in order to continue the “Shartoning” of this nation, i.e. destroying the national parks in order to deflect the money from “racist” parks to prop up more racial programs – the likes of which Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have made a living. I’ll let readers decide on that one.

Regardless of the desire for results of those whackos who make such absurd statements, they are representatives of the National Park Service. Shouldn’t it be for that reason alone, the State of Maine, and any other state, should do whatever is necessary to make sure that a United States Government that appoints/allows people who say and do insane things, has no further holding and control over them.

If nothing else, Roxanne Quimby and her representatives, should publicly denounce such extremists statements, demanding that these people no longer have influence over the National Park Service. If that is not sincerely done, then Quimby should resign her position on the board of directors.

If not, then what are we left to think?

RacismMaineNationalPark

SmokeyBearRacist

Share

Mainers Should Be Fearful Of a National Park/Monument Designation

Many Maine residents feel threatened by the prospect of Roxanne Quimby giving her land, and land that doesn’t belong to her, to the Federal Government for the purpose of a proposed national park. One of the biggest concerns that Maine residents have is they do not want the Federal Government having more power over lands and regulations in the Pine Tree State. Most of these same residents, while justifiably fearful of a central government, don’t fully understand the structure and history of a corrupt government – in this case the National Park Service/Foundation.

Before I provide links to information where readers can determine for themselves how concerned they really should be, let me first remind readers that Roxanne Quimby is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Park Foundationappointed by Barack Obama.

Several years ago, I wrote, “The Crippling and Destructive Power of the Endangered Species Act.” In that piece, I wrote of the World Heritage Convention (WHC) of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Their written goals are: “By adopting the Global Strategy, the World Heritage Committee wanted to broaden the definition of World Heritage to better reflect the full spectrum of our world’s cultural and natural treasures and to provide a comprehensive framework and operational methodology for implementing the World Heritage Convention. This new vision goes beyond the narrow definitions of heritage and strives to recognize and protect sites that are outstanding demonstrations of human coexistence with the land as well as human interactions, cultural coexistence, spirituality and creative expression. Crucial to the Global Strategy are efforts to encourage countries to become States Parties to the Convention, to prepare Tentative Lists and to prepare nominations of properties from categories and regions currently not well-represented on the World Heritage List.”[emboldening added]

In addition I wrote: “Because the U.S. is a signed member of WHC/UNESCO, we are obligated through this convention to designate and/or establish “World Heritage sites”, i.e. Statue of Liberty, Independence Hall, Yellowstone National Park, the Everglades, etc. This convention also demands the protection of habitat for listed threatened or endangered species. Ceding control of these public properties is troubling enough, but the Convention becomes even more far reaching. WHC/UNESCO is granted power through this treaty, signed by the U.S. to take “buffer zones” around “World Heritage properties” if they so deem it necessary for the protection of “their” property. These “buffer zones” can be as wide as 5 miles, or whatever is necessary to “preserve” world heritage. It just could be your land and your property.”

Must I remind readers that according to the U.S. Constitution, all Treaties are the Supreme Law of the Land?

The United States Government, the Department of State and the National Park Service/Foundation, work with the United Nations through the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) to nominate places for protection.

Readers and Maine residents should bear in mind that the WHC has stated that they are looking to protect and preserve any lands, private or public, that, if disturbed in any way would disrupt or in any way negatively effect “endangered or threatened” species – flora or fauna.

Maine residents recently learned of a lawsuit to stop the state from cutting timber on public land that might pose a danger to the endangered Atlantic salmon. The person who is bringing the lawsuit has been instrumental in getting the Atlantic salmon federally protected. Is it a mere coincidence that this public land sits adjacent to property owned by Roxanne Quimby; land she intends to be either a national park or a national monument and attempts are underway to stop the harvesting of trees? I’ll let you decide.

In addition to the Quimby park and/or monument proposal, Maine residents shouldn’t forget about efforts that are still ongoing to turn a million or more acres of the Great North Woods into national park wilderness.

While readers chew on the fact that Quimby sits on the board of the Park Foundation, and by that position is eligible to work with to discover and nominate lands, both private and public, for protection under the World Heritage Convention, are we to still consider her proposal as only a mere gesture of kindness? Don’t forget, she also has been quoted publicly as saying that Americans should not have the right to own land – even though she does herself, utilizing a capitalist system to earn millions of dollars in order to own that land.

But there is more to the Federal Government threat to Maine people than whether of not Roxanne Quimby is suspect in getting her land turned over the Feds or the United Nations. The National Park Service and the National Park Foundation have a terrible history of caring for the property they take or inherit as well as using deceitful tactics and outright corruption and criminal acts to destroy lands designated as parks and monuments as they so please, in order to fulfill political and environmental agendas.

Consider what the National Park Service did to the Point Reyes National Seashore and the Vails Ranch on Santa Rosa Island. Where once the Point Reyes National Seashore was established, legally and with full support, as a means of protecting a portion of the California seacoast by protecting the ranching community. The protected ranching community was a way of ensuring that urban sprawl and development wouldn’t take over the land.

Because Environmentalism is against ranching, farming, growing crops, etc., they have destroyed the original foundations of the National Seashore, in order to rid the land of ranching. One has to ask what protections are there in designating any land as a park or a monument if stuff like this can happen. Readers should also not get hung up on whether they agree with doing away with ranching or any other environmental-activist cause. They should be aware that government corruption will do just as it damn well pleases. This time it happened to have been the destruction of ranching. What will it be next time?

We know from history that an overreaching government “takes” lands adjacent to parks and monuments in the name of protection. The U.N. Treaty with WHC demands that “buffers” be taken around “sites” for further protection. If the Quimby parcel is designated as a “monument” by Barack Obama before he leaves office, what assurances do Maine residents have that any of that land will actually be protected from anyone or anything? In addition, because Maine owns land adjacent to Quimby, public lands and Baxter State Park, do we have any sense of honesty and decency that our Federal Government will honor its pledges? Can we assume that the U.S. Government will automatically, according to treaty, take more land as a buffer? Or will all access, all industry and all recreation be banned due to government regulation and Environmentalism?

There is one more thing that Mainers should consider. This year marks the 100-year anniversary of the National Park Service. We also know that the National Park Service is some $11.9 billion dollars behind in maintenance and upkeep. In short, like with most Federal lands, government is eager to “take” the land but not too eager to take care of it.

In consideration of the 100-year birthday and lack of money, members of Congress have proposed a bill as a part of the 100-year celebration to find better ways to fund the National Park Foundation. One of those is to appropriate $25,000,000.00 a year, from 2017-2023 (inclusive)($1.75 billion) to be used to match funds from “private” donations. What could possibly go wrong?

Anyone with eyes willing to see, realizes that money is the root of all corruption. We witness year after year big money buying political favors only to be answered with huge payoffs after certain parties win office. It matters not which party. The only limitation of the corruption that will prevail once the Department of Interior and the National Park Service begin taking bribes from so-called private donations, is in one’s mind.

If Maine residents think they have their hands full of trying to work with Ms. Quimby to keep her land open for recreational access, go ahead and invite the most corrupt U.S. Government, through the National Park Foundation, World Heritage Convention and the United Nations to take ownership of a big chunk of land right next to Baxter State Park.

For those who don’t have or are quickly losing faith and trust in a central government, consider that changes proposed within the above mentioned bill, include changing the appointment of the Chairman of the Board of the National Park Foundation, from a position voted on by the Board, to a paid position (Level V) appointed by the sitting president.

These reasons I have laid out for you, are reason enough to fight to make sure the Feds don’t get an invitation. If they want the land, they will take the land whether we want them to or not. But, let’s not give them a damned invitation.

 

Share

Final White-Tailed Deer Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, Fire Island National Seashore, New York

SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of 
the Final White-tailed Deer Management Plan and Environmental Impact 
Statement (Final Plan/EIS) for Fire Island National Seashore, New York. 
The Final Plan/EIS identifies Alternative D as the NPS preferred 
alternative. When approved, the management plan will guide management 
of white-tailed deer at Fire Island National Seashore through the use 
of integrated tools and strategies to control the deer population and 
support preservation of the natural and cultural landscape, protection 
and restoration of native vegetation and other natural and cultural 
resources.

Alternative D, identified as the NPS preferred alternative, 
provides a combined lethal and nonlethal deer reduction option through 
the use of sharpshooting with firearms, and possible capture and 
euthanasia to reduce deer populations to a desirable level. Once the 
target density has been reached, use of nonsurgical reproductive 
control of does may be used to maintain that level when an acceptable 
reproductive control agent is available that meets NPS established 
criteria.<<<Read More>>>
Share

North Woods national park debate centers on distrust of government, jobs

*Editor’s Note* – Those that are familiar with my writings know that I support private land ownership and promote that a landowner should be able to do what they wish with their land. I’ve also said that if Ms. Quimby believes a park, on her land in northern Maine, would be such a grand idea, perhaps she should employ some of her own capitalism genius and open her own private park on her own private land. But, because she proposes a national park, which would involve taxpayer money, along with more co-existence with a fascist government, she leaves her proposal open to public debate and scrutiny.

According to the 2013 Operating Report of Baxter State Park, 117,481 visitors came to the park that year – or about 322 people per day. The headline above, taken from the article linked to below, may be what some are focusing the debate about, but it may be just a distraction. The reality is the talk of jobs and a bolster to the region’s economy is a moot point if nobody is going to come.

According to the National Park Service, 2,563,129 people visited Acadia Park in 2014. Some seriously believe a National Park in the middle of nowhere, that doesn’t come close to comparing with Acardia, with nothing more to see and do than Baxter State Park, will at least share some of those visitors to Acadia, or even come close to the same number of visitors.

Unless Ms. Quimby intends on building a modern theme park, which is nothing the National Park Service has really ventured into, I fail to see why more people would be expected to visit a piece of land adjacent to Baxter State Park when there is Baxter State Park, which is not, by park attraction standards, overrun with visitors.

The article, linked to below, describes for readers what the author thinks the proposed park would look like: a rough road, a “stunning” view of Mt. Katahdin, hiking trails, nearby camping and boat launches. He just described Anywhere, Maine, except the “Anywhere” is in the middle of nowhere.

The author can do no better that to offer up a couple of pictures of the region – a picture of water flowing over rocks (found in a million places in Maine) and a second picture showing the destruction by beavers on the forest.

If you build it, they won’t come. They don’t come to Katahdin and I’ve seen no proposed plans that would make this new park anymore attractive than Baxter.

And there is another aspect few discuss. As was told to me by a friend, a guide he knows from Northern Maine reminded him that, once folks find out that we have black flies, mosquitoes and deer flies they find better uses for their time and money.

The National Park Service cannot properly take care of the nearly 400 parks included in the system. Of the 280,000,000 million visitors to national parks annually, the average becomes around 700,000 visitors per year. I have serious doubts that any new park proposal adjacent to Baxter State Park will come close to that number, thus rendering any national park just another burden on Park System and ultimately the taxpayer.

With all of this in mind, has anybody considered that with all the talk we hear from lawmakers in Washington each year about selling off federal lands, are there ever any guarantees that the Federal Government, i.e. the National Park Service, along with its active participation with the United Nations in finding land globally to lock up and keep people out of, won’t sell this land to the Chinese or do with it something worse, should they discover this park a huge liability?

The ten least visited national parks, ranging in visitors from under 12,000 annually to 175,000 annually, have far more to offer than a view of a mountain, water tumbling over some rocks and trees that beaver have destroyed.

The bottom line is there is NOTHING within this park proposal that even remotely rises to the level of national park consideration.

Let it go. One would think that with the persistence in the effort, there must be some politics behind it and not just some generosity of a philanthropist.

I don’t even think the area would make a good location to raise bees.

A rough loop road includes a stunning view of Mount Katahdin, the state’s highest peak, and hiking trails lead to several nearby summits. Existing camping areas were used this summer by artists, Boy Scouts, summer camps, educational programs and Colby College. Several boat launches provide access to the East Branch of the Penobscot River, which Thoreau rode on a flat-bottomed bateau on his final visit here in 1857.

Soaring eagles, lumbering moose and bounding snowshoe hares are common sights. Other wildlife includes bears, fisher cats and federally protected Canada lynx.

Source: North Woods national park debate centers on distrust of government, jobs | Sun Journal

Share

Feds Immune In Deadly Mountain Goat Attack

 SEATTLE (CN) – The National Park Service is not responsible for a mountain-goat attack that killed a hiker in Olympic National Park, the Ninth Circuit ruled.
A divided three-judge panel on Monday found the Park Service had no duty to destroy the animal despite numerous complaints about its aggressive behavior.
Robert Boardman was hiking with his wife, Susan Chadd, and a friend in Washington state’s Olympic National Park when they encountered the goat in October 2010. They were on a popular trail near Klahhane Ridge when they encountered the goat, known as “Klahhane Billy.”

Source: Courthouse News Service

*Editor’s Note* – In a related email, Dr. Valerius Geist was quoted as saying, “I was involved as an expert witness for the plaintiff in the first court case, and discovered – again – that the park had no biologist experienced in animal behavior. Nobody in charge recognized what the billy was signalling, long before it attacked. The billy had begun a very long time before the attack signalling its dominance over humans, initially in a weakly expressed dominance display. That’s what a big billy will do testing a rival. It means that – eventually – it will attack. That’s a guarantee. Nobody in the park understood that, and probably still don’t! A mountain goat displaying to humans has to be removed. That was not done, and the tragedy continued to its predictable end.”

Share