You are here

Assessing National Park Wilderness On The 50th Anniversary Of The Wilderness Act

Share

Published Date

September 3, 2014
Alternate Text
Has The Wilderness Act benefited the national parks as much as it could have?

It's been 50 years since President Lyndon B. Johnson signed The Wilderness Act into law in 1964, but the question remains: Why has so much land within the National Park System not been designated as wilderness?

Since 1974, U.S. presidents have asked Congress to designate at least 5.7 million acres within the system as official wilderness. While Congress earlier this year did designate more than 32,500 acres in Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan as wilderness, millions more acres in such notable parks as Yellowstone, Glacier, Grand Teton, Big Bend, Great Smoky Mountains, and Cape Hatteras National Seashore have not received this designation, even though the National Park Service has deemed the acres worthy.

While Congress ultimately is the only political body capable of designating wilderness, the National Park Service has a reputation for not promoting critical lands for protection under the Act. Part of this criticism stems from the agency's Mission 66, an initiative envisioned by then-Park Service Director Conrad Wirth that aimed to make the parks more user friendly between 1956 and 1966 with new facilities and improved access.

Olaus Murie, a founder of The Wilderness Society, voiced strong opposition to Mission 66, which aimed to foster "accessible wilderness." One aspect of Mission 66 that Murie criticized was the road-building program that accompanied it.

Historian Richard West Sellars, in Preserving Nature in the National Parks, a History, noted the National Park Service's opposition to The Wilderness Act. "In the quest to leave certain public lands essentially unimpaired, the wilderness bill represented the antithesis of developmental programs such as Mission 66 -- and it got a cool reception from Park Service leadership."

The agency, wrote Sellars, saw the Act as "redundant" since the park lands were considered to be protected from development under the National Park Service Organic Act of 1916.

Sierra Club founder David Brower believed that the Park Service's 1957 wilderness brochure, created in connection with Mission 66, was the agency's effort to "confuse real wilderness with roadside wilderness" and "helped create a lack of clarity which suggested that additional legislative protection of truly wild areas was unnecessary."

While Sellars was recounting sentiments from more than half-a-century ago, the concern remains that the Park Service is not doing enough to promote wilderness designation.

'œHistorically, the National Park Service had been reluctant to accept Wilderness Act mandates. The result has been an institutional indifference to expanding wilderness status to roadless lands,' says Frank Buono, a former Park Service manager who now chairs the board of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.  'œIt should be noted that in recent years there has been significant progress on wilderness programs in individual parks, but it is not matched by any system-wide leadership, emphasis or agenda.'

Jeff Ruch, PEER's executive director, issued a release last week to belittle the Park Service's approach to marking The Wilderness Act's 50th birthday, saying the agency spent $120,000 to produce 15 videos promoting wilderness in the park system.

'œThese videos are awfully pretty but amount to little more than institutional selfies with little substantive value,' said Ruch.

For its part, PEER has created an 'œOrphaned Park Wilderness' web center that "details every stalled wilderness recommendation and assessment while prescribing specific steps to advance the wilderness footprint of each eligible park."

'œWe are celebrating the Wilderness Act'™s half-century by highlighting its still significantly unmet potential," said Ruch.

Part of PEER's Orphaned Park Wilderness site notes that down through the years Park Service managers have developed proposals that recognized more than 19 million acres as worthy of wilderness designation, but never forwarded those proposals to either the Interior secretary, the president, or Congress. Those proposals include consideration of 1.1 million acres in Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona, 125,000 acres at Voyageurs National Park in Minnesota, and nearly 3,000 acres at Cape Lookout National Seashore in North Carolina.

PEER also created a park-by-park listing of "all legislative and administrative actions regarding wilderness," a voluminous document that notes, for instance, that while a key vision for Cape Hatteras National Seashore was creation of a "primitive wilderness" setting, the Park Service has never formally studied wilderness quality lands in the seashore, which was authorized in 1937.

Part of the problem at Cape Hatteras, the Park Service acknowledged in 2008 in a history of the seashore, was nature. Another was human access and recreation.

Well before the end of Mission 66, NPS officials understood that the beach management situation they faced was dire. As park naturalist Verde Watson titled the beach erosion control photo section of the 1957-58 annual reports, it was "Man against the Sea." The Park Service was waging a fight against a fundamental force of nature, but what was not quite as crisply understand was the futile nature of that struggle and how a commitment to preserve a "primitive wilderness" had been transformed into a commitment to protect human-made structures using techniques that actually undermined the preservation of natural beaches.

To mark the Act's anniversary, the National Park Service is:

* Participating in a panel discussion during D.C. Wilderness Week (September 13-18) about the future of wilderness for the National Wilderness Preservation System during a day with stakeholders and partner organizations at the Pew Charitable Trusts Office. 

* Attending a reception at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum today where attendees will celebrate the winners of the public wilderness photography contest on the opening day of the exhibit.

* The agency's Denver regional office is hosting an interagency panel today about the importance of wilderness and the role of partnership in fostering wilderness stewardship. Interactive activities, exhibit displays, and presentations from partner organizations will also be offered for attendees.

* Next month, Park Service Director Jon Jarvis will participate in the National Wilderness Conference in Albuquerque, the culminating and single largest national event for the 50th anniversary. 

Around the park system, the following activities are planned:

* Canyonlands National Park, Utah: 'œWalking with Thoreau' Project. A kick-off event in Moab will feature a public lecture about Thoreau and his writings. Over the course of four weekends, the park is offering free transportation from town to the park for guided walks, inspired by Thoreau, into the park'™s recommended wilderness areas. Participants will write, as Thoreau did, about their wilderness experience. Reflections will be published electronically and shared through social media.

Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona: Wilderness 50th Speaking Event. The park is hosting two speakers to discuss the importance of wilderness to audiences at the Grand Canyon School (where park-based students attend) and during an evening program for the public.

Gulf Islands National Seashore, Florida/Mississippi: 'œWilderness and You' Project. The park is providing transportation from town to park and supplying participants with camping gear to partake in a facilitated 3-day wilderness experience on Horn Island. This will likely be a first-time wilderness experience for most participants.

Isle Royale National Park, Michigan" 'œWild Stewards '“ Connecting Youth to a Wilderness Archipelago Project.' The park is implementing a program, modeled after the Junior Ranger Program, to equip wilderness youth visitors (ages 13-17) with activity booklets that engender thought and discussion about wilderness throughout the visit. Historically, wilderness users receive little to no formal contact with the park about wilderness due to the remote nature of the wilderness area relative to visitor infrastructure locations.

Joshua Tree National Park, California: Interactive Interpretive Exhibit on Display. The park has developed an interactive exhibit that asks the question, 'œWhat does wilderness mean to you?' The exhibit invites visitors to share their personal connections to wilderness via mounted notebook or iPad and can be shared, reviewed, and commented on by other visitors. Responses will be used as content for an upcoming video podcast, which will be available on the park website.

For a full list of additional celebration activities, see this site.

Comments

dillutes the wilderness experience for others, and harasses wildlife.

Funny.  I have hiked thousands of miles in non-wilderness and can't think of a single instance where I experienced "NOISE POLLUTION" from chain saws.  Like Zeb, I have hiked many a "Wilderness" where trails were nearly impassable.  Harass wildlife?  I just did a 8 NPS unit road trip including Yellowstone.  Bison on the road, Elk walking through campsites. Critters everywhere.  I don't think the wildlife is goint to find itself "harassed" by an infrequent chainsaw. 

 

 


There have been several sidetracks in this thread but the main issue is mountain bikes in wilderness. The goal of IMBA and almost all other mountain bike organizations is building up a constituency that will have the political clout to get all wilderness trails open to mountain bikes. Zip lines cannot be far behind. Driving up I- 70 a few weeks ago several large wooden towers stuck up out of the forest with zip lines strung between them.


Good for you EC.  You still fail to see what the wilderness act is about, so it doesn't matter. I dont have the time or patience to get into a 50 page thread trying to convince you of it's importance.

Sometimes a tree falls in the forest before a trail crew can get to it. That's when you either blaze through and climb over or around it, or take your ball and go home wishing to go play in the city park on the swing set. I guess that's why they call it the WILDerness. If you expect everything to be easy then you are in the wrong place.

That's part of the problem, Rodger, they want the "amusement park", not the "National Park". And some can't seem to get that a National Park is not an Amusement Park.


Driving up I- 70 a few weeks ago several large wooden towers stuck up out of the forest with zip lines strung between them.

Roger - those zip lines where within a 100 ft of a 4 lane Interstate with cars going 70 miles an hour.  They were hardly intrusive and it was hardly forest.  Actually, they were built to mimic the mining structures that are along the same route and blend in quite nicely. 

Zeb comes from a mountain biking perspective but that isn't the only or even main issue.  Personally, I see far less of an issue with mountain bikes than say horses in terms of their negative impact.  But again, I would be more than happy to allow Horses, Mtn Bikes or even ATVs and Snowmobiles (neither of which I am a fan of)  and certainly chainsaws if it meant the area was less vulnerable to paved roads or other development.  This is especially true in areas where ATV and/or Snowmobile use has been prevelent in the past. 

When you were in CO, did you get off the main roads?  There are millions of acres within a few miles that feel like Wilderness without the Wilderness restrictions.  Wish I would have been here to show you around. 


that's when you either blaze through and climb over or around it.

Oh so you are a proponent of going off trail.  Creating your own short cuts and paths?  Boy will the purist be after you now. 

 


Considering that I spent a lot of my 20s and 30s climbing and scrambling up to many of the highest points in the major ranges of Idaho, many of which don't have trails leading to the top of them.  YES.  Thats how it works.  You can leave no trace, and that's easy to practice. 


You can leave no trace,

Yeah, thats what everyone thinks.  My going off trail wont leave a trace.  Not true when multiple people are following the same path - or mutliple paths.


I rarely, if ever hike with people or in a group - it dulls the senses.  And leave no trace is pretty easy to pull off.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Your support helps the National Parks Traveler increase awareness of the wonders and issues confronting national parks and protected areas.

Support Our Mission

INN Member

The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.

Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.

You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

FREE for iPhones and Android phones.