As part of developing its backcountry access plan, Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida will also conduct a wilderness eligibility assessment for lands within the original boundaries of the preserve.
The Preserve first initiated public scoping for the backcountry access plan in the fall of 2013.
“Public comments received during the scoping period recognized a need for the Preserve to identify areas eligible for Wilderness designation as a part of this planning effort to identify off-road vehicle (ORV) secondary trails, non-motorized trails, and a camping management approach within the Preserve. This step is consistent with National Park Service policy and is necessary to ensure a thorough and defensible planning process,” Superintendent Pedro Ramos said last week in announcing the assessment.
National Park Service lands are considered eligible for wilderness if they are at least 5,000 acres or of sufficient size to make practicable their preservation and use in an unimpaired condition, and if they possess wilderness characteristics (as identified in the Wilderness Act of 1964). The wilderness eligibility assessment process is anticipated to take 4 to 6 months and the final eligibility determination will be announced through an additional press release and by publication in the Federal Register.
Big Cypress officials, including Superintendent Ramos, have been criticized over their handling of past wilderness assessments associated with the Additional Lands. The Addition Lands had been closed to both ORV use and ORV-assisted hunting ever since they came to the preserve in 1996 while officials worked on developing a management plan for the area. After announcing in their 2009 Draft General Management Plan for the Addition that approximately 109,000 acres were “wilderness eligible,” the NPS subsequently conducted a “re-assessment” completely outside of public view and which concluded that only 71,000 acres were eligible and recommended just 47,000 acres be proposed to Congress as future wilderness, according to opponents.
“This suit is necessary because the Park Service improperly rewrote wilderness mapping to produce a result which had been decided behind closed doors,”Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said at the time. “We expected better of the Park Service under this administration and, thus far, we have been sorely disappointed.”
Comments
I doubt i'll be speaking to many, but the best wilderness areas are those places that don't have trails, don't need trail crews, and don't need helicopters. It's just you a topo map, and the elements. The end. There are still a few of these places left in America, but not many. We're striving to become as bland as Europe with each call to erode what's left..
Gary, so how much time have you spent in Europe?
Gary, so how much time have you spent in Europe?
I spent 3 months there.
Zeb,
Actually, I do think that banning chainsaws in firefighting and other aspects of wilderness management is a bit extreme. I question your claim that agencies are "forced" to use helicopters in wilderness except in emergencies. All the wilderness areas I'm familiar with use pack strings to deliver supplies.
I also don't think many "wilderness believers" think resources are limitless. In fact, I'm pretty sure almost all of us believe the opposite. Resources are NOT limitless and too many have already been squandered. That is why we need to hang on as hard as we can to the few wild places that have survived.
As for the idea that existing restrictions on use are "incredible," I shudder to think of the consequences that would ensue without them.
I sincerely hope that my great grandchildren and their children may still find wild places when their turn finally comes.
Backpacker, I was the one who used the term 'hyperbole', not Lee. It's defined as "exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally."
That's an honest and accurate term for "I'm not the one who's trying to close every single square inch of outdoors to the chosen few recreationists..". It isn't ad hominem to point it out.
Gary, what specific parks did you go to?
Lee,
Your comment is no more than chicken little fears. Wilderness restrictions could be easily relaxed without destroying their characters. As for the use of pack strings to deliver supplies, what a joke! Seriously, in 2014 we still have to use 1850 means to move supplies... It's a true waste of resources. A guy in a UTV could probably get more done at a fraction of the cost. It would not have that period piece charm, but then again, if I want to see 19th century reenactments, I can always watch PBS.
Ultimately, these inane restrictions drive up the costs of managing those places without any tangible benefits.
I spent a little time in Berchtesgaden. While the alps are scenic, they are not anything close to being as wild or protected like we have in the US. Europe is a mess.
Regardless, your claims provided zero studies that showcase that ATV's don't erode trails. So, until I actually see more than just words from you, I'll go by real world accounts. Maybe this is why a lot of the BLM lands in the US are trashed when compared to the wilderness areas. Its like night and day.. But for some reason, you have all this BLM and USFS land at your disposal to play in and have your 21st century playground experiences with your motor toys, and that's not good enough.
Then you provide zero studies that canoes do anywhere near the damage that airboats do. Interesting that the park management way back in the day saw the damage that airboats were doing to the everglades. The damage they do to the ecosystem is very well documented, if you look at the image in this link. Theres also been a lot of times where drunk people have tossed their motor boat into a fragile bed of sea grass, pretty much desroying the micro-ecosystem which would take many years, if not decades for it to recover with human involvement. I don't believe that I can recall hearing the same sort of destruction occuring, in regards to those that canoe and kayak the same region.