Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 33 of total 33 in this topic |
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Nov 8, 2009 - 03:59pm PT
|
Hey Supertopians, fellow Yosemite climbers,
I realize that many of you are probably rolling your eyes at this point about the planning process in Yosemite and the federal government in general, but being actively vocal and involved with this process is your best way of changing the things you don't like about Yosemite and keeping the aspects you love.
Yosemite National Park is revisiting the Merced River Plan after two previous plans resulted in litigation. This summer's court settlement with the former plaintiffs allows the Park to move forward, essentially starting back at ground zero, with another plan. The court specifically asked us to have an open and transparent process.
As the climbing community's liaison to the NPS, I see it as part of my job to encourage all of you to give your input on the future of all of the involved areas of the Merced. I am a part of the Core Team for the new Merced River Plan, and I will do my best to keep you informed on the process. To clarify here are some excerpts from the Park Service's Planning, Environment & Public Comment (PEPC) website:
"In this plan, the agency will address resource protection and restoration; development (and/or removal) of lands and facilities; user capacities; and specific management measures that will be used to protect and enhance the river's outstandingly remarkable values....The Merced River Plan/EIS will address the quantity and mixture of recreation and other public uses that may be permitted without adverse impact to the river's outstandingly remarkable values, including a discussion of the maximum number of people that may be received in the river corridor. The Plan/EIS will also include site-specific planning for Yosemite Valley, El Portal, and Wawona, along with an analysis of parkwide transportation solutions."
Here are links to comment forms, and the Yosemite-Merced River Plan homepage.
Some elements that I would expect climbers to comment on are; camping in the Valley (Camp 4 and the Pines), El Portal, and Wawona; camping stay limits; a YCA partnered climbing museum; potential outside of the Valley climber campground; El Capitan Meadow interpretive signs, restrooms, dumpsters, viewing platform for tourists or none of the above; transportation for climbers (or transportation in general). Al of these ideas are just to help you to start brainstorming. There is no plan yet, these are only areas where I think climbers should give there input.
Climbing is already an accepted and valuable part of what Yosemite is all about, not only for you the climbers, but for the 3.5 million annual Yosemite visitors from around around the world who are impressed and intrigued by climbing on Yosemite's walls. The initial public scoping period for the Merced River Plan is over December 4th. Please do your part to make the voice of climbing (access, community, culture, history, etc.) in Yosemite a significant consideration of the new plan. However, if you do miss this opportunity, there will be more periods of public involvement and outreach as the plan moves forward over the next 3 years.
I am contacting the Access Fund, the AAC, the Yosemite Climbing Association, the Alpinist, Rock and Ice, and Climbing to solicit more comments, but if you have any other suggestions on sites for outreach let me know.
Thank You,
Jesse McGahey
Yosemite Climbing Ranger
(209) 372-0360
jesse_mcgahey@nps.gov
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Thanks for staying on top of it and sharing Jesse.
Devil can be in the details and we'll be whining about the things we don't like later. Better to share the glitches beforehand. If anybody looks through the materials and shares what is particularly troublesome or inefficient, let's hear it and join our voices to steer toward a better way
Peace
Karl
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
December 4 is a really short fuse. With the time for first input that short it seems we should digest inputs from larger organizations like the Sierra Club and use that where appropriate.
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 8, 2009 - 04:40pm PT
|
We have not developed any alternative plans, and these probably won't be released until late next year. On our schedule we are supposed to release an "alternatives concepts workbook" in May of '10. After that there will be another public comment period that will last most of the summer 2010.
Right now, this is really an opportunity for everyone to express what they like, don't like, and would like to see addressed or added to the areas surrounding the Merced River and her South Fork in Wawona.
The comment form gives you a good framework of questions to think about.
Once again here is the link to the Merced River Plan homepage:
http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/newmrp.htm
You can find comment forms and links to more in depth information.
It shouldn't take very long to submit a brief comment electronically. Please take the time.
Jesse
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
hey there say, thanks for sharing this with the folks here...
god bless...
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C. Small wall climber.
|
|
Jesse, it may help if the "public comment period" on the workbook extends through the end of September 2010. Many of those at the FaceLift might then contribute, and perhaps even the NPS could publicize it and provide the wherewithal for comments at FaceLift HQ at the Visitor's Centre. Plus we could all sit around Yellow Pines talking about it, and figuring out what to say.
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 8, 2009 - 05:50pm PT
|
Good idea Anders,
I'll pass that along to the planning team. Maybe we could include a public scoping meeting for the plan as part of the Facelift. I don't know how Ken would feel about substituting a planning meeting for one of the programs, but we could probably do one first and then have an inspiring program about Yosemite to reinforce what is important to is.
Sully, (what was your real name again?)I will be bumping this thread often, because I think it is really important that the climbing community's voice is heard loud and clear in the planning process.
Jesse
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 9, 2009 - 02:42pm PT
|
I'll be bumping this often until the window for initial public comments is over December 4th. If there ar things you are really passionate about in Yosemite Valley, the Lower Merced, or anywhere else in the Merced River Cooridor, now is your time to voice them.
Jesse
|
|
LB4USC
Trad climber
Long Beach
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2009 - 05:32pm PT
|
Jesse --
Can you help pinpoint which documents actually describe what is being proposed?
It's probably my dumb luck, but it seems like all the planning documents I've opened so far don't cut to the chase.
I've read other folks postings of plans to close the Pines campgrounds, tear down a couple of the Yosemite Lodge buildings, renovate Camp 4, etc.
But I haven't been able to locate any of this on a relevant document.
Thanks.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C. Small wall climber.
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 03:32pm PT
|
kabump!
For those of you who rant constantly about how things are in the Valley, now's your big chance to vent. That's how democracy works, sort of.
|
|
Seamstress
Trad climber
Yacolt, WA
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 04:10pm PT
|
With all due respect, public comment has had an impact on what the feds have done here and elsewhere. You never get 100%, but you can influence it - perhpas you need calipers to measure the influence at times.
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 04:23pm PT
|
Bump
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 04:47pm PT
|
I have participated in this process since the 1970's. The plans that resulted reflected almost none of my opinions, but I think that shows that my views were not those of the majority of commenters.
I must say, however, that in the last go-around, I made sure that my comments were directed both toward the NPS and toward Congressman Radanovich. The latter were much more effective.
John
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 06:36pm PT
|
take it to the bridge to give us time to read, style bump...
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Sport climber
Will know soon
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 06:47pm PT
|
Jesse, I am not new to public planning and policy, but I am for Yo Valley. Where can I get a copy of the Master Plan that has previously been proposed? To speak intelligently to the various aspects of the project, it would be helpful to have information so I can then get a feel for the entire project, it's proponents and opponents over the past several years.
Thanks, Lynne
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 06:56pm PT
|
Congressman Radanovich is a Republican that I haven't always agreed with, but I did even vote for him once after he did a friend a big favor. His office tends to get things going if you happen to want something that's not opposed to his agenda.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Jason Torlano
Social climber
|
|
|
Nov 12, 2009 - 11:04pm PT
|
Jesse, you say you are part of the Core Team for the new Merced River Plan, who else is in on the planning process? I find it interesting that usually in the planning of Yosemite that there are not people on the committees that are long term residents of Yosemite.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
primordial soup
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2009 - 01:18am PT
|
I will comment "officially", but here are some thoughts/opinions I wish others would also voice:
1) Parking- The NPS has consistantly, intentionally, systematically removed available parking spaces over the last several years (dirt lot by camp4, bus lot by YosFalls, side of road between Church Bowl and the Awhanee, lot just to name a few).
Many of these areas were very useful to climbers, and by removing them climbing in those areas is harder to access and traffic congestion is artifically increased as people drive around looking to park.
2) Off site parking- If the NPS ever manages to pave vast swaths of now forrested land and forces people to bus into the Valley, the 1st people on the buses ought to (obvioiusly!) be those who are staying in the hotels! The need no food storage, have no camping gear, less warm clothes, don't have to transport firewood or even make it to the stor before closing to get food (in most cases).
3) Motorcycles- sound limits ought to be enforcable. I am under the impression it's actually illegal to have an unnecessarily loud bike, but that is not ever enforced- there ought to be a general objection on the part of all park visitors to loud motorcycles, i'd honestly prefer to see the meadow full of litter, at least it could be picked up...
4) RVs- Why are the RVs so acceptable? A family of 3 or 4 takes a tour bus sized RV into a CG and nobody blinks? I wish those people paid by the bvehicle pound- just sayin...
5) Camping- It's a cruel joke that all removed or destroyed camping has not been replaced. Hotels do not make for a wilderness experience, they make for a Disneyland experience, so when visitors treat the wilderness like Disneyland, we should not be surprised! People in Camp 4 paying per person are actually paying far more per site than in the Pines CG's, so why are the bathrooms in the Pines CG's so much nicer? That's garbage.
i could go on forever, but I'll leave it at that for now...
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2009 - 01:33am PT
|
Excellent points, Matt. Please send the comments in for real.
John
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2009 - 01:35am PT
|
1) Parking- The NPS has consistently, intentionally, systematically removed available parking spaces over the last several years (dirt lot by camp4, bus lot by YosFalls, side of road between Church Bowl and the Awhanee, lot just to name a few).
Matt
They added more Camp 4 overflow parking across the street. This parking area was specifically introduced this fall to address your concern.
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2009 - 04:43am PT
|
I agree, good points Matt.
|
|
LB4USC
Trad climber
Long Beach
|
|
|
Nov 13, 2009 - 10:15am PT
|
I still haven't been able to locate anything that "officially" describes what is actually being proposed. There are tons of pages that describe methodologies, but ... damn ... what are they looking to do?
With that said, based on what I have seen in unofficial sites, I am opposed to anything that reduces the number of campsites (drive-in or walk-in). I would be willing to forgo individual fire rings in the drive-in campgrounds. Apart from permanent restrooms, campsites seem to be the least intrusive. If a hundred year flood rolls through, they could be the easiest to restore. I've seen areas in North Pines that are under restoration without having to close the entire campground. Why is closure of the campgrounds the only solution?
I am in total agreement with Matt that guests at the Ahwahnee and Yosemite Lodge would be the least inconvenienced by alternate parking and shuttle service. In fact I would be willing to have dedicated shuttles service for hotel guests only.
I recall that Yosemite Lodge is losing two structures riverside, but is gaining new space. Probably no skin off my nose, other than the loss of parking during demo and construction.
I've seen a proposal that would make more of a walking mall around the lodge. That's kind of cool.
I've read many renovations associated with Camp 4 including laundry/shower facilities, a communal fire ring/amphitheater, and possible site for the climbing museum. Again, other than the disruption from construction ... kind of cool.
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2009 - 12:33pm PT
|
Anders, this thread was buried back on page 3, so to speak, obviously you are correct, no interest. People will bitch but when it comes to input...
|
|
Doug Robinson
Trad climber
Santa Cruz
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2009 - 12:49pm PT
|
The name is unfortunate. It will keep non water-oriented users from commenting.
Let's remember the lesson from planning after the '97 flood. Suddenly a 5-story dorm loomed over Camp 4. It got there because planners were backing away from the flood plain, trying to keep their feet dry. Understandable in process, but look how it impacted climbers!
Remember the line from The Who, "Don't get fooled again!"
Only 5000 years ago the Valley was a lake. From wall to shining wall, everything in that Valley relates to the Merced River. Therefore, this is nothing short of the latest general plan.
This is a good thing. It means we get to rework the entirety of civilization-as-we-know-it in our beloved Gulch.
It means we have another opportunity for the citizenry to take control of our Valley back from the usual suspects, the ones renting the rooms and flipping the burgers.
|
|
Bullwinkle
Boulder climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2009 - 12:55pm PT
|
The Merced River Plan???? this is from the same people that can't figure out how to put a trashcan down at EL Cap. . .
|
|
CF
climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2009 - 01:42pm PT
|
Scoping session on the Merced Wild and Scenic River Plan in Wawona on Friday, December 4, 2009
Dear WAPOA members and Friends,
We are pleased to let you know that the National Park Service has agreed to hold a scoping session on the Merced Wild and Scenic River Plan in Wawona on Friday, December 4, 2009 from noon until 4:00 p.m. This particular scoping session will be in conjunction with a meeting of the Wawona Town Planning Area Advisory Committee (WTPAC). The agenda for the meeting is included below as part of this email.
As you are probably aware, the NPS is under a court order to complete a new Merced Wild and Scenic River Plan by December 2012. As a major consideration for the plan will be land uses along the Merced River and Wawona being situated along the South Fork of the Merced, this plan will have a direct affect on the Wawona Community. The purpose of this scoping session will be to enable the Wawona community to provide input to the NPS on issues we feel warrant consideration and study as part of this planning process. While December 4th will be the last day to officially provide scoping comments, and comments will be welcomed during the meeting, we have asked the Park Service for some extra time if necessary should we elect to provide consolidated written comments following the meeting.
Recognizing this is somewhat short notice, we appreciate the opportunity to have a scoping session in Wawona and look forward to seeing those of you who can make it.
Sincerely,
Gene Spindler President, WAPOA
WAWONA TOWN PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Date: Friday, December 4, 2009
Time: Noon to 4 P.M.
Place: Wawona Community Center
Call to order by Edward Mee, Chairman
Roll Call: Members
Edward Mee, Chair Tony Christianson
Chuck Jones, Vice Chair Gale Banks
Susan Baker, Secretary Ralph Harder
Larry Williams Roger Soulanille
Eugene Spindler
Ex-officio Members
Jim Allen, District V Supervisor
YNP representative to the Superintendent, Kristine Bunnell
1. Introduction
2. Persons wishing to speak on any item of interest not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Committee.
Note; The Committee may not take action or discuss items not appearing on the posted agenda. However, members may briefly respond to questions or statements made by the public, other members or County staff.
3. National Park Service Merced River Plan Scoping
Adjournment
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 26, 2009 - 02:01am PT
|
There seems to be some sort of deadline on December 4th, which is fairly soon. And maybe Jesse, being a seasonal ranger and all, isn't around right now to bump this one. On the beach in Thailand, running marathons, you know.
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 1, 2009 - 09:40pm PT
|
LB4USC,
The reason you haven't found anything proposed is because nothing has been proposed. The planning team first carries out public scoping, then reads and compiles the comments from this period, and then begins to form draft alternatives. There are many internal ideas of how we should manage the values of the river, and the developments in its watershed to maintain its integrity. However, these ideas are still being developed and have not been incorporated into a proposal or draft alternative.
The comments you wrote here are exactly the type of thing we want to hear. Please follow up, and send the comment form provided in my links.
Anders,
I was gone for a couple weeks of family vacation, and now I'm back for a week. I'm actually no longer a "seasonal ranger", but thankfully I still get some time off as a furlough. This year I'll be off until late January.
Bullwinkle, I also think its a good idea to put a trashcan at El Cap. Some do not. Right now the bear boxes that climbing management put down there are the defacto trash pit, and nobody like having their stash of Cobras mixed with dirty diapers! Some folks think that this would constitute more development, and they are opposed to any form of it. It would also cost $ to maintain. I'll try to get one installed down there, once again, next spring. Send in your comments, and remember that we are going through this process again because a private group sued the NPS and won.
For everyone, think about how we can limit impacts to the Merced River, and the values that make it special to us all. We have been directed to spell out "user capacity" in definite terms with this next plan.
More camping seems to be a consistent call of all user groups. I think one area where climbers really have an advantage is in our willingness (if not preference) for tent camping and walk in campsites like Camp 4. Evidently, this level of camping has far less of an impact than RV camping or individual parking sites.
Finally,
I want to remind everyone who doesn't have the opportunity to be heard through their comments before December 4th, that this process will be ongoing and once we have draft alternatives you will have another public comment period.
Jesse McGahey
Yosemite Climbing Ranger
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 1, 2009 - 09:49pm PT
|
Jason,
There are many long term residents on the core team. John Dill, is one you may know, Kim Tucker is another, Mark Butler, Loren Fazio, and Elexis Mayor, are a couple more.
Who else from the NPS would you want to be on the core team? Maybe they are already...there are about 40 people on board!
I think of one of my principal roles as a part of the core team as representing the climbing community's interests, and still speaking for the intrinsic values of wilderness and the river. If you have any particular concerns let me know, turn in comments, and go to the meetings.
Jesse
|
|
JesseM
Social climber
Yosemite
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 2, 2009 - 04:51pm PT
|
Bump
|
|
CF
climber
|
|
Are you ready?
|
|
| Messages 1 - 33 of total 33 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!