Commentary on this weeks letters.
I would ask your indulgence as well as your thoughts.
Topic #1
-Road is last defense against wilderness.
What is the big deal about wilderness? Isn’t the park already untouchable?
Topic #2
-How about some balance.
The letter to the editor is dead on!
There is an apparent liberal twinge to the SMT which plays to the masses.
Topic #3-Educating pols.
Again the note is dead on!
However there is a since of power in increasing the government and the excuse of using education has always been a good place to hide that intent. As for future votes, the people of this fair land must be on guard against the vial enemy of complacencey otherwise they and all of us will be lost.
We must turn out and be heard with our vote! This last election was proof of that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Wake up Swain County, if the county loses the 1943 Agreement the Park will be turned into wilderness instead of just being managed as one, and you can count on zones of restrictions around the Park.
Specifics, please, of these zones of restrictions that you are so worried about...
There is an old saying, 'When given lemons, make lemonade'.
A Wilderness Designation for the North Shore is just such a chance. Rather than looking at it as something too terrible to contemplate, the potential designation of the North Shore under the Wilderness Act provides an opportunity to encapsulate in law several of the aims or solutions to concerns by some Swain residents.
For an area to be designated as wilderness under the terms of the Wilderness Act, a separate piece of legislation is required. This new law would state that such and such an area is now designated as wilderness under the terms of the Wilderness Act (P.L. 88-577). These new laws also typically spell out exceptions to the Wilderness Act that the new 'wilderness' will follow.
Examples of such 'exceptions' to the Wilderness Act can be viewed in the online document Wilderness Laws: Prohibited and Permitted Uses
For example, a directly relevant example is the legislation establishing the Charles C. Deam Wilderness in Indiana. Section 3 of the act establishes in law the right of public access to a cemetery.
Another issue seems to be concern about buffer areas. Here is an example of wilderness area that establishes limits of buffer zones (see section 6). Here is another example, this time in Nevada (see Section 7)
It is clear, from reviewing existing laws establishing Wilderness Areas, that there is plenty of wiggle room in negotiating exactly what 'Wilderness' will mean in these documents.
Herein lies the opportunity. Rather than depend on the goodwill (or not) of the Park Service to provide access to cemeteries on Decoration Days, a North Shore Wilderness Designation law would provide an opportunity to legally bind the Park Service to providing access and transportation. Should they not perform, you would at least have the redress of taking them to court. Today you have no real option other than writing letters.
Similarly, the first document I linked points out that the Wilderness Act §4(d)(1) allows "the use of aircraft or motorboats, where these uses have already become established," subject to "desirable" restrictions;
While the phrase "desirable restrictions" sounds ominous, this is exactly the type of thing that could be addressed specifically in the establishing legislation. Recreational use of Lake Fontana is clearly "already established" in the North Shore area. A wilderness designation for the North Shore could specifically prohibit any restriction on these types of activities.
Specific historic structures in the North Shore area could also be exempted from Wilderness Restrictions by this legislation.
For most other matters, the North Shore area is already being managed as wilderness, so no great change occurs in the future if it is made official.
In summary, a Wilderness Designation provides a legal mechanism to put many (not all, but many) of the goals of the North Shore Historical Association into law. Were the leaders of that group to reach out of other parties that they traditionally consider on the other side of the fence - i.e. Cash Settlement forces, Friends of the Smokies, Smoky Mtn Association, and yes, even maybe the Sierra Club, I suspect they would find widespread support for just such compromises. It would be a win-win for everyone.
I know this proposal will probably make a few heads explode, but take a deep breath, count to 100 and then give it some real consideration. You can fight a Wilderness Designation and run the risk of losing completely, or embrace it and make it happen on terms acceptable to you. The choice is yours.
Anyone for tainted kool aide. Tell you what I got a option of the golden gate bridge no matter what the authorities say. It will go cheap and you can make a fortune! Trust me.
Wilderness serves no progress of any kind. It is a stab in the back and twist to Swain County. North Carolina will be able to claim 99 counties and one federal reserve.
Macon County and Jackson will be the gateway to the Smokeys.
To there is another way....Take your "wilderness" ideas and go where you came from! We will fight wilderness til the day we die and then the younger ones will step up to the plate and carry on ! our ancesters TRUSTED the government to leave their homes for the sake of "helping the WAR effort".If they had known the real truth ,the Feds would have had to shoot them to get their homes.The LEAST they could do after 64 years is BUILD THE ROAD that was promised back to our heritage !!! The 1943 Agreement IS a legal document or they would have put wilderness in place on the first try.IN the Final EIS ..volume I..3.2.5 says "NPS has determined that in light of the difficulties encountered in the previous wilderness propsals,any future consideration of wilderness designation should not take place until the northshore road issue is resolved."That is Proof that wilderness is definately the plan.If the road was built ,the land from the road to the lake could NEVER be made wilderness. The land we're speaking of is AN INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE,Controlled by the United Nations !UNESCO..In the smoky mountain times..nov.22,2007 ,the article "ROAD IS LAST DEFENSE AGAINST WILDERNESS by Linda Hogue sums up this issue very well.WE will NEVER give up,NO, NEVER NEVER.
TO THERE IS ANOTHER WAY!
We already have a written letter of agreement which guarantees cemetery access back in 1931.
We already have a Legal Binding Agreement called the 1943 Agreement to build our road, signed by the Federal Government. We have already defeated wilderness three times and you ask us to believe the Federal Government and the National Park Service again. Have you not learned anything from the past? We have!!!
To: "There is another way", show me a legal binding way thru the Federal Government system?? If the 1943 binding contact isn't binding, why should anyone think that anything other than "there is another way"?? As far as "goodwill of the park" this is another example that is "in writing" of the feds to fulfill an obligation to provide a service to the families of the interred there. It seems that you and the others in your arena have the view this is just for the "few" of the remaining family members to make a "yearly" trek to those interred. Look closer "if you can", it's also about economics for rural Western North Carolina, just like the benefits of 441 to Cherokee, and the towns near the Blue Ridge Parkway. It is "dollars" in the pockets of the communities, open your damn eyes.
Bull Dog Ask
Wilderness! When A National Park is fully protected every bug, bush, amimal, trees, water, living or dead or even structures. I ask how much more protection can we give it?? With this said Wilderness is just a way of gaining more land around it so the Federal Government can have more control of Swain Co. land and the people.
To: There Is Another Way
The Park Service and the environmentalist has one thing in mind and that is control over Swain County land. We were told many years ago by the chairman of the Sierra Club that they would take Swain County if they had to take it one foot at a time.
The Park has already got control to the water's edge and wanted it to the other side of Fontana Lake. At the last decoration on Hazel Creek we had our rights taken away. Only 13 people was allowed to go to the cemeteries and the other people was left behind, so don't talk to me about DESIRABLE RESTRICTIONS.This is just the beginning of what the federal government plans to do. Why would we want to embrace wilderness? It is not fit for man nor beast.
Sly Fox
You are right and I support you and your statement. Now we have to get others to see that all the NP
would like is take over our county.
Thanks for all your help and keep it up.
DOES ANYONE KNOW WHY THE EDITOR OF THE SMOKY MOUNTAIN TIMES MAKE SOME PEOPLE HAVE PROOF OF EVERYTHING IN A LETTER TO THE EDITOR? SOME PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO. IT IS JUST AN OPINION AFTER ALL.
Hey Rocket!! You think the new editor of The Smoky Moutain Crimes ah Times is already in the pocket of the MACHINE???? Give it a little thought.
Post a Comment