"William R. Watt" wrote in message
...

"riverman" ) writes:

... I haven't
been this worried for the wildlands since James Watt.

Watt and Boulton built steam pumps to drain mines. You must be thinking of
someone else. If you knew them as you claim, it's amazing at your age you
have the strength to lift a paddle.


Right: Watts, not Watt.

James Watts was Ronald Reagan's Secretary of the Interior. Never met him,
but he was on a Grand Canyon trip just a day upstream from me back in the
early 80s. He got to the Confluence, declared that this was "all too
boring", and had a chopper evacuate him out and he got a flight back to DC.
When his boatmen caught up to my private the next day, we had a serious
party with all the leftover food and liquor, courtesy of the US government.

Watts was known as the 'anti-envronment Secretary" as he made statements
like "We will mine more, we will drill more, we will cut more timber!" and
he described environmental organizations as "left-wing cults dedicated to
bringing down the type of government I believe in". He declared on Dec 1,
1981 that he would no longer meet with environmentalists. On Dec 24, he
decided to open the entire US coastline to offshore drilling (he didn't get
that one through). Later that year, he instututed a policy that stopped
reviewing any more land in Alaska for Wilderness status (he DID get that one
through). And so on.

He was forced to resign two weeks after telling a group of coal lobbysts
that his commission "had every kind of mix you can have. I have a black, a
woman, two Jews and a cripple." He was a real piece of work.

Interestingly enough, although Watt's policy that barred reviewing land for
wilderness status in Alaska was later rescinded by Bruce Babbitt, Alaska is
in the process of reinstating it. When land is being reviewed for wilderness
status, it is protected from developement, mining or drilling. Bush
suppports reinstating a version of this policy allowing a 'last chance' to
open up land slated for wilderness protection. Sort of one last grab at the
bride, I guess. g


The principle threat to "wilderness" is all the paddlers and backpackers
scaring away the wildlife. I wonder why people don't stay at home to
paddle and hike. It's a fact that most people in North Amercia live in
cities and most cities are located on the shores of lakes and rivers. If
you want a pleasant place to paddle amd hike then get your city to clean
up the shoreline. If you are real wilderness enthusiasts you would stick
to your own backyard instead of ignoring it to drive long distances to
paddle in places where you contribute to the loss of wilderness. I have
paddled all afternoon within the City Of Ottawa on a weekday and not met
another person while on the saem afternoon there are traffic jams on the
portages in Algonquin Park's "wilderness".

As far as I'm concerned if you look up and see vapour trails it's not
wilderness.


You have some valid points there. I like going into wilderness areas, but in
reality I haven't been into a real one in decades. Most of my
camping/paddling etc is in remote regions, but they aren't wilderness. But I
really like the idea that they are out there...that there are huge tracts of
land that are off-limits to developers, don't have roads through them, and
are practically inaccessible.

Back in the dam building days, Floyd Dominy and others (head of the Bureau
of Reclamation) used to say that 'all that water is being wasted' if a dam
wasn't harnessing it. Now we realize that freeflowing streams are far from a
waste: they represent the original ecosystems, with all the subtle nuances
and unknown entities. We can always make a managed stream: you can't make a
wild one. Same with wilderness: its not being wasted if no one is in there.
But even more so, just because no one is in there (or hardly anyone),
doesn't mean we have to open it up either!

--riverman