In the previous article, stone wrote:
The ones that think there is wilderness in the lower 48, that push
for rewriting the National Park general management plans to limit
access for the public unless you are a backpacker, that pushed
private boats out of Isle Royale (America's only "maritime" park)
[...]

Huh? Off the top of my head I can think of Channel Islands (national)
and Hanauma Bay (state) parks.
--
_+_ From the catapult of |If anyone disagrees with any statement I make, I
_|70|___=}- J.D. Baldwin |am quite prepared not only to retract it, but also
\ / |to deny under oath that I ever made it. -T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------

"J.D. Baldwin" wrote:

In the previous article, stone wrote:
The ones that think there is wilderness in the lower 48, that push
for rewriting the National Park general management plans to limit
access for the public unless you are a backpacker, that pushed
private boats out of Isle Royale (America's only "maritime" park)
[...]

Huh? Off the top of my head I can think of Channel Islands (national)
and Hanauma Bay (state) parks.

Stone is full of misinformation. The general management plan did not
push private boats out of Isle Royal. It does attempt to separate the
backpackers/kayakers from the motorboats, so that someone who spent
three days hiking or paddling to a remote campsite doesn't have to put
up with someone docking their cabin cruiser 100' away and running the
generator all night. The plan was approved three or four years ago, and
you can still take your boat to Isle Royale.

And as you correctly point out, Isle Royale is hardly America's only
maritime park.

--
//-Walt
//
//