Pemi Wilderness Bridge Info - Follow-up

[cushetunk]

Is it me or is this discussion of hay/horses/snowmobiles just pointing to a larger problem with this whole "wilderness" situation????? Ridiculous. PA-LEEZ!!!!!

I don't see it as pointing to a problem, provided there were no motorized vehicles in the wilderness area. (Well, and provided the hay is weed free. Gotta keep the invasive plants out.)

I am confused as to what makes this a "situation." Wilderness isn't managed for hiker convenience. Nor is it managed by popular vote, and thank goodness for that.

 

[David Metsky]

I don't see it as pointing to a problem, provided there were no motorized vehicles in the wilderness area.

I agree, the FS appears to have followed the rules that they set up. No larger problem that I can see.

 

[psmart]

Just to be sure we're all on the same page, horses are allowed in Wilderness, and motorized vehicles are not. Although it's been suggested that snowmobiles were used to take hay to Black Brook, I believe it was only transported by snowmobile to the Wilderness boundary.

 

[Becca M]

what's ridiculous? All this legality and meanwhile we have helicopters dropping supplies overhead to huts, fighter jets and planes overhead, signs of "revegetation" to complete EXCESS in areas where shelters have been removed, bearboxes, fading blazes/trails.... yet we cannot facilitate user enjoyment with an actual bridge or 2. These rules are ridiculous. Beat me up if you want, but, that's how I see it.

 

[David Metsky]

These rules are ridiculous. Beat me up if you want, but, that's how I see it.

We're just trying to understand why this incident, which seems to have followed the rules that have been in place for a substantial amount of time, presents any new data or controversy. If you don't accept that Wilderness can exist in the East that's one thing, but once you accept that it does some amount of regulation is necessary.

The hay/horse/snowmobiles question was just to determine if the FS followed the rules, and it appears they did.

 

[sardog1]

<amateur sociologist>
As always, this whole discussion about "wilderness" is fascinating to someone who has seen the various iterations of the concept and its promotion/regulation/legislative finagling in other parts of the country.
</amateur sociologist>

Carry on.

Damn, this Internet thang might just catch on:

TRANSCONTINENTAL WILDERNESS SURVEY: COMPARING PERCEPTIONS BETWEEN WILDERNESS USERS IN THE EASTERN AND WESTERN UNITED STATES

 

[rocket21]

Is it me or is this discussion of hay/horses/snowmobiles just pointing to a larger problem with this whole "wilderness" situation?????

Who is John Galt?

 

[Stan]

I have tremendous admiration for those who stick with their principles but sometimes government is not one of those ... finding ways to create waivers of far greater impact has been modus operandi since government began. There are usually clever and highly paid lawyers involved.

In this case I wonder if such a waiver, a short term one at that, would really cause any harm if there were adequate snow cover? I don't know but horses can cause some disruption too ... think of the postholing! I would be curious to know the comparative costs of various schemes of clearing the remains of that bridge to see whether such a waiver could be justified on a financial basis, providing no greater harm is done to the wilderness area.

Not to get too far off topic but is there much trail riding in the Pemi or other White Mountain wilderness areas? Are horses held to a literal interpretation of leave no trace? ... or is there some species discrimination going on here?

 

[psmart]

In this case I wonder if such a waiver, a short term one at that, would really cause any harm if there were adequate snow cover? I don't know but horses can cause some disruption too ... think of the postholing! I would be curious to know the comparative costs of various schemes of clearing the remains of that bridge to see whether such a waiver could be justified on a financial basis, providing no greater harm is done to the wilderness area.

The FS could deviate from the rules if a (motorized) alternative had less impact on the Wilderness. For example, a helicopter was used to fly materials in and out for the Dry River bridge reconstruction - Because of the difficult ground conditions it was argued that a couple of brief flights would be less disruptive that dragging everything overland. However, this can only be done after a complete scoping process. The same issue often arises about using chain saws for major storm cleanup, but usually they decide to stick with hand tools.

..is there much trail riding in the Pemi or other White Mountain wilderness areas? Are horses held to a literal interpretation of leave no trace? ... or is there some species discrimination going on here?

No, there isn't much horse use in the WMNF, but wilderness rules allow any type of "non-mechanized" transportation, which includes the animal of your choice.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

No, there isn't much horse use in the WMNF, but wilderness rules allow any type of "non-mechanized" transportation, which includes the animal of your choice.

And the impact of skidding over snow is much less, hence doing it in winter. Because, of course, wheels are not allowed, even if big soft tires would do less damage than skids.

Tim

 

[RoySwkr]

>> Beat me up if you want, but, that's how I see it.

Doubt I could catch you to try

>We're just trying to understand why this incident, which seems to have
>followed the rules that have been in place for a substantial amount of
>time, presents any new data or controversy.

The blog seemed to indicate that motor vehicles had gone to Black Brook which would have violated the rules, but apparently not. And why couldn't the horses drag in their own feed when they went - how many meals did they need?

[Perhaps like someone else] I am disgusted that the FS needed to remove the bridge immediately because it was an eyesore, but was perfectly willing to leave the pile of junk for years which was more of an eyesore. With all the money the FS spends on planning, they didn't do a very good job here.

 

[dailey7779]

The blog seemed to indicate that motor vehicles had gone to Black Brook which would have violated the rules, but apparently not. And why couldn't the horses drag in their own feed when they went - how many meals did they need?

They didn't tell us where the horses were set up, just that the hey was being brought to horses and the horses were helping for the removal of the old bridge parts. The ATV looked like it might be too wide to drive over the bridge right before the wilderness boundary. They probably had the horses set up near the Franconia Falls Trail.

Happy Hiking Everyone!

-Chris