What Boxer is All About

[KTMrad 515]

Want to voice your opinion ?? Write a letter to the UT writer at the bottom of the page.

LINK to article

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Protection, Acre by Acre

Couple's long fight to preserve backcountry aided by powerful ally

By Mike Lee

STAFF WRITER

March 27, 2007

Wilderness issues frame many land-use battles

For the past decade, San Diego conservationist Camille Armstrong and her colleagues have combed California for pristine parcels that might deserve the nation's most restrictive land-use designation.

JOHN GASTALDO / Union-Tribune

Geoffrey Smith and his wife, Camille Armstrong, are longtime San Diego County environmentalists and advocates of increasing protected wilderness areas in Southern California.

They've pored over maps, snapped stacks of photographs, camped far and wide across the backcountry, consulted managers of land-use agencies and lobbied politicians.

They've found a big-time backer in Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., head of the Senate's environment committee.

Recently, Boxer introduced her statewide wilderness blueprint for the fourth time. It proposes that more than 2.4 million acres of California – including about 45,000 acres in San Diego County – be designated as federal wilderness.

It's the largest of several wilderness bills introduced in Congress this year. Still, it covers only half of the lands in California that some conservationists say could qualify for the status, which generally prohibits buildings and mechanized transportation – including bicycles – in favor of fishing, hiking, canoeing and other nonmotorized activities.

Given the Bush administration's opposition to previous versions of Boxer's statewide plan, a bipartisan alliance in Congress is pursuing a more modest goal of marking some 125,000 acres as wilderness in Riverside County. It's all part of a decades-old strategy to secure new land protections wherever they can be had.

“Every history book that you read about California starts off with its natural beauty,” Boxer said. “We designate (wilderness) to make sure that the population gets to enjoy God's gift to our state.”

Boxer credits the persistence of volunteers like Armstrong for helping forge her California Wild Heritage Act.

“They have been my eyes and ears on the ground,” she said. “Without them, I certainly couldn't have gotten as far as I have.”

Armstrong attended her first wilderness meeting in 1987 hoping to protect oak trees and chaparral near Valley Center, where she grew up and now works as an elementary schoolteacher.

“I was so disturbed by what I saw going on with the San Diego County development in the late '70s and '80s that I finally couldn't take it anymore,” she said.

Wilderness in America

Most acreage by state

1. Alaska: 57.4 million acres

2. California: 14.3 million acres

3. Arizona: 4.6 million acres

4. Washington: 4.3 million acres

5. Idaho: 4 million acres

Source: www.wilderness.net

But the Sierra Club's gathering was about something else: generating support for a bill by then-Sen. Alan Cranston, D-Calif., that targeted huge swaths of the California desert as wilderness.

To qualify for wilderness status, the lands must already be federal property controlled by the Forest Service, the National Park Service and other agencies. They generally exclude roads, buildings and power lines.

After an area is designated as wilderness, the agencies can no longer reconfigure land-use plans to include development such as off-road vehicle courses, backcountry resorts and logging operations.

Federal land managers typically step up their patrols to ban snowmobiling, mountain biking and other outlawed activities. They mark the territory with signs, block user-created roads and beef up walking trails to accommodate more visitors interested in exploring the newly christened wilderness terrain. They sometimes limit the number of people who can enter such zones in an attempt to retain their unspoiled character.

Such restrictions resonated with Armstrong during that meeting two decades ago. She was tapped to lead the club's wilderness-organizing effort in San Diego County.

Seven years later, President Clinton signed the Desert Protection Act, adding about 7.7 million acres of wilderness on California's eastern edge and establishing the Death Valley and Joshua Tree national parks.

“We discovered that a few people can make a difference,” Armstrong said. “It was such an amazing experience to be part of something so big.”

Armstrong later married Geoffrey Smith, another longtime San Diego County environmentalist who had worked on the desert act. The couple focused on finding more untrammeled parcels for the next wilderness push.

“In 1994, we all celebrated . . . but we never let up,” said Smith, now executive director of The Escondido Creek Conservancy.

In fits and starts, about 107 million acres nationwide have been classified as wilderness through the 1964 Wilderness Act. It's considered a permanent designation.

Wilderness advocates survive political swings in part because they see the issue in moral terms, said Mark Harvey, a history professor at North Dakota State University and author of a book about the man who drafted the Wilderness Act.

“From their point of view, wilderness preservation would manifest the highest commitment that human beings could have to land protection,” Harvey said. “These are some of the best landscapes we have and we need to protect them . . . for the integrity of our own souls.”

By the late 1990s, hundreds of volunteers – including dozens from San Diego County – gathered under the umbrella of the California Wild Heritage Campaign and fanned out across the state to inventory roadless areas.

People assigned to specific parcels became known as “adoptive parents” because they became so familiar with the lands they studied.

“What's so special about the Wild Heritage Campaign is that we truly have done it from the ground up,” said Steve Evans, conservation director for Friends of the River, an advocacy group in Sacramento. “It wasn't done by lobbyists in D.C.”

Smith said the survey crews focused on lands between the desert and mountain parcels already secured as wilderness. “What was left over are lands that are pretty close to urbanized areas,” Smith said.

The wilderness alliance identified several million acres for further consideration, then turned its list over to Boxer's staff.

“We could only hope and cross our fingers that most of the . . . acres would get through in the legislation. About half of them did,” Smith said.

The conservationists hoped that excluding some of the potentially controversial parcels, particularly in congressional districts likely to draw opposition from lawmakers, would speed the bill's passage.

Things didn't turn out that way.

One challenge is that even some groups sympathetic to environmental protections remain skeptical of new wilderness areas. Among them are legions of outdoor enthusiasts represented by the International Mountain Bicycling Association, based in Boulder, Colo.

“A lot more conservation could be accomplished if there wasn't a single-minded focus on the federal wilderness designation at the exclusion of other designations,” said Daniel Greenstadt, who represents the association in San Diego.

“A wilderness proposal in some cases locks out the No. 1 user group,” he said. “It puts mountain bikers in a very difficult, unfortunate and unnecessary position. We care deeply about conservation, but we're asked to ban our own access to the backcountry.”

Such sentiments are common to debates about wilderness.

In San Diego County, most of the proposed wilderness land is in the district of Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine. The largest parcel is in the Eagle Peak area of the Cleveland National Forest, with smaller segments at Hauser Mountain, Carrizo Gorge and the Sawtooth Mountains.

“Far too often, areas are given strict environmental designations that prevent outdoor and nature enthusiasts from enjoying our natural resources,” said a statement issued by Hunter's office.

Boxer's statewide bill – she calls it a “marker” of her intentions – is likely to linger until there's a pro-wilderness president. The senator and others are focusing on areas with clear political support for wilderness designations.

“I am a pragmatist,” Boxer said. “I will get done what I can get done.”

Last year, for example, more than 273,000 acres of the Northern California coast gained wilderness status after Boxer teamed up with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena.

In Riverside County, Rep. Mary Bono, R-Palm Springs, is preparing to submit a bill that would add about 125,000 acres to the wilderness list. Her staff is working out the details before it's introduced, likely in April or May.

Meanwhile, Armstrong and Smith can be found tramping through the backcountry from as far away as Blythe, ground-truthing maps for potential wilderness additions.

“We will just keep going . . . until these areas get protected,” Armstrong said.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike Lee: (619) 542-4570; mike.lee@uniontrib.com

[Crawdaddy 96]

Scary stuff.......will fire e-mail into Union Trib address noted at bottom of article - mike.lee@uniontrib.com

[Ride-Orange 2]

Thanks for posting Rad. Here's an excerpt from the letter that I just sent to Mr. Lee:

"Dear Mr. Lee,

Your biased report of March 27, 2007 regarding the California Wilderness issue is beyond reproach. I certainly hope that you intend to perform due diligence and provide the people a report from the perspective of the majority of Southern Californias who oppose the expansion of the Wilderness act. One sided reporting is irresponsible and unprofessional."

If you get a chance to send an email like this, please cc: letters@uniontrib.com so that the editor can see it also.

[Brett 0]

Your biased report of March 27, 2007 regarding the California Wilderness issue is beyond reproach.

"Beyond reproach" means the opposite of what you intended to say. It means 'can't be criticized or blamed'

[PastaPilot 17]

The entire article promoted the wilderness designation but he did include this small section from a mountain biking groups concern.

One challenge is that even some groups sympathetic to environmental protections remain skeptical of new wilderness areas. Among them are legions of outdoor enthusiasts represented by the International Mountain Bicycling Association, based in Boulder, Colo.

“A lot more conservation could be accomplished if there wasn't a single-minded focus on the federal wilderness designation at the exclusion of other designations,” said Daniel Greenstadt, who represents the association in San Diego.

“A wilderness proposal in some cases locks out the No. 1 user group,” he said. “It puts mountain bikers in a very difficult, unfortunate and unnecessary position. We care deeply about conservation, but we're asked to ban our own access to the backcountry.”

I definetely am interested in conservation, but not if it's going to limit the accessibility to public land. When I was in Mammoth I kept looking for short day trips to take by car but the entire area is surrounded by Wilderness area and off limits to mechanized travel. Unless I have an entire week to walk around the area, I am either driving, riding or Mt biking in so I can see and appreciate as much as I can in my limited time.

Federal land managers typically step up their patrols to ban snowmobiling, mountain biking and other outlawed activities. They mark the territory with signs, block user-created roads and beef up walking trails to accommodate more visitors interested in exploring the newly christened wilderness terrain. They sometimes limit the number of people who can enter such zones in an attempt to retain their unspoiled character.

I also liked this one... Ban everything from entering the park then beef up the foot trails because now more people that never came in the first place are going to come to see the new wilderness area, but when they get here we won't let them in because we don't want to spoil its pristine beauty.

[Ride-Orange 2]

Your biased report of March 27, 2007 regarding the California Wilderness issue is beyond reproach.

"Beyond reproach" means the opposite of what you intended to say. It means 'can't be criticized or blamed'

Thanks Brett, sometimes I'm so stupid it scares me. I think he got the point from the rest of what I wrote to him though (most of which was not included here). Did you write to him and let him know what I really meant to say?

Here's a response I just received from Mr. Lee. I thankd him for the reply and requested a copy of the Pombo article from him.

Robert: Thanks for the note. While I appreciate your views, I disagree. The story and sidebar offered several reasons that reasonable people would oppose wilderness designations. I suspect you're more upset that I chose to profile the effort to support wilderness. If that's the case, I'd remind you that about this time last year I did a much longer and more detailed profile of Richard Pombo that drew similar complaints by environmentalists. Regards, mlee

[Mescalero 0]

Shame on us for not being "reasonable people".

What crap.......

I wrote Mr. Lee and his editor and havent recieved anything......... sounds like you shook him Rob.

[Ride-Orange 2]

Mike Lee sent me THIS link to the Pombo article. I remember it as a good piece that generated a small amount of support for Pombo's ESA bill (which was ultimately defeated in the Senate, and Pombo's seat in the House was ultimately won by a Democrat), and I wrote back to Mr. Lee just now thanking him for expressing a bipartisan view. I also asked him, since this was ancient history, to consider writing an updated article expressing the views of the off-road community. We'll see...

[Joliet 0]

It seemed like the Pombo article had a lot more to do with private property than use of our public lands. And the guy never missed a shot mentioning all the negative things "others" had to say about Pombo and accuse him of. I don't know how he could use the Pombo article for an excuse to off set the wilderness issues article. Mentioning that Pombo received contributions from off roaders and many corporations and indian tribes I didn't see where off roading or public use of lands was mentioned. I didn't see any proof about his articles being fair and balanced, however the conservatives probably think he is. Ken

[KTMrad 515]

It seemed like the Pombo article had a lot more to do with private property than use of our public lands. And the guy never missed a shot mentioning all the negative things "others" had to say about Pombo and accuse him of. I don't know how he could use the Pombo article for an excuse to off set the wilderness issues article. Mentioning that Pombo received contributions from off roaders and many corporations and indian tribes I didn't see where off roading or public use of lands was mentioned. I'm not sure Mike Lee doesn't write Boxer's speaches for her in his spare time. I didn't see any proof about his articles being fair and balanced, however the conservatives probably think he is. Ken

Richard Pombo would've been a great ally on our side, but was defeated....he only had $500,000 for his campaign, while (what I heard) the enviro groups threw $20 million at their candidates so they could defeat Pombo, because they were so afraid Pombo might get something realistic done with the Endangered Species Act and other issues.

Another reason we need to try to defeat Boxer next election, with large amounts of money to the candidate on our side, hopefully we'll have a good candidate !!

[Mescalero 0]

I got a reply from Mike Lee saying this...

Aaron: thanks for the note. i appreciate hearing from readers even when i disagree -- as i clearly do in this case. your message did confuse me: if you really do enjoy using wilderness areas for recreation, i would assume you would want to see more of them, not fewer. regards, mlee

I responded to this stating.......

Mike,

You stated this "your message did confuse me: if you really do enjoy using wilderness areas for recreation, i would assume you would want to see more of them, not fewer. regards, mlee"

This is what I am talking about. You are the one confused since Boxer loves to close areas for OHV use, mountain biking, and other public land use. She is on a mission to take away thousands of acres from the public on top of the thousands that have already been revoked already. They take areas away from public use and reclaim it as wilderness areas. Do you remember reading the recent goings on out at Truckhaven?

So yes, I do want to see more wilderness areas left alone and stop having enviro wackos like Boxer and Feinstein taking land away from the public. They take areas for OHV's away from public use and reclaim it as wilderness areas. Study the facts Mike.

Aaron

He did not respond to this. Hopefully doing his homework before he writes more about something he has no idea of what is going on.

oVER ANd 0uT!!!!!!

Sorry for the pink print but if the shoe fits...............

[Joliet 0]

Richard Pombo would've been a great ally on our side, but was defeated

Mikes Lee's point was that this article was pro Pombo, off-setting the other article, and I don't think it was even neutral let alone pro Pombo. However Pombo does sound like the kind of guy I would like to vote for. It must be a tough sell being in congress, wanting less government control and interference in peoples lives. I hope there are lots more like him out there. Ken

[Ride-Orange 2]

A rousing debate, I love it!

Here's more from this afternoon. It looks like I caught his attention with this one (I guess you CAN catch more bees with honey than you can with vinegar). It's an email string so read the "Original Message" first:

Robert: I've long wanted to do an indepth piece on the off-road world and your angle is among the best i've run across... i didn't realize that people were dying out there... can you give me any quick overview of the situation so i can ponder it a bit more... regards,mlee

-----Original Message-----

From: Robert N. Hoyt [mailto:rob@division8inc.com]

Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 3:48 PM

To: Lee, Mike

Subject: RE: Spurred to action | The San Diego Union-Tribune

Thanks, I do remember this article and it is a great piece. Since this is history, and the Pombo ESA bill was defeated, would you consider doing an updated story in the near future? For example; It strikes me as odd that the off-road community and the environmentalist are not teaming-up to oppose the proposed Geo Thermal exploration in the desert, or maybe something about the number of deaths that are caused every year by the over-concentration of off-roaders (which is a community that will continue to grow) who are currently squeezed into ever decreasing areas of public land…

Thanks for your consideration.

Rob

[Joliet 0]

I say offer him a day out riding with our small group, even if only riding in a truck. Or at least drive him out to Corral for a day, show him the trail we adopted, make sure Richard Tull will be there and introduce them. Show him how they have squeezed the off roaders into a few small areas. I think some "hands on" experience would make more of an impression than a thousand letters.

[sandiegoland 0]

I’ve gone back to read this article a few more times…

Mike Lee wrote an excellent article folks. Look, it wasn’t written as a 50/50 comparison of the issue (as if there could only be two sides). It’s an article about Camille Armstrong; her philosophy, her angle, her background, her support, her successes and the issue at large. Subsequently it is also about Barbara Boxer.

The article doesn’t sell me on Camille’s ideology at all. I think I better understand what she is all about though, as well as others in her camp. To me she comes across a bit single-minded and one-dimensional. In fact Mike even uses that term in voicing the dissention in the ranks of those who love the backcountry:

“A lot more conservation could be accomplished if there wasn't a single-minded focus on the federal wilderness designation at the exclusion of other designations,” said Daniel Greenstadt, who represents the association (International Mountain Bicycling) in San Diego.

=====

Generally speaking, what you want to point out directly to the author of an article are corrections, clarifications, omissions, and biases. Be specific! Another thing to engage the author in are discussions about future articles or investigations. You want to be a source or expert witness, not an antagonist.

Now, what you do if you want to disagree with Camille and her side is to write a letter to the editor and state your disagreement with the points of her case. Stick to the issue. Remember that personal attacks are referred to as ad hominem attacks, and are a sign that your argument does not hold water on its own. A published letter to the editor is how you can make your point to the readers of the UT.