Wilderness is the new currency of environmental groups, and it damn sure isn't in short supply. There is more designated Wilderness today than at any point in history...and that's a fact.
I've enjoyed Wilderness both professionally and personally for over 20 years in my home-state of Idaho, but people that think it's necessary for the "protection" of public lands are kidding themselves. There are a myriad of management prescriptions available, most of which allow for far "better" management of lands imho...acknowledging that "better" is subjective in nature.
........ I'm not arguing that it doesn't have some inherent value for the record, just that it has very, very low utilization as compared to other federal lands.
I don't favor another acre in Idaho being designated as Wilderness. Some is fine, but we long ago reached what I believe to be "balanced" in Idaho.
As to the matter of BHA,...they are an extremely "green" group in Idaho. If you believe otherwise you're either a member yourself or you've never researched the issues they weigh in on in Idaho.
Good discussion Dave, and I'd like to add to it.
First when you talk about being"green," I think you have to define that a little. Are you talking "Green Party" green, or someone like me who values clean water, clean air, and wide open spaces? Like efw, I'm tired of having to choose sides in that particular debate.
Second, you are correct in that there is more
designated wilderness now than at any time in history, but that's not surprising since the designation only took place in 1964 and we've added to the total acreage since then. So we're not talking about a big slice of "history." If you want to talk about wildlife habitat and places available for the average guy to hunt, then no we don't have more than in the past. We have less, and we're losing more of what we have every year.
You're right in that there are many different ways to manage the National Forest and BLM lands short of wilderness designation that work well. As far as the "level of use" for designated wilderness IMO that all depends on what your particular use is. I can tell you that during hunting season, people flock to designated wilderness in Colorado and there are many places with too many hunters. Same thing in the summer with some of the more popular hiking destinations like high country lakes. I've seen too many hunters in multiple wilderness locations, the designation is a magnet for hunters to the point that I avoid some of them. There are better places to hunt that don't have the designation, they're just roadless so not as many hunters target them.
As far as more wilderness in ID, I can't comment on that because I don't live there. That's a local/state matter. I can tell you that here in CO, lots of people do favor more designated wilderness, and I cited one example in a previous post. Again, it's a local/state issue.
