Mudhen
I have 2 ??
1. Why do they NOT want to allow more designated Wilderness ?
---- to allow more oil exploration or to allow more public USE ?
2. Aren't there ENUFF designated Wiildernessi (grin) ?
Jerry
1. For the die-hard conservatives in the GOP, wilderness is a "job killer."
2. Whether there is enough or too much designated wilderness is obviously a question that is still subject to debate. In the case of the parcel that would provide public access to the landlocked 16,000-acre Sabinosa Wilderness, the owners of the parcel are willing to donate 3,000 acres of private land that will allow the public to access the Sabinosa. However, they have stipulated that once the parcel is transferred to the federal government (in this case, the BLM), it must be designated as wilderness and managed as such along with the 16,000 acres of existing wilderness. The only controversy is in Washington--the local communities, as well as hunters and other outdoor enthusiasts, are overwhelmingly in favor of the terms of the donation.
