A June 17 editorial argued that a lawsuit seeking removal of structures in the Olympic National Park Wildernesses should be dropped. If you value wilderness and believe federal agencies should follow the law, this opinion comes up short.
Congressional intent has been to protect some of the nation’s remaining natural and unmodified federal lands in a National Wilderness Preservation System for the benefit of future generations.
Courts have ruled that the over-arching responsibility of managing agencies is to protect “wilderness character” or wildness. And roads, structures and aircraft landings are viewed as the antithesis of wilderness. The 2012 Green Mountain Lookout Case and the 2005 Olympic National Park Shelters Case generated rulings against the government for ignoring the Wilderness Act restrictions on structures. These cases and many others have affirmed that agencies have a primary responsibility to the Wilderness Act and to maintain wilderness character. They have also affirmed that when an area is designated wilderness the pre-existing structures are in conflict with wilderness management objectives.
There are now more wilderness exceptions and modification proposals before Congress than ever. Mountain bikers want wilderness trail access, hunters and shooting sports people want opportunities for habitat manipulation, water users want new reservoirs and water transmission opportunities, some want more local control, and so the list goes.
I am a Northwesterner for whom the Olympic and Cascade mountains are unique and magical. I am continuously amazed that so many are unable to appreciate the uplifting wild qualities of these areas without superficial recreation improvements and enhancements.
Bernie Smith
Beaverton, Oregon
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
