🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: ca.environment
Article #7469

Re: Disaster! (was Cal Desert Bill passes!)

#7469
From: Eric Mankin
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 00:11
57 lines
3240 bytes
In article <38eo2p$hps@crl5.crl.com> ourston@crl.com (Todd Ourston) writes:
>Eric Mankin (mankin@mizar.usc.edu) wrote:


#: I am quite aware that it closes some roads. It does not close them all,
#: and I explicitly said in the post that I might join in a suit
#: to reopen certain jeep trails after the park had been established: 
#
#I can't imagine what grounds you would have for such a suit.  The road
#closures are now part of a congressional mandate--the California Desert
#Act itself--so the NPS is not only not breaking the law by enforcing those
#road closures, it must enforce those road closures to avoid breaking the
#law

It wasn't me who proposed the suit. Someone else on this thread said 
that they were; I said if it were around a trail I felt strongly about
I might even join them. 

[bicycle stuff omitted]

#: I thought it was good to get the park set and then work on its rules
#: afterward.
#
#I see.  So you figured that if our legislators just passed a law that had
#been the focus of congressional battles for the better part of a decade,
#it would be no sweat to turn around and change part of that law shortly
#thereafter?  Tell me, why would anyone in Congress want to get in the
#middle of that bruising battle again? 

Why did they get into it in the first place? That's what legislators
do; they legislate.

As wilderness, the East Mojave isn't
going anywhere, it isn't changing. And not all is wilderness. I've
read the bill. I can live with it, and hope for changes in parts I
don't like.

#: Was there anything ambiguous about the sentence, "I am 
#: emphatically not in favor of closing all jeep trails on public land"
#: in the post above?
#
#Only the part about you support for the law that prohibits ORV use of  
#some of the jeep trails that you think should remain open to ORVs.

That may make it seem contradictory, but it's not ambiguous. The overall
idea is that the idea of a park is not a bad thing, but a good one,
and the desert is still big enough so that I won'd be short of destinations.

#: They also (again, speaking selfishly) make a lot of noise. One of the
#
#Most modern ORVs do not make a lot of noise.

A "lot of noise" is a relative term. In the desert, it is often so quiet
that the sound of your own shoes on a path sounds loud. The whine
of a motor carries a long way, even a relatively quiet motor -- and
not all are quiet.
 Eric Mankin
Technical Details
Message-ID: <38eu4d$6ab@mizar.usc.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!usc!not-for-mail
References: <38bog5$57e@nuhou.aloha.net> <38ei8e$1ic@mizar.usc.edu> <38eo2p$hps@crl5.crl.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fa1e9,863af5ff4b0f7c61
X-Google-Attributes: gidfa1e9,public
X-Google-Thread: 10df74,92400604b160c5bc
X-Google-Attributes: gid10df74,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-23 17:18:54 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!usc!not-for-mail
From: mankin@mizar.usc.edu (Eric Mankin)
Newsgroups: ca.environment,rec.motorcycles.dirt
Subject: Re: Disaster! (was Cal Desert Bill passes!)
Date: 23 Oct 1994 17:11:57 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 57
Sender: mankin@mizar.usc.edu
Message-ID: <38eu4d$6ab@mizar.usc.edu>
References: <38bog5$57e@nuhou.aloha.net> <38ei8e$1ic@mizar.usc.edu> <38eo2p$hps@crl5.crl.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu