WhiteBlaze Pages 2024
A Complete Appalachian Trail Guidebook.
AVAILABLE NOW. $4 for interactive PDF(smartphone version)
Read more here WhiteBlaze Pages Store

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25
  1. #1

  2. #2

    Default

    Good article, hard to think there are people who think places like Katahdin Woods, Canyon of the Ancients in CO, and Giant Sequoia in CA, are abuses of government power, according to a president who feels these lands should be "returned to the people", meaning developers. I often wonder what would have become of these places had we not protected them for future generations.

  3. #3

    Default

    I appreciate the sentiment of the editorial but the author took a fair share of literary license in writing it. I probably comes down to not letting the facts getting in the way of a good story. A casual reader not familiar with the area and Thoreau's journeys would infer that the Katahdin Woods and Water (KWW) delisting would impact Mt Katahdin and the AT, it doesn't as that was already protected long ago by Percival Baxter as Baxter State Park (BSP) which is protected as a wilderness preserve, with the exception on one block in the northern part of the park. It does protect the view shed to the east of the summit (about 5 miles at the closest to the summit). An AT hiker will not even be able to see the KWW lands until they are at the summit. N & S Turner blocks much of the view of the KWW area from the summit thus the closest view into KWW past North Turner is closer to 10 miles. A hike along the North Peaks Trail or the views from the Traveler Loop probably have the best view into the monument. KWW does have great views into the park from some locations but the reality is the majority of the views are of a landscape that is already protected in BSP. A far more apt name for this area would be the East Branch Woods and Water monument but I expect that just wouldn't be as big of a draw. There are not any plans to run connector trails or roads into BSP from KWW so the biggest attraction of KWW will be tantalizingly out of reach.

    Thoreau made three journeys to that area. The first trip came from the south via the West Branch of the Penobscot and is when he attempted to climb Katahdin via an older slide near the current Abol Slide route. The referenced commentary by Thoreau was made during that trip. Unfortunately he never set foot on, could see or was particularly near the KWW protected land. The land he was on is now protected by BSP and has been protected since the 1930's . BSP has arguably more wilderness protections than the Monument Designation. Thoreau's second trip to the region was well west of the Katahdin via Greenville. He turned around at Chesuncook Lake and was one watershed west of KWW. His third trip did go through the north end of what is now BSP via the East Branch of the Penobscot. Once the East Branch leaves what is now BSP the East Branch does go past the KWW lands and in two locations actually goes through KWW. Thus a large portion of his third trip would be partially protected although the experience would be substantially different than he experienced as the Matagamon dam flooded much of the upper East Branch. The lower East Branch that flows next to and occasionally through KWW is a no longer a wild river, its primary flow is maintained via the Matagamon Dam. Its a nice tourist attraction and with a regulated flow I expect there will at some point be more tourist businesses located outside the KWW to take advantage of it. This is already a popular tourist industry to the west and if folks can be convinced to make the extra 2 hour drive to the KWW area I expect there will be seasonal jobs created.
    Last edited by peakbagger; 06-21-2017 at 08:49.

  4. #4

    Default

    Darn I don't have edit privileges (haven't since the convenient pay pal option to donate went away) but I used past tense to imply that Thoreau hiked on BSP land. He hiked it long before BSP exist.

    thanks to Rick B, I am now a contributing member and corrected this in bold
    Last edited by peakbagger; 06-21-2017 at 08:49.

  5. #5
    Is it raining yet?
    Join Date
    07-15-2004
    Location
    Kensington, MD
    Age
    47
    Posts
    1,077
    Images
    62

    Exclamation Please

    Wow what an article. About as one sided as even the NYT could muster.

    1. The article implies the new Nat'l Monument is a virgin forest as Thoreau saw it. It is anything but.
    2. The article implies that Mt. Katahdin is w/in the Nat'l Mon. It is not b/c the State of ME wouldn't give it up.
    3. There exists a true debate as to whether the Antiquities Act was intended to allow a President to unilaterally set aside millions of acres of land given the statute's language authorizing the president to set aside "...the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the [historic] object....". The article doesn't bother to mention this either.
    4. The statute's language allows for Nat'l Monument designation of government land; no allowance was made for private "donations", as is the case here.
    5. Numerous National Monuments have been reduced in size by numerous Presidents and/or Congresses; no mention here. In fact, Antiquities Act designations are no longer possible in WY or AK b/c Congress pulled it back after FDR & Carter went nuts with their exec. authority there......


    PLEASE
    Be Prepared

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCloud View Post
    Wow what an article. About as one sided as even the NYT could muster.
    PLEASE
    It wasn't an article (though the term "article" is often used for everything in a newspaper", it was an opinion piece by a contributor, not staff. As such, the NYT is not responsible for the content of a specific viewpoint, that is the responsibility of the contributor.

  7. #7
    Registered User BuckeyeBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-18-2012
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Age
    64
    Posts
    1,445
    Journal Entries
    6

    Default

    Yes it was an OP-Ed piece, but I always remember NY Times' motto - "Only the news that is fit to print".
    Blackheart

  8. #8

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,866
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    NY times and other major msm, have outlived their usefulness.
    Nothing more than shills pushing agendas today
    If you read or listen to anything they say, your a sheeple. Baaaa.

    There are alternative sources that report news without trying to influence it or oughtright create it. Just have to be able to discern news from spin.

    I try not support them in any way. Clicking on their website, etc generates ad revenue.
    Last edited by MuddyWaters; 06-20-2017 at 11:29.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    NY times and other major msm, have outlived their usefulness.
    Nothing more than shills pushing agendas today
    If you read or listen to anything they say, your a sheeple. Baaaa.

    There are alternative sources that report news without trying to influence it or oughtright create it. Just have to be able to discern news from spin.

    I try not support them in any way. Clicking on their website, etc generates ad revenue.
    The cited article was an op-ed essay - meaning it was an opinion piece. If you disagree with the opinion, that doesn't make it wrong, it makes it a different opinion. No more, no less. As far as papers outliving their usefulness, tell that to the NY Times and the Washington Post who are laughing all the way to the bank with record-setting print and digital subscriber growth - yuuge!

    Crying "fake news!" and spouting the usual hackneyed "msm" talking points isn't exactly critical thinking or critical reading - it's laziness and intellectual incuriosity - and certainly nothing to brag about. One can choose to believe what makes one feel good (or what talk radio bloviators and the internet fringe tell you to), but don't be surprised when reality pops the bubble.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    05-05-2011
    Location
    state of confusion
    Posts
    9,866
    Journal Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Offshore View Post
    The cited article was an op-ed essay - meaning it was an opinion piece. If you disagree with the opinion, that doesn't make it wrong, it makes it a different opinion. No more, no less. As far as papers outliving their usefulness, tell that to the NY Times and the Washington Post who are laughing all the way to the bank with record-setting print and digital subscriber growth - yuuge!

    Crying "fake news!" and spouting the usual hackneyed "msm" talking points isn't exactly critical thinking or critical reading - it's laziness and intellectual incuriosity - and certainly nothing to brag about. One can choose to believe what makes one feel good (or what talk radio bloviators and the internet fringe tell you to), but don't be surprised when reality pops the bubble.
    Baaaaaa

    You must be too young to remember when journalism was a respected profession, and we made fun of the bs coming out of tass. It hasnt been that way for many years, because the american voter gets dumber every passing day.

    Nyt and wapo are the worst. I wouldnt support either in any way. Including clicking on links...

    I daresay, today you can believe what comes out of russia, before whats printed in US media.
    Last edited by MuddyWaters; 06-20-2017 at 12:33.

  11. #11
    Registered User BuckeyeBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-18-2012
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Age
    64
    Posts
    1,445
    Journal Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    Baaaaaa

    You must be too young to remember when journalism was a respected profession, and we made fun of the bs coming out of tass. It hasnt been that way for many years, because the american voter gets dumber every passing day.
    This totally true. Today's newspapers and magazines are written at a 7-8 grade level. Who would ever forget Walter Cronkite's expression when he announced the JFK had passed away?
    Blackheart

  12. #12

    Default

    IMHO - Opinion pieces are intended to discuss different viewpoints of a situation and the author is obviously not supporting the attempt to delist. Unfortunately the author obscured facts using Thoreau's Katahdin trip up to the Tableland of Katahdin in an attempt to support that opinion, just as the administration tends to generate alternate truths to support its goals. 2 plus 2 =4, it doesn't equal 3 or 5, trying to convince someone to the contrary that Katahdin is in peril by delisting is not opinion, its just plain wrong. I do expect that an editor did soften the absolute by adding the text I bolded "How can it threaten us, to care for such a prize and its surroundings in common?" as that opens up a subjective argument as to what constitutes "its surroundings".

    Despite the "black and white" choice presented by the author of development versus preservation, there are many other options that could protect the land from development in perpetuity. Its been done at BSP and at numerous locations along the AT in Maine. The national monument designation after all was a last ditch effort to get under the wire of the last administration in hopes that the National Park proposal might someday come to fruition. While the National Monument designation is strictly for the lands donated by the owner, the National Park proposal would put in place a method of controlling development on a large block of land and to a limited amount its surroundings owned by multiple owners with no compensation. When there have been attempts to discuss alternative protection schemes with the owner reportedly they have been rejected as they want the prestige that only national recognition would shine on their gift.

    Unless things have improved at the actual monument site, the federal managers claim that they would hit the ground running last year didn't appear to happen last season. When I inquired about driving in last fall (Labor Day) I was advised that the roads were unsuitable for passenger vehicles and that high clearance and 4wd was required. I didn't attempt it and thus couldn't verify how good or bad the roads were although I suspect that they were conservative in their assessment.
    Last edited by peakbagger; 06-21-2017 at 08:52.

  13. #13
    GSMNP 900 Miler
    Join Date
    02-25-2007
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Age
    57
    Posts
    4,861
    Journal Entries
    1
    Images
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Traveler View Post
    It wasn't an article (though the term "article" is often used for everything in a newspaper", it was an opinion piece...
    BOOM!!!
    Pretty much says it all... long on 'opinion' and severely lacking in 'fact'.

    The only 'fact' I recall learning from this piece was that "no president has ever rescinded a national monument created by his predecessor"... but even that was immediately followed by a reference to someone's 'opinion' that only Congress has a right to do that.
    Last edited by HooKooDooKu; 06-20-2017 at 14:35.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-20-2017
    Location
    Lincoln, NH
    Age
    32
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    Baaaaaa

    You must be too young to remember when journalism was a respected profession, and we made fun of the bs coming out of tass. It hasnt been that way for many years, because the american voter gets dumber every passing day.

    Nyt and wapo are the worst. I wouldnt support either in any way. Including clicking on links...

    I daresay, today you can believe what comes out of russia, before whats printed in US media.
    Actually, on average the IQ of the American electorate has been rising with time. The attitude you have is partially why the opposite seems to be true.

    I know of many "alternative" media sources on both sides, and each one that I know of just picks and chooses MSM articles that support their agenda to report upon or turn into their own. How often do "alternative" sources break huge stories, and have fact-checked research to back it up?

    People aren't getting dumber, they're getting more ignorant. It's bound to happen when people only watch news they like, and belittle sources that have news they don't like. Being able to read an article you don't agree with and come up with an argument against the facts it states is one thing, the whole "fake news" war cry and sheeple stuff is just a cop out for ignorance.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MuddyWaters View Post
    Baaaaaa

    You must be too young to remember when journalism was a respected profession, and we made fun of the bs coming out of tass. It hasnt been that way for many years, because the american voter gets dumber every passing day.

    Nyt and wapo are the worst. I wouldnt support either in any way. Including clicking on links...

    I daresay, today you can believe what comes out of russia, before whats printed in US media.
    When you hike, how do you keep the tips of your trekking poles from popping your bubble and letting the memories of the "good ole days" leak out? Do the rubber tip protectors prevent damage?

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-20-2017
    Location
    Lincoln, NH
    Age
    32
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Back on topic: this opinion piece reads more like a story than journalism. I read through it rather quickly, but don't recall any real discussion on what would happen if it lost its status. Would Maine simply step in and create their own protective order, would it be logged, and how could it be messed with if it was donated to begin with? I didn't really learn anything from this piece, but I can say that the quote by the president that "tremendously positive things" will happen on the land is a bit confusing... like what?

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zea View Post
    Actually, on average the IQ of the American electorate has been rising with time. The attitude you have is partially why the opposite seems to be true.

    I know of many "alternative" media sources on both sides, and each one that I know of just picks and chooses MSM articles that support their agenda to report upon or turn into their own. How often do "alternative" sources break huge stories, and have fact-checked research to back it up?

    People aren't getting dumber, they're getting more ignorant. It's bound to happen when people only watch news they like, and belittle sources that have news they don't like. Being able to read an article you don't agree with and come up with an argument against the facts it states is one thing, the whole "fake news" war cry and sheeple stuff is just a cop out for ignorance.
    Well said, but I'd change one thing. People are getting more willfully ignorant.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Traveler View Post
    It wasn't an article (though the term "article" is often used for everything in a newspaper", it was an opinion piece by a contributor, not staff. As such, the NYT is not responsible for the content of a specific viewpoint, that is the responsibility of the contributor.
    Oh really? You're going to make an argument that the NYT is not responsible for text they distribute to their readers? They carefully control what their readers see. This "article" was no exception.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zea View Post
    Back on topic: this opinion piece reads more like a story than journalism. I read through it rather quickly, but don't recall any real discussion on what would happen if it lost its status. Would Maine simply step in and create their own protective order, would it be logged, and how could it be messed with if it was donated to begin with? I didn't really learn anything from this piece, but I can say that the quote by the president that "tremendously positive things" will happen on the land is a bit confusing... like what?
    Unlike the western lands, the national monument land was owned by Roxanne Quimby the founder of Burt's Bees. The general assumption is if the government delists the land that it will revert back to her. She bought essentially cut over timber land that lost a lot of its value when the mills in Millinocket closed down. I also believe these lands were hit hard by a spruce budworm epidemic that occurred around 30 years ago which killed most if not all of the spruce and fir so its still regenerating spruce/fir which is quite obvious from Google Earth. If left alone the woods would grow up until the next budworm epidemic.

    If the assumption is correct that it reverts back to her, she can contact any number of groups that are already active in Maine to donate the land and have it protected or she can create a new entity. She also can approach the Baxter State Park Commission about donating it and the associated endowment to the adjacent Baxter State Park which is managed as a wilderness preserve. Alternatively she can sell it to someone else to do what they will. Or she can donate a conservation easement limiting the rights of future landowners to develop the land and sell the land with those restrictions in place.

    Realistically the "tremendously positive things" mentioned are hyperbole, there are millions of acres in Maine of similar characteristics and with the significant shrinkage of the pulp and paper industry and the low Canadian dollar, there is not a lot of value currently in owning timberland in Maine. The DOE has identified much of Maine along with the northern forest along the US Canadian border as a significant source of feedstock for biofuels which would be needed if the US elected to deal with climate change in the long run but the impact of that would be industrial forestry the likes of which has not been done in Maine since the budworm epidemic 30 years ago. Realistically the biggest value to property is for a conservation organization to take it over as it comes with a generous endowment. Most conservation groups are desperate for properties with endowments to run their day to day expenses as one large endowment will fund staff that can service numerous properties. The Nature Conservancy has a similar large parcel in northwestern maine with similar characteristics and they actively log portions of it to cover the expenses of managing the overall property. The Appalachian Mountain Club does the same in their holdings along the AT in Maine. The alternative use is for a billionaire to buy it to get boasting rights to the biggest landowner in the US. John Malone bought some very large holdings in Maine several years ago and I believe he now may be the largest private landowner in the US, if not he is hot on the heels of Ted Turner (2.2 millions acres for Malone and 2.0 million for Turner).
    Last edited by peakbagger; 06-21-2017 at 08:56.

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreeGoldRush View Post
    Oh really? You're going to make an argument that the NYT is not responsible for text they distribute to their readers? They carefully control what their readers see. This "article" was no exception.
    I was actually attempting to clarify the "article" was an opinion piece. NYT has a lot of opinion pieces from right to left and right down the middle. Accept what you want.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •