SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (94475)1/10/2005 1:45:31 PM
From: Neeka   of 793881
 
Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Tracy), a former cattleman and now chairman of the House Resources Committee.

I'm kind of angry at him. Richard Pombo is the guy that let the Wild Sky Wilderness Act die near the end of the last session. He said the area included bridges and former mines, and was therefore unsuitable for permanent protection as pristine wilderness. Most of these mines are abandoned, and don't other Wilderness areas have mines? I don't have a clue as to why an area having bridges would preclude it from becoming a wilderness area. Don't other Wilderness areas have bridges?

I've spent a decade exploring this area, and it is ripe for protection.......especially from logging. It is very visible and receives thousands of visitors every year that come for the fishing, camping, hiking, rock climbing, photography and just to enjoy the natural beauty. For the most part it is pristine and includes several wild rivers with minimum access.

I really hope our dem legislators (Murray and Larsen) bring it up for consideration in the 109th. The Wild Sky Wilderness proposal is the only positive thing I've seen come from either one of them. I do have an ulterior motive.......our riverfront property is on the western boundary. Would hate to see it all get logged. -g-

M
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext