Advocacy groups

[DirtyDog]

here is another issue: how many of you have been to USAL beach ? http://www.wildcalifornia.org/blog/take-action-now-to-support-the-usal-redwood-forest/


Are they trying to close the beach or improve it?

 

[MarkBC]

SUWA, a group that uses "wilderness" in it's name, can't be expected to do anything other than promote wilderness. "Wilderness" that is buzzing with internal combustion engines is not wilderness. It's as simple as that.
I read SUWA's Mission Statement -- there's nothing in it that an environmentalist couldn't support.
And I don't understand the reference to "rich guys...for rich guys", since I'm pretty sure that a quad or a motorcycle costs a lot more than a hiking boot.

I think there's nothing wrong with a group that suggests some areas should be accessed by foot -- feet are not just for depressing accelerator or clutch pedals. I accept that there are some areas I won't be able to drive to. To argue otherwise would be to say that every 14,000er should be like Pike's Peak. The whole natural world does not need to be handicap-accessible.
I've been a $upporter of SUWA in the past, but let it lapse. Since I'm about to visit southern Utah again, and since I'm glad I won't have to share a hiking trail with a motorcycle or a quad, I think I'll re-up my $upport.

 

[EdoHart]

I'm just creating a directory. Whether people want to support the organizations in the directory is their own choice.

I think the directory is a good idea and I'm glad you listed one of my favorites in your original post. I also think it would be great to include the mission statement of the organizations in the directory. Something which you might want to consider is that WtW is giving de facto support of all organizations listed in the directory.

 

[craig333]

My problem with SUWA is it uses a one size fits all prescription, namely Wilderness designation. Nothing else will do. When I first heard of them they were advocating for 3.5 million acres. Every few years it has increased to where it is now shy of ten million acres. Think they'll stop there?

As for the rich maybe that comes about because they are wealthy. From wikipedia:

In the late 1990s, SUWA began building a large endowment from grants. The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Wyss Foundation were particularly generous. As of 2004, SUWA had amassed almost $5 million. Swiss-born billionaire Hansjorg Wyss joined the board of SUWA in 1996 and later financed a new $1.4 million Salt Lake City headquarters. Though SUWA has been able raise large sums of money over the last decade its membership numbers have declined 30% from a high of 20,000 to 14,000 [6] Still, SUWA maintains that 70 percent of their funding comes from membership dues and donations, and roughly 80 percent of the organization's income is spent on program work.[

Their contempt of OHV's is obvious in the use of the pejorative term ORV over and over.

I really wish people would actually learn something about the organizations they support. My mom didn't understand why I don't support the Sierra Club. So I asked her "mom, do you know their position on logging?". She was sure they for less and well done logging. "Sorry mom, they are for zero logging, none at all". Mom did you know they want to have OHV's confined to designated OHV parks and not allowed in the forests?. You know she didn't, not many people actually know their official positions on many subjects. Its on their website but you have to dig real deep to find them (btw they have hundreds of official positons, interesting reading).

Okay, thats all I'm going to say on the subject of advocacy groups. I really do want to stay civil and make this thing work.

 

[MarkBC]

The real forces (behind the scenes or openly) working against wilderness designation and similarly-restrictive national parks designations everywhere are commercial interests (e.g, mining and timber companies, etc.)....commercial interests that are much richer than any wilderness advocacy group. Grass-roots "shared use" groups are used by commercial interests whether they know it or not.
REAL money is needed by wilderness advocacy groups in order to fight the much-richer commercial interests.
Money makes politics go 'round.

 

[clikrf8]

Guess I have been chastised.

OHVs, ORVs, ATVs are fine for trails especially designated for them. As a photographer, I do NOT like tracks in my pics. In January 2010, I made a several day trip to Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park in Utah to shoot the dunes. I was more than a little upset to find that off road vehicles had the run of the whole place except where there was vegetation. The glorious dunes, even in the very early light were crisscrossed with tracks from the day before. And, what really upset me was that I paid the same entry fee. It was a very quiet beautiful place until some big toyhauler with 2 vehicles arrived.

Sometimes you have to have a stance of all or nothing because in the end you have to compromise.

And, I prefer my forests quiet.

And, I am not rich. Blue collar hubby, mostly stay at home me.

 

[Cort]

following the path that I originally predicted...

Its really to bad.... we all do have much more in common with each other than these devisive examples

but I'm not going anywhere


Cort

 

[highz]

Hey, Cort, I'm glad you're not going anywhere. I'm sticking around, too. Clikrf8, I personally appreciate your comments. and most definitely agree about quiet forests. It's OK for us to state our beliefs, I don't think that's a bad thing, really. It's honest. It's just not OK to single someone out for flame wars. And, if we can cordially disagree and then try to find common ground, why we're better than Congress! There will be room for both sides in the list DD will put together. I believe that.

 

[DirtyDog]

following the path that I originally predicted...



You predicted an overwhelming amount of support for this issue along with a relative handful of folks ranting and raving about minor changes here on the forum? You are the new sage of WTW.

I'll buy you a beer and everything will be fine

 

[leadsled9]

OHVs, ORVs, ATVs are fine for trails especially designated for them. As a photographer, I do NOT like tracks in my pics.


In your very first sentence you state that "OHVs, ORVs, ATVs are fine for trails especially designated for them".

Then you drive to the Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park in Utah, that has an entire area "designated for them".....it states that right in the middle of their webpage....and then become upset because it's not quiet there and there are tracks in your pics?????

Seems to me a little common sense here would have prevented you from having this unpleasant experience.

There are lots of quiet places to camp and photograph.......that are not OHV, ORV and ATV havens.

 

[Argonaut20]

I think it should be pointed out that there are ways to support the National Parks that don't involve huge amounts of money: volunteering to serve for a time in the parks. You might do anything from guiding tours to cleaning toilets; all the things necessary to keeping the park open and operating. In return you get to stay in an area thought by many to be worth National Park status. You learn about an area by living in it, not just visiting for a day or two. You meet interesting people. You meet people from all over the world.

It can be hard work, it can be boring, it can be frustrating. It does help support the parks in another way. There is a button on the NPS web page on volunteering. If you think this is your chance to go stay at Yellowstone up close and personal, think again. There is probably a waiting list a mile long for the well known and popular parks. For the smaller or more remote parks, not so much.

Worth thinking about...

 

[Ted]

Ok everybody, step away from the computer and relax. Getting on my soapbox. DD, feel free to remove this if I'm out of bounds here.

Everyone has an opinion on the best way to use our public lands and this back and forth could go on forever. But the key thing here is we all are users of the outdoors and I think we all agree that funding for public agencies that manage the outdoors are under funded. All that has been mentioned for WTW's advocacy is clean up and repairs at existing campgrounds. That seems fairly simple, necessary, and uncontroversial to me.

I haven't talked to DD about this but I believe what he is doing in this thread is simply putting a resource list together of advocacy groups for anyone that wants to look them up. Much like the National Parks section or Geographic Areas section. Its a list, nothing more. Like going to the yellow pages to look for a plumber. There are going to be plumbers with better reputations than others but the yellow pages doesn't get into that, its just a listing. It's up to the people using the list to do their homework on those listed. If this advocacy listing is thorough, it can become something that drives traffic to this website.

So please take this thread back to suggested advocacy groups, and if you wish to discuss the pros and cons of certain groups, start a thread in the Lounge section.

Stepping off soapbox now.

 

[ski3pin]

Everyone has an opinion on the best way to use our public lands and this back and forth could go on forever. But the key thing here is we all are users of the outdoors and I think we all agree that funding for public agencies that manage the outdoors are under funded. All that has been mentioned for WTW's advocacy is clean up and repairs at existing campgrounds. That seems fairly simple, necessary, and uncontroversial to me.




The idea of a simple focused and hands on the ground advocacy is doable and accomplishes much.

 

[ski3pin]

It's up to the people using the list to do their homework on those listed.


Well said Ted. I have been impressed, once again, with some of the knowledge and wisdom stated by folks here. Ted hit on the bottom line, do your homework. There are wolves in sheep's clothing. Do your homework, be a skeptic, ask hard questions. Do not easily part with your hard earned money.

 

[ski3pin]

And so, if this is just a list, there is one organization that I support with my time and my money: Trout Unlimited. If we don't have clean water and healthy watersheds that are so necessary to our wildlife legacy in this country, we don't have a reason to wander the west.

 

[leadsled9]

An organization that I support is the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Their mission statement is simple:

"The Elk Foundation’s mission is to ensure the future of elk, other wildlife and their habitat".

 

[DirtyDog]

I hand't thought of it but yeah we'll do a wildlife category.

 

[craig333]

Nature Conservancy
CORVA
UFWDA

Personally though I think we'd be better of focusing on local or regional groups rather than national advocacy organizations.

Btw, your truck is an OHV.

 

[highz]

Audubon. The New Mexico Audubon mission statement is:

"As the state office of the National Audubon Society, Audubon New Mexico’s mission is to conserve and restore natural ecosystems, focusing on birds, other wildlife, and their habitats for the benefit of humanity and the earth’s biological diversity. We aim to enhance the knowledge of New Mexico citizens to make informed decisions about the protection of wildlife and to empower them to be active stewards of the planet. This conservation mission is accomplished through education, science, and public policy work."

 

[mtn-high]

Locally we support:

http://www.erwc.org/ this is a local group my wife is heavily involved in due to her work in the Water industry.

http://www.walkingmountains.org/ Our kids took part in many enviromental/outdoor education programs in elementary/middle/high school through this program when it was called "the Gore Range Natural science School". If you visit this area it might be worthwhile to look at their schedule. (in advance)