Re: Wilderness Designations

["steven proe" <trails@jps.net>]

Hi Joe: Thanks for the reply, one of the great things about the US is that
we can all have our say. I am very active in working with developers in
Northern CA. I may of my experiences that one of the first things a
developer is exclude the PUBLIC from what used to be Public Land, one must
accept that the loss of a short section of land that contains "the/Any trail
at times means a huge dedication of time and resources to replace or
relocate any trail. This to me is unacceptable and should not be a burden on
the Public because of the sale or exchange of Public Lands. I applaud all
that have a opinion that is different from what I view. This form serves to
inform the Public as to what is/has occurred through out the US. steven


----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Long <jlong@mti.net>
To: <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: Wilderness Designations


>Steven, you are engaging in the fallacy called the excluded middle.
>That is, you take a complex situation with a wide range of
>alternatives, and insist that there are only two possible scenarios.
>To wit:  Wilderness designation or loss to sale/development.
>
>These are not the only two options, not by a long shot.  And for
>horsemen wishing to ride, loss of a trail to a Wilderness designation
>is just as much lost as if it is sold to a developer.
>
>--
>
>Joe Long
>jlong@mti.net
>http://www.mti.net     Business
>http://www.rnbw.com    Personal
>
>