This blog is closed
This is why…
… I always laugh ruefully when some wingnut speaks the phrases “radical environmentalist” and “Sierra Club” in the same breath.
From an article by Paul Rogers in the San Jose Mercury News
Now, after little change since its construction in 1933, the celebrated [Tunnel View] overlook two miles west of Yosemite Valley is about to get an overhaul, even a tree-cutting.
The National Park Service is finalizing a $2.3 million plan to expand public viewing areas, install new interpretive signs and improve traffic safety at the spot, whose panoramas were made famous by photographer Ansel Adams. Construction is scheduled to begin in the spring and finish by next fall.
“Tunnel View is probably the most well-known view in the park,” said Yosemite National Park Superintendent Michael Tollefson. “What we’re trying to do is make the traffic flow better and safer, and improve the viewing area so that the visitor has a better experience.”
Potentially the most controversial part of the plan calls for cutting down about 20 ponderosa pines and other trees that have grown to block the celebrated view for the 3 million tourists who visit every year.
So far, however, even the Sierra Club supports cutting the trees.
“I suppose there will be some people who think they should never cut a tree. But those iconic views are important,” said George Whitmore, chairman of the Yosemite Committee of the Tehipite Chapter of the Sierra Club, which includes the park.
Whitmore noted that stewards of the park, which was first protected by Abraham Lincoln in 1864, have cut trees for years to preserve views.
“Unless people can see the natural wonders and the beauty - the reason why the park was established in the first place - they might say ‘all I see is a bunch of bushes and trees. What’s so special about Yosemite?’ ” he said. “If you can’t see it, you’re going to lose the political support for protecting it.”
You know, I didn’t know Dave Brower all that well. I spent perhaps 48 cumulative hours in his company, much of that time spent sitting in meetings. But I did know him well enough to know that if you’d reminded him of this photo of Tunnel View, 1930s-vintage, by Ansel Adams:
… and then showed him this 2007 Tunnel View photo from the Park Service:
… and asked him to say how the view’s beauty had been degraded in the intervening 70 years, I am certain he would not have pointed to anything green.
Under Brower’s direction in 1958 the Sierra Club opposed the destructive widening of the Tioga Road past Tenaya Lake, which the Park Service justified in language very much like that with which the Sierra Cub’s Whitmore defends the cutting of trees in the western part of the park. I cannot imagine but that this project would have made him at least momentarily apoplectic.
I do have a couple of pieces of news for Whitmore. First off: there is no lack of public support for protecting Yosemite. To speculate that the public will decide to abolish the park because a tree stands between them and El Capitan is ludicrous. Secondly: To the extent that the view is “impaired” by the 20th Century’s crop of trees, it is impaired only for those visitors who do not get out of their cars. If the Tehipite Chapter of the Sierra Club wants to provide stunning views to those people who choose not to get off their asses, they can simply sell them a DVD
Using the excusably ignorant park management techniques of a hundred years ago to justify violating the spirit of the Organic Act? The Tehipite Chapter is acting atrociously. Shame on them.
Posted by: Chris Clarke
Note: A database glitch in 2008 ate a bunch of archived comments. Don't be offended if yours isn't here, or confused if the conversation seems disjointed. Thanks!
it is impaired only for those visitors who do not get out of their cars
Amen, brother.
By: By JM on 2007 10 07
Maybe next they’ll try some mountain top mining techniques to improve the perspective. ..... Ah, when nature becomes an artistic canvas for bureaucrats.
By: By Bruce on 2007 10 08
Just a guess, but is it possible that the original “tunnel view” was created as a result of cutting down trees for road construction?
Also, I’m struggling to identify all the levels of irony in defending a “tunnel view.”
By: By Charles on 2007 10 08
it is impaired only for those visitors who do not get out of their cars.
Yeah, I had that thought too.
Of course, I’d expand that out to the whole idea of scenic “photo stops” - while I appreciate scenic overlooks in places where one is driving through on the way to something else, it seems bizarre to have them in a place that is a destination, since it implies that the way to “do” the park is to just drive through it. Just get out of the car and go exploring, for pity’s sake!
By: By Rachel Shaw on 2007 10 08
=v= Certain people can’t see the Subaru Forester for the trees.
By: By Jym Dyer on 2007 10 08
Chris, Spyder et al - In many respects I substantially agree with you. And I do not think Dave Brower would have preferred parking lots and idling diesel buses full of idling tourons to idyllic piny vistas. In fact, I know he would not. As Chris is aware, my entrée to Earth Island and CRN was through Dave, who is one of my principal inspirers. However, now I work for the Forest Service (which Dave despised), so let me spout a little company line just for grins. The particular trees at Old Inspiration Point may not be problematic, but the influx of conifers, particularly white firs, in Yosemite and throughout the Sierra Nevada in the past 75-100 years of fire suppression is a problem in terms of fuel buildup, deviation from pre-settlement fire return intervals, root fungi, and general ecosystem imbalance. Yosemite Park is one of the pioneers and leaders in analyzing fire ecology and trying to modify forest structure where fire cycles are severely perturbed, so fewer catastrophic fires occur. I admit that the Park Service is schizoid with respect to resource issues, because they are commanded to enhance visitor experiences while preserving natural values - frequently an impossible divergence of missions. But, it is not, for instance, in my view and that of many professional resource managers who are charged with trying to maintain a functional diversity of ecosystem structure and function, out of the question to rid meadows of invading conifer trees. Meadow habitat is relatively rare and supports species that reside there and nowhere else, like willow flycatcher, sundew, bog orchids, and so on. Where a century of fire suppression and surface disturbance by grazing threatens the hydrologic and ecological integrity of meadows, conifer removal is a frequently prescribed and effective method (in conjunction with stream restoration, etc.) for helping regain valuable meadow surface and edge habitat. It is also used where similar changes in disturbance regimes have caused coniferous invasion of aspen stands, which particularly on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada are also a rare and valuable habitat type. Now, don’t get me wrong. I love trees. I support preserving ancient forests where they still exist, and doing what we can to help existing ecosystems towards something resembling their previous structure and diversity. Often the only tool available is tree removal or stand thinning where fire has been excluded for so long that other methods such as prescribed fire would not be effective, or rather would be TOO effective, wiping out the stand completely and probably escaping to wreak havoc as an uncontrolled wildfire. So, we’re in a pickle of our own making with respect to forest health, and mechanical intervention is certainly something we need to consider in a lot of places. This is opinion is mine, and is NOT meant as a blanket approval of all timber harvest activities. If trees are blocking a view, though, maybe there is a natural reason why they weren’t there in the past, and perhaps if we don’t take them down, fire eventually will, with its own set of consequences.
By: By Fred Levitan on 2007 10 09
Categories:
Wildlife
