Comments to Mariposa Gazette:
This is commentary on the April 4, 2008 publication by the Mariposa Gazette and also the "Gedi-spin" from the Gazette:
http://www.mariposagazette.com/news/contentview.asp?c=24005
The PBS show "California Connected" is off the air due to "un-funding" after their piece on "Views of Yosemite." (you can visit the show via our link under the website tab "References") It is more than likely that this is all a bigger story than most people are aware; one that is far deeper and broader than the issues of camping and planning conflicts.
Take the fact that Mr. Hodap, a DOI representative, was fired after his objective report of flood damages after his inspection (he called for the replacement of the campgrounds/sites). There are many events that are compelling. Everyone seems focused on what Scott Gediman will say next when in fact a macroscopic scrutiny is warranted yet camouflaged and disregarded.
Let's point out one event that has changed by the 9th Circuit Decision in favor of the Coalition's mission. Gediman's rant from the Mariposa Gazette is quite deceiving; it seems to imply that the Utility Project is halted when, in fact ,it is not as it is approved by special order of the court for Phase 1. What we get out of it is that the removal of the sewer section that crosses over the Merced River from the North Pines Campground to Lower Pines is now on hold due to the 9th Circuit Decision, whereby preventing the removal of toilet facilities in North Pines, whereby preserving North Pines Campground for now. The Park would like to say that "North Pines removal is part of the YVP and since toilets are non functional, we are closing the campground and that it is in accordance with the YVP. " Now, however, this cannot happen and it must frustrate the YNPS to no end. Also, the halt of the 89 new walk-in and RV campsites in Upper Pines, remember, is so that the YNPS can remove North Pines is a "swap" scheme. Additionally, who is he fooling with protecting the river when construction of the 89 sites would disturb the existing undisturbed/natural state of the future 89 sites? Keep in mind that of the 50/89 walk-in sites, 20% are for "disabled sites" and of the 39/89 RV sites, 9 are for disabled sites." Guess what, there are no standards for disabled walk-in and RV campsites! Isn't it an oxymoron to make this statement? This is really a shell game of deception. The YNPS does not explain the removal of North Pines with the 89 new sites and they only try to persuade the camping public that we are anti-camping! Who are these guys anyway?
How can building 89 new sites on undisturbed parkland ever qualify as "preservation" along the Merced Wild and Scenic River? |
