Why would you want to close these areas off. Future generations will have them closed off to them also. Saying we are saving these areas for future generations does not make it true.

There seems to have been a lot of bills proposing land closure to access lately. Why?! You don’t protect something by hiding it from the world, who’s to say when the appropriate time is to re-open them? More frivolous bills…..

The areas covered by this bill are already as economically depressed as they can handle. Recreation brings in money and keeps business open and keeps people employeed. We have to have some people working and paying taxes other wise the gov’t will not have any revenue to operate. I wish they would let the people that live and visit these areas decide how they chose to travel and not restrict this choice. Most of the people voting on this bill will never vist the area and have no idea what is really on the ground. This bill is a bad idea and should be stopped.

It seems that there is a perception that this bill totally closes off the land to human access. To be specific, wilderness designation would close the land to development (things like paving roads through the landscape or industrial development such as mining and drilling).

Wilderness designation does NOT prevent people from enjoying the land. Quite the opposite; it ensures that people CAN enjoy the land as it currently exists for many years to come. It allows us to explore wild lands that are unblemished with development. You will have access to these lands – hiking, camping, horseback riding, fishing, hunting, bird watching, photography, etc. Basically, things that don’t permanently scar the land.

Consider this: turning natural backcountry into developed frontcountry is generally an irreversible act. This is what is meant by protecting and preserving the land for future generations.

Lookup this term, and check on YouTube:

AGENDA21

A project to “re-wild, and re-green” America, back to its Natural State.