I understand what Gary is saying, but the Wasatch NM idea did not just come out of thin air. You have to go back several years and take a lot of other things into account. The first is Matheson's Wilderness bill to get this area designated as a wilderness. As a hunter this would have been a plus because hunting is recognized as a use under wilderness, unlike national monuments where it can be excluded.
The local population was for the designation, and as a water shed, it was the right thing to do.
Now enter Skilink, a proposal to sell a strip of FS land to connect two pieces of private land(to Talisker a Canadian company). This effort was backed by Bishop, a guy that supposedly favors local control. This was in opposition to the FS, and the majority of local stake holders. If this sale went through, it would cut off hundreds of contiguous acres from the wilderness proposal area. And it would lock the public out of those hundreds of acres through the sale of 40(very long and narrow strip of land). This effectively cuts the acreage required to get wilderness designation down making that impossible. More proof that Bishop's "Grand Bargain" is all a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is more than willing to usurp local control and interest to Washington if it supports his agenda, while crying foul if anyone else should suggest doing the same.
With Skilink a possibility, and Matheson(the only hunter we had) gone. The prospects of a wilderness designation were non existent. So the idea of the Wasatch NM was born. I favor a wilderness designation for obvious reasons, but that's not a possibility at this point. With local peoples wishes, and their local representation held hostage by outside interests, this was the natural progression of things.
As hunters it comes down to development of the area which will reduce hunting and access. Or a NM, that could preserve access, but possibly reduce hunting. Before the NM proposal ever saw the light of day, my contribution was to add language preserving hunting as a continued use of the area. If the NM is to happen, and you want to see hunting maintained as a part of these in the future, then you need to make sure that the preservation of hunting language is a part of this NM.
If you look at Brown's canyon in CO where they obtained NM designation you see the same thing. Local interests wanted wilderness(led by hunters), but national level meddlers prevented it. Their only choice was a watered down NM designation.
And the central Wasatch is a national draw, and becoming more so. I read about people coming to hike and backpack there all the time, this includes international visitors as well.
An email I received the other day:
"Hi Josh
I'd like to buy one of your ****** set-ups if you have one available to ship. I have a trip mid August in Utah I'd like to bring it on.
Everything I'ive bought from you works great, *******, ******* (just used in the Wasatch last week!!, and the ******* (lots of miles on them..)
(I tried that massdrop but there not available.) Let me know.
Thanks
Trevor
TREVOR ******
619-***-9377
[email protected]*******.COM
***** INC.
27** Main Street
San Diego, Ca. 92113"
This guy comes from San Diego several times a year to backpack in Utah. And that includes the central Wasatch. I know of people from all over Europe and Japan that come to the Wasatch as well.
Utah has no idea what it has going for itself. And its not even that we are greedy and don't want to share, I could get down with that. We want to sell it off to the lowest bidder.