THE DESERT
PEAKS SECTION NEWSLETTER JAN-FEB 1971 NUMBER 104 CHAIRMAN'S CORNER |
||||||||||||||||
Last year Ben
and Miriam Romero presented an outstanding program at a DPS meeting concerning
the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) study of the California desert. The
object of this study was to find out what was happening in the 16 million acres
of California desert, 11 million acres of which is public domain; that is, land
under the control of the BLM. The results of this study were published in
November of 1968 in a volume entitled The California Desert and copies
are available from the BLM. Basically what the study found was that many people
were using the desert for various recreational purposes, and that the number
was increasing greatly each year. It seemed to them to be necessary to preserve
and to develope areas according to their present and future usage. They
identified 19 areas as having some various amount of recreation potential to
people ranging from climbers and hikers to dune buggyists and
motorcyclists. A brief summary of their concepts and recommendations is given below.
It is this last point that concerns us as desert peakers more than anything else. Here is a chance to make our views understood by those people who are in a position to do something. As preservationists first and recreationists second most desert peakers will find things in the BLM plans that are slightly or totally disgusting to our senses of values. However it is much to our advantage to have the BLM dvelope certain areas for those people who like to do things other than wander around on foot. If not offered recreational areas to ride motorcycles and drive dune buggies or jeeps they will continue to find and destroy new desert areas. And these areas will probably be the areas further from LA than they now go, places like the New Yorks, Providences, and Whipples. The areas to be developed or preserved by natural area classification are divided into three priority groups. This is the order in which the BLM feels that each area should be developed or preserved. It is interesting that all priority one and half of the priority two areas contain no peaks on our qualifying list. |
Page Index | Prev | Page 1 | Next | Issue Index |