Attached are letters & maps we've sent in the past, seeking road-head relief for climbing our peaks. PLEASE NOTE THAT 5 OR 6 OF THE 9 ROADHEADS WILL ALSO BE CLOSED UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION BILL, (HR 3066/S 2393)!!!!!!!!!!
On behalf of the hikers & climbers who enjoy the desert, please leave the 9 roads we've described OPEN!
April 7, 1992LETTER TO EDITOR
Dear Editor:
I was at the Senate field hearing April 4 on the California Desert Protection Act and was appalled when Dale Van Dalsem testified against the bill. That he spoke against it was no problem--of course he's entitled to express his own opinion. But his manner was most maddening.
First, he invoked the official name and position of the DPS as a Sierra Club activity section against legislation enthusiastically endorsed by the Sierra Club -- and which wilderness enthusiasts and desert lovers among us have been working hard to promote. But even this-treachery was not as sad as the embarrassing picture he painted of DPS values. When he stood up there and whined in public about how this bill would make desert -peakbaggers walk a few more miles to reach a few of their peaks, he gave listeners the impression the DPSers are a soft, sissy type who care, only about "bagging" a summit-- "ding" a peak--and not about the adventure and achievement of reaching and climbing a mountain. If this attitude becomes widely known, the Desert Peak Section will become the laughingstock of true mountaineers everywhere. As Dale ranted, I was ashamed to be a DPS member. My consolation was--most of our members are more mature.
One of the exciting things about the Desert Bill is the opportunity it presents to us peak climbers to add challenge and adventure to several peaks. But, as Dale whimpered about being forced to walk through "boring" desert, I fully expected him next to ask Senator Seymour for roads--or maybe railings-- to be built to our summits. Luckily his minute was up.
Thank you.
Vicky Hoover (Wwomen for Wilderness -- not Whiners against Wilderness) P.S. I enjoyed meeting Leora at the April 4 hearing.
| Dear RON, | 5/2/92 |
After reflection, I choose not to reply to any letters commenting on my testimony at the Senate Field Hearing. A reply from me will change no one's stand on this issue and it would alienate some people. It could be construed as editorializing against the Desert Act and thus get the DPS into trouble.
As Editor of the SAGE it's your decision as to what you print and what you don't print. I would urge you to print letters from active DPS members in their entirety. Let the readers assess her letter based on its complete content. Mr ----'s complaint is unworthy of a dignifying comment (He called the DPS, the "Desert Plundering Section").
It's a big, gorgeous desert; there's room for all of us out there, including Alan Cranston! Some kind of Desert Bill will probably be enacted, Whatever it is, we can live with it!
Warm regards to you
