Re: Desert Protection Act

[ Follow Ups ] [ Death Valley Talk - Archive Set 3 ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by David Victor Day Sr. on October 15, 2002 at 18:23:27:

In Reply to: Desert Protection Act posted by J on October 15, 2002 at 16:27:40:

It depends on how you look at it. If you are a warm and fuzzy arm chair eco-star in Los Angeles or San Francisco, then, of course, it was good for the desert. However, if you are someone who respects the desert; travels in the desert; studies the natural and human history of the desert; and loves the peace and solitude of the desert, then maybe the answer is no.

The major effect of the Desert Protection Act was to call attention to the Death Valley/Mojave area. As a result, the numbers of visitors has increased dramatically. There has been nearly a four-fold increase in visitation in Death Valley since the DPA was first proposed. Most of those visitng do not know and respect the desert. Hence, you will now find dumb tourists trying to drive off onto the salt pan or walking in the mud of the Race Track thereby ruining for decades the natural tracks formed there. You will find the vast number of visitors crawling all over the place, ruining the natural beauty and historical artifacts. You will even find that the death rate for tourists had increased significantly since the DPA was passed.

And the end result of all of this stupidity by the dumb has resulted in more than 20 roads being closed or truncated in Death Valley alone. Those of us who have been visiting and respecting the desert for over 30 years no longer have the access we once had, all in the name of protecting the tourists attracted to Death Valley by the DPA.

The desert would have been better served if all the attention created by the DPA never happened.

Is the desert better protected now? NO
Is the desert a safer place now? No
Are the resources of the desert better protected now? NO
Did DiFi gain favor with her arm chair consituents? YES

Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Death Valley Talk - Archive Set 3 ] [ FAQ ]