Skeptical observations

Here are two recent posts taken from the Turns-All-Year website where there is a lengthy thread on the proposed expansion:

     I attended the AALP presentation at REI last night (in Bellingham) and  left with far more questions and concerns than I went in with. Sorry I didn’t get the name of the presenters and will have to refer to them as THEM. Or the AALP. The meeting was populated by folks who seemed sympathetic to the expansion proposal. I might have been the only skeptic in the room, if there were others they didn’t speak up. City of Subdued Excitement after all.

     The AALP is not done drawing their proposal map apparently. The presenter asked the group what other areas they would like to see included in the proposal and the Nooksack Cirque and Artist Point received nods from the audience. The presenter expressed a personal desire to see better access to the Nooksack Cirque and Artist Point was touted as a possible visitor center. They also discussed moving the park boundary at Hannegan Pass to include the pass. 

The speaker discussed some of the meetings he has had with the various user groups. He was unapologetic about negative outcomes for other user groups saying that a certain loss of freedom is necessary to adequately protect the natural resources of the region.

I was able to ask two questions. 
Q. What percentage of the 300,000 annual visitors to the HWY 20 corridor are engaged in activities that would be prohibited if the  park proposal goes through?
A.  I don’t know, the park study didn’t address that.

Q. Regarding the hatch marked area of the proposed expansion(see map), what specific threat do you see to that area?
A. Small Hydroelectric development. The permits are on the books.
Q. Is that a realistic threat? Hydro in the shadow of Liberty Bell?
A. (shrug) The permits are on the books.

And another post by the same person:

Indeed, their shoulder  shrugging was very telling. Some other unsettling attitudes emerged during the meeting. Any talk about accommodating the desires of affected user groups is lip service at best. A very clear anti-hunting, anti-motor, anti-dog, anti-mountain bike, anti-ski area agenda was voiced. Regarding backcountry skiers they made it clear they don’t understand the demographic, referring to , “cross country skiers who like to use snowmobiles to access the backcountry.”  Huh? As someone stated earlier in the thread this appears to be an attempt to garner a wide base of support early in the game using soothing language and gauzy environmental platitudes. The people currently using the Hwy 20 corridor are exactly the people who would stand up to a legitimate environmental threat to the area. This proposal alienates nearly all of them by creating a police state wilderness.

JRD’s post on page 2 of this thread reads like a doomsday scenario. A very cynical vision of the North Cascades future. Gold mining! Logging! Hydro! Biomass extraction? Should I buy my backyard bomb shelter now?

The AALP suggestion that we should be willing to give up the freedom we currently enjoy makes me very prickly. The proposal in it’s current form is probably intentionally over reaching in anticipation of the whittling that will occur when the various interest groups catch wind of it. They are asking for a lot of territory and their sights are set on  Hwy 542 to include Mt. Sefrit, Goat Mt., Larabee, Tomyhoi and low elevation wetlands along the Nooksack river.

My skin in the game? I’m an avid split boarder, dog owner, hunter/gatherer, mountain biker, Nordic skier and wannabe heli-rider. The reason I moved to Whatcom County is to have the North Cascades as a backyard. This ill-advised proposal hits home.
 

The North Cascades Parkway

     It took nearly 100 years for the North Cascades Highway to finally be completed since the concept of a northern crossing in the state was first considered. The first public crossing of the highway took place in 1968, back when this stretch of road was referred to as the North Cross State Highway. Officially, the highway opened in September of 1972 for two and a half months. And since then, except for the winter of 1976-77, the highway has closed for several months in the winter.
    Relative to its youthful age and remote location, the North Cascades Highway has been a longtime popular traveling destination for tourists and recreation enthusiasts as well as being an important commerce and transportation route for the rural communities on both sides of the mountain range. The highway also continues to grow in popularity as evidenced by the increase in traffic the last past decade. Statistics from the Washington State Department of Transportation from their Cutthroat junction traffic counter show a steady, yearly increase in the average daily number of vehicles from 640 in 2006 to 920 in 2009.
     That may not seem like much traffic, but if you are familiar with the highway, then you know that for a daily average, those numbers, growing as they are, are pretty impressive. The past week, especially given this time of year and weather conditions, there certainly wasn't 920 vehicles coming or going over the North Cascades Highway each day.
     Without a doubt, the bulk of the traffic occurs on weekends from July to September. Before that time, there is some periods of significant travel, but with much of the high country that is accessible from the road still buried under snow, the vast majority of the traffic is just passing through.
     And that is one of the main concerns with plans to expand the park: This could turn the North Cascades Highway into an absolute nightmare to drive, especially on certain weekends. Already annual traffic counts are growing. Creating a national park that encompasses the highway, changing that section into the North Cascades Parkway, as presented in the AALP Economic Study, will suddenly jack the number of vehicles way beyond what is steadily growing now. AALP proponents, concerned as they seem about climate change, laud the increased visitation that will come to the highway with a park expansion. Nearly all of this increased numbers will be by vehicle. Congestion, traffic hazards, noise and air pollution could all become major issues on this scenic highway.
      The North Cascades Highway is an unique and beautiful stretch of road that will have its current qualities diminish if the North Cascades National Park is expanded along its corridor.

What about the NCNP?

     In addition to impacts on the USFS, expanding the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park would also have impacts on the existing NCNP management situation. What kind of impacts could those be?
     Like any other national park, the NCNP has its budgetary deficits, backlogged maintenance issues and other administrative challenges. The park units themselves are quite large, plus there is the additional oversight of the entire NCNP Complex, which includes the Ross Lake and Lake Chelan national recreation areas. Administratively, park infrastructure and personnel are spread out in wide distances: from the way-out-of the-park headquarters in Sedro-Woolley to Glacier, Stehekin, Marblemount and Newhalem. Expanding the park boundaries eastward along with constructing a visitor center in the Methow Valley would stretch these distances, geographically- and administratively-speaking, even further. Obviously this would require additional federal dollars, funding which is already lacking for the park currently, yet still coming from the same pot of taxpayer revenue.
     With an expanded area to cover, the NCNP would undoubtedly have some growth and continual oversight headaches. An expanded National Park Service presence, including enforcement and maintenance, would cost more park money and demand more park resources along with the task of incorporating the new lands into the current management plan, especially with the recreation exceptions that AALP proponents have discussed in regard to current recreation usage that conflict with the park's current rules.
     The east side lands along the Highway 20 corridor provide ready access and popular spots for the public to enjoy. Use in these areas would likely additionally increase because of the new national park status. This increase in visitation numbers would require similarly increased park oversight and management undoubtedly equating more regulation.
     It appears that the NCNP has its hands full now overseeing such a vast complex with its various issues and challenges. Adding extra acreage that has been under forest service jurisdiction for a long time seems like an unduly burden that is neither desired or needed. But, again, one can inquire with NCNP personnel as to what their viewpoint is regarding the notion of expanding the park.

Additional quotes

Park expansion proponents want the public to believe that they are recreation-friendly. This apparently depends on what type of recreation meets their approval:

"N3C opposes all motorized recreation on Ross Lake."
– From NCCC letter (Sept. 30, 2010) to North Cascades National Park Superintendent Chip Jenkins regarding the Ross Lake National Recreation Area general management plan.

"... hunting should be banned in all areas of the RLNRA."
– Same letter from above.

"And so it is with the profusion of high tech ski gear that the back country is not as protected as it used to be, even 10 years ago. I see there is a new usage challenge to consider as we work to protect and enhance our North Cascades"
– NCCC board member Tom Hammond, July, 2010. 

What about the USFS?

     If the North Cascades National Park were to be expanded, particularly on the east side of the crest, many acres of public land that have been managed for a long time by the United States Forest Service would then be under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service.
     It isn't hard to fathom that the folks at the Methow Ranger District may not want to see these lands along Highway 20 as well as several major tributaries near the Methow Valley turned over to the NPS. These lands are a major highlight, practically the crown jewel, of the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, whether from a biological/habitat point of view or that of tourism and recreation.
     The management of these lands have long provided good, federal jobs for community members in the Methow Valley, both full time and seasonal positions. The same jobs that park expansionists say would come to the area if NPS moved in. So, it is plausible that there would be some personnel reduction within the Methow District if these forest service lands were designated national park lands.   
     What other impacts may occur?
     The timing of the park expansion proposal really could not have been worse given the long-term management plan revision process the OWNF is currently undertaking. Losing a vast chunk of prime acreage certainly isn't a consideration of the plan.
     Revenue loss would occur from commercial outfitters that utilize these recreational-rich lands and annually pay the USFS  a percentage of their gross profit.    
     The USFS would lose a lot of public recognition with their presence in being replaced by NPS management along such a visible and important tourism corridor like the North Cascades Highway. Their presence, at a time when the agency striving to impress its existence in managing these public lands, would certainly be diminished.

     It is a safe bet that many locals involved with the USFS do not want to see the park expanded using national forest lands. But don't take NOPE's word on this matter, ask some USFS employees what they think.

More quotes

"Jenkins brought peanut-butter bars and a puppy named Rocket."

– From a recent Settle Times article where the reporter encounters North Cascades National Park Superintendent Chip Jenkins on Desolation Peak in Ross Lake National Recreation Area. This would most likely be another area where dogs would no longer be allowed if the NCNP was expanded to include these NRA lands.

“This is not a recommendation that the heart of the North Cascades wilderness be opened to motorized visitation in order to boost local rural economies. It is just pointing out that the park’s front-country potential along State Route 20 has not been made as attractive, interesting, and educational as it could be and this has impacted the number and character of visits and reduced significantly their local economic impact.” – AALP Economic Study

“We cannot use data specific to the NCNP Complex to estimate the local economic impacts.” – AALP Economic study

Early Winters National Forest Recreation Area

This article was submitted by Mazama resident Eric Burr:

 Noparkexpansion.blogspot.com (NOPE) contains a wealth of negative ideas. I think however, that we need to answer the sincere concerns of park expansion proponents with some positive suggestions too. I’m a retired national park ranger, who has also worked, as a Wilderness ranger for the U.S. Forest Service, and lived in the Methow for 28 years.

    My first suggestion is the alternative of my title. The second is to endorse merging the north and south units of the park, by including part of Ross Lake NRA, The National Parks and Conservation Association has already proposed this, as part of their input to the Ross Lake NRA planning process.

   Spring and fall are when the North Cascades really needs an economic boost, which I think these two ideas could best help provide. More overnighting in Marblemount would be encouraged because it facilitates early starts to enjoy not only Cascade Pass, but also our east side spring skiing and flowers, or fall colors, with para-gliders, climbers, snowboarders, and skiers, to watch and rub shoulders with. This NFRA should have more trails that encourage, not just allow, dogs, horses, and mountain bikes, in addition to hiker-only foot paths for birdwatching. The short loop trails envisioned by N3C’s Alps Project are only a start on what’s required if this NFRA is to serve as an effective buffer for the Park and Wilderness. Longer trails too are demanded by today’s fitness sports.

    When the pass is closed, we have the announced intention of WSDOT to install additional east side closure gates, which would enhance spring skiing. Ski huts are standard in Europe and Canada to absorb the impact of increasingly popular backcountry skiing, and at last beginning to catch on stateside, but still usually not allowed in American National Parks. They were rejected from the 1968 national park and Wilderness establishment, (“Hickel’s Hostels”) and a good thing too, because the eastern planners sited all but one in avalanche paths. Early Winters has plenty of safe and sunny places for more huts, if demand and impact warrants them. For details, read my Ski Trails and Wildlife book.

    MVSTA (Methow Valley Sport Trails Association) has proven that ski trails allow summer and shoulder season use by a wide variety of users, without the potential conflicts managed too often in national parks, on limited trails, by regulations, permits, and cop-rangers.  Trail design and maintenance as zoning tools are the user friendly ways to help recreationists do the right things. The Methow has pioneered this better way, than the “police state Wilderness” typical of national parks. An NFRA could encourage the Forest Service to continue to improve their recreation management by inspiration, instead of regulation.

    Perhaps the most cost effective aspect of this plan is that it doesn’t require expensive Congressional action to implement. Ross Lake NRA is already run by the Park and the windshield wilderness tourists think they’re in the “park” now anyway. That arrowhead symbol, and the Smokey Bear hats on rangers have them fooled or confused. Their ignorance is also an opportunity for education, if designed for the urban visitor, who needs more basic orientation than the old traditional visitor center.

    A highly visible Information (not “Visitor”) Center, right on Highway 20 proper, before the Marblemount turn-off to Cascade Pass is what’s needed.  This Information Center run jointly by Seattle City Light, the U.S. Forest Service, North Cascades Institute, and the Park, is the critically missing facility that could let pilgrims know they’ve arrived in the Wilderness Alps. They could also learn where they can go to find the recreation and lodging or camping they seek, without getting busted for breaking some rule they never had the opportunity to learn about. And yes, the dams are part of what’s interesting here, just as in the European Alps. National parks are for history and culture as well as nature. Organic farms too, on both sides of the divide, are a critically important biological saga that needs a greater audience. The European Alps don’t allow pesticides or GMOs.

    Early Winters NFRA too, like the “park,” already exists – although in neglected form. If it could reopen the old ranger station and more old trails, we’d be on our way to filling those shoulder season slumps. So the westside could provide the traditional style American National Park, Seattle City Light provides dramatic boat tours, and the eastside provides the alpine huts, heli-skiing, lift and self powered skiing, with plenty of sunny user friendly trails, much like the European Alps but more like Canada, only sunnier and less crowded.  The American Alps Legacy Project needs an Early Winters NFRA if it is to pass political muster and truly fulfill the alpine vision many, on both sides of the controversy, had back in the 60s.                                                         

Unrealized potential

"... NCNP is largely “invisible” and unvisited. This has dramatically reduced its contribution to the small town and rural economy surrounding it." – AALP Economic Study

Aside from seeking greater protection, warranted or not, for public lands surrounding the North Cascades Highway by including them in an expanded North Cascades National Park, the North Cascades Conservation Council is apparently looking to squeeze more money out of the park for the nearby rural communities. If you look at comments and conclusions made throughout the NCCC-sponsored Economic Study, the NCNP, as it is now, is clearly not producing desirable financial benefits, especially when compared to the two other national parks in Washington.

"If the national park component is considered by itself, i.e. without the two national recreation areas associated with it, in 2008 it [NCNP] had the lowest estimated local economic impact of any national park outside of Alaska." – AALP Economic Study

It seems that 42 years later after the park's creation, the group primarily responsible for that monumental feat is now concerned that NCNP isn't pumping enough money into the economies of the communities on both sides of the crest. Interestingly, when the park was created, there wasn't much, if any, concern over the economic health of these same rural areas.

This a disconcerting stance, viewing a national park as an economic generator, and that a park like NCNP has this "unrealized potential" to be tapped into. This sentiment, unfortunately, is not uncommon in the conservation world.

Here is a quote from a Seattle staff member of the National Park Conservation Association in regard to garnering support for converting Ross Lake National Recreation Area land into NCNP:

"Along with protecting our national heritage, national parks are important economic engines. Across the country, national parks pump nearly $12 billion into park gateway economies and sustain hundreds and thousands of jobs. In Washington, Olympic and Mount Ranier National Parks represent roughly $150 million of the state's economy. Meanwhile, North Cascades pump $15 million into surrounding communities. North Cascades National Park has a minor impact upon Washington in part because most visitors who travel along Highway 20 never enter into the park proper. Rather, Highway 20 takes them through the Ross Lake NRA with views of the park in the distance. Only the most hardy who take to the trails actually enter the park"

The last sentence is especially ironic as the NPCA (as well as the NCCC) is opposed to the rerouting and rebuilding of the Stehekin River Road which would allow, as it had for decades, the less able or hardy to access and experience the North Cascades much easier.

The North Cascades National Park is unique in many ways. Much of the usage of the park is dictated by seasonal weather conditions, its remoteness that is such a major part of its character and, of course, accessibility issues. (It should be pointed out that in entire 60-plus page AALP Economic Study, not once is it mentioned that the North Cascade Highway is closed in the wintertime for several months; perhaps the consultants from Montana did not know this.) That NCNP doesn't generate the visitation and economic numbers that other national parks do certainly shouldn't be seen as a deficiency nor a supporting reason to radically change the park boundaries.

Especially since it can be readily pointed out that visitation along the North Cascades Highway and the resulting economic boost for the adjacent rural towns appears quite healthy and continues to grow modestly. This was especially evident during an extremely busy Labor Day Weekend.

Follow the Money

The following perspective was submitted to NOPE by a Mazama resident:

If you take the time to carefully review the recently released report titled, Increasing Rural Jobs and Income in the North Cascades: The Economic Impact of the American Alps Legacy Project, you may find yourself surprised to find that the champions of the American Alps Legacy Project are building their support for their proposed land grab on the back of the very highway corridor they fought so hard to prevent.

What is even more surprising is an apparent obsession with cramming more cars, motorcycles, and RV’s onto Highway 20, while distracting the reader with a dangling carrot of cash that will supposedly flow into local communities simply by capturing the highway corridor and branding it as “National Park.” How many more cars, trucks, RV’s and motorcycles you ask?

According to their own study, the advocates of Park expansion have a goal of increasing visitor trips to North Cascades National Park from the current level of 20,000 per year to over 940,000! Whether these “conservative” projections of growth are realistic or not is open to debate, but one thing is clear: this vision for Park expansion is banking on significant opportunities for private developers to create new commercial “gateway” centers at the new park entrance stations in Marblemount, Winthrop and Mazama.

“The intent is also to “bring the national park” closer to Methow Valley communities” (Increasing Rural Jobs and Income in the North Cascades: The Economic Impact of the American Alps Legacy Project).

If the American Alps Legacy project comes to be, the lasting legacy of a drive over the North Cascades will be highlighted by opportunities to sleep in chain hotels located within walking distance of go-cart tracks; pay entrance fees entitling one to park in spacious RV-friendly parking lots; amble like cattle on paved paths crowded with tourists pouring over “spoon-feeding” interpretive signs; and fierce competition for “amenities” in the form of picnic tables securely chained in the shade of composting toilets.

Don’t believe it? The following excerpts from the NC3 report further underscore this perverse vision for “conservation”; one of several that are simultaneously being supported by the National Parks Conservation Association and others influenced heavily by the National Park concessionaire industry.

“The American Alps Legacy Project proposes to change this by folding most of RLNRA into the national park while also adding important public recreation lands to the park that will bring the national park boundary much closer to the towns of Mazama, Winthrop, and Twisp. New visitor centers in Marblemount and Winthrop will make these towns true gateway communities to the national park” (AALP Economic Study).

“The Methow Valley is so far to the east of current park lands that local businesses do not focus on serving park visitors. With the park expansion, Winthrop and Mazama will be adjacent to the park and Twisp much closer. These new “gateway” communities, in turn, will be able to provide private support services to the increased park visitors” (AALP Economic Study).

The fact is, the only way to advance a proposal to expand North Cascades National Park through Congress is to “buy” the support of powerful interests like those who want nothing more than to “serve” those 940,000 visitors each year.

If NC3 and its partners really cared about the communities they claim to want to save from rural squalor, economic demise, and imagined “threats” to the lands currently being managed by the US Forest Service, they’d probably be spending more time explaining the merits of the soon-to-be-necessary, downtown by-pass to the Winthrop Town Council and Chamber of Commerce, and less time lobbying the King County Council, the Snohomish County Council and Republicans for Environmental Stewardship.

Like many so many efforts dreamed up from afar by those who know what is best for the rest of us, all you have to do to understand this proposal is follow the money.

Big Park

Proponents of expanding the North Cascades National Park would have one believe that there is "a great demand for moving the park boundaries closer to the Methow valley and Marblemount" (The Wild Cascades newsletter, Spring '09).
Well, that depends on who you and where you ask: In the local communities on both sides of the crest, it would not be a stretch to say there is a great deal of concern about plans to expand the park and turning these rural towns into "national park gateways," that would apparently, according to AALP supporters and their Economic Study, bring great economic prosperity to these regions (more on that later).
For better or for worse, the small hamlet of Stehekin at the north end of Lake Chelan provides an excellent and local example of what can occur with public land designation changes that brings the National Park Service into an existing community (in this case the formation of Lake Chelan National Recreation Area back in 1968 when the park was established). Surely, like other places across the country, becoming and developing into a national park gateway community is a double-edged sword – some sort of jobs and dollars come into play, but so do a host of growth and development concerns, like traffic congestion, pollution, crime issues and rapid growth. If you have been to places like West Yellowstone and Gaitlinburg, TN then you have experienced one example of a national park gateway community.
But maybe, one can argue, it would be different in Marblemount, Mazama and Winthrop. Who can really say 10 or 20 years from now what may happen to these communities after turning into national park gateways?
Folks in Stehekin can offer their perspective, and it seems like a mixed bag, for sure. This quote from a Seattle Times article back in 1991 offers some insight: "There were 1,700 acres in private hands when the 62,000-acre recreation area was created. But the Park Service has been buying private land, and it is now down to 477 acres."
Interesting.

On a humorous note, here is a spoof video to enjoy that is a bit over the top, but perhaps poignant as well: Big Park

Contribute to NOPE

Interested in contributing your perspective to the NOPE blog regarding your concerns or opposition to any expansion of the North Cascades National Park?
You can contribute your thoughts by sending an email to NOPE (noparkexpansion.gmail.com). After editing, it will be posted on the blog. You can identify yourself by name, occupation or where you live, or remain anonymous.

Recreation restrictions and changes

Expanding the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park, particularly using what are currently Forest Service lands on both sides of the park, would undoubtedly impact existing recreational uses.

"There will likely be some new restrictions associated with park or wilderness status, but most current uses can be accommodated." The Wild Cascades (a publication of NCCC), Spring '09.

Despite vague and misleading assurances from park expansion proponents about some of the potential impacts, many being negative ones, on various existing recreational uses, it is important to remember that down the road, more restrictions could come under an expanded park scenario.

Current recreational uses and potential or definite changes if the park is expanded:

Backpacking/camping: More rules and restrictions, including required permits for overnight trips and group size limitations. With the proposed expansion and predicted increase in visitation, it would be difficult to obtain an overnight permit for certain areas. While some may view permits as a minor inconvenience, others see them as a hassle and a major issue of principle.

Hiking and backcountry camping with dogs: Would be restricted or prohibited altogether. Dogs are frowned upon and generally not allowed in national parks. Currently, many accessible areas off the Highway 20 corridor are ideal for outings with dogs and many folks take advantage of this.

Hunting: Would be restricted or prohibited altogether. "Hunting is allowed in wilderness areas, but not in parks. Unfortunately, there are major safety concerns when hunting occurs in the area with high-use hiking trails." (TWC, Spring '09).

Snowmobiling: Most likely would see restrictions over time on the Highway 20 corridor. Clearly, AALP proponents are not snowmobiling fans despite statements like, "the American Alps Legacy Project has already given a nod to snowmobiles by excluding Harts Pass and Barron Mine" and "the American Alps proposal will accept environmentally compatible access to the Harts Pass road." So after decades of snowmobiling in places like Harts Pass, snowmobilers will be relieved to know they will be able to continue this activity as long as it is "environmentally compatible."

Heli-skiing: Likely end to heli-ski operation (North Cascade Heli, Inc.). AALP backers imply supporting continued heli-skiing until the current ten-year permit comes up for renewal in 2016. But if the park is expanded before then, any Forest Service-issued permit will become null and void, thus voicing support for the continuation of heli-skiing is a moot point. "Incompatible uses, such as downhill skiing and motorized recreation, are also popular and slowly encroaching on pristine non-motorized recreation areas adjacent to the current park" (from NCCC website).

Backcountry skiing: Especially using snowmobile access, could eventually face restrictions. "And so it is with the profusion of high tech ski gear that the back country is not as protected as it used to be, even 10 years ago. I see there is a new usage challenge to consider as we work to protect and enhance our North Cascades" (NCCC board member Tom Hammond, July '10).

Climbing: Would face greater management oversight at popular areas like Washington Pass, including potential fixed anchor bans and route development restrictions.

Mountain biking: Currently, mountain biking options in the proposed expansion areas are limited, but classic outings on the West Fork of the Methow and Cutthroat trails could eventually be closed under Park Service management.

Paragliding: Popular flying areas near Washington Pass would no longer be open to paragliders as this recreational use is not allowed in the park.

Driving the NCH: The current Windshield Wilderness experience will be negatively impacted with the increase in traffic, congestion, noise and motor pollution along the North Cascades Highway (suggested name change to North Cascades Parkway) with the increased visitation promoted by AALP proponents as a result of an expanded national park.

AALP supporters argue that there are long-term concerns (20 to 50 years from now) like mining, logging and hydroelectric projects threatening the "federally unprotected" public lands outside the current park boundaries. Similarly, one can argue that years from now, or less, many types of existing recreational use on these public lands could be impacted, restricted or prohibited to one degree or another, despite assurances that little will change, with a radical land designation change from forest service lands to national park lands as suggested by the American Alps proposal.

Quotes and such

From time to time we will be posting quotes and tidbits related to the proposed park expansion.

Here are two:

 “The planning task force [in forming the NCNP] reached an agreement with Okanogan and Skagit county commissioners to limit commercial development along the Highway 20 corridor near the entrances to the park complex "to avoid creating another West Yellowstone or Estes Park" in gateway towns like Winthrop and Marblemount.” – Contested Terrain (David Louter).

“The fundamental need is for management of the citizenry.” – Marc Bardsley, NCCC president, in 2001

 

NCNP history and the AALP

The North Cascades National Park was established in 1968 after a contentious and historic multi-year battle. Land at the time was under Forest Service rule and many people in the rural communities on both sides of the crest were against the formation of the park and surrounding wilderness areas.

The North Cascades National Park Service Complex is comprised of 684,000 acres of remote and wild land. It includes the park's north and south units, as well as Ross Lake and Lake Chelan National Recreation Areas. These "complementary protected lands are untied by a contiguous overlay" of the Stephen Mather Wilderness.

Also created in 1968 were the adjacent Pasayten Wilderness of 550,000 acres and the enlargement of the Glacier Peak Wilderness to 464,000 acres. In the 1980’s, more designated wilderness was established, also with opposition in nearby local communities, with the Chelan-Sawtooths and Mt. Baker wilderness areas.

     Currently, the NCNPS Complex is administered by the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior. All other land in the proposed expansion area is under the jurisdiction of the United States Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture except along the North Cascade Highway, where the Washington State Department of Transportation is involved, as well as a few county roads like part of Cascade River Road.

The American Alps Legacy Project currently proposed by the North Cascades Conservation Council (NCCC), along with the Mountaineers (a "non-profit" outdoor activity club), would ultimately expand the NCNP to over 300,000 acres by including the RLNRA and adjoining USFS lands. The project would ultimately need legislative approval by Congress and the President.

The reasons given for the expansion are two-fold: One is to secure NPS-type protections for what they believe are potential long-term threats like logging, mining, hydroelectric projects and climate change. The second reason is to increase visitation to the park through developing greater amenities and access in the front-county of the proposed “study areas” and the gateway communities outside the new park boundaries and theoretically helping these rural areas economically while encouraging families and children to appreciate their public heritage. 

Proponents of the AALP state they will have a final proposal due out this summer.

Welcome to the NOPE blog

Greetings!

This blog has been created to have a place for posting information, as well as opinions, about and against plans to expand the North Cascades National Park

There has been a lot of information and propaganda coming out from the main group (North Cascades Conservation Council) proposing some sort of expansion of the NCNP. This group's effort is known as the American Alps Legacy Project, which would seek to possibly reconfigure the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park by over 300,000 acres, usurping United States Forest Service lands on both sides of the park as well as folding the Ross Lake Recreation Area into national park land. This is a complicated and dramatic land designation change with many implications and consequences regarding, not only existing recreational use, but the development and growth impact on the existing "gateway communities" that border this expanded NCNP scenario.

Stayed tuned to this blog for points and perspectives against any expansion of the North Cascades National Park.