Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

The Tennessee Wilderness Act: Will the fourth time be the charm?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • The Tennessee Wilderness Act: Will the fourth time be the charm?

      timesfreepress.com/news/opinio…rth-time-be-charm/294594/

      The Tennessee Wilderness Act: Will the fourth time be the charm?March 23rd, 2015


      The wilderness area of Big Frog Mountain could be enlarged under proposed federal legislation.

      Tennessee Republican senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker have introduced -- for a fourth time -- the Tennessee Wilderness Act.

      This legislation, the Tennessee Wilderness Act of 2015, would safeguard nearly 20,000 acres of public land in the Cherokee National Forest.

      Specifically, it would expand the Joyce Kilmer Slickrock, Big Frog, Little Frog, Big Laurel Branch, and Sampson Mountain wilderness areas, and create the new 9,000-acre Upper Bald River Wilderness Area -- the first new wilderness area for Tennessee in more than 25 years.

      Wilderness areas ADDITIONS* 1,836 acres: Monroe County's Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness* 348 acres: Polk County's Big Frog Wilderness* 966 acres: Polk County's Little Frog Wilderness* 4,446 acres: Carter and Johnson counties' Big Laurel Branch Wilderness* 2,922 acres: Unicoi and Washington counties' Sampson Mountain Wilderness NEW* 9,038 acres: Monroe County's Upper Bald River WildernessSource: Tennessee Wilderness Campaign

      Three times before, we've thought this legislation is a no-brainer -- an easy agreement for our dysfunctional Congress to sing a little Kumbaya over. We were wrong. And we're still waiting for 3rd District Rep. Chuck Fleischmann to step up and lead on this in the House

      Never mind that a diverse coalition of hunters, anglers, business owners, faith leaders, outdoor recreationists, local lawmakers and conservationists are applauding this proposal and eager for a similar one in the House.

      Wilderness areas add an important layer of conservation. They mean no new roads no logging. They preserve critical wildlife habitat, outstanding land and water recreational opportunities, and clean drinking water essential to nearby communities. And nothing about wilderness designation changes how hikers, campers, hunters, anglers, horseback riders, paddlers, swimmers, and rafters can continue to enjoy the popular Cherokee National Forest.

      The areas included in this legislation is home to brook trout, black bear, bobcat, and white-tail deer and many migratory birds, as well as 4.5 miles of the Appalachian Trail and nearly 15 miles of the Benton MacKaye Trail.

      This carries neither expense nor inconvenience to American taxpayers, and the U.S. Forest Service has formally recommended expanding wilderness in the Cherokee National Forest in their Land and Resource Management Plan.

      Outdoor recreation is big business in Tennessee, boosting the local economy through outdoor recreation and tourism jobs. According to the Outdoor Industry Association's 2012 economic report, the outdoor recreation industry generates $8.2 billion in consumer spending in Tennessee each year and creates 83,000 jobs in the state.

      This wilderness bill has no cost, no downside and would benefit Tennessee, the nation and the region. As a bonus, it preserves this beauty for generations to come.

      Dawson Wheeler -- a long-time outdoor advocate and co-owner of Rock/Creek Outfitters, puts it this way: "This is beneficial to our region's development in many ways. The [outdoor] industry is historically recession-proof. It give s rural communities the opportunity to build businesses and improve real estate. But equally important is the simple preservation of the land."

      Alexander and Corker are to be commended for their unwavering commitment to this effort to grow our wilderness footprint.

      We would hope Rep. Chuck Fleischmann would make a similar effort in the House, where -- to date -- this effort has had no traction.

      Most of the nation's wilderness has already vanished. What's left merits visionary work and lasting protection.
      its all good
    • Hmmmm, not the 20,000 acres but it's a start. the Big Laurel Branch Wilderness is near Watauga Lake and the AT.

      WASHINGTON — Nearly 7,500 acres in East Tennessee would be designated as federally protected wilderness areas and would be added to the Cherokee National Forest under a bill filed Thursday by U.S. Rep. Phil Roe.

      Roe's bill, called the Tennessee Wilderness Act, marks the first time legislation to expand the national forest has been filed in the U.S. House.

      U.S. Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker have been pushing a similar bill in the Senate for a number of years.

      "As an avid outdoorsman, I strongly believe we must protect the beautiful lands we're fortunate to have in East Tennessee," said Roe, a Johnson City Republican. "Though these particular lands have been treated as wilderness for more than a decade, it's important to officially protect them."

      Roe's legislation differs from the Senate bill in one respect: The Senate version would add almost 20,000 acres of designated wilderness to the national forest. Roe's bill would apply to only some 7,500 acres located in his congressional district.

      Areas to be designated as wilderness areas under Roe's proposal include 4,446 acres in Carter and Johnson counties that are generally referred to as the Big Laurel Branch addition and another 2,922 acres in Washington and Unicoi counties known as the Sampson Mountain addition.

      The state would continue to have jurisdiction over fish and wildlife management of the land, which would protect permit holders' ability to hunt and fish. Privately owned land would not be affected by the legislation.

      The Appalachian Trail Conservancy said designating the land as wilderness ares provides "the best protection available" for the trail.

      Morgan Sommerville, the group's southern regional director, said the organization endorses the new wilderness protections "as long as enough volunteers are available to help maintain the trail."

      Mary Johnson, who is with the commercial real-estate firm Land Partners in Bristol but also runs a small farm and vineyard in the mountains, said Roe's legislation "ensures that future generations will always be able to hunt, fish, hike, camp and experience our remarkable mountains, creeks and rivers just as we do today."
      Lost in the right direction.
    • TrafficJam wrote:

      Hmmmm, not the 20,000 acres but it's a start. the Big Laurel Branch Wilderness is near Watauga Lake and the AT.

      WASHINGTON — Nearly 7,500 acres in East Tennessee would be designated as federally protected wilderness areas and would be added to the Cherokee National Forest under a bill filed Thursday by U.S. Rep. Phil Roe.

      Roe's bill, called the Tennessee Wilderness Act, marks the first time legislation to expand the national forest has been filed in the U.S. House.

      U.S. Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker have been pushing a similar bill in the Senate for a number of years.

      "As an avid outdoorsman, I strongly believe we must protect the beautiful lands we're fortunate to have in East Tennessee," said Roe, a Johnson City Republican. "Though these particular lands have been treated as wilderness for more than a decade, it's important to officially protect them."

      Roe's legislation differs from the Senate bill in one respect: The Senate version would add almost 20,000 acres of designated wilderness to the national forest. Roe's bill would apply to only some 7,500 acres located in his congressional district.

      Areas to be designated as wilderness areas under Roe's proposal include 4,446 acres in Carter and Johnson counties that are generally referred to as the Big Laurel Branch addition and another 2,922 acres in Washington and Unicoi counties known as the Sampson Mountain addition.

      The state would continue to have jurisdiction over fish and wildlife management of the land, which would protect permit holders' ability to hunt and fish. Privately owned land would not be affected by the legislation.

      The Appalachian Trail Conservancy said designating the land as wilderness ares provides "the best protection available" for the trail.

      Morgan Sommerville, the group's southern regional director, said the organization endorses the new wilderness protections "as long as enough volunteers are available to help maintain the trail."

      Mary Johnson, who is with the commercial real-estate firm Land Partners in Bristol but also runs a small farm and vineyard in the mountains, said Roe's legislation "ensures that future generations will always be able to hunt, fish, hike, camp and experience our remarkable mountains, creeks and rivers just as we do today."
      I always have mixed emotions when the Gov. does something like this, before they can give you anything they must first take it away from someone else...thought about that when I passed two very old cemeteries now on NF land that used to be a community of land owners while hiking the Pinhoti this weekend.
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.
    • Drybones wrote:

      JimBlue wrote:

      I know of two dams built in Texas that had to be done for flood control. People got displaced for both. One displaced two small towns. But overall the displacement saved lives.
      And destroyed others.
      Life is full of trade offs, I just always hope we get the Cost Benefit Analysis right.
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General
    • TrafficJam wrote:

      I haven't found evidence that designating new wilderness areas under the Wilderness Act will displace people. If anyone can cite sources, please let me know.
      I've said it before but in my opinion, one of the most valuable functions of the trail is simply conservation -- quite independent of any hiking that takes place on it. To me, simply designating a piece of land as "thou shalt not build a mall or housing development or office park here" is well worth the effort.
    • rafe wrote:

      TrafficJam wrote:

      I haven't found evidence that designating new wilderness areas under the Wilderness Act will displace people. If anyone can cite sources, please let me know.
      I've said it before but in my opinion, one of the most valuable functions of the trail is simply conservation -- quite independent of any hiking that takes place on it. To me, simply designating a piece of land as "thou shalt not build a mall or housing development or office park here" is well worth the effort.
      I agree with the exception of banning mountain bikes. Most of the new wilderness areas being created we're previously open to bikes.
      Sometimes you will never know the value of a moment until it becomes a memory.
      Dr. Seuss Cof123
    • Drybones wrote:

      JimBlue wrote:

      I know of two dams built in Texas that had to be done for flood control. People got displaced for both. One displaced two small towns. But overall the displacement saved lives.
      And destroyed others.
      The ones displaced were some of the ones who kept losing family members to drowning. They were moved to land that was flatter, and had little chance of being swept away due to a flash flood. Fewer trees was one of their complaints. When another town suggested they plant trees, they didn't. By this time, their grandkids have likely planted more trees and prefer where they live over the flash floods area that the town was located in.
      --
      "What do you mean its sunrise already ?!", me.
    • JimBlue wrote:

      Drybones wrote:

      JimBlue wrote:

      I know of two dams built in Texas that had to be done for flood control. People got displaced for both. One displaced two small towns. But overall the displacement saved lives.
      And destroyed others.
      The ones displaced were some of the ones who kept losing family members to drowning. They were moved to land that was flatter, and had little chance of being swept away due to a flash flood. Fewer trees was one of their complaints. When another town suggested they plant trees, they didn't. By this time, their grandkids have likely planted more trees and prefer where they live over the flash floods area that the town was located in.
      I'd just as soon make my own decisions instead of the feds making them for me.
      I may grow old but I'll never grow up.
    • Drybones wrote:

      JimBlue wrote:

      I know of two dams built in Texas that had to be done for flood control. People got displaced for both. One displaced two small towns. But overall the displacement saved lives.
      And destroyed others.
      Ain't no fair way to do it, more's the pity.

      My local history also has a lot of people smarting:

      catskillarchive.com/watershed/olive.htm
      One ironic part of the story is that the village of Neversink ... is sunken.

      [IMG:https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2930/14018132286_885f34f6b9_z.jpg]
      New York City watershed marker by Kevin Kenny, on Flickr

      "Wilderness" designation is also controversial.
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.
    • JimBlue wrote:

      I know of two dams built in Texas that had to be done for flood control. People got displaced for both. One displaced two small towns. But overall the displacement saved lives.
      where are the dams located?

      Lest we forget.....



      SSgt Ray Rangel - USAF
      SrA Elizabeth Loncki - USAF
      PFC Adam Harris - USA
      MSgt Eden Pearl - USMC