Boulder-White Clouds NM?

[BillyGoat]

What are your thoughts on this proposal?

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/04/14/2533828/new-life-for-idaho-treasure-quest.html

Maybe I missed it, but it's not clear to me what monument designation would mean exactly as compared to wilderness designation other than motorcycle, snowmobile & mountain bike activity could still be allowed in a monument. This area is already protected somewhat under the SNRA from mining, logging, grazing and development. What would monument status offer?

 

[ID_deerslayer]

it appears that monument status would make the area a national monument and not state land, other than the private. Hunting would most likely be cut out of the area I would think and fishing would still be allowed on the rivers, most likely catch and release only though.

 

[BillyGoat]

Hunting would most likely be cut out of the area

I don't believe this is a concern. There are national monuments that allow hunting.

 

[1_pointer]

Having spent a limited amount of time in the proposed monument, I cannot imagine that it needs more "protection" or that it would be granted such through NM status. What is or is not allowed on the monument would depend on the the land use plan. You are correct that "motorcycle, snowmobile & mountain bike activity could still be allowed in a monument." however, that is not a certainty with monument status.

Though I've only passed through, I've worked with and talked to many about the Grand Staircase-Escalante NM in southern Utah. At least in this case, the amount of visitation/use of the area went up considerably after NM designation. In come cases/areas, from what I've been told, it's almost "saved it to death". I'm not of the opinion that NM designation for the sake of designation alone is a good idea. If the current management is doing a good job why change? I can almost garantee that it won't be a smooth ride if this area gains NM status as there will be lots of fighting over what will be allowed where.

Couple of pics from the area:

 

[6speed]

If you use the Craters of the Moon NM as a reference the possibility of no hunting signs going up is a very possible concern. I agree that the National Rec. Area protection is enough and they should leave it alone.

 

[BillyGoat]

In come cases/areas, from what I've been told, it's almost "saved it to death".

This is what I'm afraid of. It doesn't need the attention NM status would bring if that status offers nothing substantial to further protect it. Personally I'd like to see it (or most of it) become designated wilderness -- and I am an avid mountain biker and have ridden there (as well as backpacked, fished, climbed, and hunted). But if that's not going to happen then just leave it be. As far as I know, there are presently no major threats to this area.

If you use the Craters of the Moon NM as a reference the possibility of no hunting signs going up is a very possible concern.

It's completely different terrain so I don't think that's a fair comparison. Besides, only the National Monument part of Craters near the visitor center is closed to hunting. The National Preserve part, which is much larger, is open to hunting. Pretty reasonable IMO.
http://www.nps.gov/crmo/planyourvisit/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=393889

 

[1_pointer]

It doesn't need the attention NM status would bring if that status offers nothing substantial to further protect it. Personally I'd like to see it (or most of it) become designated wilderness

I agree, especially with the first sentence I quoted. Wilderness wouldn't bother me either, but I'm not sure it would really benefit from that designation either. My only concern with a wilderness designation is that it could limit management options, notably with fire and or weed management, that may be beneficial. IMO, the current management is doing quite a good job.

 

[6speed]

It's completely different terrain so I don't think that's a fair comparison. Besides, only the National Monument part of Craters near the visitor center is closed to hunting. The National Preserve part, which is much larger, is open to hunting. Pretty reasonable IMO.
http://www.nps.gov/crmo/planyourvisit/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=393889

Its not more than 50 miles away as the crow flies and its being proposed as a National Monument not a preserve. I can think of a couple organizations that would like nothing more than to shut down hunting in the BWC and I have no doubt they will be pushing for it using the Craters as an example.

 

[1_pointer]

Its not more than 50 miles away as the crow flies and its being proposed as a National Monument not a preserve. I can think of a couple organizations that would like nothing more than to shut down hunting in the BWC and I have no doubt they will be pushing for it using the Craters as an example.

I agree. There are groups, some very local to BWC, that will use the land use process to push their agendas that, IMO, will not really help the resource. It would take at least a decade to get through the LUP process if this is designated a NM and cost a whole lot of wasted time and money in the process for little gain.