Saline Valley Talk

Hosted by SPA, the Saline Preservation Association

Let's talk!

Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
Randy

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 16
 #16 
If it's a done deal that there WILL be some sort of management of camping areas at the springs then I agree that boundaries seem to be the best alternative, however at the point they are in now in the decision making process I still think a hands off alternative is possible, and in my opinion, preferable.  Lets not forget that the area has been developed and maintained without government oversight by the users for many years and when you go out there and see how nice it is you should be wondering if adding a layer of "management" is going to improve the experience or diminish it.
James Sel

Registered:
Posts: 335
 #17 
I would not be apposed to a couple of designated/established campsites with good sized concrete slabs, raise BBQ's & table for cooking. A well thought out plan must include the Disable campers.  There is only one sad site for them now.
 If by any chance  the park service is unwavering about making established camp sites. A reasonable plan would include an overflow area/s. If forced compromise would include all the presently used sites as overflow (always open). The new sites could be made between the restroom and the ball field.     
rickandurs

Registered:
Posts: 78
 #18 

Randy, as you stated in reply #4, maybe take a look at what the NPS is doing, the Saline Valley MANAGEMENT Plan, our input to them is importment and needs to be our meaningful solution, if we don't they will and it may not be meaningful in our eyes.

Heay, lets address some more of the topics.

TRAUMAhead, tag, your it.

rickandurs

Registered:
Posts: 78
 #19 

So if the DVNP folks said, make a choice, as stated in Major Toms comment #1, then what would you do, NPS may not go with a free range alternative, I would personally go with a boundary, who would manage camp sites?

Heay, as long as we are talking we are helping formulate what future policies might be.

Randy

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 16
 #20 
Yeah, I always use established campsites and avoid driving off the road too, but my opinion is that there are adequate campsites already created around the springs and trying to create an artificial boundary seems to me to be unnecessary.  If there is an issue that creating a campsite boundary would solve then I might change my opinion but why try to fix something that doesn't seem to be broken.
rickandurs

Registered:
Posts: 78
 #21 

Not to sure it is a "rule" as it just happens, camp site sprawl may not be acceptable, just my opinion, I never make a "camp" or drive off road.

Randy

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 16
 #22 
Why not leave it as it is and not designate any boundaries at all?  Open desert camping has always been the rule out there.  We don't need another over managed camping area.
Ed_B

Registered:
Posts: 49
 #23 
Camping boundaries is probably the best way to address the issue. In that way the users of the springs can enjoy the experience without being limited to a small developed campsite.
Major Tom

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 353
 #24 

Rather than having established campsites, a general boundary around the springs can be established that would allow for camping within a defined area. This was suggested to me by the Martin administration (DVNP) some years back.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

Chat Room

Appreciate the forum? Value SPA's efforts? Donations to the Saline Preservation Association are tax deductible!