Mt Hood National Forest

Wild places can be loved to death by too many people. But limiting access means some governing body has to make rules and oversee their enforcement. We lose the fantasy of being one with nature when our role is confined by park regulations.  As a lover of wild places who finds solace in the woods, I want them to be there for everybody.  But I also recognize that people are slobs who trample and litter. And once the wildness is gone, it never returns.  I have lived long enough to see Nisene Marks Wilderness Area, once accessible only via rutted dirt road, become the suburban playground it is today.  And while there’s nothing wrong with the exercisers, the jogging strollers and the mountain bikes, gone are the days when the only sounds were birds calling and creeks burbling. Now the exercisers are talking on their mobile phones as they work out on the fire road. Curse you, Verizon. I used to take the girls to play in Aptos Creek. Now where it’s not dried up sludge, it’s polluted, with dog feces and trash along its worn-away banks. The wheels of  mountain bikes have worn deep ruts in my favorite trails, making it impossible to look up from the trail while walking without risking a stumble. And once the bikers have created ruts too deep for themselves, they just ride next to the trail, in the vegetation, creating trail braids.  As Aptos expanded, the adjacent wild area became overrun. I have observed a similar trajectory for the wilderness areas around Bend. Here’s the official problem as set out by the USFS:

https://www.fs.usda.gov/projectdetail/deschutes/landmanagement/planning/?cid=FSEPRD543135

One local affinity group of dog owners, dogpac.org, is surprisingly in favor of permits for and quotas on wilderness visitors.  But a more persuasive voice, the Bend Bulletin, argues that there should be no new rules without sufficient manpower to enforce them. And then where is the funding for new rangers to come from?  Will permits be sold?  Why should wilderness belong more to the well-heeled, instead of to all of us?

Bend should protect its outside recreational spaces for social, environmental and economic reasons.  The residents will kill their golden goose if they lay waste to their pristine environs.  But everything has a cost, including preservation.  Describe the problem as behaviors: littering, illegal camping, human waste eliminating, and figure out how to curb them.  Who will pay for the authorities to issue tickets?  This cost must be borne by all, not just by users. We all benefit by having clean natural spaces for our watershed, our air, and our fellow creatures. It may be too late for Aptos, but it’s not for Bend.