Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14139Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Emma Long Park

Expand Messages
  • Barb Jernigan
    Dec 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Oh, I positively get you ... I'm one of those who can argue both sides of almost any issue. Grew up to/in the midst of the battle between the US Forest Service, the loggers, Sierra Club, and Friends of the River..... And I've threaded more than a few game trails -- wish I were skinny as a deer, though.
       
      I'm all for conservation -- but I also have witnessed conservationists getting over-myopic (and sans sense), and do everything in their power to prevent public space from being used by the public. Anyway, don't mean to get into an argument... I think my post was meant mostly to remind us to be VERY careful of our brush crashing. Of course, no cacher HERE would be so focussed on the find that they'd CRASH through the brush and fling endangered birdie nests willie nillie.
       
      And perhaps we as users of the areas need to speak up.
      When there's only one voice yelling, they get all the attention just to shut them up.....
      =gentle smile=
       
      On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 22:55:13 -0600 "Wayne Lind" <wlind@...> writes:
      I see their point as well, to a degree. First, it is possible to position a cache off the main trail in such a way that a trail doesn't form. I have done it. It takes a little more work on the placement and that's another story. Second, some trails are not formed by geocachers but by the animals that live there. I have followed many clearly defined trails through the cedars that were either made by deer or smurfs. I don't see anyone asking the deer to stop making trails. If a cacher places a cache on a pre-existing game trail, how is that negatively impacting the area? My "The Moose is Loose" cache in Emma Long took advantage of a game trail that was used by the deer to get to the creek. I didn't make that trail, nor did geocachers, it was there when I placed the cache. Third, at least for the moment anyway, the cache density versus cacher population in the area means that caches probably get found only about 25-30 times a year. This varies depending on the distance traveled to get to the trail head and the distance you have to walk to get to the cache. The Moose is Loose was found 65 times in the 18 months it was active, or about 0.8 times a week. I have a hard time imagining this as being devastating to the environment. Finally, when a casual trail forms (and yes, they do form) they invariably leave the main trail and dead end at the cache. So if the argument is that the casual trail could lead to an unplanned major trail at some later point, if the trail dead ends, it is useless to anyone but geocachers and wildlife.
       
      While I want to do all we can to save endangered species, I am having a big problem with the BCCP stealing Austin's parklands for wildlife preserves when there are several hundred million acres of hill country land currently uninhabited and untouched by humans outside the city. This land is geographically identical to the park land that the BCCP is proposing to steal from the taxpayers who bought it. If the BCCP needs more land, let them buy it. Then they are more then welcome to fence in the entire area. If the parkland is so critical that this is where the birds are absolutely going to live, let the BCCP purchase parkland that will replace the land they are currently stealing on an acre for acre basis. What is the point in my paying taxes to purchase parkland I will then be forbidden to use?
      There are currently 3 parcels of parkland available for caching north of the Colorado river. NOTE, I am not talking about a .15 acre playground as a park! There is Emma Long Park, St. Edwards Park, and Walnut Creek Park. There was talk earlier this year about the BCCP stealing all or most of St. Eds, and now they are stealing Emma Long. Pretty soon there will be no usable parkland north of the river. This has to stop!
       
       
      -----Original Message-----
      From: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Barb Jernigan
      Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 9:05 PM
      To: CentralTexasGeocachers@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [CentralTexasGeocachers] Emma Long Park

      On the one hand, that's a bummer.
      On the other -- I've found too many off trail caches by following the
      previous cachers' tracks.
      We're not purposely destructive, but, as they say in the old US Park
      Service movies, each off trail venture starts a new trail.
      I see where the parks are coming from.

      On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 19:17:19 -0000 "Brent" <brbapb@...> writes:
      > Yikes! This has the potential to cause some problems for cachers, at
      >
      > least in the posted areas of Emma Long Park. I posted a photo of the
      >
      > signs to watch out for in the photos section.
      > http://tinyurl.com/dp3ft
      >
      > Yes that is correct, no off-trail hiking is allowed and that is a
      > year-round restriction.  Bikes and motorcycles are restricted to
      > special use area within the park.  The intent is to protect the
      > habitat and natural resources year-round.
      >

      >
      > Thank you for your inquiry.
      >

      >
      > Donald L. Koehler, Ph.D.
      >
      > Austin Water Utility
      >
      > Senior Biologist, BCP Program
      >
      > 3635 RR 620 South (Reicher Ranch)
      >
      > Austin, Texas 78738-6807
      >
      > 512-263-6431 (Office)
      >
      > 512-263-1276 (Fax)
      >

      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      > -----------
      >
      >
      > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 8:52 AM
      > To: don.koehler@...
      > Subject: Emma Long Park and BCCP
      >

      >
      > Hello!
      >

      >
      > On your website http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/preserves/access.htm it
      > states that Emma Long park is open to hiking, mountain biking, and
      > motorcycling. However at some points along the trail signs such as
      > those in the included attachment state that it is an endangered
      > species habitat and that you must stay on marked trails. Does that
      > mean that no off-trail hiking is allowed, and if so, is that year-
      > round on only when the Golden Cheeked Warbler is in the area?
      >

      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > --------------------~-->
      > Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your
      > home page
      > http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/YltolB/TM
      > --------------------------------------------------------------------~->

      >
      >

      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >

      >
      >
      >
      >


      @,.-:*'``'*:-.,@,.-:*'``'*:-.,@
      The here and now is all we have; and if we play it right it's all we'll
      need. --Ann Richards
      @,.-:*'``'*:-.,@,.-:*'``'*:-.,@
      Americans will put up with anything provided it doesn't block traffic.
      --Dan Rather
       

      @,.-:*'``'*:-.,@,.-:*'``'*:-.,@
      The here and now is all we have; and if we play it right it's all we'll need. --Ann Richards
      @,.-:*'``'*:-.,@,.-:*'``'*:-.,@
      Americans will put up with anything provided it doesn't block traffic. --Dan Rather
    • Show all 8 messages in this topic