Re: In Other News...

Did anyone see this or have any insight as to what is going on?

"The future of the roughly 80-year-old Stoneman and two other spandrel arch bridges has pitted environmentalists, who want the river to flow freely, against historic preservationists who say these early examples of the rustic park architectural style are too culturally important to destroy."

http://news.yahoo.com/historic-bridges-yosemite-valley-under-siege-182438735.html

I hope they leave the bridges alone. If they tear them out, they will have to be replaced in order to travel the valley anyway. Does anyone know what the plan would be? Anyone have a link to the National Park Service for citizen comments?

If the plan goes through Sugar Pine and Ahwahnee bridges will be removed and the trail/bikepath relocated. If the Stoneman Bridge is removed than traffic patterns will have to be changed.

I suggest that people who are interested in knowing what is going on in Yosemite that then periodically chech the planning section at www.nps.gov/yose for plans that have been decided, in the planning stage or in the begininng stage. There is a lot going on. You can also ask to be on a email list that will notify you when plans come out. It can be found on the forementioned website.

This debate has been going on for a long time. I first saw the discussion when the original MRP came out many years ago, it was addressed again after the 1997 flood and more recently in the last two Merced River plans, one that came out in the fall and one this spring. It has also been talked about on this site and many others. More people have become aware of it lately since the bridges were listed on a historical endangered site and it has also been in newspapers since this spring's concept plan came out. The bridge removal was part of this recent Merced River Plan comment period and you can go to www.nps.gov/yose site and look under the planning section to see documents that have this issue mentioned in them. This fall, the final alternatives will come out and you can comment on them. Keep track of the planning section for updates.

As you pointed out here:
http://yosemitenews.info/forum/read.php?3,56015

---

Just to clarify, not all of the alternatives that the Park Service is considering for the Merced Wild & Scenic River requires the removal of these historic bridges. Some of the alternatives will leave the bridges alone. So it all depends on what the preferred alternative will be come this fall.
.

I wonder who did their research? See this quote:

"Called the "Voice of Yosemite" by famed naturalist John Muir, the Merced River flows for 81 miles in the park, from its source 13,000 feet high in the Sierra-Nevada wilderness to its 317-foot drop into the tourist mecca and through it."

Ummm, it drops a LOT more than 317 feet across the total system into the valley. Sounds like they took the measurement for Vernal and ignored the rest.

Quote
hotrod4x5
I wonder who did their research? See this quote:

"Called the "Voice of Yosemite" by famed naturalist John Muir, the Merced River flows for 81 miles in the park, from its source 13,000 feet high in the Sierra-Nevada wilderness to its 317-foot drop into the tourist mecca and through it."

Ummm, it drops a LOT more than 317 feet across the total system into the valley. Sounds like they took the measurement for Vernal and ignored the rest.

They're referring to the final drop into the Valley, i.e. Vernal.

Very informative workbook detailing various options... http://www.nps.gov/yose/parkmgmt/upload/YOSE_MRP_Workbook_Final3-19-12_WEB_READY.pdf

Would be interesting to see what the alternative to traffic flows would be if they took out Stoneman. Always enjoyed my bike rides across Sugar Pine and Ahwahnee bridges. One of the less travelled areas in the Valley and one of the more peaceful areas of the Valley. Oh good grief, might as well lock up the entrances to the whole park and keep all humans out. That idea should excite the extremists.