Who visits the San Gabriels?

Post by **JeffH** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 9:09 pm

Saw this story tonight - doesn't match my perception of the people I see walking around up there.....

http://www.kcet.org/socal/departures/la ... riels.html

Obviously lots of competing interests noted.

dgrimreaper · Post by **dgrimreaper** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:23 pm

Jeff,

Agreed. Percentages seem to be way off.

In regards to the National Recreation Area (NRA), just look at the organizations involved: Anahauk Youth Sports Organization, San Gabriel Moutains Forever Coalition, The Wilderness Society, Conservation Corps, Acjachemen Nation - Juaneno Tribe, Sierra Club, The City Project, COFEM, Campaign for Americas Wilderness, Project Amiga, Amigos de los Rios, California Wilderness Coalition. That is 12 listed. There is a lot of money being thrown at this behind the scenes. I could be wrong and I would love to know more unbiased information, but it appears to me that this deal smells like an out house on a hot summer day.

Seems like most of these organizations stand to make lots of money, tax payer money at that, if the NRA gets approved. So is it really about getting the people to the mountains, or is it about the money?

PackerGreg · Post by **PackerGreg** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:14 pm

It's another globalist land grab under the UN's Agenda 21 plan. It is typically sold with feel-good messages like the need for "diversity" in this article. But they lie and deceive, and folks that don't know any better go along. Those that oppose it are ridiculed and marginalized. The US is losing its sovereignty one "National" Recreation Area/Wildlife Corridor/Historic Corridor at a time; and we will all live in "smart cities" and never be allowed in the wildlands.

PackerGreg · Post by **PackerGreg** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:24 pm

MtnMan · Post by **MtnMan** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:45 pm

For some more numbers, try looking up the National Visitor Use Monitoring Program. Although, some of the numbers may not be entirely representative of every aspect of use patterns, just doing some basic searches, it looks like they have some decent trends that match what I see out there sometimes.

plug in the Angeles, and other details for the report you want.

http://apps.fs.usda.gov/nrm/nvum/results/

Ze Hiker · Post by **Ze Hiker** » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:52 am

obligatory

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/24b56c ... -underwood

jmac · Post by **jmac** » Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:23 am

Zé wrote: ↑obligatory

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/24b56c ... -underwood

Post by **JeffH** » Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:50 pm

I ran that for Angeles and the numbers add up to 125.5%. Is that the new math?

andthewalrus · Post by **andthewalrus** » Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:13 pm

1) So is it only me that always seems to run into the tour bus carrying one of the Korean hiking clubs?

2) Is that first picture San Antonio falls?

Hayduke · Post by **Hayduke** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:21 am

MtnMan wrote: ↑For some more numbers, try looking up the National Visitor Use Monitoring Program. Although, some of the numbers may not be entirely representative of every aspect of use patterns, just doing some basic searches, it looks like they have some decent trends that match what I see out there sometimes.

plug in the Angeles, and other details for the report you want.

http://apps.fs.usda.gov/nrm/nvum/results/

Is the Angeles NVUM data statistically valid? Last time I checked there was some questionable data in there.

But I think most forests NVUM data blows. I suppose it's the best measure going, but that doesn't mean it's a good one.