May & June 2003

The Pilgrims

Bears of the Kennicott Valley

In Which, NPS rewrites history & law

Ill Winds threaten Inholders

McCarthy says “yes” to road upgrade

Mccarthy-Green Butte Trail—legal?

NPS comes to town

Question by local resident: “[Superintendent], this is customary/traditional use..if you cannot define it and we view traveling up and down McCarthy Creek as customary/traditional use how can you deny it when you can’t even define it?”

Superintendent Gary Candeleria (GC): “Customary and traditional is something that in many areas is undefined. In many parts of the nation.”

Question: “How can you outlaw what you can’t define? It’s a legitimate legal question.”

GC: “I am not a lawyer.”

Question: “You need to define this issue before you ban an activity.”

GC: “The activity is a result of an illegal action.”

Question: “What is the worst case example of what they destroyed on that road?”

GC: “I don’t know what they’ve destroyed.”

(crowd goes wild! Laughter)

Question: “So they might not have done any harm at all?”

GC: “Maybe not.”

Question: “Isn’t it true that this is all about you guys being upset because they didn’t talk to you?”

GC: “No, no”

Question: “The whole thing is not about them not talking to you?”

GC: “No, the action they took without talking to us is …” (interrupted)

Question: “Action, what action? You said you don’t know what action they took.”

GC: “Because we haven’t had the chance to go over the ground yet.”

Try to imagine two and a half hours of the above lunacy, and you have a picture of the recent town/NPS meeting.

This action follows months of harassment by the NPS in the form of slanderous innuendos and rumors toward the Pilgrim family.

The rangers say that their numerous overflights of the family’s property show that “they may have gotten off their property with the dozer,” then add, “we don’t know where the property lines are.”

Some people charge that what NPS actually wants is the 400 acres the family live on. The Park Service apparently tried to negotiate with the former owner, but were unsuccessful.

Whatever the motivation, the fact is that these people have been singled out for punishment although there is no evidence that they have done any damage. And in America, that is w-r-o-n-g.