Yosemite Lodge probably won’t be torn down, readers say
by on
Tearing down the venerable Yosemite Lodge is not likely to happen in the National Park Service’s actions to protect the Merced River.
That’s what callers and emailers are saying today after I mentioned the possibility in my column on the Merced River Plan, which is supposed to be completed some time next year.
The removal of the lodge is just part of one preliminary concept from the National Park Service. Nobody is serious about it, some said.
A few readers added that they doubted that the Curry Village Ice Rink would be closed — another concept in the preliminary options that I mentioned.
Apologies to anyone who might have read this as a done deal. I would only point out that these ideas really are among the proposals, and I found it interesting.
I wrote the item only to raise awareness, and I didn’t couch it quite right. Next time, I’ll tweet it.
Responses
Posting this comment for a reader. MG.
I have an opinion on this however no one seems to care.
To limit the number of visitors is completely wrong. If the Yosemite park belongs to the people of THE USA we should make every effort to make it available to them for their use. Just think it is used by only 3 million visitors per year. If you divide 3 million into 300 million people you will see it would take 100years for just the American people to see it for one day one time. Most of them would be dead before their turn. ( Even if there were no outside visitors.)
The use of such excuses as the protection of the river is not acceptable because both can be done at the same time. Many parking places can be put in areas that are behind trees and rocks that are out of sight. Camp sites can be located in many close areas that are not within the seven mile valley. Hotels could be added
In many places that are not within the valley and financed by the operators themselves. They had one in years past. Cable cars could be installed to many areas with exhalent views and still not detract from the overall experience.
YES I HAVE AN OPINION AND I THINK IT IS MORALY WRONG TO LIMIT THE NOUMBER OF VISITERS. WE CAN MAKE ROOM FOR MORE IF WE TRY.
James Opie 10742 Serra View Madera California.
Posted for an email commenter, MG:
Mark
PLEASE inform your readers that there are actually FIVE “concepts” with regard to the Merced River Plan. They go from involving 161 acres (allowing for the most recreational use) to 336 acres (the most restrictive for recreational use). Additionally, under the most restrictive, many icons within the valley that are currently on the National Historic Register will be removed/demolished.
PLEASE, readers, call Planning Division Chief, Kathleen Morse (379-1270) to find about upcoming meetings where public comments can be made.
People, plese don’t take this sitting down. Inform and educate yourselves before you sit and say “How did this happen?”
I understand, according to a phone call to Kathleen Morse earlier this week, there WILL be a public meeting sometime in November. PLEASE LOOK FOR IT as I hope it will be publicized in the Fresno Bee.
Eleanor Keuning