Deanna Wulff: Why a Range of Light National Monument?

Last week, Deanna Wulff was in Three Rivers to tell the story of the founding of Unite the Parks. The nonprofit’s mission is to upgrade the protection of 1.4 million acres of the Sierra National Forest.

Currently the director of Unite the Parks, Wulff said raising the status of these forest lands to a national monument makes perfect sense. It is right in the center of the two oldest national parks in California — Sequoia and Yosemite. Only Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, established in 1872, is older.

“What we would be creating is a landscape-wide protected area that would span three million acres when you include Yosemite and Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks,” Wulff said. “The longest interconnected wilderness in the lower 48 exists right now in the Sierra Nevada.”

Creating the monument would end activities like commercial logging and road-building in this area. The forest lands contain similar values as the neighboring national parks, Deanna said.

In her first interview, Deanna explained the difference between the Forest Service lands and national parks and why it is imperative to protect the Sierra Nevada.

“A national monument is a designation that can be written to address the issues in the area, and that is what we hope to do,” Wulff said.

Video-editing by Ethan Paggi.

Dead and dying trees: Climate change signal in Sequoia NP

3 thoughts on “Deanna Wulff: Why a Range of Light National Monument?

  • September 13, 2019 at 10:23 am

    I’m sure my views will come as no surprise to anyone but still, I feel the need to express them.

    As for me, I have many doubts and questions about this proposal. Here are just a few:
    – What government department will head it?
    – Will it be funded under the current Depart of the Interior?
    – How will all this land be administered? Paid employees? Volunteers??

    These lands are all supposed to be designated as PUBLIC (that means us taxpayers, folks) lands.
    – Will the PUBLIC have access to all these acres or will it be closed to only government “scientists” to be able to study fire behavior and serve as their private laboratory?
    – Will this land be under the current Park Service “control” burn regulations? If so,that means more unhealthy breathing space via air pollution for valley and foothill inhabitants.

    There are so many more issues here and they need to be addressed and answered satisfactorily.

    My final thought is – this seems like another government land-grab & take-over; I think it is a bad idea and my vote would be no.
    Sophie Britten

  • September 16, 2019 at 12:09 pm

    This reminds me of the farmer who doesn’t want all of the land, just the property next to him. I have watched the protectorate that the government established in the tule river watershed and if the preservationist count all the land and trees that burned during their watch as wonderful happenings, you will now understand their motivation. I firmly agree with others that the ultimate goal is more restrictions. Ask the park service if they have built any new camp sites in the last 50 plus years and while I am on my rant ask the park service if closing the neighborhood ski area in Sequoia made it such a better place. Doug Bodine

  • September 16, 2020 at 1:41 pm

    Logging was shut down in the Sierra National Forest years ago by the Sierra Club and Bay Area tree huggers . Now We are breathing smoke watching it all burn,they have done enough damage.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.