User Friendly Mount Spokane State’S Restricted-Use Plan Draws Criticism

New restrictions aren’t needed to protect Mount Spokane State Park, most speakers said at a crowded hearing on the park’s future.

“The park’s in great shape. Why are we all here?” asked Gerald Olson, one of 235 people at Tuesday night’s hearing.

Ten years ago, the Legislature ordered portions of state-owned forests set aside for study and preservation. In response, the state Parks and Recreation Commission last year proposed limiting most uses on 4,870 acres of the 13,820-acre park.

Groups representing snowmobilers, horse riders, skiers and other users oppose the proposal, which since has been scaled back to 3,500 acres so the alpine ski area can be expanded.

Many conservationists support the idea.

A 15-member Mount Spokane advisory committee is split over the issue and called Tuesday’s meeting to hear from users. The committee is supposed to make a recommendation to the commission in September.

The response was clear from more than 50 people who took their turns at the microphone. Three-quarters of them said they oppose any changes at Mount Spokane, or think changes should wait until a park master plan is written.

Some speakers were offended that officials would think the park needs protection from those who love it.

“The recreating people have been good stewards of the park; otherwise it would not be recommended as a natural area,” said Marie Gillio.

Others said restricting use would cause teens to turn from snowmobiles and quarter-horses to cocaine and vandalism.

“How are we going to teach (children) to take care of things if we don’t allow them up there?” asked 4-H leader Maureen Janecek. Still others said the proposed restrictions are an example of government run amuck.

“I think somebody in Olympia was drinking his bath water and smoking pot when he came up with this,” said one horseman.

“We are losing our rights to live as free human beings in the United States of America,” said another.

Members of the Spokane Audubon Society and other conservation groups noted that users still would be allowed in restricted areas, as long as they were on foot and stayed on trails.

“It’s not taking rights away from anyone. It’s preserving the rights” of bird-watchers and other quiet users of the forests, said Larry Hampson of the Sierra Club.

“The non-walking recreationalists already have more than two-thirds of the park available for their use,” said Tom Rogers, a retired biology teacher who fought to create the Dishman Hills Natural Area.

“This (proposal) is a very generous compromise from the walkers.”

Map: Proposed Mount Spokane State Park natural forest areas