HARD SELL

At a meeting sponsored by the Allegheny National Forest Vacation Bureau in Bradford on August 3, folks from the Governor’s staff presented information related to the “Pennsylvania Wilds” initiative.  Much discussion centered on the potential for enhanced visitation to the region based on the fact that 48 million citizens live within a six hour drive of the projected region.  Their contention is that the 13 county region is better situated than several major parks including Yellowstone, Yosemite, Great Smoky Mountain and others to receive visitors.

While that may be the case logistically, two issues quickly come to mind regarding such analysis.  First, the 13 county region is not a park, but in fact is home to many people struggling to make a living.  Second, the “Wild” reference sends a mixed message because it is promoting tourism while at the same time suggesting the area is wilderness like.

No matter how you slice it, wilderness cannot successfully promote human activity because by its very definition, wilderness means devoid of people.  The Wilderness Act Handbook describes the state of existence as being “untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.”  Further, the Handbook speaks of “solitude” and “primitive recreation” as being hallmarks of such area.  Certainly, such a conclusion is contrary to the fact that several thousand Pennsylvanians live and work in the area being billed as “wild.”

Such a promotion may work with limitations in the “natural” and “wild” areas (so designated by DCNR) in Potter, Tioga, Clinton, and Cameron Counties.  But for all intents and purposes, they do not apply to the other counties.  In fact, someone from the Governor’s office might like to consult with the folks that live and are trying to scratch out a living in those four counties whether they want their habitat to be considered “Wild” by gubernatorial proclamation.  In the meetings I’ve attended regarding the issue, local folks are lukewarm to the idea at best.