The Sabinoso Wilderness is the only wilderness area in the country the public can't get to—for now
By Alex Robinson August 1, 2017



Secretary Ryan Zinke (right) during his tour in New Mexico.

Jason Amaro
There’s a 16,000-acre wilderness in Northern New Mexico that’s full of turkeys, mule deer, and elk (it’s even rumored to hold trophy aoudad). What’s more, this rugged wilderness of deep canyons, cottonwood river bottoms, and mesas has seen hardly any hunting pressure for at least a decade. The nearest city (Las Vegas, N.M., population 13,285) is a good 50 miles away.

But there’s a catch to this backcountry hunter’s paradise, and it’s a big one.

Right now, the Sabinoso Wilderness is completely inaccessible to the public—it’s the only designated wilderness in the country that you can’t get to. The area is surrounded by private land (since it’s designated wilderness, you can’t even helicopter in if you wanted to).

This wilderness could be unlocked, possibly in time for this fall’s hunting season, with a signature from the Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke. One of the ranches bordering the Sabinoso Wilderness was sold to the Wilderness Land Trust for $3 million, and the Trust intends to donate that land to the Bureau of Land Management in order to open access to the public.

A quick aside here: The Wilderness Land Trust got the funds to purchase the ranch through the Wyss Foundation, a private charity founded by Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss. Hansjorg, who now lives in Wyoming, made his fortune through the medical device industry. While working in the U.S., he fell in love with the American ideals of public land.

Back to Zinke… The Secretary has not yet accepted the donation from the Wilderness Land Trust. But over the weekend, he did spend a day touring the Sabinoso on horseback with New Mexico's Democratic senators, Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich, who have been working for 10 years to open the property to the public. Heinrich invited Zinke to visit the area during this exchange earlier in the summer:

The Sabinoso was first designated as wilderness in 2009, and Udall, Heinrich, and local sportsman’s groups hoped that increasing its profile would create leverage for access opportunities. Since then, they’ve been waiting for one of the bordering ranches to sell, which finally happened with the 4,176-acre Rimrock Rose ranch in February 2016.

“This is an enormous opportunity that might only come around once in a generation,” Heinrich says of the land donation. “[The Sabinoso] is a pretty spectacular property. Even when public access is granted, it won’t be easy to get into. It will attract a certain type of hunter.”

Heinrich, who describes himself as an avid hunter, says he’s “cautiously optimistic” about Zinke accepting the donation in time for fall, but no timeline has been given by the Secretary.

Local media reports indicate there’s strong grassroots support for opening the wilderness. Besides gaining a new place to hunt, unlocking the Sabinoso could bring locals more business through outfitters and traveling hunters.

“The community really supports this,” says Jason Amaro, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers southwest chapter coordinator. “This should be a quick and easy win for [Zinke]. I can’t see why he wouldn’t do it.”


Continued:

http://www.outdoorlife.com/how...wMDM3NTI4NwS2#page-2

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 41,

Awesome.

What does Zinke have to decide?

Wyss is my former boss' boss at Synthes, which was sold in 2011 for just over $21 billion - the largest acquisition in J&J's history. Wyss owned a majority of the company and was a multibillionaire before the sale even. The Wyss Institute at Harvard is named after him, following the $125 million gift to his alma mater. He's not a saint however if you do your research on some of his medical device decisions.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
What does Zinke have to decide?

Before the trip to Sabinoso, Zinke was unsure that the ranch fit the wilderness designation criteria. Now, all parties involved are hoping Zinke is willing to compromise and accept the donated land as wilderness.

I assume that is one of the factors. Also you probably need more than one point to access the Sabinoso Wilderness area.

In the past, there have been many areas other States closed off to hunting and other activities. We are at the turning point in my opinion.

Maybe they will permit hunting of the wolfs in other areas that have killed off the elk and deer.

Zinke is a stand up guy. Proud to say he's from Montana.

quote:

Originally posted by FN in MT:
Zinke is a stand up guy.

Yep, I think so too. How many of those pantywaists in Washington could even sit a horse, let along get out in the wilds of New Mexico and go for a ride.

Oh, and please add me to the list of people who prefer elected officials who wear jeans and boots, and who actually know what work is.

Id guess the properties aroind it might be pissed. But maybe not.

Now lets see those trophy animals

Udall and Heinrich are not to be trusted.

quote:

ight now, the Sabinoso Wilderness is completely inaccessible to the public

False. The private landowners can access it, and those with permission of the landowners.

Access is restricted, not denied.

Question: Why should that change?

quote:

The area is surrounded by private land

This seems unlike a crisis to me. Isn't nearly everything surrounded by private land?

What am I missing?

That said, if someone wants to donate land and make it available to the public, good on them.

I'll never go there - not my sort of place - but thank you Mr. Wyss.

quote:

Originally posted by 41:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
What does Zinke have to decide?

Before the trip to Sabinoso, Zinke was unsure that the ranch fit the wilderness designation criteria. Now, all parties involved are hoping Zinke is willing to compromise and accept the donated land as wilderness.

I assume that is one of the factors. Also you probably need more than one point to access the Sabinoso Wilderness area.

In the past, there have been many areas other States closed off to hunting and other activities. We are at the turning point in my opinion.

Maybe they will permit hunting of the wolfs in other areas that have killed off the elk and deer.

Zinke himself, doesn't get to decide "Wilderness" or not Wilderness; that's up to Congress. My initial take is that Zinke is probably right to hesitate given the Wilderness Land Trust's attempt at imposing this restriction on the donation. Typically, much of a working ranch would preclude its designation as Wilderness because of all the necessary infrastructure to operate the ranch. Personally, I think the cheapening of Wilderness by Congress in the effort to increase quantity of Wilderness over quality of it, jeopardizes the entire System. If they want further protections for their donated land, then push for those stipulations--not Wilderness designation.

Bigger question. How did a Wilderness--without public access, ever achieve Congressional designation?

ETA: It just occurred to me. What the Land Trust probably wants is for Zinke to accept the donated land for the BLM as a "Wilderness Study Area" (WSA). I believe he would have that authority. Right now, there are no limits on the amount of time an area can exist in the limbo of WSA--other areas literally for decades. It's ridiculous. A WSA would operate under the limitations of designated Wilderness, without going through Congressional designation. A time limit for WSAs would be a good thing for the Administration to work on.

I'd leave BLM out of it.

They blow whichever way the political winds blow.

^ I agree. That it ever got that designation without public access it pretty crazy.

So we have public land that is only accessible by a select few, the adjacent property owners.

So have you donated to the National Parks or given money to acquire wilderness areas?? Can you access some of the projects you helped to acquire?

It is good to preserve these areas for future generations but it can be a can of worms to manage with common sense.

I have seen what the Wilderness Act has done to some areas. When they made the St. Mary's Wilderness area in 1984, I returned to check it out since it was one of the areas I hunted in high school. It looked like a herd of cattle had passed through the area I assume due to the publicity as a wilderness area. Also a lot of trash deposited in the stream and on the trails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..._Mary%27s_Wilderness

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

quote:

ight now, the Sabinoso Wilderness is completely inaccessible to the public

False. The private landowners can access it, and those with permission of the landowners.

Access is restricted, not denied.

Question: Why should that change?

This makes sense. Again my comment, it is probably a nice place to hunt for the private land owners.

Basically the public cant get to it cause there is no public land allowing access. So one has to get permission.

In Kansas this is similar except Kansas considers the high water mark on rivers as public land so us Duckers can get out and hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

quote:

ight now, the Sabinoso Wilderness is completely inaccessible to the public

False. The private landowners can access it, and those with permission of the landowners.

Access is restricted, not denied.

Question: Why should that change?

Answer: a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

I was wrong about Zinke's authority as SecInt. This is Section 6 of the Wilderness Act of 1964:

quote:

SECTION 6. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture may accept gifts or bequests of land within wilderness areas designated by this Act for preservation as wilderness. The Secretary of Agriculture may also accept gifts or bequests of land adjacent to wilderness areas designated by this Act for preservation as wilderness if he has given sixty days advance notice thereof to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Land accepted by the Secretary of Agriculture under this section shall become part of the wilderness area involved. Regulations with regard to any such land may be in accordance with such agreements, consistent with the policy of this Act, as are made at the time of such gift, or such conditions, consistent with such policy, as may be included in, and accepted with, such bequest.

(b) The Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to accept private contributions and gifts to be used to further the purposes of this Act.

It comes as no surprise that Senator Tom Udall (D, NM) wrote the bill for Sabinoso Wilderness designation. A Wilderness that for 7 years now has had no public access.

Here's a question for Sen. Udall's staff. How has the BLM, charged with management of the Sabinoso, fulfilled its obligation to the citizens of the United States, when they themselves would have been denied access to monitor use of the Wilderness by adjacent land owners?

quote:

a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

Indeed.

quote:

Originally posted by arabiancowboy:
Answer: a private individual should not be the gatekeeper for public land.

...and government should be?