Page 2 of 2

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:12 am
by EarMountain
Anschutz Exploration ends oil and gas project on Montana's Blackfeet Reservation.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:41 am
by RoryKuykendall

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:53 pm
by ManyGlacierMountaineer

Hey Wastral, here is a little quote just for you, see if you can tell me where is is from:

You start a conversation you can't even finish.
You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again?

The "alarmists" won this round handily. The fight isn't over because the Tribal Council, like you, prioritizes short-sighted economic profit over long-term sustainable tourism and world heritage. You might call many Blackfeet and whites around the greater Glacier area NIMBYs, but when your back yard is a UNESCO World Heritage Site, I think any sane person would agree it should be your duty to be a NIMBY.

In my opinion, this is actually just a stall tactic until the prospectus period for the concessions contract ends, or Anschutz will just sell the leasing rights to another company. It is still a mission of many around to ban fracking on the Blackfeet Reservation and there are still plenty of folks around these parts that would like to make that happen. Good day sir. We NIMBYs up here in Glacierland, we will keep battling the kind of ignorance and downright short-sightedness you so thoroughly embody as long as we have to.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:03 pm
by EarMountain

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:34 am
by Wastral
Well maybe if you knew what fracking is and the myriad of options used to employ it you might have a leg to stand on and sound halfway rational. As it is, all you sound like is a shrill hyperventilating little kid unwilling to even look at an issue as you throw all fracking into the same category. Fracking is used on water wells as well as oil and Ng. It has hundreds of permutations in how it is used. You ignorantly clump them all together as bad. You wouldn't sound like a shrill hyperventilating kid if you took issue with specific techniques instead of clumping it all together as "evil" where the mere word is enough to throw you into an unreasoning tizzy.

You also blithly ignore the fact that oil is not just used to power cars, houses, and create fertilizer(actually I doubt you even knew this). It is used as the sole source for all plastics, of which you have some on your body right now. When you buy underwear without elastic or create machines to produce your products keeping you comfortable allowing you the freedom of time to actually save land instead of spending your entire life hand to mouth just to feed yourself without grease(oil products) let us all know will ya? Or shoes without rubber soles, or tires on your vehicle made out of bitumen. Or give up Gore-tex rain jackets, fleece jackets, nylon ropes, and nylon pants. Or how about those shiny flyers they hand out at the park entrance. They have plastic in them too.

Hey, how about this; buy the blackfeet reservation so you can increase the size of your favorite NIMBY(action near) National Park. Already bought the Wesern part of the Blackfeet Indian lands for gold prospectors that eventually went into GNP creating said park. Until you do so, you are advocating stealing their rights to do with their land as they wish. More power to the Blackfeet if they want to turn their lands into a park or an oil refinery and plastics manufacturing hub. That is their decision, not yours. They might aspire to be more than ranchers as ascribed by you and who are you to tell them otherwise?

So far, all you have done is come across like a selfish NIMBY.

PS. There are far better places in BC than GNP that aren't labeled as UNESCO world heritage sites that aren't even protected. Just proving that UNESCO title is nothing but a political sticker placed on the Watterton/GNP complex as it happens to span 2 countries borders instead of being highly unique in wildlife/scenery. It is unique in the lower 48, but common place in BC and ubiquitous in Alaska/Yukon. NIMBY's in AK/Yukon should be advocating stripping GNP/Watterton of UNESCO status so as to apply it to their new park "properly" protecting that which truly is grand and unique which GNP certainly is not.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:53 pm
by ManyGlacierMountaineer
Wastral, you contradict yourself so much it is ridiculous. Again... Glacier is unlike anywhere in the Lower 48 states and most Canadians I know that live in Banff, Waterton and along the Canadian Rocky front agree Glacier is special, as does the NPS, UNESCO and any other publication you see. You sound so ridiculous claiming on one hand it is unique in all the lower 48 and then saying it isn't that special. It is extremely special. Most of the parks in Canada are not like Glacier because they don't have wilderness designation, as they ALL have towns within them. Parks Canada and Canadians refer to Glacier as "The Glacier Wilderness". So, again, stop being self-contradictory and disingenuous. The ecosystem is ABSOLUTELY unique in that it is easily the most wild part of the Rockies in the US and most of Canada as well. From the Bob Marshall WIlderness all the way north trough Glacier to the Canadian border, there is one permanent road (and the GTTS seasonal road) that bisects a 4 million acre wilderness. One. To claim a 4 million acre wilderness is not unique in the Lower 48 shows your lack of knowledge and respect for nature in general.

As for you AGAIN putting words in my mouth, nobody said the word evil, except for you. Stop it and stick to the subjects.

Fracking is not the sustainable and appropriate use for the land of the western portion of the Blackfeet Nation, or for most places for that matter. You will not convince me or anybody else who values nature otherwise. You can keep your insults, your misinformation and your opinion to yourself. People all over the country who have suffered from the effects of fracking will disagree with you.

And the entire state of Montana will disagree that the Blackfeet can do as they wish when it affects the surrounding communities in a negative way. There will be political and legal pressure put on them. You can count on it. The state of Montana knows where their long term priorities lie, and it isn't in making the state look like Oklahoma or Texas.

I would like to know what you are even doing in this forum at all Wastral. You don't seem to be a climber, you have no pictures, no trip reports, no avatars, no logged climbs, nothing. What are you doing here? Why are you coming on this site at all? The site administrator knows you don't post about mountaineering or hiking or climbing at all. Myself and others are actively working to have you removed from the site. I recommend you actually take up mountaineering sometime, it could change your life for the better.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:04 pm
by EarMountain
Wastral and ManyGlacier Mountaineer,

Give it up already! Enough is enough!

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:58 am
by Wastral
So, you finally admit that all oil, ng, coal is the height of "bad" AKA "evil"(my bad you don't like that word) as it ruins the environment in your opinion. So much for your "coal is ok", BS upthread, its unsustainable after all. Me, myself, and I? I prefer Nuclear. But salt reactors instead of PWR as that way if there is a problem you open the plug in the bottom of its pool and down 40,000 feet it goes into a predug shaft. Vastly less polluting than coal or oil as there are vast tonnages of heavy metals spewed into the air environment via coal, let alone oil. Far more on a yearly basis than if we went 100% nuclear on uranium. But you will claim its unsustainable as well, though not in the next 10,000 years at a minimum with reprocessing. We still have to have oil and Ng for our modern existence. Until someone creates a matter converter that is...

You likewise gratuitously insult Texas and Oklahoma with giant broad strokes of your brush. There are small parts that actually even have visible oil tanks/oil wells producing products keeping your pampered self absorbed existence comfortable.

Let us all know when you stop using electricity and all oil products generated from unsustainable methods will ya, and walk your talk?


PS. Get a pair of reading glasses. I did say GNP was unique in lower 48, but ubiquitous commonplace in BC. I stated it wasn't worthy of being unique UNESCO title, then again took a look at how many sites UNESCO has slapped their label on lately and well, its meaning is rather diluted. So, it could be. How about traveling a bit. Nearly all of BC is wilderness. No, its not "designated" as such, though a vast region of it is. No one needs to do so as no one lives there and never will.

PPS. GNP unique as wilderness in lower 48? No. Besides you need to actually look before spewing. GNP is a bit over 1 million acres. A bit less of this is actual wilderness. Not the hilarious 4Million you spouted. Since you have problems actually looking stuff up: Check out Washington state sometime, border southwards, NCNP, RLRA, PW, GPW, WDW, CW, SW, ALW. Or heck, check out Olympic National Park, same size, all wilderness. Or hey hey hey, look at Death Valley, its all wilderness and even the parts that aren't may as well be, as no one even bothers to go there, likewise those reading glasses might be handy, as its triple the size of GNP. Here is a listing for your perusal, since it would appear you need to do some research. Frank Church is vastly larger as well in your own state. Between Kings Canyon/Yosemite,John Muir, etc its wilderness is larger as well.

PPPS. It is ranting like what you are doing is the reason why I quit my membership in the Sierra Club and the Mountaineers. Keep it up and keep driving people away with incoherent ranting just hurts your cause you know.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:07 pm
by ManyGlacierMountaineer
Wastral, this is the absolute last response I will have to you.

1. Again, I never once used any words such as bad, evil or anything of the sort, again you are simply putting words in people's mouths.

2. Your views against the UNESCO status of Waterton/Glacier shows what you think of anything conservation related. Claiming that unprotected lands in Canada should have higher standing than actually protected lands that will remain so indefinitely, is irrelevant and completely missing the point. The UNESCO status is a conservation status. Unprotected lands simply cannot have it, plain and simple. Get over that. As for your claim that the UNESCO status is dilluted... there are only 8 UNESCO World Heritage Biospheres in the entire US, so your "stance"/misinformation is simply wrong.

3. Of course I know Glacier is 1 million acres. The 4 million acres was the total "Crown of the Continent" Ecosystem, which includes Glacier, the Bob Marshall Wilderness complex, as well as Waterton NP. So, yes, it is 4 million acres.

4. For the umpteenth time, I have told you I am not some Luddite who is against technology or the human use of natural resources to power modern society. YOu are continuously railing against something I am not and it makes you look bad. I have repeatedly told you I am not against oil, natural gas or anything else. I am against developing said resources in inappropriate places and I am against the continued inappropriate development of unsustainable resources at the cost of wild lands. It is simple... you don't ruin a great thing that could potentially last forever in favor of something that by definition is going to run out and will likely only help the Blackfeet economy for 30 years tops. Next door to a UNESCO World Heritage site is not an appropriate place for fracking, not for the park, not for the economy and not for the long-term sustainability of the greater Glacier area, as the best resource in NW Montana is our wild land. You probably cannot fathom that idea because you don't live in a state where the largest city is less than 100,000. GET THIS IN YOUR HEAD - MONTANA'S GREATEST RESOURCE IS ITS WILD LAND. THE VAST MAJORITY OF MONTANANS AND ANYONE WHO KNOWS ABOUT HOW RURAL ECONOMIES WORK WOULD AGREE WITH THIS. Fracking on lands that put Montana's biggest industries at risk is just foolish for anybody interested in the long term well-being of the Glacier region and Montana will agree.

Now, again, you have made your views very clear. You are against conservation, I get it. And again, why do you come on Summitpost at all? You clearly are not a climber, hiker, mountaineer or even a fan of outdoor recreation it seems. Why do you to this site?

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:44 pm
by Wastral
ManyGlacierMountaineer wrote:
Now, again, you have made your views very clear. You are against conservation, I get it. And again, why do you come on Summitpost at all? You clearly are not a climber, hiker, mountaineer or even a fan of outdoor recreation it seems. Why do you to this site?

You didn't make your views clear. You state you are for coal, oil, and out of your same mouth comes the word "unsustainable" in relation to lands adjacent to GNP. Hypocrite much?

I am all for conservation. I am not for blatant stealing(pressuring) of others land for my own agenda. I gladly back those willing to pay for land wanting to be conserved as I have donated money towards buying out private lands inside wilderness here in Washington state. No there is no "proof" I have done so, but its what I believe in. Now, if you wanted to share concessionaire profits from GNP to the Blackfeet Nation, you would be seen by me in a far better light. You essentially are stealing their land rights via outside pressure, but unwilling to share the wealth. You state its imperitive to Montana, then it should be imperitive to you to share said profits in regards to the lands around that which you wish to protect. You never bring such subject up. Compensation.

The coming on summitpost comment, WOW, coming from a guy who specifically made this nic to beat his own drum. Hypocrite.

Last I checked, you have to have climbing insight etc to get thanked. Of which I might note, you have none.

Sorry, I don't post all my climbing trips for self glorification when said climbing routes are fully documented on this site along with many others. If you want a fairly unique report I have done, go over to and do a search for wastral. You will get my report for Waddington Area. I have been back a couple times since, but other trip reports are out there on the region and I don't feel the ego need to post myself all over the internet.

PS. If you want to see my climbing partner not named my brother who is not shy about posting our photos all over google earth, randylikestoclimb is his name. Last I knew, he had posted about 150 summit photos of us(my brother and I, along with himself) in Washington, Colorado, California, and I believe in Idaho as well. Couple in BC as well.

Re: Glacier National Park and surrounding area needs your he

PostPosted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:46 am
by sushiman
Many glacier mountaineer, where does your energy come from?
Do you drive a Prius? Do you wipe ur butt with leaves? How about g.m.o.'s? Do those get your panties in a bind? I bet u use electricity...right?
We have to get nrgy somewhere, why not the eastern front of the Rockies? I'd love to see some of my friends who make 'crap' per hour prosper by producing real energy, rather than conforming to your ecological fantasy...

P.s. unicorns and elves aren't real