Molly's Folly. A poem.

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

J&J

Active member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
534
Reaction score
186
Someone who is not on this board asked me if I would post this on VFTT. I said sure, why not. This board could use a little poetry to get us through our days.

John



The writer's editorial comment first as to why the poem came to be:
Even as time passes I am still appalled by the bureaucratic arrogance of the bridge removal. This point was driven home for me again this past Saturday. Two gentlemen, who said they had been hiking here since before there was a "Lincoln Woods" fancy parking lot and all, didn't know the bridge had been removed. It seems no amount of redundant signage can wipe-out the memory of this bridge. With these thoughts weighing somewhat heavily on me, I penned the following doggerel.


Molly’s Folly
(with apologies to Robert Frost)

Whose woods these are she thinks she knows
Because she wears the Chief Ranger’s clothes
The White Mountain Forest is her domain
It is she who gets to say what goes (or stays)

Like a queen at the height of her reign
Her obsession is to widen her fame
She wants to make a mark, a legacy
To impress her bosses in Washington DC

Thus, she’ll interpret Wilderness Policy
With a decision resulting in a travesty

It began said she, in a disingenuous way,
That while she was hiking up the river one day
She was Shocked! Shocked, to see
A bridge crossing HER East Pemi

“Aldo Leopold, Bob Marshall, and Henry David T
When it comes to Wilderness I am holier than all three
That bridge will be gone, just wait and see
Even purer then MY Wilderness shall be”

49 years that bridge had stood up the river from Lincoln Wood
It was there before the Wilderness was declared
Previous rangers even had it repaired
But if it reached 50 it must be preserved to the good (as the rules are understood)

That bridge offended her Wilderness sense
So she simply deferred all maintenance
Then one day made a pronouncement:
“Its dangerous! The public will be safer without it”

That’s her excuse, that’s what she’ll say
Even though it will cost more to carry the pieces away

“Repair it for less?” “Ha! You’re missing the point
This is about doing my will, not doing what’s right
So send in your letters, come voice your concern
Your decision has been made for you, as you’ll soon learn”

“They held a public hearing in Lincoln town
Though no congressman could stop me, or even slow me down
And these locals are not so acute
My crew took that bridge out before they filed suit”

“JE Henry was not as powerful as they say
After all, he had to sell this land back in the day
He was no civil servant, like me
With bureaucratic power absolute over the Pemi”

Whose woods these are she thinks she knows
Because she wears the Chief Ranger’s clothes

Now the bridge is gone, only the pieces are left
Piles of debris give evidence
Though complaints come in, she cares not what they say
For in the end she had her way.
 
Back in September of 2009 when there was all the chatter here about the bridge I decided to go and take a look. I headed down the east side of the river. When I got up to the area of the bridge the trail was blocked off with tape.
032-1.jpg


I didn’t continue on the trail but instead went back along the river a ways and then whacked out to the river. It was very quiet and I didn’t know anyone was around but as I neared the bridge from the woods I saw a young ranger sitting on the bridge reading a book. I stood there a moment watching him without making any noise. After a bit Lauky, who wanted to go visit his “friend” made some noise and the ranger looked up startled. Over the years I have found the rangers to be very friendly. This fellow was not unfriendly, but was, nevertheless, very ill at ease. Any of you who know me know what a frightening looking person I am, or maybe it’s my ‘huge’ dog. Anyway, he called me over then wrote me up, albeit with no fine, and sent me on my way.

034-4.jpg



I walked up the trail a ways then whacked back to the stream and rock hopped out to the middle where I got my picture of the partially dismantled bridge.

037-4.jpg


I realized then and there that all the chatter was a waste of time. That bridge was coming down. I continued on over the river to the other side and headed back to the car. It was a very interesting experience.
 
Last edited:
To quote a PM -

"Appeasing bullies in adulthood doesn't work any better than when we in the 3rd grade.

As someone who spent many years in public service - from my perspective, the USFS won the battle but lost the war. Once a public agency loses its credibility, it's very difficult to regain it. There's an administrative process which, if followed, can arrive at unpopular decisions without losing credibility. The Pemi office chose to run roughshod over that process for the sake of expediency, and it will be a long time before they regain my trust."
 
Wrote you up for what???

Good question. He didn't charge me with anything, at least not verbally, but took down my name and address and all that. What else he wrote down I don't know but probably something to the effect that I had approached the bridge. As I said, however, I had not approached on the closed trail and the whack probably put me in a "gray" area. As I think about it, because I got so close without him hearing or seeing me he may not have known how I got there. I don't really know.
 
Great poem, I can think of quite a few places where this should be posted.

I'm confused, though. Who set's "Wilderness policy"? The reason I ask, I just got back from a week on the Long Trail in VT. The section I walked passed through at least 2 desingnated Wilderness areas. I mentioned to the GMC Trail Angel / Volunteer who shuttled me that in both the Pemi & Wild River "Wilderness" in NH the USFS are dismantling lean-to's and suspension bridges. His response was WHAT!? He'd asked me why and my uneducated response was they are considered non-conforming structures and HAD to be removed. I also noted various large blowdowns in the VT "Wilderness" where chainsawed. The GMC Volunteer replied "yah, why not"?

So anyway, who is responsible for setting "wilderness" policy? Local bureaucrats?
 
Great poem, I can think of quite a few places where this should be posted.

I'm confused, though. Who set's "Wilderness policy"? The reason I ask, I just got back from a week on the Long Trail in VT. The section I walked passed through at least 2 desingnated Wilderness areas. I mentioned to the GMC Trail Angel / Volunteer who shuttled me that in both the Pemi & Wild River "Wilderness" in NH the USFS are dismantling lean-to's and suspension bridges. His response was WHAT!? He'd asked me why and my uneducated response was they are considered non-conforming structures and HAD to be removed. I also noted various large blowdowns in the VT "Wilderness" where chainsawed. The GMC Volunteer replied "yah, why not"?

So anyway, who is responsible for setting "wilderness" policy? Local bureaucrats?

I can't answer that question directly - perhaps psmart will respond.

What I do know is that "wilderness" policy seems to vary considerably across the United States. I've personally observed active logging in designated wilderness areas of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest in Washington state, and cattle grazing within designated wilderness areas not far from where I now live in the Eastern Sierra. The closest such area is the Sacatar Wilderness, about 8 miles away. Many wilderness areas in the west are managed by the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) rather than the USFS or USPS, so that might account for some differences.

I used to know a USFS ranger who worked in the Green Mountain NF office in Rutland. He once told me the way the GMNF and the WMNF are managed is quite different. The general perception of the GMNF among Vermonters is one of cooperation and solid forest management, and is rarely confrontational.
 
So anyway, who is responsible for setting "wilderness" policy? Local bureaucrats?

What I do know is that "wilderness" policy seems to vary considerably across the United States.
Each National Forest has a Forest Plan which is updated periodically by bureaucrats nominally using public input chiefly from large lobbying groups. Local bureaucrats make decisions supposedly based on that plan.

In the Pemi bridge case, the District Ranger decided the bridge had to go based on her interpretation of the plan although previous Rangers had seen it differently. Her decision was not appealable under FS regulations.

In VT, the Forest Plan allows geocaches in Wilderness, construction of new leantos in Wilderness, etc. because that's how the lobbyists wanted it.
 
...In VT, the Forest Plan allows geocaches in Wilderness, construction of new leantos in Wilderness, etc. because that's how the lobbyists wanted it.

Roy - who are these "lobbyists" you refer to? Lobbyist is a pejorative word, and I'd be curious who you place that label on.
 
Great poem. That whole experience made me wonder what else will be taken away, to be missed by so many is such an awful thing. I see that same autocratic nature at the condo where I live and it is just as frustrating there as things such as the loss of this historic structure.
 
Great poem. That whole experience made me wonder what else will be taken away, to be missed by so many is such an awful thing. I see that same autocratic nature at the condo where I live and it is just as frustrating there as things such as the loss of this historic structure.

I think the same can be said for the Resolution Shelter IMO. I know it's not on the Historic Register but I wish there was some respect by FS personnel for WMNF recreation history. Just read the June 39 Appalachia which talks about two men staying at the Shelter during the '38 hurricane and not releasing it until making their way out. I think it's a shame.
 
Great poem, John

I really hope the USFS changes it's position on Wilderness Area Management. I think we are going to lose alot of trails as they simply disappear under blowdowns. And then there are places like Owls Head where the maze of herdpaths just depresses me.

I would like to see a partnership such as the one between the DEC and The 46rs in the Adirondacks -- that idea really inspires me.

Simple herpaths require minimum of maintenance and provide a more solitary experience than a major trail corridor. And they make finding people and carrying litters safer, I'd say, than battling with blowdown and branches.

I agree with Audrey- please publish this!
 
Roy - who are these "lobbyists" you refer to? Lobbyist is a pejorative word, and I'd be curious who you place that label on.

Paid professionals from advocacy groups that want a say in forest management, this would include the timber industry, snowmobile clubs, environmental groups, etc. Only those that work for the other side are lobbyists?
 
From a recent trail conditions posting:

Terribly sad how in the Wilderness area the log bridges are just being allowed to rot away and some brush snipping here and there would help a lot.

This is mismanagement. Situations like this will lead to trail widening in search of good footing, or a messy myriad of herd paths forming around the wet spots. The same thing goes for blowdowns.

Even with Wilderness standards, it's about *management* which is something the current forest administration seems incapable of. The trails are there and they, and the recreational users, are not going away. To protect the forest requires just a modicum of maintenance to the trails. They can't just close their eyes to these issues while taking down cairns and blazes. For that matter, blaze removal is supposed to be congruent to having a followable footbed, which requires, you guessed it, a little bit of maintenance. Even in the Wilderness, a declared trail shall be followable.

Other Wilderness areas don't seem to have a problem with this, why is the Pemi such an issue? There's plenty of Pemi away from the trails that is all truly wild and will remain that way regardless.
 
Last edited:
Michael J you have hit the nail squarely on the head. And as una_dogger pointed out, the NYSDEC, the Adirondack Mountain Club (ADK) and the 46ers have all come to agreement on how best to "manage" the trails and the wilderness experience. Vermont seems to be on board with this same type of policy. This should become the model for NH.

una_dogger, sorry, I don't agree with cleaning-up the debris/mess left by the USFS who thought they were doing the "right thing" removing a useful structure that should have been left to be enjoyed by the hikers they(she?) serves as a public employee. Let the USFS find and spend their own funds and labor and feel some of the pain they have imposed upon themselves.

This whole thing is another example of government stupidity and arrogance. There is more knowledge about the Pemi Wilderness within the AMC and this website's membership than the USFS or any other local government officials have jointly. These groups need to encourage the USFS to "partner" with the user groups as they currently do successfully in NY and VT.
 
una_dogger, sorry, I don't agree with cleaning-up the debris/mess left by the USFS who thought they were doing the "right thing" removing a useful structure that should have been left to be enjoyed by the hikers they(she?) serves as a public employee. Let the USFS find and spend their own funds and labor and feel some of the pain they have imposed upon themselves.
'their own funds' are OUR fund$. IMHO, you can't really punish the government. But you can punish people in it.
 
... Only those that work for the other side are lobbyists?

To avoid inflammatory labels, the term "stakeholders" is often used to describe parties participating in complex agreements. Lobbyists are specialized individuals/firms hired to represent others.

To categorize stakeholders as lobbyists does them a disservice.
 
Top