4 ms·
> publicly accessible conserved open spaces I agree these places make nice "parks", but but they generally feel pretty not-wild to me, I'd prefer more inaccess
by fsckboy 3y ago
> publicly accessible conserved open spaces
I agree these places make nice "parks", but but they generally feel pretty not-wild to me, I'd prefer more inaccessible wilderness. In terms of philanthropy, the rich person donates the money to set the spaces aside, and the average Joe donates "I won't go in there".
- ghaff 3y agoHard to access wilderness is great and all that. It also doesn't work very well for people looking to spend half a day on the weekend. Sure I'll take remote parts of Yosemite over some park in the South Bay all other things being equal--but they're not. (And those parks near population get lots of use.)
- ifhsblrocnBak 3y agoI think you and the previous poster may be missing that this land is (practically) contiguous with one of the most inaccessible and least travelled wilderness areas in California: the Ventana Wilderness. It’s amazing how few in the Bay realize that there is a stunning, brutally wild wilderness area that is a 2.5 hour drive from SF on a Friday after work.