If there are folks in Lawrence County who like the idea of the state acquiring more land in the heart of Spearfish Canyon and turning it into a state park, they aren’t speaking up. The first public meeting held by Game Fish and Parks on the project last week in Spearfish drew nearly 500 people, and reporter Jaci Conrad Pearson apparently didn’t hear any of them saying they want Spearfish Canyon State Park:
“I look at Spearfish Canyon as a biblical Garden of Eden, and we want to keep it like God created it,” said John Lewton of Sturgis at Thursday’s first public meeting regarding the proposed Spearfish Canyon State Park. “We want to stand our ground.”
“You didn’t seek public input prior to proposing the land exchange,” said Jerry Meyer, who cited this as the biggest thing sticking in his craw about the entire matter, a sentiment that rang through repeatedly over the course of the evening.
…Laughter ensued when [principal architect Jolene] Rieck, referring to Daugaard’s Thursday announcement of no access fees ever to the Canyon, showed a slide that both claimed there would be no access fees charged and then launched into examples things that will likely be charged for, including campground and shelter reservations [link added; Jaci Conrad Pearson, “Speaking Out,” Black Hills Pioneer, 2017.01.27].
All this opposition and more came out Thursday evening, lending support to legislative leaders’ statement at their Thursday afternoon press conference that nobody but the Governor is backing the park plan:
It seems likely that the proposal will die, said Sen. Ryan Maher, R-Isabel.
Sen. Blake Curd, R-Sioux Falls, said the only support he’s heard for the park was from Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard, who pitched the idea.
Any other support seems to be waning, said Maher, the Senate assistant majority leader….
West River residents are bucking the plan, Curd said.
Rep. Lee Qualm, R-Burke, said the same thing. He’s the House majority leader.
If there’s no public support for the new state park, Qualm said, he’s not going to get behind it [Scott Waltman, “State GOP Leaders Don’t Hold Much Hope for Spearifish Canyon State Park,” Black Hills Pioneer, 2017.01.27].
I wonder if Maher, Curd, and Qualm are also hearing the West River folks say they trust state government less than the federal government:
…“All this nonsense about a state park is putting the cart before the horse,” said Allen Harwin of Spearfish.
“State land is not the same as federal land,” said one attendee. “State land can come and go at the whim of state politicians. I don’t trust my state politicians” [Conrad Pearson, 2017.01.27].
I share my Lawrence County neighbors’ mistrust of our Republican rulers in Pierre. I’d like to believe that the GOP leadership’s dismissal of the Spearfish Canyon State Park proposal is another signal that Republicans in Pierre aren’t as arrogantly determined to ignore the will of the people as some of their legislation suggests. But it seems just as plausible that public opposition to acquiring the Spearfish Canyon land fits with pre-existing GOP legislators’ resistance to more state spending and those darn greenies in Game Fish and Parks.
There are a lot of locals out there who seem to want to keep Spearfish Canyon for themselves. I say develop it so that the rest of us can enjoy it.
There is nothing stopping the “rest of us ” from enjoying it now. The U.S. Forest Service had done an excellent job of maintaining the canyon as has South Dakota in upgrading the Rough lock Falls area that Homestake deeded to the state.
I am suspicious of the Governor’s pledge about entrance fees. We do not have to pay an entrance fee to enter Custer State Park and drive through on the main highways but do not stop along the way without paying the entrance fee or you could be fined. The same could be done in the canyon.
I have several small children and a camper. We go to the Black Hills camping almost every summer. There is nothing I would like more than to park my camper at a state park in Spearfish Canyon. I’m yet to see a state park that hasn’t been built with the utmost respect to the it’s placed on. Roughlock Falls is an excellent example of this. Not everyone is a mountain biker, or a four wheeler(er);). Not everybody likes to truly “rough it”. There’s still plenty of space in the Black Hills for all of this. The Spearfish Canyon is shrine to our great state. The more people that can enjoy it’s beauty the better. IMHO
*ground it’s placed on
I’m a Spearfish resident. I don’t really like camping at all. I guess, it’s been okay the few times I’ve tried it, but somebody else set it up.
That said, if you’re like me and don’t like to rough it, then you can camp in the Spearfish Campground in the City Park. If you want the experience of the canyon, you’re going to have to toughen up, or just spend the day hiking.
By the way: There was one guy who said he supported the state park at the meeting. You gotta give him credit for going against the grain :-).
How much of the inherent beauty and serenity of the canyon would be replaced/destroyed by making a state park there? I doubt anything man could build there would improve or enhance what was already perfect. But maybe that is just me.
With the development at Savoy and the two falls in the last few years the place has pretty much become a park. It seems like the questions are: (1) how to fund its maintenance and care – with taxes from the feds or the state? And 2) Who should conduct the maintenance – the feds or the State?
So far the feds have done a pretty good job. The Rounds/Dauguaard handling of GEARUP grant money and investments from EB-5, along with the proposed diversion of $2.5 million of current SD assets to the new proposed park project seems to raise some red flags. Maybe the third time is a charm?
Going to have to toughen up? You tell that to my parents, or my grandparents. Not everybody can do it. We spent a couple hours at Roughlock last summer and it was incredible. Accented the falls beautifully and offered views that would have not been accessible otherwise. Not to mention the picnic areas. What is the state looking at? 1400 acres? Even if you take 80, which would be a lot of space, there is plenty of area that would remain untouched for those who want to rough it. Win-win.
Chip, you can already camp at 2 campgrounds, Timon or Rod and Gun. What more do you want – a KOA labelled SD GFP? Private campground vendors testified they don’t want the competition from more government facility-enhanced campgrounds, whether those be the state’s or the city of Spearfish’s. The same vendors said they think they have little direct competition from the rustic FS campgrounds. Perhaps one thinks its the duty of government to compete with the private sector – most do not. About that accessibility – sooner or later we all age – but its not societies position to make sure we can all ski the Black Runs at Terry Peak or sleep under the stars at Timon.
The proposal is about money; not about caring for nature, not about making the canyon more accessible. The private inholdings will likely become mega-resorts increasing vehicle and human traffic in the canyons fragile riparian landscape and trout fishery. The state has other opportunities in the Hills to ‘protect nature’ or even enhance tourism. And that doesn’t begin addressing the proposal’s biggest problem – the waiving of federal land exchange rules to load the dice for the state — as if an acre of Lyman or Jones County prairie is worth an acre of Spearfish Canyon. If that’s the case – then consider running out to Lyman and Jones tomorrow to stock up on the deal of the century before missing out.
Private campgrounds don’t hold a candle to state parks. That’s the beauty of them being non-profit. I had no idea that state parks were such a windfall for the state? Someone will have to enlighten me on that.
I’m sorry, I don’t see the problem with taking 5-10% of this parcel of land and making it into something functional that people can actually use to enjoy the beauty of Spearfish Canyon.
Why the need to “take it” – it’s already your federal public land.
Do your own research. Better yet the tourism department and SD GFP have done it for you on why and how Custer State Park is a windfall for the taxpayers, the concessionaire, and the tourism industry. It applies in lesser amounts to other state parks – and that’s a big reason that local campground and resort owners do not support a growing threat to their business from the state which, compared to private owners, has the appearance of nearly unlimited resources to expand.
Maybe I should have said repurposed instead of taken. That may have been a little more pleasing to the palate. And no, I’m not doing your research for you. You’re the one making the wild accusations. If they’re offering more services and generating more cash that’s not a windfall, that’s good business. Our State Parks are something to be celebrated, not drug through the mud. And they’re not cheap. Every little bit helps.
Please leave Spearfish Canyon as it is….I don’t trust this state to run “anything” honestly! Does anyone know that South Dakota is ranked among the top “10” US states for corruption? That is not an honor to be proud of. And we keep re-electing the same people to run our state! Wake up people!!
Interesting to hear Chip (and the one guy who stood up at the meeting! Good to know, Ben, and yes—kudos to a guy who can stand up knowing the majority is against him and still make his point!) and compare his position to others.
I enjoy our state parks immensely. I respect the work our park rangers, conservation officers, and range scientists do. I spent a lot of my life on Lake Herman, where I had the pleasure of a state park just across the water where I could run, bike, canoe, picnic, meet friends, and be happy. Beautiful spot.
I also love Roughlock Falls and Savoy. That was the first area I rode my bike to when we moved to Spearfish. I took my family back up there that same weekend to see it. That hard ’76 Trail up to Buzzard’s Roost is great. Later I discovered the trails in the forest along the north rim. Amazing.
Any time in the Black Hills is time well-spent. But some of the best times I’ve had have been out on trails, away from the roads, away from the (relatively) noisy and crowded campgrounds, away from darn near everybody, out walking and tenting in places and in ways that just don’t exist in East River. Here in Brown County, I can’t just park on some dead-end, put on my backpack, walk out in the country, go whichever way I want, and sleep under the stars. Every place is somebody’s cornfield or pasture or a state park. Every place requires someone’s permission.
The best places in the Black Hills don’t require permission (yes, I’m neglecting my red brethren, who might have a word or two to say about my wanton violation of the Fort Laramie Treaty, but let’s not get all complicated).
I get what Chip says about how the more people who can enjoy the Canyon, the better. The more people who see it, hike it, camp it, whatever, the more people who will fight to protect it if its in danger. But we can’t universalize that sentiment. The more people who see it, the more noise and pollution we get, the more pressure on the trout population, the less safe it is to drive and bike up the highway. The more people who see it, the more pressure there will be to add into the hotel, to bring in more restaurants and shops to capitalize on the tourist market, the more some people may push to build cabins and houses there.
And the more people who see it, the further each of them will have to hike to see the Canyon in its natural state, with as few traces of civilization as possible.
That’s the challenge of Spearfish Canyon policy: we have to find the balance between preserving and enjoying the canyon.
The trust issue SweetPea notes also intrigues me here, and may be a separate issue. In a fascinating reversal, some South Dakotans are saying they trust the feds more than the state. Is that a reversal from the position Lawrence County folks took when it came to fighting the pine beetle?
As I’ve said, I am yet to see a State Park that doesn’t offer the utmost of respect to the ground it’s placed on. To suggest otherwise in the case of the Spearfish Canyon is purely speculation. Even the information booth/c-store in Custer was a welcome sight last summer when we all were looking for snacks and a bathroom with actual indoor plumbing. Not to mention the volumes of information we learned from the people working there. Just as John pointed out that older people need to respect their limitations and not get their hopes up about wanting to enjoy Spearfish Canyon, bikers need to respect the desire of others to enjoy the canyon as well. Also as I’ve said, it would take a small portion of the allotted acres, which is just a portion of the canyon. I don’t think that’s asking too much.