Talk:Angeles National Forest

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as High-importance).

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wilderness Expansion

There are two Designated Wilderness areas that are in the process of being expanded to afford greater protection to the watershed, one of which is the Sheep Mountain Wilderness which begins at Laural Gulch along East Fork of the San Gabriel River, along which a great deal of illegal mining takes place daily.

Expansion link

Question: Is it relevant or even worthy of making note of the current Congressional effort in the body of the article here? The expansion effort could fail, it could take months or years to come to pass, or it may be voted and signed today, there's no possible way of telling. Damotclese (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, there have been a number of efforts and bills regarding the ANF over the decades, many of which have not succeed. We should avoid recentism, or giving too much space to mere proposals. That said, a sentence or two noting the existence of a bipartisan proposal to expand the wilderness areas wouldn't be excessive, IMO. Will Beback talk 22:52, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable, more so since it's possible that the effort for expansion will fail, yes. Damotclese (talk) 19:25, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bubonic Plague

It might be better not to mention current closures since that changes a lot, it may be better to make it more encyclopedic to list some of the numerous times that bubonic antibodies was tested positive, campgrounds where rodents and birds were tested positive have been closed, later to be re-opened, otherwise because bubonic is detected literally every year in some campground or another or along various trails, you'll be editing the page repeatedly. :) Damotclese (talk) 14:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Safety Hazard -- Side Note About Photograph of Bear Creek

Just a side note: The photograph shows the region where Bear Creek flows past Smith Mountain Saddle and through the Designated Wilderness. Though it's not relevant to the extant article, people searching for information about the ANF who see the photograph and check this Talk: page should know that Upper Bear Creek Trail as it passes Smith Saddle and enters in to the Designated Wilderness should expect to encounter potential safety hazards since within the first 200 hards or so, the trail has disappeared down in to the canyon floor anywhere from 100 to some 300 feet below where the trail used to be. Damotclese (talk) 17:09, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteer organizations

I should add Montrose Search And Rescue to this list since they do a lot of the rescue work now, heavy rescue and human remains retrieval in the Eaton Canyon area. (This is a note to myself, basically.) Damotclese (talk) 00:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added the Save The East Fork Association. Another volunteer group is from the Xtreme Board Shop in Glendora which works along Glendora Mountain Road in the Angeles, but I need to get more information about what they do. Damotclese (talk) 02:28, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External Links Removal

The editor that removed the external links, please explain your reasons. Thanks. Damotclese (talk) 16:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The links removed were either dead (which you could have easily checked for yourself before reverting), or otherwise not really appropriate for the article per WP:EL (THREE spammy links to the same site not specific to the subject of the article?!). But do whatever you want, doesn't look like anybody else cares about this article anyway. :P --jnkyrdsprkl (talk) 19:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Normally when dead links are found, replacements are located and then an "access date" notation is made. I'll do that to any dead links. As to "spammy," I don't find any "spammy" links in the list. I'll fix the dead links here shortly. Thanks. Damotclese (talk) 19:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You were right, one dead link that was not second sourced, and one spammy from "Outside Magazine" that was nothing but spam. I removed them both and added access dates to the external links. Thanks! Damotclese (talk) 19:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Nearest City" is wrong :)

Actually the nearest city is Azusa which resides part way within the Angeles. Damotclese (talk) 17:56, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Angeles National Forest. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6EaRGckIT?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foresthistory.org%2FASPNET%2Fplaces%2FNational%2520Forests%2520of%2520the%2520U.S.pdf to http://www.foresthistory.org/ASPNET/places/National%20Forests%20of%20the%20U.S.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:46, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]