You can have your national forest back

Originally Posted By: SnaggltoofHis point still stands in part though, you want to close areas because of a few bad actors. And a road is a road. Whether its for logging or mining, a passenger vehicle is surely easier on the road surface too. And if its public, and we pay for it, we should be able to use it in a responsible manner. Just my opinion here. But more public access on public lands seems like its a good thing for us all.

The problem is you don't pay for it, or you pay very, VERY little for it. I don't think a lot of people understand the cost of maintaining roads in general, much less the roads on every National Forest in the country. When roads are used for any commercial purpose they pay a fee specifically for road maintenance. When the public uses the roads they don't. With a tight budget (as they should have) and about half of it going to fire suppression and very little if any timber dollars flowing into the system there isn't enough to maintain the entire road system adequately. Do you want to pay more taxes or pay a user fee to drive on all these roads? The National Forest user fee idea is real and is continually being evaluated as an option to provide the revenue needed for all of the Forest Service activities that are no longer supported by timber revenue.

The OP was about trying to force the Forest Service to open roads that are already gated, not the Forest Service trying to close additional roads. Of course there are roads that need to stay open and be maintained. Roads support the trail systems, they allow motorized access for those unable or unwilling to walk, they allow general forest management activities, provide firewood cutting, etc, etc. I don't think every road should be closed. The national forests are managed under a "multi-use strategy" and recreation is part of it, part of it. Some people think they have a right to drive on any road in the forest, I'm sorry but that isn't the case. Instead of just assuming the National Forests were created to be the public's playground do some research on the history and intent of the Forest Service and National Forests.
 
Last edited:
The thing is.. The land belongs to the tax payers, and should belong to the states and not the federal Government. There is nothing in the constitution about owning land on the states.

The National parks and forests were to prevent the situation where in Europe only privilaged could use it..
Well isn't that happening now??
THe land is owned by the people. The roads that are there, are for responsible land management and Fire fighting Access. Historically if you ask people from the 60's they could use that land and access it. If we own it, as the people, then we paid for the roads in one way or another, and should be able to use it.. Those that mis-use it should be delt with.


I am also a Disabled retired vet, and with the forest Service closing off access to land that means There are hundreds of thousands of Acres that are being taken away.
I personally support using the Americans Disability act and using it on the Government that want's to close the land.


The real deal is that if there are people doing thing they shouldn't be, then deal with that individual, but if one person gets a DUI, we all shouldn't loose our cars.
FS is closing off roads and not letting the people go, which means instead of getting out there and patroling to do their previous job they are driving around acting like a possessed landowner.

Oh, and for what I pay to gas tax, vehicle tax, hunting and fishing lic and tags, not to mention what you have to pay to use the forest tags, there should be enough money and if there isn't enough to grade the roads on occassion, well.. They should fire a few more deadbeats sitting in DC, and hire more grader opperators.
Don't tell me they are not making enough money when it's $25 to get into the Grand Canyon to look at a hole they didn't make, or have to maintain. They also charge $6 plus $4 for a boat per day to use the National forest here.
 
Last edited:
If we own it we should be able to use it. And trust me we all pay a lot for it. And companies that pay royalties on minerals or logging or whatever can be put towards it. I just think when in doubt the thing to do is more freedom, not less. We are regulated to death already, because a few bad actors might do this or that. Well I'm tired of these excuses.
 
In Southern California we have to buy what's called an adventure pass at $5 per day or $30 per year just to park a vehicle on National Forest land. So there is a fee system here in SoCal but they still won't unlock the gates and let us drive the roads. I wonder where the $30 I spent on an annual pass went and why that revenue couldn't be used to maintain roads within the National Forest?... I guess it takes a lot of money to run Commiefornia!
 
Last edited:
Here in northern Wis. there are plans to close hundreds of miles of roads on public lands.You can call it national forest Ill call it public because we the people own it.We pay for it and we own it,not the government.Its obvious that liberalism has made deep inroads into the american mind.Im not against some areas left hard to access for those who to want enjoy a quiet wilderness experience,but it has gotten way out of hand.If seeing garbage on public land bothers you,do you pick it up and haul it out.If not then shut up. Its obvious that many of you dont understand the constitution,or the meaning of we the people.The government is supposed to work for us but we are increasingly becoming slaves to it.Liberalism is a mental disorder, if you voted for Obama you have been infected.The sad thing is you don't even know whats happened to you.
 
Originally Posted By: J.MarkHere in northern Wis. there are plans to close hundreds of miles of roads on public lands.You can call it national forest Ill call it public because we the people own it.We pay for it and we own it,not the government.Its obvious that liberalism has made deep inroads into the american mind.Im not against some areas left hard to access for those who to want enjoy a quiet wilderness experience,but it has gotten way out of hand.If seeing garbage on public land bothers you,do you pick it up and haul it out.If not then shut up. Its obvious that many of you dont understand the constitution,or the meaning of we the people.The government is supposed to work for us but we are increasingly becoming slaves to it.Liberalism is a mental disorder, if you voted for Obama you have been infected.The sad thing is you don't even know whats happened to you.

So the answer is to pick up all the trash we see or to "shut up". I'll remember that that next time I drive by a washing machine that's full of bullet holes. I didn't vote for Obama, but I guess I have a "mental disorder" and didn't even know it! I'll have to throw away all my Michael Savage, William F. Buckley, Mark Levin, and Ann Coulter books. . .
 
Ok,within reason.I hate seeing garbage in the wild and usually pick it up if I see it.Your missing my main point that national forests belong to the people.The sierra club mentality would give it all back to the wolves and ban all humane activity.
 
No federal agency locks people out from access. They REGULATE how that access occurs. Some of you say we shouldn’t regulate for the 1% or more like the 10% that screw things up. Then how should it be regulated. Each and every American tax payer probably pays far less than a dollar that actually makes it to field offices that manage the land. It costs thousands of dollars to maintain each road in the the system. Multiply that by thousands of rds and it quickly depletes the funding for rd maintence.

Also for every person who wants a road left open theres one who wants it closed...and probably more vocal about it. This is public land and decisions are made based on public comments. You want something different be more involved

Comparing road access in the past to access today is silly. The number of people using public lands is growing by leaps and bounds. The equipment in use is totally different now also. This all equals a lot more resource damage.

Individually users impart little damage but cumulatively its huge.

Disabled users keeps coming up. Well around here if you qualify as disabled you can get a free permit that allows you access to SOME closed roads. All you have to do is present your permit and you get a key.

Go to public meetings and voice your opinion. All these closures that take place have public meetings or public scoping before decisions are made.
 
Last edited:
The National Parks and National Forests are two very different things and were/are created for two very different reasons. Historically people just did whatever they want in the National Forests because there was no one to tell them no, not because it was their right to do it. Whether you're disabled or not, do some research on why the National Forests were created...they were not created to be your playground. Federal ownership of the land is another argument that we probably wouldn't disagree on but in terms of what it is now, most people don't know the intent of the National Forest system. In regards to paying for the roads, in fact you didn't pay for a vast majority of roads, revenue from commercial activities paid for and maintained the roads.

J.Mark, calling people who disagree with you liberals, Obama voters, or whatever slight you can think of shows your inability to debate and lack of knowledge on the subject. I live in a state with almost 12 times the National Forest acerage (roughly half the size of Wisconsin) as your state. If I'm a liberal because I understand economics, road maintenance, and the intent of the National Forests then it's pointless trying to talk to you. I can guarantee you I've been responsible for hundreds of millions of board feet of timber being cut...what can you muster? My point all along has been, regardless of what you think, you don't have a "right" to drive on any road in the national forest and regardless of what you think you pay in taxes to support the infrastructure in the national forests I can assure you it's not even close to being enough to maintain every road you think you have a "right" to use. Nobody is blocking your access to the land, your ability to drive wherever you want is being regulated.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Tbone-AZ
Oh, and for what I pay to gas tax, vehicle tax, hunting and fishing lic and tags,

Not a penny of which goes to the national forests...
 
Originally Posted By: J.MarkOk,within reason.I hate seeing garbage in the wild and usually pick it up if I see it.Your missing my main point that national forests belong to the people.The sierra club mentality would give it all back to the wolves and ban all humane activity.

I see your point, J.Mark; I really do. I know which side of the issue you stand for. I'm not even necessarily saying you're out of place. We just see things differently. I happen to agree with Timberbeast7; and I stated in a previous post on this thread that historical use by people on the roads has been a PRIVILEGE. Keeping gates locked (or locking more) is a regulatory action and the privilege to using roads is being revoked; not the RIGHT to access the land. "We the people" have a RIGHT to voice our opinion and interject what we believe. You can certainly start a grassroots effort and lobby your congressman. They are there to represent their constituency. I think what'll you find though is that even if you had a majority of people on your side, and the congressman was in agreement with you, where is the money going to come from to not only maintain thousands of miles of roads, but also to fund the enforcement needed to patrol all those roads? As much as people want to believe that their hunting/fishing license, park access permits, etc, etc pay for their ability to maintain the roads, it simply isn't true. They don't even collect a fraction of what it would cost; in fact I'm willing to bet that those sources don't even come close to funding the few ranger stations we currently have (if those funds are even used for that all). The people who are screaming from the mountain tops about their "right to use the roads" are the same people who scream equally as loud about being charged a user fee or a tax increase that would potentially help keep the roads open and maintained. I don't know about you, but I don't want to pay more taxes so if that means closing the road; so be it. I can still access the land by foot or bike which is what I do anyway. I suppose you could use horses as well.

To Snaggletoof; I assume your question was directed at me so I'll answer it. Roads were installed for the use of tree harvest and mineral extraction. The users (logging companies, and your example of iron mining outfits) pay thier own way. They pay the maintenance cost for keeping the roads going; which is obviously in their best interest.

So here's an idea that maybe some of us could agree on. How about the govt makes a contract with any user like iron mining, logging, cattle grazing, etc that they can harvest from the land (which they do anyway) but in return they have to not only keep regular maintenance of roads, but they also have to pay for road maintenance costs for 10-15 years after their operation is done? It would be the price of doing business. It may sound like a simple idea and most likely isn't feasible (since there is so much land that isn't being used by these private outfits) but that sort of thing could potentially keep some roads open that are currently closed or are going to be closed. Just a thought. I'm sure some people would want to run with an idea like this and others will point out how it won't work. Either way, this has been a good discussion I think.
 
Originally Posted By: Timberbeast7Originally Posted By: bluealtered

Try taking just a moment and clear your head if you can. The only reason you can publicly say screw everybody else is because someone before you gave service to our country so you would have the right to do so.

Inspite of your thinking it's all about you, it isn't it's all about US, everybody here in America. What about our service men and women who are coming home and need a place to go and help themselves try to adjust to what they have gone through? How much more do they have to go through to make you happy?



Using vets and injured vets to justify your want to drive everywhere is sad. There are still plenty of areas you can drive and there are permits in many areas that allow disabled people driving access to restricted areas. Coming from north Idaho where there is a jammer road every 600 feet on the slope and everybody and their brother hunts from the back of an ATV regardless of whether the roads are closed or not, a few gates are a welcomed site. You do have access to the forest, sometimes you just have to get out of your rig.

I see you like limiting access for your own interest. The problem with limiting access you will start to limit the number of recreational users, what happens when the Quote:greatest good of the greatest number in the long run does not include recreational use?
 
jlh321, you need to dissociate "access" from "driving".

Currently recreational use, IMO, occupies too large a percentage of the management strategy, hence the lack of revenue from commercial activities that support the infrastructure that you feel you have a "right" to drive on.

In reality this bill has no chance. Why would the counties want to open all these roads? Why would they even care? Who is going to pay for maintaining all the roads that would be opened? The Forest Service definitely doesn't have the budget for that. The counties are definitely not going to foot the bill, they derive no property taxes from the National Forests. Do you think citizens of the counties are going to suck it up and pay double or more in property taxes to pay for the roads? The counties want the industry to return to the National Forests so jobs and income and taxes return to the counties.

What did people do before all these roads were built on the National Forests? Do you think Teddy Roosevelt drove everywhere? Most of these roads were built in the 60's and 70's, did people before then not have access to the National Forests? Of course they did!
 
Let's be a bit more objective about the issue for second, if we can.

TB7, are you a USDA FS employee? (Just wondering...)

Having quite a bit of experience in the National Forests of NM, and more particularly, Otero County there, (Google Otero County and Forest Service and see what pops up) I have seen them try and close all roads in huge areas, not only in the Lincoln Natl. Forest, but the Gila Natl. Forest as well.

TB7, you mention the access to forest lands in the 60's and 70's. Of course people went into the forest then, and before. I know from personal experience that many, many hunters owned horses and/or pack mules for the simple reason of accessing Natl. Forest lands to hunt, fish, camp, etc.

Now, if you look at what vehicles the people wanting access to the lands have these days, it sure isn't horses. More than likely it is a pickup truck, SUV, and probably an ATV. Horses have pretty much gone away for the common family. Is there a problem with idiots taking advantage of things and messing up things with their vehicles? Absolutely.

What is always the knee jerk reaction of the Forest Service to address the problems encountered like this? In nearly ALL cases, they simply close all roads having the problem, or in some cases, propose closures that cover the entire forest. Now, that is throwing the baby out with the bathwater too.... But, sadly, that reaction is exactly the agenda that many liberal management people that now hold position within the USDA F.S. WANT.

There are other solutions to the access problem that causes such passionate responses in folks nowadays.
First. Let the people that want to access the public lands with ATV's or vehicles do so, after criteria and conditions are met. Simply make them take a 15 minute course on treading lightly, and other responsible behavior while riding the machine or vehicle in the forest. Next, make them ante up with licensing, or permit monies that let you know who they are, where they are, and what they are doing on forest lands. Also, earmark the monies taken in for the access, for road improvement, and/or habitat improvement.

It's very unlikely that a guy that has a permit issued and has met the requirements to have access is going to mess things up that he knows he will be held responsible for.

The USDA Forest Service is hardly perfect themselves. I have never witnessed an more inept, unqualified organization of people with such a simple duty tasked to them.... Take care of the forest!

Logging restrictions and access issues, fires, and political agendas, along with lawsuits from tree/bunny huggers have the Forest Circus running around like chickens with their heads cut off. And instead of any sort of leadership coming forward to garner good will and good faith to get things back on the right track, nearly all Forest Service management personnel now repeat the same thing, over and over, like a broken record.... "Close all the roads and prohibit access for this reason or that..."

This "Closing the Forest" stuff is getting old.

Pretty much the same verbiage has been adopted and made law by the USDA FS, and the BLM as the Multiple Use Act.

Quit addressing the problems with outdated crap like telling us we don't have the "rights" to do this, or do that, and start coming up with some real world, real time solutions to the problems. If the truth be known, I would feel better about the forest management being handed back to county level government (which it was intended to be anyway), than to continue to watch the Forest Circus MISMANAGE our forest lands, or simply let them and everything contained within them burn.

It's not rocket science, guys. It's called LEADERSHIP.

The Forest Service should try it sometime. They might be amazed at what kind of problems go away...
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: rockinbbarThere are other solutions to the access problem that causes such passionate responses in folks nowadays.
First. Let the people that want to access the public lands with ATV's or vehicles do so, after criteria and conditions are met. Simply make them take a 15 minute course on treading lightly, and other responsible behavior while riding the machine or vehicle in the forest. Next, make them ante up with licensing,

There are a lot of states that require those exact things. Utah is one of them. I can tell you that a tread lightly course means nothing to a lot of people. I have seen it here. Parents tear things up and teach their kids to do the same thing. The kids are required to take a course to get a permit to ride also. I even seen a photo that an ATV club posted. Their big thing is to "tread lightly". The photo showed about 4 machines on part of a lake bed that was closed. Right in the front of the picture was a sign that said closed to motorized vehicles and the ATV's about 50 yards behind it. They had driven right past the sign. I caught a lot of people on a road that had been closed for 20 years and had a berm bulldozed across it. They wanted to argue with me about it being closed. I have been hunting the area for 40 years. You could see nobody had been on the road in a very long time, it was over grown. They just didnt want to travel another 20 minutes to come around on the existing road. Unfortunately there are a lot of people that just dont care. They are going to do what they want, when they want. It is those of us that want to do things the right way that lose out.
 
Rockinbbar, I like some of the ideas you have about taking a "tread lightly" course, license fees, etc. I wonder if they would actually make enough revenue to maintain all those roads? I doubt it, but it would definitely be a start in the right direction I guess. Like I stated earlier maybe they could also squeeze the commercial operators for more maintenance fees as well. I don't know much about those industries and/or if they make enough profit to make it worth their while to pay more for roads. I'll also say again that if more roads are closed, I'll be alright as I already walk/bike into closed areas. However after reading many of the points made by folks who are for opening roads, it is a bit selfish. I guess over the years I've become a little jaded. I get tired of taking the time to bike/hike in just to have rule-breakers and lock-cutters come blazing into the hunting spot I spent days getting into. I guess closing gates really won't help in the long run since there will always be people who can't follow the rules/laws.
 
rockinbbar, I have worked for the Forest Service, along with State management agencies and two private timber companies. Your comments, although not completely objective, are true (at least IMO) about the current mis-management of the land by the FS. That, and who should really be managing the land, is a completely separate issue (one which we most likely agree on).

My point all along has been that like it or not you don't have a "right" to drive on the FS roads simply because they are there and whether you agree with them or not the National Forests were created with specific ideas in mind...and recreation wasn't the main reason. As far as opening every gate in the N.F.s, most people have no clue what it takes to manage and maintain that type of infrastructure. I like the ideas you have about permits and user fees but in my experience the same people who gripe about the roads being closed are the same ones that complain the loudest when the user fee/permitting ideas are presented.

As far as real world solutions, in a nutshell, mine would be start logging again and make long term contractual commitments so companies are willing to rebuild mills and invest in equipment. IMO, the biggest issue with the FS and government land management agencies in general has been them making our natural resources off limits to industry...but again that's not what this thread was about.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: reb8600Originally Posted By: rockinbbarThere are other solutions to the access problem that causes such passionate responses in folks nowadays.
First. Let the people that want to access the public lands with ATV's or vehicles do so, after criteria and conditions are met. Simply make them take a 15 minute course on treading lightly, and other responsible behavior while riding the machine or vehicle in the forest. Next, make them ante up with licensing,

There are a lot of states that require those exact things. Utah is one of them. I can tell you that a tread lightly course means nothing to a lot of people. I have seen it here. Parents tear things up and teach their kids to do the same thing. The kids are required to take a course to get a permit to ride also. I even seen a photo that an ATV club posted. Their big thing is to "tread lightly". The photo showed about 4 machines on part of a lake bed that was closed. Right in the front of the picture was a sign that said closed to motorized vehicles and the ATV's about 50 yards behind it. They had driven right past the sign. I caught a lot of people on a road that had been closed for 20 years and had a berm bulldozed across it. They wanted to argue with me about it being closed. I have been hunting the area for 40 years. You could see nobody had been on the road in a very long time, it was over grown. They just didnt want to travel another 20 minutes to come around on the existing road. Unfortunately there are a lot of people that just dont care. They are going to do what they want, when they want. It is those of us that want to do things the right way that lose out.

I have seen that stuff too. It infuriates me.
mad.gif


They need to be held accountable for their own actions.
 
Back
Top