Timberbeast7
New member
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.
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: