nea4wd.org


Welcome To The Northeast Association of 4WD Clubs

"Age Old Question"

Feel free to use this area for general banter but keep it clean.

"Age Old Question"

Postby tammylynn » Wed Dec 19, 2007 3:21 pm

I found this while catching up on the United forum and thought is was interesting.

http://www.ufwda.org/smf/index.php?topic=1683.0
tammylynn
 
Posts: 7917
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:24 pm

Postby Treasurer » Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:41 pm

We sit back and let this happen. We should be suing the BLM for ADA access to federal lands. It takes lots of money to fight the Eco-nazis.
Steve N.
Treasurer NEA4WDC
User avatar
Treasurer
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:38 am
Location: Nashua NH

Postby tammylynn » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:41 am

I was pondering more on the different view of how we always ask ourselves how we can get people to help out more. If we could get people to think more along the lines of how it will ultimately impact them if they don't get involved-I think it would increase some of the involvement.

But then the logical side of me says no it won't because everyone will just go back to wheeling illegally. :roll: :lol:
tammylynn
 
Posts: 7917
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:24 pm

Postby Treasurer » Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:24 am

Always remember it is much easier to wheel illegally than legally. As long as OHVs exist they will be used on terrain they were built to be driven on. With this in mind the government cannot close all of the land to motorized users and expect it to be enforced or work. I hope SEMA and the lobyists for the manufactures will keep congress from passing more laws against motorized user groups. We need to work on purchasing land with grant money, fund raising and donations. The RTP grant money in NH can be used for purchasing the land the trails are on. The rest of the land that surrounds the trails we would have to pay for with our own money.
Steve N.
Treasurer NEA4WDC
User avatar
Treasurer
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:38 am
Location: Nashua NH

Postby Wagz » Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:54 am

Treasurer wrote:We sit back and let this happen. We should be suing the BLM for ADA access to federal lands. It takes lots of money to fight the Eco-nazis.


Suing the BLM for ADA access to federal lands? I don't believe that's an answer, or even a reasonable argument. The BLM isn't typically even in the business of constructing improvements of any type on land they manage. In fact, the BLM is so strapped for staff, they don't have enough people to properly manage and patrol the land they are responsible for. As a result, trash and debris are illegally dumped all over, drug deals and illegal aliens run rampant across the deserts, it's scary. At night, predatory wildlife is the least of your concerns in many of the more remote locations.

What type of ADA access do you feel is not provided at public BLM properties? Grazing rights, mining rights, and others legally allow people leasing these lands to fence off areas with gates that the public can access through. BLM doesn't dictate the type of fence. Sure, they succomb to pressure by ranchers and oil/gas interests, but it's due mainly to where the money comes from.

Don't get mad at an underfunded public agency that is probably one of the last providers of open, public, wheelable land in our country. Instead, try to come up with a way to preserve the access we have, and expand the model of responsible access across the remaining federal recreation land agencies (USDA/USFS, BoR, etc.).

Merry Christmas to all, from the great northwest.
User avatar
Wagz
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: Central Idaho

Postby Treasurer » Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:10 pm

The ADA access would be to see all the landmarks that are now only accessible by hiking. Think about this. The Eco-Nazis would use the ADA if it could get more land closed and fullfill their agenda.
Steve N.
Treasurer NEA4WDC
User avatar
Treasurer
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:38 am
Location: Nashua NH

Postby Wagz » Wed Dec 26, 2007 12:35 pm

Treasurer wrote:The ADA access would be to see all the landmarks that are now only accessible by hiking. Think about this. The Eco-Nazis would use the ADA if it could get more land closed and fullfill their agenda.


While it's true, there are groups that would use the ADA or any number of other regulations and laws to further their goals, suing the BLM to provide access to national monuments is no solution. These same groups are primarily responsible for suing the BLM, BoR, USFS, and even NPS for not restricting motorized use, or controllling grazing/mining activities strongly enough. What would suing BLM to obtain ADA access to many of these monuments get you? A boardwalk or paved pathway with ramps to keep grades within the regulatory requirements? Do you think any agency responsible for protecting natural, national monuments would, in response to litigation for access, simply open a road for you to drive up to them?

I don't believe that. I also do not believe that's an appropriate response. There does need to be balance. There do need to be places where motorized vehicles are not allowed. We have that, and if we enforce that, I don't feel there's a need to expand upon it either.

The Sawtooth Wilderness is pristine country. I don't believe we should allow motorized use in there. It's a truly heavenly place, in a state of being much as it was 200 years ago or more. Adjacent to that is the Sawtooth National Recreation Area, and the Boulder-Whiteclouds. Motorized trails run through these areas. Blue Ribbon member groups maintain a network of trails for motorcycles that criss-cross the entire region. They're beautiful trails, and well maintained. Just as I don't advocate for opening up the wilderness areas to motorized use, I have argued against those who are trying to shut down the trails in the Boulder-Whiteclouds. There has to be balance. There has to be opportunities for everyone to join in and experience our wonderful outdoors, the wildlife, the scenic vistas, and the simple remoteness of being far from any civilization. But do it with balance and with reason. Demanding more from underfunded federal agencies just adds to the strife and results in further conflict. Have a happy new year.
User avatar
Wagz
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: Central Idaho

Postby Treasurer » Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:14 pm

The Eco people want all land closed to motorized vehicles. That is what we need to stop. When I finally move out west there will be not much for me to see in my 4x4 that is legal. They even got a rock covered gorge closed in Death Valley. That is just wrong. I cannot hike in there to see the beauty of Death Valley from the top of the gorge.
Have a great new year.
Steve N.
Treasurer NEA4WDC
User avatar
Treasurer
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:38 am
Location: Nashua NH

Postby Wagz » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:43 pm

Treasurer wrote:The Eco people want all land closed to motorized vehicles. That is what we need to stop. When I finally move out west there will be not much for me to see in my 4x4 that is legal. They even got a rock covered gorge closed in Death Valley. That is just wrong. I cannot hike in there to see the beauty of Death Valley from the top of the gorge.
Have a great new year.


Now let's not reduce ourselves to vague generalities. Steve, I understand your position. But it's not as simple as all that. There are millions of acres of public land with more miles of unimproved roads and trails than you'll ever be able to travel still available. Illegal use, thoughtless and deliberate abuse, and an unwillingness to follow simple, common sense rules are what closes us out of these areas.

I love nothing more than exploring the vast backcountry, searching for a remote section of river to fish, or a desert butte to hunt chukar. I use my Jeep to get me, my dog, and my gear further into the backcountry. But there's a limit. There's a point where the vehicle needs to be left behind. Some other less intrusive mode is necessary.

I admit, not every parcel of public land may be accessible to all people. I don't know what to tell you. Not all of that land is there simply for our pleasure. Often it's needed for habitat -- to support the fauna and flora we so love to visit, to watch, or to just know is still there somewhere. When you immerse yourself in the wild and you realize how huge these spaces are, you have to accept that you'll never get to see it all. It's impossible. It's too vast. Take the parts you can get to. Expand further by whatever means are allowed, and enjoy them as responsibly as you can.

I can still drive through great sections of Death Valley. Beyond that, there's millions of acres of high desert in the Mojave and Great Basin deserts, the salt flats, and more red rock than you can take pictures of.

Extreme environmental activists do pose a challenge, and I agree, they would like to remove all motorized travel from public land (and mechanized travel for that matter). However, as long as we act responsibly, work to improve our surroundings, and minimize the negative effects of our presence in the backcountry, most of the state and federal agencies have supported our continued, managed use of the land.

We are our own enemy. The ignorant and the thougtless are the direct causes for the loss of access, and we are responsible for not addressing the situation ourselves. We should look inside before turning to others to shoulder our blame.

Steve, I hope you get a chance to see much of what remains open and accessible in the country. Just one weekend will be enough to reassure you that the land is there, nature is resilient, and if we focus our efforts, we can maintain access to some of the most beautiful land North America has to offer.
User avatar
Wagz
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: Central Idaho


Return to Off Topic-General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests