62 replies to this topic

[Bill Z]

too many restrictions, too many fools.... it ruins it for those of us who do play by the rules

For me, this kinda sums up everything that I think is wrong with our country.

[supermom]

Yeah...because this isn't condescending at all:


You wonder why people are "quick to jump on you"? I can tell you. It's because everything you disagree with in this forum isn't just met with disagreement, it's met with all your reasons why no one else should be permitted to engage in the activity as well.

no--I just see things differently than you.

Hey great--you have the right and the money to go buy a 4 wheeler. But you demand that public areas we are trying to be preserved are allowed access via destructive vehicles.

Whats wrong with making "parks " for 4 wheelers? Why do they need to be in the national and state parks--when they are counter productive to the conservation of the tiny little bit of land we have left that hasn't been destoyed by encroachment?

That's my view of it.

And if that's my view--why attack me? Why not just say--hey I disagree and this is why?

Whatever your preconceived judgements are about me ( which appear on every thread you respond to my posts ) : I certainly don't attack you-just the post.

Get over yourself--

and Howdy--I can see you feel very strongly about offroading vehicles. I'm sure they are fun, challenging, etc...
But in all honesty--couldn't you have that same level of fun on an "offroading farm" that is designed and taylored just for these vehicles?

[Phonon]

I guess we might disagree on that. Public use means it is available for anyone to use but maybe not for Hummers, dirt bikes, motorized vehicles, etc.

Hummers (H1 or H2) on forest trails.

[Bill Z]

Whats wrong with making "parks " for 4 wheelers? Why do they need to be in the national and state parks--when they are counter productive to the conservation of the tiny little bit of land we have left that hasn't been destoyed by encroachment?

Dear Supermom,

Maybe you missed my previous post and some others 4-wheelers already aren't allowed to go offroad in National Parks & most State Parks. they also aren't allowed in Designated Wilderness areas of which this state has many.

To name a few in CA: Trintiy Alps Wilderness, Granite Chief Wilderness, Desolation Wilderness, Mokelumne Wilderness, Carson-Iceberg Wilderness, Hoover Wilderness, Emmigrant Wilderness, John Muir Wilderness, Golden Trout Wilderness.
Now for some parks, Yosemite, Sequoia National, Kings Canyon.

[jafount]

no--I just see things differently than you.

Hey great--you have the right and the money to go buy a 4 wheeler. But you demand that public areas we are trying to be preserved are allowed access via destructive vehicles.

Whats wrong with making "parks " for 4 wheelers? Why do they need to be in the national and state parks--when they are counter productive to the conservation of the tiny little bit of land we have left that hasn't been destoyed by encroachment?

That's my view of it.

And if that's my view--why attack me? Why not just say--hey I disagree and this is why?

Whatever your preconceived judgements are about me ( which appear on every thread you respond to my posts ) : I certainly don't attack you-just the post.

Get over yourself--

and Howdy--I can see you feel very strongly about offroading vehicles. I'm sure they are fun, challenging, etc...
But in all honesty--couldn't you have that same level of fun on an "offroading farm" that is designed and taylored just for these vehicles?

Quoting your post and responding to it isn't an "attack". Again...jump off the cross. I'm not crucifying you. I have no preconceived notions about "you". I've formulated an opinion over time based on your responses. The reason I respond to your posts, is because I, as a rule, vehemently disagree with your "well I don't like it for these reasons so everyone else should change" takes.

I have no "love" for offroading. I don't do it. But I think other people should have the right to experience it in designated areas within OUR national forests that are maintained with OUR tax dollars.

For the record, I think the the difference between telling someone their post is "lame" and calling the poster "lame" is only semantics.

Case in point:

Not sure about the you don't make any sense part: unless your referring to **gasp** your attitude of quick anger when someone says hey...

The argument that a hiker caused a fire so off roaders do less damage is: well, lame.

Once again, you arm yourself with opinion that isn't supported by facts. You calaim there is only a "tiny amount of forest land, when in fact the USFS owns 297,000 square miles of Forest land. Not exactly a "tiny amount". BTW this figure doesn't take into account millions of acres of national prairie and grasslands also controlled by the USFS.

98% of your takes are opinion based conjecture not supported by any facts. The most amazing thing about them, is you feel the need to opine on nearly subject with these ill-supported editorials, never taking a moment to see the entire picture and give yourself an opportunity to learn something from other people. This board thrives on discussion, yet history has shown you don't want to "discuss" anything. You'd rather castigate others under the guise of discussion and it's a tired mantra.

[EDH Jen]

Off-roaders lose 1,000 miles of trail in new Eldorado plan.
http://www.sacbee.co...ory/829734.html

Please vote and then state your position.

For anyone who is interested in what this is all bout, and who is behind it, Google 'Karen Schaumbach'.

[Bill Z]

For anyone who is interested in what this is all bout, and who is behind it, Google 'Karen Schaumbach'.

I tried googling her, got some results, but when I tried to open one of the links, my IE locked up. I think my commie sensor was triggered.

[buick24]

The whole reason this occurred is because Karen and her late husband (he of course was an avid dirt bike trail rider) purchased a plot of land in the Georgetown Divide area right next to an off-road legal park without knowing it. Karen wanted to shut down the place and created many non profit organizations to help facilitate the land grab (she now runs the PEER and CNSC). Karen in the past used to spike the trails in the region in order to keep the riders away from her "sanctuary". These trails were legal at the time so Karen proceeded to sue the FS and force a travel management policy in the Rock Creek area. She then sued the EDNF using the same arguments. Karen is not an environmentalist as she would have you believe, Karen sold much of the timber on her 20ac's to a logging company, she is an exclusionist. Karen and her groups are preparing their appeal over the current forest proposal (modified b)Final Report and will no doubt attempt to lock everyone out. This includes not only the off-road community but those that used to use dirt roads to get to their favorite hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, bird watching, cycling areas. You can no longer park your car off of the road and must be within a few feet of the allowed travel road. I have seen the arguments about saving the environment, closing access to the forest doesn’t accomplish that. Reducing what you purchase, how far you drive, what you eat, travel etc will accomplish that. People always speak of off-roaders as rednecks and are bastardized by the elitists. Just so you know I have my engineering degree from Cal Poly, have been a vegetarian for 16 years, and I ride an off-road motorcycle. I respect the environment and all of my fellow riders do the same. We work on the trails, clean up after others (Every group has its bad apples), educate others, and enjoy the outdoors. For those of you that want “quiet” recreation, you have your special designated wildernesses (The Forest Service can’t even fight fires or fly in helicopters in these areas). National forest are meant to be enjoyed by Americans, National Parks are meant to be preserved, please don’t assume one is the other.

[EDH Jen]

The whole reason this occurred is because Karen and her late husband (he of course was an avid dirt bike trail rider) purchased a plot of land in the Georgetown Divide area right next to an off-road legal park without knowing it. Karen wanted to shut down the place and created many non profit organizations to help facilitate the land grab (she now runs the PEER and CNSC). Karen in the past used to spike the trails in the region in order to keep the riders away from her "sanctuary". These trails were legal at the time so Karen proceeded to sue the FS and force a travel management policy in the Rock Creek area. She then sued the EDNF using the same arguments. Karen is not an environmentalist as she would have you believe, Karen sold much of the timber on her 20ac's to a logging company, she is an exclusionist. Karen and her groups are preparing their appeal over the current forest proposal (modified b)Final Report and will no doubt attempt to lock everyone out. This includes not only the off-road community but those that used to use dirt roads to get to their favorite hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, bird watching, cycling areas. You can no longer park your car off of the road and must be within a few feet of the allowed travel road. I have seen the arguments about saving the environment, closing access to the forest doesn’t accomplish that. Reducing what you purchase, how far you drive, what you eat, travel etc will accomplish that. People always speak of off-roaders as rednecks and are bastardized by the elitists. Just so you know I have my engineering degree from Cal Poly, have been a vegetarian for 16 years, and I ride an off-road motorcycle. I respect the environment and all of my fellow riders do the same. We work on the trails, clean up after others (Every group has its bad apples), educate others, and enjoy the outdoors. For those of you that want “quiet” recreation, you have your special designated wildernesses (The Forest Service can’t even fight fires or fly in helicopters in these areas). National forest are meant to be enjoyed by Americans, National Parks are meant to be preserved, please don’t assume one is the other.

[supermom]

Quoting your post and responding to it isn't an "attack". Again...jump off the cross. I'm not crucifying you. I have no preconceived notions about "you". I've formulated an opinion over time based on your responses. The reason I respond to your posts, is because I, as a rule, vehemently disagree with your "well I don't like it for these reasons so everyone else should change" takes.

awwwha ha ha ha---You think I want to change you? boy, who divorced you and left you in the dirt?
I'm not trying to change you. Merely pointing out my opinions. they are opinions. You don't like it, just say so.

I have no "love" for offroading. I don't do it. But I think other people should have the right to experience it in designated areas within OUR national forests that are maintained with OUR tax dollars.


Just because the tax payers pay for forests doesn't mean they need to be destroyed by those tax payers to feel like they are getting their kicks.

For the record, I think the the difference between telling someone their post is "lame" and calling the poster "lame" is only semantics.
Some cases --maybe so---but comparing a pyro nut to all hikers to make a point that all hikers are worse on nature than off roading vehicles is pretty lame. Actually, the more I think about it--it aounds VERY LAME.

Case in point:


Once again, you arm yourself with opinion that isn't supported by facts. You calaim there is only a "tiny amount of forest land, when in fact the USFS owns 297,000 square miles of Forest land. Not exactly a "tiny amount". BTW this figure doesn't take into account millions of acres of national prairie and grasslands also controlled by the USFS.

yea--1/4 million acres is ohhh so much when you consider the diverse amount of animals and plants that can only survive in that not-black tarred area; compared to the rest of the outlying areas. Great point. Pretty moot--if you ask me.


98% of your takes are opinion based conjecture not supported by any facts. The most amazing thing about them, is you feel the need to opine ( you mean I'm opinionated? Oh, God; what to do? A woman with an opinion? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! You slay me!! ) on nearly subject with these ill-supported editorials, never taking a moment to see the entire picture and give yourself an opportunity to learn something from other people ( oi' I have learned a lot--in fact--if you bother to pay attention--you'll have noticed that on two very separate issues I had completely reversed my opinion on those topics; ie., Illegal immigration and gay rights--but yeah--You seem to like disliking and arguing with me. Carry on.. )This board thrives on discussion, yet history has shown you don't want to "discuss" anything. You'd rather castigate others under the guise of discussion and it's a tired mantra. (If your tired go to bed)

ps. billz--I don't know much about the mountain terrain up in this area that allows or does not allow offroading--however I do remember reading about the desert in Socal that has a large offroading turnout every spring. The NFS has been trying for years to ban offroading there; because of plants that are specific only to that reason. I read the story and had never had an opinion one way or the other about offroading 'till then. Seems that the vehicles are pretty destructive. What's the point of going to see nature and then destroying it intentionally?

[buick24]

ps. billz--I don't know much about the mountain terrain up in this area that allows or does not allow offroading--however I do remember reading about the desert in Socal that has a large offroading turnout every spring. The NFS has been trying for years to ban offroading there; because of plants that are specific only to that reason. I read the story and had never had an opinion one way or the other about offroading 'till then. Seems that the vehicles are pretty destructive. What's the point of going to see nature and then destroying it intentionally?

Exactly my point here. Once again Karen has been suing the BLM (Algodones Dunes Dunes, aka Glamis is owned by the BLM) over OHV access due to the "Pierson’s Milk-vetch " in order shut down the remaining legal OHV access area's. The NFS as you stated doesn’t manage the area and the BLM has not been trying to shut it down. These groups manipulate the NEPA and ESA processes to accomplish their anti access goals. My problem simply comes down to people making assumptions as you did here. Your drive by (feel good) actions do nothing but perpetuate ignorance to the issues. Today its the Milk Vetch, tomorrow it will be another plant. These groups are the ones that pay for the studies so thier results are always skewed.

[Bill Z]

ps. billz--I don't know much about the mountain terrain up in this area that allows or does not allow offroading--however I do remember reading about the desert in Socal that has a large offroading turnout every spring. The NFS has been trying for years to ban offroading there; because of plants that are specific only to that reason. I read the story and had never had an opinion one way or the other about offroading 'till then. Seems that the vehicles are pretty destructive. What's the point of going to see nature and then destroying it intentionally?

I believe the desert situation is different than the mountains. Life in the desert is harsh, to add lots of vehicles driving at high speed really does tear up the terrain and the plant life that is barely clinging to life doesn't stand a chance when hundreds of vehicles drive criss-cross crazy voer all of the terrain. Rock crawling is slow (You can walk faster than these things drive) and is relatively confined to the trail, or to open stretches of granite. You can't just drive through thick forests whereever you want. While on the granite, there isn't much harm they can do. In the dirt, they do contribute to errosion, but from backpacking and rock-crawling, my observances are I feel the Equestrian crowd has actually a harder impact on mountain terrain than the 4-wheelers that drive nicely and backpackers with dogs (my dogs are banned from the back-country in national Parks like Yosemite while horse trains are still allowed and it's because they say my dogs disturb the environment. My dogs don't poop on the trails and their feet definitely don't dig up the dirt like a horses hooves do. ) The pressure on a horses foot is far higher than the the 4-wheelers tire is on the dirt road. So in my book, if environmental damage is the real concern, ban horses before you ban anything else.

[jafount]

hey supermom... Its 297000 SQUARE MILES not a quarter million acres. Thanks for making my point that you're quck to respond with conjecture and Ill informed opinion...

Nice comeback though.

[Bill Z]

hey supermom... Its 297000 SQUARE MILES not a quarter million acres. Thanks for making my point that you're quck to respond with conjecture and Ill informed opinion...

Nice comeback though.

Wow, that's like millions & millions of acres.


190 million to be a little more exact.



"What are we talking about here?" - Chicken Little


Dang it, did it again!!! Divulging my knowledge of cartoon movies (God I love having a 6 year old)

[jafount]

Wow, that's like millions & millions of acres.
190 million to be a little more exact.
"What are we talking about here?" - Chicken Little
Dang it, did it again!!! Divulging my knowledge of cartoon movies (God I love having a 6 year old)

Exactly, Bill and remember, this doesn't take into account all the similar amount national prairie and grassland open space that's also controlled by the USFS.

For those others that may think I'm being hard-nosed, please understand that I'm just saying things should be put into true perspective before jumping on the political correctness bandwagon and rallying against an extremely small demographic of people who use--and for the most part, respect--the national forest lands.

awwwha ha ha ha---You think I want to change you? boy, who divorced you and left you in the dirt?
I'm not trying to change you. Merely pointing out my opinions. they are opinions. You don't like it, just say so.

I don't think you're trying to change "me" I think you're trying to change "everyone". It's a constant haranguing on issues, whether it's sub prime loans, karate versus an intruder, firearm use, traffic accidents or this issue. Rather than adding something to the discussion, you offer your opinion as fact. I'm just saying, take a moment to look something up before you opine and we'll all benefit, don't you think? After all, you have a world of information at your fingertips, via the internet.

Just because the tax payers pay for forests doesn't mean they need to be destroyed by those tax payers to feel like they are getting their kicks.

Another great example of the "I don't like it so people shouldn't be doing it" camp. I guarantee you the people engaging in these activities, aren't all out there tearing through the forest running down bunny rabbits. They stay to the paths and roads that are assigned. It's a challenge for them, against nature, against engineering, against machines. They aren't doing high speed runs up there. To say they are "destroying the forest" is asinine.

Some cases --maybe so---but comparing a pyro nut to all hikers to make a point that all hikers are worse on nature than off roading vehicles is pretty lame. Actually, the more I think about it--it aounds VERY LAME.

Soooo...now hikers who have campfires are "pyro nuts"? Classy. Way to paint with a broad brush.

yea--1/4 million acres is ohhh so much when you consider the diverse amount of animals and plants that can only survive in that not-black tarred area; compared to the rest of the outlying areas. Great point. Pretty moot--if you ask me.

Well...you didn't read, but I did mention that above.

( you mean I'm opinionated? Oh, God; what to do? A woman with an opinion? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! You slay me!! )

Didn't say you shouldn't. I said it would be nice if you at least attempted to make it somewhat informed before spewing forth the inaccuracies and just being part of the overall campaign of mis-information problem.

( oi' I have learned a lot--in fact--if you bother to pay attention--you'll have noticed that on two very separate issues I had completely reversed my opinion on those topics; ie., Illegal immigration and gay rights--but yeah--You seem to like disliking and arguing with me. Carry on.. )

Feels pretty good to open your mind, doesn't it?

(If your tired go to bed)

Wow....just...wow.