Arizona Roadless Area Use meetings

[Jonathan Hanson]

One thing we have found is that the people at the forest Service who deal with public input are virtually always grateful when someone comes to them with well-thought-out, truly constructive input. A group that says, "Look, we really support the roadless plan, but we think it's wrong to close down this area here or this road here," will get MUCH more attention than those merely yelling, "Close it all!" or, "Don't close anything!"

 

[crawler#976]

Thanks Chris!

The term that the FS rep could not define was "Basic Custodial Care (CLOSED)" - it doesn't sound good tho.

 

[DesertRose]

Chris - you wrote "This definitely warrants some studying on our part and meeting with the USFS to talk about it."
I agree - I wanted to throw in something to chew on, too:

The USFS can't afford to maintain all the roads that are now there - there's a huge backlog, and we hear a lot of complaining from the 4x4 and backcountry crowd about it.

I've been involved in a lot of hiking clubs, but in general these clubs/groups haven't gotten the idea that somehow it's their right to demand that all trails are maintained by the government to their satisfaction. Instead, most of these groups have committees to work with the government to maintain trails on a volunteer basis - a work crew for free. It's a great thing for all involved, and the local FS and NPS and BLM folks are very grateful.

Just something to think about when we chat with the FS folks! (And I know many 4x4 groups do trash clean ups, but I'm talking about real road maintenance - or putting up a fund if it's not possible to do it w/out heavy equipment; another food for thought: nature-lovers who have relationships with Wildlife Refuges often form "Friends of XYZ Wildlife REfuge" and raise/ put up their own funds to help maintain trails and nature education and even hunting opps.)

 

[calamaridog]

Most of the reputable off road clubs actually do the adopt-a-trail programs and do real hands on trail maintenance. Our local OHV area close to San Diego, has major 4x4 trails that are maintained every year by the two biggest local clubs. I have participated in their efforts in the past and they always have a huge turn out of members and other local 4x4 enthusiasts.

These same trails are also open to equestrians, hikers, and mountain bikers but access is maintained by the 4x4 clubs.

As a matter of fact, many trail systems are closed/impassable during the winter and are opened in the spring by volunteers from local 4x4 clubs.

The volunteer efforts seem to be from old fashioned clubs, not the internet spawned groups like TTORA, who are just loosely affiliated groups of people from all over the place.

So let me know if expeditionportal decides to adopt-a-trail and I will try to drive out and help:wavey:

 

[Ursidae69]

The other issue that I am concerned about is unrelated to the IRA situation, but showed up on the IRA maps. The FS is in the process of updating the long term management plans (NFMA) for the Prescott Nat. Forest, and the maps showed a lot of roads scheduled for out right closure or another designation that the FS rep couldn't explain to us. (I don't have the maps here at work to give ya'll the exact term). This process has a much greater impact than the IRA plan does for motorized FS users...

I was wondering if you ever got any clarification on these closings?

Also, I was browsing the New Mexico Game and Fish site and they had a 42 page pdf on roadless areas in New Mexico. If anyone is interested, here is the link for that. http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/documents/RoadlessReport.pdf

 

[crawler#976]

Nope, I'm gonna have to try and take time off and go to the main office. The person I spoke to at the meeting didn't have on a name tag - so I'm gonna call my buddy Doug and see if he can set me up.

 

[crawler#976]

GOT THIS TODAY

Your message

To: Roadless
Subject: IRA Comments
Sent: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:56:11 -0700

was read on Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:26:51 -0700

 

[Seldom Seen]

Well it all *might* be moot, all the details are not in and I just got the PDF of the courts decision. As it looks now the 9th district court has struck down the state petition process stating the USFS failed to do an EA prior to instating the petition process. I'm not 100% sure if the ruling applies to all states or just the ones named as plaintiffs but, it looks like it's back to the drawing board.

IX. CONCLUSION

For all these reasons, Plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment are granted and Defendants' motion is denied. The State Petitions Rule is set aside and the Roadless Rule, including the Tongass Amendment, is reinstated. Defendants are enjoined from taking any further action contrary to the Roadless Rule without undertaking environmental analysis consistent with this opinion.


*edit* more news here: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_4370738

 

[crawler#976]

gotta love it...how much time and money has just been wasted