Comments on: Forum for Discussing Roadless and Wilderness http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/ Just another FS weblog Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:08:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 by: Terry Shepherd http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-2521 Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:17:45 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-2521 I am most appreciative of reading comments by forest users who are true multiple-users, like Mr. Albrecht, who, is "not above wearing out a pair of hiking boots," yet also uses an ATV. If we all took the opportunity to embrace the inherent contradictions we face daily as humans in our 'use' of the planet's resources and our efforts to 'conserve' those same resources for tomorrow, I think we would have more productive dialogue within our communities. Irregardless of how you look at the issue of roads, they are a change to the natural landscape, and hence, we must take responsibility for whether we allow that change to become irreversible damage. The old adage that the bad behavior of a few ruin it for the rest of us, plays true for all forest users, motorized and non-motorized alike. Nonetheless, we play in our national forests, and then go home. Yet, there are others (wildlife, plants, fish, water, air) that "are" our national forests. If we make the permanent landscape inhospitable, then not only do we show the true arrogance of our species, but we also show what a mistake it was for us to be entrusted with opposable thumbs. I am most appreciative of reading comments by forest users who are true multiple-users, like Mr. Albrecht, who,
is “not above wearing out a pair of hiking boots,” yet also uses an ATV. If we all took the opportunity to
embrace the inherent contradictions we face daily as humans in our ‘use’ of the planet’s resources and our
efforts to ‘conserve’ those same resources for tomorrow, I think we would have more productive dialogue within
our communities. Irregardless of how you look at the issue of roads, they are a change to the natural
landscape, and hence, we must take responsibility for whether we allow that change to become irreversible
damage. The old adage that the bad behavior of a few ruin it for the rest of us, plays true for all forest
users, motorized and non-motorized alike. Nonetheless, we play in our national forests, and then go home.
Yet, there are others (wildlife, plants, fish, water, air) that “are” our national forests.
If we make the permanent landscape inhospitable, then not only do we show the true arrogance of our species,
but we also show what a mistake it was for us to be entrusted with opposable thumbs.

]]> by: Tim D Peterson http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-2091 Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:27:33 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-2091 Boyd's suggestion that there should be no rules because some don't follow rules is laughable. The veiled threat is a nice touch, too. The real misinformation here is the comparison Boyd tries to draw between the most horrific genocide of the 20th century and conservationists. Totally unacceptable, Boyd. The public process is about reasoned, civil dialog, not name calling. As a fifth-generation Utahn, a conservationist and a patriot, I want all roadless, undeveloped, and wilderness-quality lands protected from abuse - be it by ORVs, oil and gas drilling, destructive vegetation management, or by over-development. We need to preserve the places between the roads for wildlife, quality hunting and fishing, and for the benefit of future generations - it's not ours to "use up" or destroy. The Dixie is very heavily roaded in many places, and the new forest plan and the new travel plan probably won't change that. It would take a lifetime of weekends to ride every mile of route on the Dixie, so the "they're locking us out" smokescreen thrown up by sagebrush rebels like Boyd really has little or no basis in fact. I'm constantly amazed how these rebel types get all worked up and let their conspiracy theories push out reasoned thought and civil discussion. Everyone has a right to enjoy the Dixie National Forest, but no one has the right to abuse it. Finally, we should all take a moment to remember that our public lands are always wide open to us, even if we have to get off our ATVs and walk a bit. That's ACCESS. Boyd’s suggestion that there should be no rules because some don’t follow rules is laughable. The veiled threat is a nice touch, too.
The real misinformation here is the comparison Boyd tries to draw between the most horrific genocide of the 20th century and conservationists. Totally unacceptable, Boyd. The public process is about reasoned, civil dialog, not name calling.
As a fifth-generation Utahn, a conservationist and a patriot, I want all roadless, undeveloped, and wilderness-quality lands protected from abuse - be it by ORVs, oil and gas drilling, destructive vegetation management, or by over-development. We need to preserve the places between the roads for wildlife, quality hunting and fishing, and for the benefit of future generations - it’s not ours to “use up” or destroy. The Dixie is very heavily roaded in many places, and the new forest plan and the new travel plan probably won’t change that. It would take a lifetime of weekends to ride every mile of route on the Dixie, so the “they’re locking us out” smokescreen thrown up by sagebrush rebels like Boyd really has little or no basis in fact. I’m constantly amazed how these rebel types get all worked up and let their conspiracy theories push out reasoned thought and civil discussion.
Everyone has a right to enjoy the Dixie National Forest, but no one has the right to abuse it.
Finally, we should all take a moment to remember that our public lands are always wide open to us, even if we have to get off our ATVs and walk a bit. That’s ACCESS.

]]> by: Boyd Colton http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-594 Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:35:40 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-594 I am in favor of access by all, fewer laws and rules. Laws and rules are only for those that follow them, and that is the problem, the lawless are causing problems with off road travel and off trail travel. Keep our land open to us, so that can enjoy the beauty of this great state. Dont make National forests like National parks.....more rules and regulations than a person can deal with, more dont signs at the entrance than do signs. Dont fall into the trap of missinformation given by the "wilderness nazis" because they will stop at NOTHING. I am in favor of access by all, fewer laws and rules. Laws and rules are only for those that follow them, and that is the problem, the lawless are causing problems with off road travel and off trail travel. Keep our land open to us, so that can enjoy the beauty of this great state. Dont make National forests like National parks…..more rules and regulations than a person can deal with, more dont signs at the entrance than do signs. Dont fall into the trap of missinformation given by the “wilderness nazis” because they will stop at NOTHING.

]]> by: Veronica Egan http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-137 Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:20:47 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-137 There are already, by the Forest Service's own reckoning, nearly 6000 "routes" on the Dixie NF (altough many are not authorized). Surely that's more than enough for even the most adventurous driver/rider. Wildlife requires large tracts of roadless areas into which to retreat and remain undisturbed. Any hunter or angler worth his salt will tell you that the biggest deer, elk and fish are found in roadless areas. There are already, by the Forest Service’s own reckoning, nearly 6000 “routes” on the Dixie NF (altough many are not authorized). Surely that’s more than enough for even the most adventurous driver/rider. Wildlife requires large tracts of roadless areas into which to retreat and remain undisturbed. Any hunter or angler worth his salt will tell you that the biggest deer, elk and fish are found in roadless areas.

]]> by: Bart Albrecht http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-134 Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:29:38 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-134 above comment intended for ohv use, sorry. I hate designations for the, simple reason. It seems more difficult to get actual management on the ground with mucho hoops jumping. there is a woking plan. availabe to manage prestine areas. USE IT. Then when there becomes a issue deal with it. No labels and designations. Sound management. We have Natl. Parks we dont need to desigante more. Parks or other wise. It is all in use and Management. Good Luck guys. above comment intended for ohv use, sorry. I hate designations for the,
simple reason. It seems more difficult to get actual management on the
ground with mucho hoops jumping. there is a woking plan. availabe to manage
prestine areas. USE IT. Then when there becomes a issue deal with it.
No labels and designations. Sound management. We have Natl. Parks we dont need
to desigante more. Parks or other wise. It is all in use and Management. Good
Luck guys.

]]> by: Bart Albrecht http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-132 Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:21:32 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-132 getting great comment on all issues. Been involved, to great extent, of ohv use and abuse. It is a shamelss few that really give heart ache to all ohv entusiasts. I hope all users read these letters. And all enthusiasts get involved in educating and reportting mis use. I hate seeing off trail travel. walk more. I own a atv. And I USE my atv. I am also not above wearing out a pair of hiking boots. I take pride in MY Fishlake and Dixie forests. And anybody wants to disrespect these areas. well I wont go there now. This is a hot topic in all areas. But all the patroling in the world will not stop some idiots from trying to ruin something for someone else. It would be interesting to know just how much wildlife habitat, food , cover, Fear has been ruined by those that consider themselves hunters conservationists. Users of the wild. Step back and take a look. And keep our travel to the designated trails getting great comment on all issues. Been involved, to great extent, of ohv use and
abuse. It is a shamelss few that really give heart ache to all ohv entusiasts. I
hope all users read these letters.

And all enthusiasts get involved in educating and reportting mis use. I hate seeing
off trail travel. walk more. I own a atv. And I USE my atv. I am also not above
wearing out a pair of hiking boots. I take pride in MY Fishlake and Dixie forests.
And anybody wants to disrespect these areas. well I wont go there now. This is a
hot topic in all areas. But all the patroling in the world will not stop some
idiots from trying to ruin something for someone else.

It would be interesting to know just how much wildlife habitat, food , cover, Fear
has been ruined by those that consider themselves hunters conservationists. Users
of the wild. Step back and take a look. And keep our travel to the designated trails

]]> by: Betty Stokes http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-119 Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:20:44 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-119 I strongly support the use for hiking and horseback riding in the public lands (national forests), but off road vehicles tend to do a lot of damage. I strongly support the use for hiking and horseback riding in the public lands (national forests), but off road vehicles tend to do a lot of damage.

]]> by: James W. Thompson http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-113 Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:57:06 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-113 I don't think roadless areas and wilderness areas are one and the same--just a difference in restrictions. And contrary to what some say, they are not lands set aside for a few. Many people can use them for recreation, even if they just drive to an edge and look in, or more common, drive on a legitimate road that runs through two areas, realizing that both sides of the road will remain primitive, and won't result in "millions of nilly willy spurs". Plus what's wrong with walking, riding a horse, or floating down a wild river? I don’t think roadless areas and wilderness areas are one and the same–just a
difference in restrictions. And contrary
to what some say, they are not lands set aside for a few. Many people can use them
for recreation, even if they just drive to an edge and look in, or more common, drive
on a legitimate road that runs through two areas, realizing that both sides of the
road will remain primitive, and won’t result in “millions of nilly willy spurs”.
Plus what’s wrong with walking, riding a horse, or floating down a wild river?

]]> by: Jack Weller http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-67 Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:00:13 +0000 http://www.ecosystem-management.org/dixie/blog/2005/12/20/forum-for-discussing-roadless-and-wilderness/#comment-67 I would encourage the FS not to designate roadless/ wilderness areas for National Forests. We have way too much land set aside for a few. The national forests are for us tax payers, and we should be able to use them. Spend the time and effort to manage them, rather than limit access to them. I would encourage the FS not to designate roadless/
wilderness areas for National Forests. We have way too
much land set aside for a few. The national forests are
for us tax payers, and we should be able to use them.
Spend the time and effort to manage them, rather than
limit access to them.

]]>