Just notified by the local KTM shop that there are some very unfreindly people in the forest service dept right now. And that right now, they are under some mandate to define certain areas for motorized use or non. Now, there is a meeting at the Idaho City Citizen center on July 31, 7pm. From what I understand, we need a strong showing to support our cause, or risk loosing access to limited areas or non. These are the details I have, whether there is more to know, I can't say. If your interested, you can call MotoSports in Boise for more details @ 208-375-5660

Here's the RSS feed. Comment period ends August 30th. Send in your personalized comments and trail experiences for specific trails and destinations.

http://www.thumperta...ad.php?t=663833

Just a heads up. This is a doubled edged sword, a trail has to get listed to be considered to be a trail, if not listed it does not exist. So it will not exist in the future. On the other hand, it could be an illegal trail, and could be closed anyway. You guys up there need to be active on this or you will loose areas to ride!!! We've lost a lot of trails down here due to this.
Good Luck & FIGHT!! If you loose a trail or area you will never get it back.

This isn't just in ID, it's a nationwide FS effort known as the Travel Management Rule. It applies to any non-tracked vehicle. Any road, trail, or area not designated on an official travel map will be CLOSED to use by any non-tracked vehicle (this includes firewood cutting, dispersed camping, big game retrieval, etc.) If there is a spot, trail, area, whatever that is important to you, tell the folks at the FS and make sure everyone else you know does the same. Even if the trail you ride is not on a map now does NOT mean it will not be included in the travel map- if it's a good trail that is maintainable and doesn't clash with other FS needs (endangered species, fish, whatever) it could be included. Take a GPS, mark on maps, do whatever you need to do to make sure the places you like to play are known to the FS so they at least have a chance of making it onto the travel map.

piedralone - don't forget you can comment as well, if you vacation here or come up for the ISDE qualifier, even if you've only wanted to ride in Idaho City, it matters and your comments matter. This designation will directly impact the ISDE Qualifer Idaho City 100 courses, if those courses don't get designated in this round, by next year this time they'll be closed.

Good point vdigz.

I went to the Boise meeting a few weeks ago. This is a crazy situation with us riders being req'd to, in essence, "nominate" any/all existing trails for designation and then being subjected to FS review/approval. If we don't nominate all of the trails that are already there, they could be designated illegal.

It's really an opportunity for the FS to extract a large portion of the trails from our legal riding areas.

This can't be said enough, "GET OFF YOUR ASSES AND GET INVOLVED". Learn the process, write the letters, go to the meetings...

...or you're going to be telling your kids about the "good 'ol days" when you used to be able to ride IC.

mowtown said:

Actually, it's an opportunity for the users to tell the FS what areas are important to them. What good is a trail if nobody ever rides it? Why put $ into maintaining a trail or road that doesn't get used? I know this seems at first like the FS is trying to shut a bunch of stuff down... it's my opinion that that was never the intent of the travel management rule but some FS people are sure trying to make it that way. This is something that was dreamed up by former FS Chief Dale Bosworth and has been handed down from a national level so it does have some flaws, but in the end I think it will be a good thing.

Your are right that I should also voice my opinions, also feel that the locals
(meaning people that are able to attend meetings) should attend in person. Seems to make more of a impact that people are there in person. Myself, I don't normally hit the Land use forum. Perhaps another sub forum/sticky should be set up on every regional forum with links to all land use issues in all regions. This way more info is spread. Also include easy ways to to sign a petition/voice a opinion etc. Maybe someone who more savvy with the site could do this.

cowboyona426 said:

I have to respectfully disagree. It seems to me the FS has lost sight of what the National Forest was and is intended for, recreation and natural resources. I'll ask you a question, why should a trail have to be "maintained", to be left open for me or anyone else to ride it, hike it, or horseback it? In Oregon we rode lots of trails that were not maintained by anyone other than us riders or clubs. If I choose to ride a trail that's brushy, rutty or whatever, it shouldn't matter if it's not a trail that the FS has chosen to "maintain". I understand that public lands (remember national forest is public land) need laws governing their use, but the forest service has grown into another huge bureaucracy that needs to justify it's own existence by implementing these silly rules that don't always serve the publics best interest. This of course is only one man's opinion.

doggerdan1 said:

...or two. The comment at the meeting that scared me was that after we (the public) handle the burden of "nominating" the trails (a flawed process in itself), the FS then will assess whether or not they "have the funds and resources to maintain those nominated trails". If they decide that they do not, they will designate the trail(s) illegal. So, in essence, they could deem trails illegal that have been used and NOT maintained by the FS for decades just because they can't maintain them now.:bonk: Sounds like a tidy little beuracratic way to justify closing trails.

We have to nominate EVERY trail (the burden's on the public). If we miss one (or hundreds), they're closed. Then the one's we do nominate are subject to the FS's limited financial resources, so many may close even after being nominated.

Sorry, Cowboy, you're much more of an optimist than I. Do a search on Clear Creek in California to see how the these type of things can start out as an "opportunity..." for the public and end in illogical mass closure of riding areas...

doggerdan1 said:

mowtown said:

Maybe I am being optimistic (for once) because I'd like to see this work out for the benefit of the users. You both bring up a lot of good points. The one thing that is going to kill us the worst in this whole process is pigheaded FS employees pushing personal vendettas- a fish biologist saying a trail has to be closed to protect the fishery resource even though the trail has been there for over 50 years and the fish are doing fine, that sort of crap. The major, well known trails should be pretty safe... its going to be the little "local secret" type trails that get lost in this process.
doggerdan- "maintain" can be interpreted in a lot of ways. In many places in the PNW at least (ID, OR, WA) the FS relys on user groups to do the work to keep trails open. Unfortunately the Chief's decision to go ahead with this deal didn't also come with a big wad of cash to help get things done. I don't see FS employees doing more trail work after the rule is done, we will continue to ask the users to help out. Not only does it get the trails open, it gives the users a stronger sense of ownership and pride.
Remember that this thing has been handed down from the top, and its something the FS across the nation is stuck with now for better or worse. At the local level it makes almost no sense at all because the ranger districts won't be getting more $ or more people to do the work and enforce the rules when it's all done. Who knows... maybe the dang thing will die when the higher-ups see what a huge PITA its going to be.
The best thing you can do (and it sounds like you have been) is stay involved, get everyone you know to get involved, and raise holy he!! when need be.

The problem with the meaning "maintained" is that the FS has guidelines that must be followed. Stupid stuff like downed logs that are supposed to be cut back for an 8' wide right of way. Here in Idaho, it is literally impossible to make some of these trails 8' wide, so what will happen to those trails? Who the hell wants to ride a sickle on an 8' wide trail anyway? The people pushing these idiotic rules are pencil pushers owned by the sierra club and the likes. All we can do is show up and voice our concerns because you know what they say, you can't fight city hall. Oh yeah, here in Idaho, the FS does have paid employees that do trail maintenance work, although I think the local clubs do more. If I'm not riding that day, I plan on attending the meeting in IC.

doggerdan- I spent most of my life in Idaho (grew up there) so I know how things work in ID. I've spent quite a few hours doing volunteer trail work in the Sawtooths north of Boise and south of Twin Falls back when I lived in Twin. I've never rode Idaho City but it sounds like a blast.
Keep in mind with the new rule that each trail will be use designated, so a trail for 2 wheel bikes won't need to be 8' wide. Yes the green clubs will fight us all the way to the end, but we are up against that anyways. I just hope that the majority of riders out there realize how important being loud and proud is right now.

cowboyona426 said:

Well you probably know Idaho a lot better than I do, we've only lived here for about 9 months now, I actually grew up in Oregon.:thumbsup:

What part of ID did you land in? There's a lot of good riding not too far from most places in ID.

Just to clarify, the 8' rule that you're referring to was regarding cutting downed logs...not the trail itself. The rule is (as she explained it at that meeting we were at) that when cutting away a tree that has fallen across a trail, it must be 8'-0" clear between the log ends.

It still is a rediculous rule but atleat they're not requiring an 8' trail.

doggerdan1 said:

The people pushing these idiotic rules are pencil pushers owned by the sierra club and the likes.

Tell me about it!....They're your best friend until you get in their way!.....My other foot dangles into the Mt Bike pool...it kills me how many Mt Bikers support the Sierra Club wrongly thinking the SC is fighting their fight to protect resources and access!

As for IC.......my undersanding was that the Ridge Riders had all the trails GPS'ed? (rumor I heard a while back by a Ridge Rider?)

The Boise Ridge Riders has all of the trails GPSd and the FS knows about all of the ISDE courses and other trail locations the BRR has provided.
This is where we come in to comment on our experiences riding those trails and using IC as a play desintation.

This is important from the aspect that the economy in IC doesn't rely as much on logging or mining as it used to. The new input to the local economy are recreationists. Mtn bikers and hikers(I'm avid in both respects so no offense) don't spend nearly as much money or as much time in the area as the OHV community as of today.

The comment process is really easy this time with both e-mail and snail mail format available.