I have seen the enemy...
Posted August 08, 2002 - 02:59 PM
Brought to you by the folks active with radical environmental groups.
[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Dan from HB ]
Posted August 08, 2002 - 04:47 PM
Posted August 08, 2002 - 05:16 PM
I grew up in east Texas where all the trails are very flat except for creek crossings. I went to school at UTEP and did most of my riding in New Mexico.It looked alot like your pictures.
It makes me sick to my stomach when I read about situations like this, I can't believe how the USFS sucks up to the tree huggers. In our National Forests the trail riding clubs are the groups who do most of the work keeping the trails maintained. Perhaps its to hot for hikers/tree huggers to come out and see what their missing. I couldn't picture coming out to the woods on foot and hiking in the summertime.
We've lost select areas of our forests, but the majority has stayed the same. I've ridden these trails for over 20 years and they look the same except for erosion control bricks and bridges that TRAILRIDERS purchased, placed and constructed. I've yet to see some tree hugging hiker do anything other than than give me a Go To Hell look when I ride by, even when we back waaaay off the throttle to pass. We get better responses from deer hunters in the middle of hunting season when we ride by.
Posted August 08, 2002 - 06:28 PM
I am a little confused about the message though. It seems to say in one paragraph that this was the work of somone pretending to be the USFS, but in the next it says that the USFS is responsable. Do we know which is true?
I started offroading as soon as I could drive in the Tahoe Truckee area and one by one the trails I started on have been closed or sold to private interests. Never quite like these pictures though.
Posted August 08, 2002 - 06:40 PM
"If I can't have it, no one can". Childlike, self-centered, lying ba$+@r)$.
Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:19 AM
Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:23 AM
I'm a little confused still as to whom is to blame for this. It looks like it's the USFS, but like the article mentioned, the sign didn't look regulation, and it's hard to believe anyone with half a brain would think that's an acceptable way to stop trail usage...You'd think someone with the USFS would see that and offer some kind of statement...
[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: YZeezee ]
Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:45 AM
Just to add my 2 cents in. i think the greenes are missing the point about what they are trying to do. they want the forest to be safe for all the natural creatures that live in it. well, Indians lived in them too. the indains would burn the under brush to clear the forest floor out. the trees would grow bigger due to lack of compition from under brush stealing water and things from the soil. with no under brush, there was no raging fires like we see today. same thing happenes at what is called torepines(spelled wrong i know) in san diego La jolla area. the pine trees are not growing up and strong like they use too. they are short and bent looking because the have compition from under brush that use to be burned. its a sad world what they peole trying to save the forest, have no idea what they are trying to do. so in the end they blame it on us.
Posted August 09, 2002 - 10:21 AM
[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dan from HB ]
Posted August 09, 2002 - 12:34 PM
Not all areas are like this thank goodness, but this is good ammunition to stop the next one that they try to get. This is embarrassing for many here in Utah, not only for the decent recreational rider, but also to those who got what they wanted.
Posted August 10, 2002 - 04:59 AM
1. Complete destruction is not somehow less damaging. Even over long periods of time.
2. If you want to minimize "impact", leave existing roads and trails open. Closing only encourages new roads and trails to the same destination.
3. There is no difference between a backpacking trail in the "wilderness" and a motorcycle/mountain bike/horseback/hiking trail in terms of look, touch, feel, impact, net environmental effect. I've done both, and local wildlife don't give a hoot about either kind of trail or the people who use them.
More to come later...
Posted August 10, 2002 - 12:46 PM
Posted August 10, 2002 - 03:06 PM
Posted August 10, 2002 - 06:37 PM
Problem is, the radical enviros WANT IT ALL. And they especially want the areas that we now use regularly. To them, it is war. Pure and simple. They have even dropped the original intent of their movement (to help the environment) to #2 on the priority list. They just want us off the land so badly, it has become more important than their founding principles.
The only way to protect our rights is to join the organizations that can be effective where an individual cannot. That's the BRC, ARRA, Corva, and even AMA (as much as I hate to admit it). Join, send them money, and write your elected officials. Remember, this is an election year. Remind them you are watching how they handle these issues.
Have fun, you are making a difference!
Posted August 11, 2002 - 06:34 PM
Posted August 11, 2002 - 07:05 PM
All the riders I know love the outdoors, and derive much of the enjoyment of our sport from being out there. One has to wonder just what the hell the agenda is with these extremists. It can't be preserving the environment.
Posted August 12, 2002 - 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Dan Lawrence:
Looks like Sherman's march to the sea.
or like the infamous quote from the Tet offensive: "We had to destroy the village to save it"