I have seen the enemy...

24 replies to this topic
  • Dan_from_HB

Posted August 08, 2002 - 02:59 PM


And it's not the US Forest Service, but it IS this guy who works for them. Check out this link:
Brought to you by the folks active with radical environmental groups.

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Dan from HB ]

  • Dean400

Posted August 08, 2002 - 04:47 PM


The people in charge of the US Forest Service must get dumber by the minute. :)

  • huskyrider

Posted August 08, 2002 - 05:16 PM


This looks like a really nice trail in a really beautiful area. What I would give to ride trails with all those elevation changes, mere words could never pass to the reader.
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 consider myself an environmentalist. I think by definition most offroad enthusiasts are. We value the beauty of the places we visit and want them to stay that way. Things like this, and there are a lot of them, make me embarrased to use the term enviromentalist though.
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.

  • Dan_from_HB

Posted August 08, 2002 - 06:40 PM


Yeah, unfortunately, this is so typical of the radical enviros. They would rather destroy the forest than allow us to use legal trails. What does that tell you about their real motivation?
"If I can't have it, no one can". Childlike, self-centered, lying ba$+@r)$.

  • Dodger

Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:19 AM


That's totally sick..........gad that make me sad :D .........

Dodger :) :D

  • YZeezee

Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:23 AM


I can't even imagine how anyone can possible think that is better than an atv trail in the forest... Even someone who absolutely hates OHV's can't possibly think that's a better alternative. Pretty sad really... :)

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 ]

  • Air450

Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:31 AM


Someone needs to post this on all the boards!

  • CHris_PArks

Posted August 09, 2002 - 05:45 AM


The funny thing is right now is that the tree huggers are not the forest services favorit people anymore. because the tree hugger will not let them do things like burn the under brush, or make fire roads in the forest, we have huge out of control fires everywhere. all the states who have fires right now are trying to have laws put in by the greeneys removed to try and save there land.

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.


  • YZeezee

Posted August 09, 2002 - 07:30 AM



Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • Dan_from_HB

Posted August 09, 2002 - 10:21 AM


Whoever wrote the USFS reply (see link in the document) was in on this. I can't believe they actually condoned this. This is the sewage left over from the Clinton/Gore administration. If it is not on their maps, they feel they can do anything they want, so they just leave out any routes they don't want us to use, then close them without a hearing. Then they try to convince us the damage they cause is not really damage like what we create. Then they try to tell us theirs "heals itself" and ours remains for hundreds of years? The enviros once had an agenda that truly was trying to help the environment. Now, it has become far more important to hurt those who don't agree with them than to help the forest/desert/whatever.

[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dan from HB ]

  • pedman

Posted August 09, 2002 - 12:34 PM


Sad thing is that many tried to stop this, I for one. I have a summer home mentioned in the rebuttal from the USFS. We had tried to work on compromise with the USFS, but due to some people it was obviously not even a thought to keep this area open. The sad thing is that the area is some of the most beautiful area in the state of Utah, but the destruction that they did to stop people from enjoying a nice ride will by far leave a devastating scare on the landscape.

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.

  • Dan_from_HB

Posted August 10, 2002 - 04:59 AM


Sorry to hear your backyard riding area is now closed AND destroyed. What drugs are these people on? You can't justify this with any mumbo jumbo about how the area can now return to its original splendor....I think they just had a new toy and they were looking for any excuse to use it.
Dan's axioms:
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...

  • Bamster

Posted August 10, 2002 - 12:46 PM


Sounds like you got a lot of interbread mogeloids down there.

  • Mitch_R

Posted August 10, 2002 - 03:06 PM


Truly unbelievable :) :D I sent an email to the forest service I'll post there response if they write back. This stuff never ceases to amaze me.... once again I'll ask that we all join the brc, corva and the ama. That is the only way we can keep these trails open is to organize and raise money, and lots of it :D :D :D :D

  • Dan_from_HB

Posted August 10, 2002 - 06:37 PM


Unfortunately, Mitch is right. Most conservationists (like me)and even many environmentalists are reasonable people. But the few radicals are driving the whole enviro agenda. Most people recognize the need for some areas where humans just don't mess with it. There is even a need for severely curtailed human activities in still other areas. That really leaves LOTS of open public land for us to ride on, even if you separate us from hikers, backpackers, campers, fishermen, hunters, and everyone else who uses the backcountry.
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!

  • SealClubber

Posted August 11, 2002 - 01:17 PM


Looks like Sherman's march to the sea. :)

  • Guest_Guest_*

Posted August 11, 2002 - 06:34 PM


this devastation proves that these people arn't for the enviorment at all, they are just useing the "enviorment" as an excuse to further their cause and that is to keep people out of the areas that we have a right to be in.

  • cyclenut51

Posted August 11, 2002 - 07:05 PM


This is all too sad, and maddening at the same time. This parallels the "environmentalist" view that Deer hunting is somehow bad for Deer populations. As mentioned earlier in the thread, Native Americans lived in the wilderness, and knew to preserve the environment, as it was key to survival. This of course included hunting, as well as burning the underbrush, in order to stimulate and maintain existence in both cases.

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.

  • mikeolichney

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"


Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.