Jellystone was already getting pretty 6 months after the burn. Maybe it was just the black background, but the new growth of baby trees and grasses was somethin' to behold. Nature is a powerful and beautiful force.

 

Here's why:

Habitat isn't just trees. Undergrowth is a huge part of what makes up a forest or any other form of habitat. In CA, loggers can pull fallen or "sick" trees out of the forests, and the result is less forest for hippies, mountain bikers, hunters, and ATV'ers to enjoy. Redwood trees sprout from fallen logs and branches you see. It's by far the most common way for new redwoods to germinate. Also, you have to build roads into forests to clear out the undergrowth. It screws everything up. On top of that, clearing undergrowth and dead trees increases runoff of topsoil. This depletes the soil of nutrients critical to the ecology and again results in less habitat for rednecks to fire guns off in. The runoff ends up in streams killing all the salmon. Then the rednecks start to complain, which leads to fights between them and native americans using nets, which leads to increased limits for Japanese salmon boats and further depletion of fish stocks.

The point is, it's all interconnected, and too complicated for a Ford truck forum.

 

What??!! How dare you question my end telly gents!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TruBluScru
[B]Here's why:

Habitat isn't just trees. Undergrowth is a huge part of what makes up a forest or any other form of habitat. In CA, loggers can pull fallen or "sick" trees out of the forests, and the result is less forest for hippies, mountain bikers, hunters, and ATV'ers to enjoy. Redwood trees sprout from fallen logs and branches you see. It's by far the most common way for new redwoods to germinate. Also, you have to build roads into forests to clear out the undergrowth. It screws everything up. On top of that, clearing undergrowth and dead trees increases runoff of topsoil. This depletes the soil of nutrients critical to the ecology and again results in less habitat for rednecks to fire guns off in. The runoff ends up in streams killing all the salmon. Then the rednecks start to complain, which leads to fights between them and native americans using nets, which leads to increased limits for Japanese salmon boats and further depletion of fish stocks.

Could you please explain to me how a roaring fire that burns everything insight to smoldering moonscape is better then logging? The soil is still left bare, the runoff to streams and rivers is even greater and combined with ash and soil. Logging operations that clear cut are also required to go back and plant literally millions of seedlings that are the basis for the new forest, who does this after a fire? Logging allows the forest to become a renewable resource.

As for all the "REDNECKS" you keep b****ing about, Ducks, Quail, Turkey, and Elks Unlimited have done more to preserve habitat in the US and Canada then all the eco terrorist like ELF, ALF, and the Seirra Club combined. The first conservationist in America where the hunters, look it up, it all started with Teddy Roosevelt.

As for the EPA being your friend, apparently you ave never had that band of Aholes show up at your door. In Kansas The EPA, at the urging of the Seirra Club, has tried to enforce rules (ie beaurocratic enforced laws) to deny farmers access to water that crosses their property. They literally want all streams, ponds, dry creeks, and rivers to fenced off because COWS are peeing in the water! Apparently they don't like the idea that the water someone might swim in was once shared by a domestic animal. Meanwhile the city of Wichita releases millions of gallons of raw untreated sewage monthly because they won't update their treatment facility. Guess its a lot easier to pick a fight with a few old farmers then a city of 400,000. Kind of like "enviromentalist" that fight fur and not leather, old ladies are easier targets then motorcycle gangs.

 

than the trees, the tree hugging eco-freaks use the endangered species act as a save all for the public property.
Not long ago, in klamath falls oregon, he so called endangered salmon on the river took precedent over the farmers. The irrigation lines were shut down, farmers lost their entire lives, and way of life. Many people had to fold up shop to family farms that had been there for a very long time. the Government PROMISED this land to people for payement for serving wartime duties, and it was also WRITTEN they would receieve water.
WRONG.. well after it became a national outrage the water finally got turned back on. The endangered species act needs a serious overhaul. It's ridiculous that someone owns 100 acres and cant build a house on it because they found a rock vole there, or even worse yet because it LOOKS like suitable habitat even though none have been found. I do agree, that we need some pristine wilderness..Thats obvious, but my big problem is with the enviro's shutting down established recreation areas, many of which have been there for decades? Look at the imperial Dunes, look at Glamis? Most of our property in WV is private, THANK god.
We dont have to deal with the BLM ""beurocratic land managers".
It's just sad.
And I also Agree, that part of the off-road community brings it on it's self.
blazing new trails, driving or riding in non- permitted areas, leaving trash.
But you know what you NEVER hear about??
you never hear about the clubs that do the trail maintenance, You never hear about the clubs that HELP people buy getting them out of their snowbound house, or rescue people in flooded homes that normal cars cant get too..
You never hear about the clubs that drive the roads at night in blizzard conditions looking for stranded motorists to help. But one person throws down a twinkie wrapper, and by god it makes national news.
Its sad that the government comes in and says we want to restore the everglades, so you have to sell your 100 acres to us that 2 generations of your family has lived on so we can do it.
it's all just wrong.
Add Clintons roadless initiative to all of this, and I wont even talk about that stupid idiotic moron, but just his initiative.
thousands of acres that had trails and roads across them could become "roadless" because Clintons morons helped DEFINE a road.
it wasnt good enough that a jeep trail had been going across a piece of property for 50 years, it had to meet certain widths, and be MECHANICALLY upkept? How many Road graders run the road back to that remote hunting camp.
So Technically it became very EASY to call an Area roadless, and designate it as wilderness, which of course means no motorized transport.
ARGH

Ron
00 Excursion Limited 4x4 V-10

 

I'm a hunter, love the outdoors and would avidly support no motorized vehicles in all public areas, especially 4x4s and ATVs. And I own 3 4x4s. Selfish? Yes. You may talk about the positive behavior of certain organizations and that's all well and good, but the majority of our populace seems to have a 'this is my right' attitude about our public lands and that attitude is more destructive than anything else. Any hunting cabin that's been in the family for several generations would be just as accessible by horse or mule, which is probably the way it was originally utilized. But having no stereo, CB, GSP, A/C, heating or big knobby tires would spoil the experience for contemporary ‘outdoors people’.

 

People do have a "this is my right attitude"
They think its's their right to shut out all other activities they find offensive or think damaging. The point is it is PUBLIC land, and portions of it should be set aside for Multi-Use recreation, setting aside 1000 acres out of 400,000 is nothing.
I agree, I guess alot of people have that "its my right attitude" dont they George?
And I guess you could take a mule or a bicycle to work or the grocery store then couldnt you?

Ron
00 Excursion Limited 4x4

 

Too many SUV drivers with cell phones stuck in their ears on the way to the grocery store. Why risk a mule or bike to indifferent attitudes? Especially when I have vehicles maufactured to get groceries and protect me from that indifference?

1,000 acres doesn't go far when subjected to continual abuse. I've watched ATVs tear up 60 acres of soft spring ground in a weekend. And take pictures of their damage to 'show the boys'. What'll eventually happen as demand exceeds supply is commercial ATV parks.

 

As an avid dirtbiker and more recently ATVER, I welcome commercial parks. WV took private property and turned it into more than 800 miles of trails for equestrian, mountainbikers, atvs, etc.. its wonderful and very well laid out and thought out.
Its an example of what can be done.
So yes you see atvs tear up 60 acres of soft soil. I wont argue with that It does happen. You see hunters toss a cigarette and start a wildfire too.. Your point is?

My point is , if there is somewhere responsible to ride, or drive your 4x4, then you lesson the chance of damage to snesitive areas, which im not arguing against, but the fact is I PAY TAXES for the great country, and will not standbye and let special intrest take over all the public land for their use, it's mine too.
Your point about driving is mute, the point is technology makes it easier so you dont NEED a mule.
While there are plenty of places to primitive camp by hiking and horseback riding, If My cabin has a road to it, then by god im gonna load up the Excursion with my gear and drive to it. I have a large family and sorry the Donkey wont cut it. I mean by your comments then, the military should be using Donkeys to Invade or defend, I mean its transportation, right? I mean s long as they have a gun, they do minimal damage, no deer or owl has to hea r a tank.. makes perfect sense.

Ron

 

George, a topic we disagree on!

IMHO, your opinion is every bit as much one of "entitlement" or "righteousness" as those you despise. Why should your views on the use of public land override any other tax payers?

Ever the dreamer I guess, I see simple solutions to these problems.

1- Everyone is entitled to use the land as they see fit - WITHIN CERTAIN GUIDELINES.

2- Punishment for those who choose not to follow the guidelines will be swift and harsh.

Problem solved.

What are the guidelines and how do we enforce them?

I'll try to keep it short.

1- Distinct, well marked areas should be designated for each type of activity example motorized vs. non-motorized.

2- Areas should and can be designated as multiple use. There's no reason that Equestrian and motorized recreation can't co-exist. It works here in Alberta in areas where there is co-operation and respect between the two groups.

3- Sensitive areas should be protected. As much as I don't like someone telling me what I can and can't do, I'm intelligent enough to realize that sometimes the greater good must come before my wishes. I'd like to think that most people are intelligent enough to grasp that if it's presented to them in the proper manner.

The problem as I see it is not the majority, but the minority. Eco-extremists on one end and "idiots" (for lack of a better term) who destroy their surroundings on the other.

The key is to eliminate, or at the very least, police these two sides. They are the source of all the problems.

That requires "policemen". These should be paid for through the taxes we already pay (rather than going into a general coffer) and by user pay systems. User pay including VERY LARGE FINES for breaking the rules.

One of the biggest problems as I see it, is that there is no deterrent for bad behaviour. Public lands are basically on the honour system. I think we all know how well that would work if we applied it to an urban situation. We NEED strict enforcement and suitable punishments for those that choose to break the rules and ruin it for all of us who obey the rules.

IMHO, it really is that simple.

Waxy

 

Just a point of clarification:

Logging operations tend to rend the ground because of the heavy equipment used. Pivoting equip. and dragging logs is generally how. That along with the cutting of access/haul roads necessary actually promotes greater erosion than forest fires.

 

Waxy,
How can you say that you disagree with george when you are saying the same thing he has? And he has said the same thing as we have all said: Extremists are squealing and getting the grease (or propagating it). I have not heard a thing from anyone on this topic about doing away with environmental protection and its laws. It’s how each side goes about doing their tasks/deeds.
As far as setting up a monitoring/policing organization to take care of this – IMO – will probably never happen. If it does then it will probably be dominated, eventually, by politics and the extremists once again. The laws are already there, in place, to take care of things that we, as outdoorsmen, cannot. What we need is a local educational group, funded and staffed locally, to monitor and debate with EPA’s rulings. The EPA is an association made of human beings that do care, but could, to some extent, be ignorant of certain processes and blinded by regulations.
I have learned from the EPA here that there are certain circumstances where their (EPA) rulings have been overturned by a good argument – and amendments have been made.

Ah! The power of education and application!

 

I disagree with this post. Specifically the first couple sentences.

Waxy

 

Surely you don't think he means "No access" do you? Do you George? I didn't take it that way. I took it that he meant abuse of the resources. Not closing off roads where those in wheelchairs or quadriplegics could not enjoy it.

Right or wrong?

 

That's exactly how I took it.

I'm sure George will be along to clarify.

Waxy