under the gun in the media again


Active member
front page of the RGJ has another wonderful article about our land- super!

though they focused mostly on hunters and ATV's; it applies to all of us.

everytime the BLM and USFS gets lobbyed for closing the lands to public use, its our informal duty to make a concerted effort to push back and say how we feel about having the PUBLIC land taken away from the PUBLIC

fact: 87% of the land in Nevada is owned by the BLM- Bureau of Land Management. I.E. - the government. I.E - the public.

go write a letter of concern to someone who cares- like the big wigs at the USFS. the sources from the story on the front page of the paper today(may 9) is at the end of the article.

Reno 4x4 as a group is evolving. I've seen this evolution already from the short amount of time that i have been involved with us- maybe 4 months if that....
i see a lot of friendships growing among us, and more wheelers are being united in the area. We are very active as far as having events and regular meetings at regular intervals. We have a lot of crossover from us and the hills angels also (ive been a member with them for over a year now)

with the growing size and popularity of Reno4x4, we should start taking on a few responsibilities as an entire group. I liked the idea, mildly, of adopting the moonrocks, but the only problem is that we as 4wheelers, do not dominate the area, or come even close. i would agree that we should do that if there were more groups involved, like the quadding peeps and the dirtbike peeps and such, but we are totally not in control of the moonrocks, and would be cleaning up for everyone else including the teenage drinking bonfire weekends all by ourselves.
There are many different places around peavine that are up for grabs, as stated by mike(deadandcompany) on another thread, along with some of our other fave trails like steves loop and bronco canyon. Bud canyon and many others that are part of peavine all all just one of the many flavors that we have to chose from, so i think that we need to start taking adoption of a trail seriously. im completely behind selecting an area or trail and then helping with coordinating with the govt to get it going. and ill be there for every damn clean up. id be more than happy to spend the weekend cutting up and winching out an abandoned car, like the hills angels did a few weekends ago

thats all of my senseless rambling for now, i have it out of my system...


Heres the article http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/htm...p3=umbrella&sp5=RGJ.com&sp6=news&sp7=umbrella

Feds plan to restrict off-road vehicles in West
5/8/2005 11:43 pm

For decades, off-road vehicle enthusiasts have been mostly free to roam federal forests and rangelands at will. But their freewheeling days could be numbered.

In a move expected to generate controversy, the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management are developing plans to restrict the vehicles to designated routes and areas.

Federal officials say the proposal is essential to curb environmental damage and ease conflict among users of public lands. Nationally, they cite a sevenfold increase from 1972 to 2000 in the number of off-roaders to 36 million.

?The days of blazing new trails are coming to an end,? said Leo Drumm, off-highway vehicle coordinator for the Nevada BLM. ?Off-highway vehicles are a legitimate use of public land, but there has to be some controls.?

Nowhere would the proposed changes have a bigger effect than Nevada and its wide-open spaces.

The federal government controls 87 percent of the state, and Nevada is home to the largest national forest outside Alaska: the 6.3-million-acre Humboldt-Toiyabe.

While the vast majority of Nevada?s backcountry is currently unrestricted to off-roaders, federal land managers have begun the process to ban travel off designated routes and areas.

And while the changes might be most dramatic in Nevada, similar efforts to address off-road travel are under way across the West.

?We?re all recognizing at the same time the need to work on this issue,? said Bob Vaught, supervisor of the Humboldt-Toiyabe. ?There?s widespread agreement that we need to do a better job of managing off-highway vehicle use.?

Even though a Forest Service national off-road policy awaits final action nearly a year after it was unveiled, individual national forests are being encouraged to address the issue because of soaring off-road use.

Federal land managers are taking a cue from Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth, who identified unmanaged recreation as one of the four biggest threats to national forests.

BLM Director Kathleen Clarke shares Bosworth?s concerns.

Environmental and motorized recreation groups praise federal officials for confronting the issue, but they say a battle looms over which roads and trails to close and keep open.

Conservationists said they?re concerned not enough roads will be closed to protect wildlife and habitat.

?We need to encourage them to act in a way that will result in real on-the-ground protection,? said Jeremy Garncarz of the Wilderness Society?s Denver office. ?We?re losing wildlife habitat on a daily basis because of these problems.?

Most hunters welcome the push to keep off-road vehicles to designated routes and areas, said Stan Rauch, hunter outreach coordinator of the Washington, D.C.-based National Trails and Waters Coalition, which seeks better management of the vehicles on public land.

Traditional sportsmen have accused those who go off road to hunt using all-terrain vehicles of disturbing their hunts and punching out more new roads in remote regions across the West.

?It?s a good positive development for the land and users looking for a quality experience on public land,? said Rauch, a big-game hunter from Victor, Mont., and member of the National Rifle Association.

Vehicle enthusiasts will try to keep as many roads and trails open as possible, said Brian Hawthorne, public lands director of the BlueRibbon Coalition, a motorized recreation advocacy group based in Pocatello, Idaho.

?(Environmentalists) are spending millions of dollars to close public land to public uses,? Hawthorne said. ?That?s where the controversy is generated. What we want are managed off-highway trail systems and areas that are sustainable and that we can enjoy for generations to come.?

Gerald Lent of the Nevada Hunters Association said most off-roaders are responsible and are being unfairly singled out. He questions the need for restrictions.

?Out in the middle of the desert, what damage are you doing with an ATV?? Lent asked. ?It doesn?t hurt anything. There?s so much land out there I don?t know how they would harm it.?

Last year, Nevada Wildlife Commission Chairman Tommy Ford got a taste of the intense feelings surrounding the issue when he recommended a plan to prohibit hunters from driving ATVs more than 25 yards off established roads on public land.

Ford, who said the proposal was necessary to protect wildlife and habitat, shelved it after Lent and other hunters circulated petitions calling for his removal and printed bumper stickers that read: ?Ban Tommy Ford, Not ATVs.?

?They mislead the public on everything. They made it a personal issue,? Ford said. ?But it (off-road restrictions) is going to happen. It?s happening as we stand here.?

Federal land managers said they will work with various groups to identify roads and trails suitable for vehicles.

Each BLM district will update its resource management plan, and each forest district will work under centralized oversight to develop a system of designated routes and areas.

Every national forest is different and has to evaluate its own needs and abilities to provide for motorized use and recreational use at the local level,? said Jerry Ingersoll, the Forest Service?s Off-Highway Vehicle Program manager in Washington D.C.

?Many national forests are and will be evaluating those needs over the next few years,? he said.

?The answers they get from doing travel planning are likely to be just as different as the national forests are different from one another,? he said.

Implementation will vary, but some districts are shooting for as early as 2007.

While federal land managers said it?s premature to discuss road closures, they won?t rule them out.

?We?re growing up as a state and we can?t handle the unrestricted cross-country travel like we did in the past,? Drumm said. ?Every time you go out you find more new trails. Unfortunately, we?re going to have to rein them (vehicles) in.?


I think this goes along with whats happening in California. They are inventorying all trails, or "designated routes" and whatever trails are not inventoried will be closed.

It is important to let our voice be heard, and do worthwhile projects as clean-ups or officially adopting a trail. I know Denis is looking into that.

It is also a worthy cause to join a group working to protect our public lands "for" us, not "from" us. One such group is the BlueRibbon Coalition