Go Back   Pacific Northwest Four Wheel Drive Association > Wheeling > Land Matters Discussion Area
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Land Matters Discussion Area Discussion Relating to Your Land/Legislative Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-07-2010, 07:56 AM
just duckie's Avatar
just duckie just duckie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bend Oregon
Posts: 45
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumpy View Post
WOW! That is fantastic...Mona, may I add that to our thread on this subject on the Putters' site?
(i just wanted to hear it again) lol



April 7, 2010
Planning on a new Planning Rule:

Yesterdays roundtable found me sitting at a table named Plans could foster sustainable NFS lands and their contribution to vibrant rural economies. I chose that table topic as the topic, Plans could address recreation and enjoyment of NFS lands was very full. I was encouraged by the presence of three PNW members presence at the recreation table. Actually since I am a member of the South East Oregon Resource Advisory Council representing Off Highway Vehicle Commercial I assumed I was right where I belonged.

I have spent the last week studying the information sent by the US National Forest Service as to the topic and agendas of the “roundtables”. I had made an outline of their web site and addressed each issue as I gleaned through it. I had bounced my summation off of several knowledgeable peers. All seemed ready to go. I could almost feel prepared.

The opening of the events yesterday went just as I had expected. Except during the power point presentation the same one I had observed over my lap top at home one item one point seemed to pop out at me;

Time for change:
*previous rule making efforts have faced legal challenges.

This was music to my otherwise over taxed ears and brain.

I am sure Arlene and Randell our fearless Respective State Executives will give us a report and I do not want to blur their message. But I do want to reiterate; my message to the USFS, “Coming through the recent lengthy Travel Management Plans I am here today because litigation put a stop to any good thing the TMP had offered”. “Litigation thrown in by members of teams of users who collaborated for months and years, sat at roundtables and gave their input sued against their own time spent because a few miles of class II trails were included in the TMP.”

After the meeting Arlene asked me if I had influenced my table. She embarrassed me by her thoughtful question I told her I sometimes feel I am speaking and they are not listening. As I ran over the day’s events attempting to sleep I remembered two ah ha moments, frozen in my memory bank of USFS faces as I shared my thoughts of litigation ruining years of mitigation by teams of “users”. The faces of the gals were ah ha, smile, someone knows my pain. I took from their smiles they too are tired of working and having their time and efforts stolen by anti-access groups who will not bend and feel no remorse at throwing monies and legal actions at the public’s right to access their own public lands.

Please access the blog set up by the USFS and tell them if you were forming a Plan to Rule the forest it would include, then address: YOUR IDEAS___________________.

more info:
http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/pdx/planning-rule.shtml
__________________
Mona Drake


Deschutes County 4 Wheeler
(Trails Development Committee)
Harney County High Desert Wheeler
Region 6 PNW4WDA Secretary
South East Oregon Resource Advisory Council

Last edited by just duckie; 04-07-2010 at 08:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-07-2010, 08:08 AM
Art Waugh Art Waugh is offline
Cherokee Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lebanon,OR
Posts: 725
Default

Patti-

If you will re-read my comment, the first thing I did, was agree with Mona's comments, so back off with the slams. The rest of my comment was nothing but pure truth as to where the new planning rule is coming from, and the probable direction it will be headed.

And yes I do know that we have at least 4 members on BLM Rac's, as well as members on various other USFS RAC's and PAC's.
__________________
1981 Cherokee W/T, 360, T-18, Warn 8274 in custom bumper/deer strainer (tested and approved)

1988 Cherokee 4 door, 3" Rancho lift, custom sliders/steps, custom roof rack, custom camo paint, custom camo headliner, custom bumpers and Warn 9500 HS, 31-10.50's

Only 31's, but can drag self with either rig

BLM John Day/Snake RAC-OHV Representative

Wolfpack 4x4's - Region 5 - "Cave Lupum"

VP- Outcast Land Use Review Team
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-09-2010, 10:28 AM
Grumpy's Avatar
Grumpy Grumpy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kennewick, WA
Posts: 467
Default

POCATELLO, ID (April 8)—The BlueRibbon Coalition (BRC) expressed its concerns following the Science Forums the Forest Service held in Washington, DC last week. Heralding science and collaboration as underpinning the making of the new Forest Planning Rule, the agency held the two days of Science Forums stating that information presented at the conference would lay the foundation for upcoming National and Regional Roundtables scheduled for April and May.

Applauding the Forest Service efforts in facilitating both the Science Forums and the subsequent National and Regional Roundtables, the Coalition supports the open collaborative effort to gather information prior to writing the first draft of the new Forest Planning Rule.

"This represents a welcome approach to national rule making. On behalf of our members' recreational interests on public lands, we welcome the opportunity to take part in the national, regional and local meetings," said BlueRibbon Coalition Executive Director, Greg Mumm. "I believe this approach is a critical step toward building understanding of, and support for, the development of a lasting, efficient, and effective Forest Planning Rule."

At the same time, after attending both the National Science Forums and participating in the first National Roundtable in Washington, DC, Mumm did have concerns that some segments of science may be missing from the analysis. "I came away from the Science Forums feeling it was top-heavy with biological/ecological science and lacking data from the social/economic science side of the issue."

Mumm concluded, "In the end, this Planning Rule will have a dramatic affect on a great many communities across this country and I would encourage the Forest Service to broaden the science they are looking to 'underpin' the making of it with. 'Science' is a method of inquiry-not a static body of knowledge. Human communities are an undeniable part of the natural environment and more than just narrow perspectives on 'hard' science need to be part of this equation."

The BlueRibbon Coalition is encouraging its members and the general public to be engaged in this important process. More information and a summary of other input the BlueRibbon Coalition has offered to the Forest Service on the rulemaking process can be found on their website at:
http://www.sharetrails.org/public-la..._Planning_Rule


# # #
__________________
Dave Walters
Tri Cities Peak Putters
Land Use Coordinator

www.peakputters.com


It's a Scout thing
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.