Owyhee Canyonlands Changes

[arctictraveller]

Originally Posted by Orv

Earlier comments in this thread suggested the land restrictions won't affect any roads that SMBs are likely to drive on. Do you have information to the contrary, or are you just opposed to wilderness preservation on general principle?

It’s not just SMBs that could be affected by land closures. It’s all off road motorized travel, side by sides, bicycles with electric motors. Motorcycles, offroad events like rally’s or races etc. There are lots of very knowledgeable folks on this forum and I am sure they are very well-versed on land use legislation. Unfortunately, I am not an expert, so that’s why I rely on user advocate groups who are experts on land use and land closure. They employ lawyers who pour over pending legislation and analyze it closely to determine the effect on the off-road community in general. My personal experience says that legislation that is beneficial to the off-road community is nearly non-existent, it’s almost always about more land closures and restrictions. When I hear there is a pending legislation to designate over 1 million new acres of wilderness, I question whether that is fair to all users of our public land. I completely agree, that there needs to be rules that protect our land, but I don’t think closing off millions of acres to anything but hikers or horseback riders is fair to the general public. Without advocacy groups working on our behalf we would have far less opportunities to recreate in the wilderness. Just look at the attempt to completely close the Pismo beach oceano sand dunes, or the current effort to close hundreds of miles of historic trails and camp spots in Moab. I just have difficulty believing that an attempt to close over 1,000,000 acres of public land won’t have an effect on the off-road committee that I love so much. The information I have to the contrary of other opinions is based upon the expert analysis of land-use advocates who employ professionals to determine the effect on our community. When they say it’s likely to be bad, I believe them.

[deserteagle56]

Originally Posted by Orv

Earlier comments in this thread suggested the land restrictions won't affect any roads that SMBs are likely to drive on. Do you have information to the contrary, or are you just opposed to wilderness preservation on general principle?

I suggest, based on my observations of the past 50 years, that this is BS. Here is the legal definition of a wilderness, right out of the Wilderness Act that is being used to create these areas:


"An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation"...yet what I have seen is areas designated as wilderness that have cabins, corrals, mines - and yes, roads in them. But the roads are "closed".

Here's a prime example, and I can give plenty of others:


Behind that Road Closed sign is wilderness. Yet that road goes for several more miles, leading to several old mines and cabins. Blocking off a road and marking it Closed does not make it magically disappear! The area obviously does not meet the legal definition of wilderness. But due to pressure from the various Wilderness advocates it was so designated.

Let me be clear...I have absolutely no problem with designating an area as protected so there is no further development, logging, mining, whatever. But when you start closing roads, pretending they are not there, then you lose me because to me you are then catering to the backpacking folks to the exclusion of the rest of us. There's too many of us no longer in physical shape to backpack. There are plenty of truly roadless areas out there for those who choose to hike and backpack.

And "restrictions won't affect any roads that SMBs are likely to drive on"? I am the only one qualified to determine what road I can drive my rig on, not some bureaucrat!

[Orv]

Originally Posted by arctictraveller

It’s not just SMBs that could be affected by land closures. It’s all off road motorized travel, side by sides, bicycles with electric motors.

SxS's are IMHO a lot of the problem, ruining it for everyone. They tear around off-track doing donuts and ripping up the landscape, and spend more time on their roofs than on their wheels. They create pressure to close areas that more responsible uses would not. They're also a huge annoyance for rally organizers because they don't respect temporary road closures. I've seen rally stages canceled because of SxS owners who respect neither the laws of God nor man.

[Orv]

Originally Posted by deserteagle56

Blocking off a road and marking it Closed does not make it magically disappear!

True; on the other hand where I live a lot of roads that AREN'T in wilderness areas are closed due to lack of money to fix them. One way or another there's going to have to be some triage because people don't want to pay what it would cost to maintain access. Maybe letting some of them return to nature is the right answer.

And "restrictions won't affect any roads that SMBs are likely to drive on"? I am the only one qualified to determine what road I can drive my rig on, not some bureaucrat!

Eh. Maybe you know what you're doing, but a lot of people say stuff like that, then expect a rescue at taxpayer expense when they get stranded.

[arctictraveller]

Originally Posted by Orv

True; on the other hand where I live a lot of roads that AREN'T in wilderness areas are closed due to lack of money to fix them

I don’t deny that SxSs are a big part of the problem, but closing off millions of acres of public land isn’t a good answer. As for closing roads due to a lack of money for maintenance, the worse they get, the less traffic there will be without the need to close them. Plenty of folks go out of their way to find challenging roads.

[vandiesel]

It’s the lack of case by case basis that is so tough to take. There aren’t sxs out in the SE Oregon deserts where the truly remote riding experience can be had. Also the roads out there are 1880’s Calvary tracks. They are neither viable to keep maintained nor really driveable except on a MC. This is exactly why they are great but because they fall under a broad brush of road management plans they get closed. It sucks for making memorable trips waaaay off grid which is really only possible in these few areas left. Closing does little if anything to help the area because it gets so little use as it is. Leave it. No one is going hiking out there and they certainly won’t ride horses. But a intrepid adventurer? Pure heaven.