Loss of Bear Hunting Access Due To Extreme Fire Danger

[lonne]

Tucson John. I like quads, but people run quads like crazy in Four Peaks area. Some care about oncoming vehicle others fly down the road as though they have some sort of pass to drive as fast as they want. It is unbelievable how many of them disregard their safety. The fireworks sounds nuts too. I think instead of trying to regulate stupidity they should educate more about not having unsafe camp fires or make the fines steeper. There is no solve all, unfortunately. But the actions of the stupid shouldn't affect the actions of all of us. We do live in a free country. Every year they pass more and more laws, restricting more of your freedom, many of them regulating stupidity (telling people they cannot own a chimpanzee, for example), taking away more and more of our freedom. Understand the forests are owned by all, but it seems increasingly likely unless this drought goes away soon we will not have access to the forest, period, in the summer.

 

1uglydude. Guess I cannot retain you? :-) Joke aside, I'm not violating the closure simply referring to those that would have enough money to hire a lawyer, do something like this, camp safely, and get the charge dismissed b/c of high paid lawyer technicality, or take advantage because they are a forest service employee, while the rest of us all suffer.

 

1) Closed means closed

I understand this, or I would not have been so upset to post and protest

 

2) 23 looks great, I'll keep in mind for future. I live in Phoenix, would love to hunt that area, but base alot of decisions based upon gasoline prices and what is in my wallet.

 

3) Also understand this, and it's too bad. Many native americans have hunting rights, not privileges (opposite). I guess I mistook our hunting privileges as having the privilege of being able to hunt on state land as a right, when it's not. But usually hunters are considered a little more respectful of the land. Not saying they are. But I did take a hunter education course and maybe a fire safety course should be offered. Of course I understand if this was the case, Roosevelt's management wouldn't be successful as there would be too many poachers, abusers, etc. Just stating...but I do understand.

 

4) Never said I haven't made it out yet. In fact I put quite a bit of time scouting the area in 22 where I found bear(s), and that is why I was so upset when it was closed. Like alot of people, I've been looking for bears for a long time, was excited to have found one or some, and now this happened. I haven't been hunting bear in summer as long as you but definitely next year I'll anticipate and expect this.

 

5) You can call it complaining, but I prefer to call it protesting against wanting to use the land and not for ill-purpose or harm...Would you like to be out there hunting possibly now? If yes, then join me in finding out a way we can eliminate the idiots somehow that affect us all.

 

6) I don't disagree with you. From a legal perspective you're right. How about camping, is that a right? LOL...seriously. I don't know. I assume it is a privilege but would sure be depressed if I was next told I can't camp anywhere and it's not my right, but a privilege that can be taken away no matter how safe of a camper I am.

 

As far as cameras go. I was scouting Mazatzals and there camping when the Sunflower fire hit and evacuated. I have a cam there also and I am now not able to get to it. Sorry to hear about your camera, did you lose it completely? The fire hadn't reached the camping area I was in but it did approx a week later. Drove by the other day and it looks awful.

 

Instead of dealing with a $5,000 fine, I decided to scout somewhere for the weekend. Even if I had $5,000 I still would have complied. Just protesting...I feel like in 20 years many politicians will take away many things due to a stupid few...

[AZHUNTER05]

Tucson John. I like quads, but people run quads like crazy in Four Peaks area. Some care about oncoming vehicle others fly down the road as though they have some sort of pass to drive as fast as they want. It is unbelievable how many of them disregard their safety. The fireworks sounds nuts too. I think instead of trying to regulate stupidity they should educate more about not having unsafe camp fires or make the fines steeper. There is no solve all, unfortunately. But the actions of the stupid shouldn't affect the actions of all of us. We do live in a free country. Every year they pass more and more laws, restricting more of your freedom, many of them regulating stupidity (telling people they cannot own a chimpanzee, for example), taking away more and more of our freedom. Understand the forests are owned by all, but it seems increasingly likely unless this drought goes away soon we will not have access to the forest, period, in the summer.

 

1uglydude. Guess I cannot retain you? :-) Joke aside, I'm not violating the closure simply referring to those that would have enough money to hire a lawyer, do something like this, camp safely, and get the charge dismissed b/c of high paid lawyer technicality, or take advantage because they are a forest service employee, while the rest of us all suffer.

 

1) Closed means closed

I understand this, or I would not have been so upset to post and protest

 

2) 23 looks great, I'll keep in mind for future. I live in Phoenix, would love to hunt that area, but base alot of decisions based upon gasoline prices and what is in my wallet.

 

3) Also understand this, and it's too bad. Many native americans have hunting rights, not privileges (opposite). I guess I mistook our hunting privileges as having the privilege of being able to hunt on state land as a right, when it's not. But usually hunters are considered a little more respectful of the land. Not saying they are. But I did take a hunter education course and maybe a fire safety course should be offered. Of course I understand if this was the case, Roosevelt's management wouldn't be successful as there would be too many poachers, abusers, etc. Just stating...but I do understand.

 

4) Never said I haven't made it out yet. In fact I put quite a bit of time scouting the area in 22 where I found bear(s), and that is why I was so upset when it was closed. Like alot of people, I've been looking for bears for a long time, was excited to have found one or some, and now this happened. I haven't been hunting bear in summer as long as you but definitely next year I'll anticipate and expect this.

 

5) You can call it complaining, but I prefer to call it protesting against wanting to use the land and not for ill-purpose or harm...Would you like to be out there hunting possibly now? If yes, then join me in finding out a way we can eliminate the idiots somehow that affect us all.

 

6) I don't disagree with you. From a legal perspective you're right. How about camping, is that a right? LOL...seriously. I don't know. I assume it is a privilege but would sure be depressed if I was next told I can't camp anywhere and it's not my right, but a privilege that can be taken away no matter how safe of a camper I am.

 

As far as cameras go. I was scouting Mazatzals and there camping when the Sunflower fire hit and evacuated. I have a cam there also and I am now not able to get to it. Sorry to hear about your camera, did you lose it completely? The fire hadn't reached the camping area I was in but it did approx a week later. Drove by the other day and it looks awful.

 

Instead of dealing with a $5,000 fine, I decided to scout somewhere for the weekend. Even if I had $5,000 I still would have complied. Just protesting...I feel like in 20 years many politicians will take away many things due to a stupid few...

 

Well said! Its the same deal with the retards in new york trying to ban large sugary drinks, because they are unhealthy! Ya they are unhealthy but what gives you the right to tell me i can't drink what i want when i want. I disagree with forest services not allowing people in certain areas because they are scared someone "might" accidentally start a fire. Thats just BS. Lighting might cause a fire too, what are they going to do ban lighting next?

[billrquimby]

Seems like you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

Just a few weeks ago was the anniversary of the start of the Wallow Fire. About this time exactly one year ago, people up here were saying the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest supervisor should have realized conditions were right for a major wildfire and closed the forest a month before that fire began.

 

Bill Quimby

[drcarr]

Just another example of the Governments "Nanny State" mentality...it doesn't matter if it's on the Federal, State, County or City government level you must always believe that they know what’s best for you…year after year we lose more and more autonomy over our individual actions....the concept of Incrementalism at it's finest...the old nose of the camel under the tent routine...too many people have become accepting of these new restrictions and/or rules because they seemed "reasonable" or "necessary" or "for the good of everyone"....ENOUGH ALREADY...whatever happened to PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY (Being willing to answer — to be accountable — for the outcomes resulting from your choices, behaviors, and actions)….when did the concept of holding the individual accountable for his or her actions as opposed to forcing restrictions upon the law abiding majority become obsolete???...for those of you that do not join me in lamenting the loss of these freedoms I offer my sincere condolences as you must be too young to have experienced them in the first place …for those of you that choose to view all these new restrictions and/or rules as "reasonable" or "necessary" or "for the good of everyone" I can only ask what are you thinking and remind you of the slippery slope principle????….and just for the record I’m not advocating “Anarchy” just a return to “Personal Accountability”…thanks to those that took the time to read my rant…

[1uglydude]

Tucson John. I like quads, but people run quads like crazy in Four Peaks area. Some care about oncoming vehicle others fly down the road as though they have some sort of pass to drive as fast as they want. It is unbelievable how many of them disregard their safety. The fireworks sounds nuts too. I think instead of trying to regulate stupidity they should educate more about not having unsafe camp fires or make the fines steeper. There is no solve all, unfortunately. But the actions of the stupid shouldn't affect the actions of all of us. We do live in a free country. Every year they pass more and more laws, restricting more of your freedom, many of them regulating stupidity (telling people they cannot own a chimpanzee, for example), taking away more and more of our freedom. Understand the forests are owned by all, but it seems increasingly likely unless this drought goes away soon we will not have access to the forest, period, in the summer.

 

1uglydude. Guess I cannot retain you? :-) Joke aside, I'm not violating the closure simply referring to those that would have enough money to hire a lawyer, do something like this, camp safely, and get the charge dismissed b/c of high paid lawyer technicality, or take advantage because they are a forest service employee, while the rest of us all suffer.

 

1) Closed means closed

I understand this, or I would not have been so upset to post and protest

 

2) 23 looks great, I'll keep in mind for future. I live in Phoenix, would love to hunt that area, but base alot of decisions based upon gasoline prices and what is in my wallet.

 

3) Also understand this, and it's too bad. Many native americans have hunting rights, not privileges (opposite). I guess I mistook our hunting privileges as having the privilege of being able to hunt on state land as a right, when it's not. But usually hunters are considered a little more respectful of the land. Not saying they are. But I did take a hunter education course and maybe a fire safety course should be offered. Of course I understand if this was the case, Roosevelt's management wouldn't be successful as there would be too many poachers, abusers, etc. Just stating...but I do understand.

 

4) Never said I haven't made it out yet. In fact I put quite a bit of time scouting the area in 22 where I found bear(s), and that is why I was so upset when it was closed. Like alot of people, I've been looking for bears for a long time, was excited to have found one or some, and now this happened. I haven't been hunting bear in summer as long as you but definitely next year I'll anticipate and expect this.

 

5) You can call it complaining, but I prefer to call it protesting against wanting to use the land and not for ill-purpose or harm...Would you like to be out there hunting possibly now? If yes, then join me in finding out a way we can eliminate the idiots somehow that affect us all.

 

6) I don't disagree with you. From a legal perspective you're right. How about camping, is that a right? LOL...seriously. I don't know. I assume it is a privilege but would sure be depressed if I was next told I can't camp anywhere and it's not my right, but a privilege that can be taken away no matter how safe of a camper I am.

 

As far as cameras go. I was scouting Mazatzals and there camping when the Sunflower fire hit and evacuated. I have a cam there also and I am now not able to get to it. Sorry to hear about your camera, did you lose it completely? The fire hadn't reached the camping area I was in but it did approx a week later. Drove by the other day and it looks awful.

 

Instead of dealing with a $5,000 fine, I decided to scout somewhere for the weekend. Even if I had $5,000 I still would have complied. Just protesting...I feel like in 20 years many politicians will take away many things due to a stupid few...

 

Your initial quesiton made it sound like you wanted to know whether you could shoehorn hunting as an approved activity within the current closure language. I was responding to say that it can't be.

 

We're not talking about "state" land here. It's land owned an operated by the federal government. Although we liked to say that "the people" own it, it's managed for long-term benefit and multiple uses in federal trust. Now, if they had said hiking is okay, but hunting is not, then we'd have someting to complain about. If they hadn't closed it and some jackwad had done something stupid to start a fire, we'd all be on here complaining about how the forest is mismanaged.

 

I also wanted to point out that we shouldn't be surprised by the closure. It happens nearly every year in 22, especially around Mt. Ord...they have expensive communication towers to protect.

 

I don't expect to find out about my equipment for quite a while. Who knows when they'll open the area. The danger of flooding will linger for some time.

[1uglydude]

Seems like you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

Just a few weeks ago was the anniversary of the start of the Wallow Fire. About this time exactly one year ago, people up here were saying the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest supervisor should have realized conditions were right for a major wildfire and closed the forest a month before that fire began.

 

Bill Quimby

 

+1

 

Also, to the complaints about the "nanny" state...well...the USFS is the nanny over the federal lands under its care. They're not limiting our personal rights, only our recreational privileges, and it's doing so to protect the land from a clear and present danger.

 

Let's not forget, the Wallow Fire was started by hunters who thought they were being responsible.

[1uglydude]

Seems like you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

Just a few weeks ago was the anniversary of the start of the Wallow Fire. About this time exactly one year ago, people up here were saying the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest supervisor should have realized conditions were right for a major wildfire and closed the forest a month before that fire began.

 

Bill Quimby

 

+1

 

Also, to the complaints about the "nanny" state...well...the USFS is the nanny over the federal lands under its care. They're not limiting our personal rights, only our recreational privileges, and it's doing so to protect the land from a clear and present danger.

 

Let's not forget, the Wallow Fire was started by hunters who thought they were being responsible.

[AZLance]

I think we should ban people from all public lands year round. These responsible people could accidently road kill a endangered species. We need to protect our public lands from the public who thinks they are responsible...

 

burn baby, burn!!!!!!!!!

[lonne]

Just another example of the Governments "Nanny State" mentality...it doesn't matter if it's on the Federal, State, County or City government level you must always believe that they know what’s best for you…year after year we lose more and more autonomy over our individual actions....the concept of Incrementalism at it's finest...the old nose of the camel under the tent routine...too many people have become accepting of these new restrictions and/or rules because they seemed "reasonable" or "necessary" or "for the good of everyone"....ENOUGH ALREADY...whatever happened to PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY (Being willing to answer — to be accountable — for the outcomes resulting from your choices, behaviors, and actions)….when did the concept of holding the individual accountable for his or her actions as opposed to forcing restrictions upon the law abiding majority become obsolete???...for those of you that do not join me in lamenting the loss of these freedoms I offer my sincere condolences as you must be too young to have experienced them in the first place …for those of you that choose to view all these new restrictions and/or rules as "reasonable" or "necessary" or "for the good of everyone" I can only ask what are you thinking and remind you of the slippery slope principle????….and just for the record I’m not advocating “Anarchy” just a return to “Personal Accountability”…thanks to those that took the time to read my rant…

 

+1

 

It is called slow adaptation...slowly brainwash them and they will fall in line...

[jim]

Yeh lets go with individual accountability. Right after you burn down the entire forest we can hold you accountable. And what does that do to get the forest back. So how do you decide who's smart enough to be in the woods? Because you get on a website and shout how much smarter you are than anyone else, the rest of us should give you the chance to burn down all our forest's.

[drcarr]

Yeh lets go with individual accountability. Right after you burn down the entire forest we can hold you accountable. And what does that do to get the forest back. So how do you decide who's smart enough to be in the woods? Because you get on a website and shout how much smarter you are than anyone else, the rest of us should give you the chance to burn down all our forest's.

Absolutely hold me accountable for my actions...just be so kind as to wait until I make them....unlike you, I don't presume to have the right to decide "who's smart enough to be in the woods"...again, as an adult I just prefer the concept of Personal Accountability to being treated like a child by a "Nanny State" mentality government....perhaps if you seek definitions for “Nanny State” and “Personal Accountability”, using a more credible resource than “wikipedia”, my statements may make more sense…..additionally, I never said or even insinuated that I believe myself to be "smarter than anyone else"....I am apparently more willing than some to accept that an individual has a right to make choices, exhibit behaviors, and experience the consequences for them...

[drcarr]

Seems like you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

Just a few weeks ago was the anniversary of the start of the Wallow Fire. About this time exactly one year ago, people up here were saying the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest supervisor should have realized conditions were right for a major wildfire and closed the forest a month before that fire began.

 

Bill Quimby

 

+1

 

Also, to the complaints about the "nanny" state...well...the USFS is the nanny over the federal lands under its care. They're not limiting our personal rights, only our recreational privileges, and it's doing so to protect the land from a clear and present danger.

 

Let's not forget, the Wallow Fire was started by hunters who thought they were being responsible.

Well, I did ask what those of you that see no problem with the steady loss of freedoms were thinking....that said:

1.) Since its establishment in 1905, the Forest Service, as an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, was tasked to manage public lands which include national forests and grasslands. The Forest Service motto "Caring for the Land and Serving People," reportedly captures the Forest Service mission which as set forth in law reads, "the Forest Service mission is to achieve quality land management under the sustainable multiple-use management concept to meet the diverse needs of people"....MY BELIEF is that the USFS has become a tool for agenda driven individuals which has lead this agency to far overstep it's stated purpose/legally defined boundaries and thereby significantly erode previously held personal freedoms...(remember the old adage; "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."…

2.) Furthermore, I have been unable to find any informational source to support that “the Wallow Fire was started by hunters who thought they were being responsible.” I did find several sources that cited the same general information as can be found at this web link http://www.azfamily.com/news/-Cousins-charged-in-Arizona-wildfire-plead-guilty--144435265.html about “two campers” that accepted responsibility for their actions by pleading guilty to Federal misdemeanor offenses for which their sentencing remains pending…before you assume I’m being petty in this matter I suggest that we not provide the anti-hunting crowd with ammunition by blaming “hunters” of reckless, irresponsible behavior when that was apparently not the case….

What is it about the concept of holding the individual accountable for his or her actions that certain people appear unable to comprehend and/or unwilling to accept????

[billrquimby]

"What is it about the concept of holding the individual accountable for his or her actions that certain people appear unable to comprehend and/or unwilling to accept????"

 

 

Okay, we can hold an individual responsible for his/her actions. In fact, that's already being done whenever possible with people who start wildfires. However, we also need to decide how we will determine who we allow to enter forest land during extreme fire danger periods and who we must keep out. Any suggestions on how to do that?

 

I suspect you might feel differently about forest closures if you were like my wife and I last year when we were told at 2 a.m. that the Wallow Fire was five miles away and traveling toward us at six miles per night. The firefighter's exact words were "the next time you see me, you must be prepared to leave immediately. It could be as soon as a couple of hours." We packed what little we could get into our truck and left two hours later, not expecting to see our cabin again.

 

I have spent the past 40 years building this place, doing nearly all the work myself. The memories of spending weeks here with our daughter and grandkids as they grew into adults are everywhere we look.

 

We were fortunate that firefighters were able to hold the fire to the west side of the Little Colorado River. When we were allowed to return nearly three weeks later, we learned the fire had burned to within 300 yards of our place.

 

I wonder if the owners of the twenty-two cabins that burned here in Greer feel better knowing the two jerks (the story being told up here is that they were shed hunters) who started the fire are being held "accountable"?

 

Bill Quimby

[DesertBull]

Yeah, and We need to make sure no one has fire arms because they might hurt someone.

[AZLance]

Yeh lets go with individual accountability. Right after you burn down the entire forest we can hold you accountable. And what does that do to get the forest back. So how do you decide who's smart enough to be in the woods? Because you get on a website and shout how much smarter you are than anyone else, the rest of us should give you the chance to burn down all our forest's.

 

This is the STUPIDEST thing I have ever heard! So if we go with your concept, which is the same as the anti-gun crowd, how can we trust you with a gun? So because you get on this website and shout how much smarter you are than everyone else, we should give you the chance to accidentally kill someone? What does that do to get that person you killed back? And the rest of us should give you the chance to kill someone?