Arizona?s Roadless Areas

[dave]

Check this out folks.

 

http://www.azgfd.gov/outdoor_recreation/roadless.shtml

 

I hope you will attend the meeting in your area.

 

I guess what troubles me most is that our hunting world does not fight these fights.

 

This issue will hurt hunting in Arizona more that any other issue in the last ten years.

 

What troubles me second is that many of the respected leaders of our hunting groups and conservation groups support this idea.

 

Ironically, hunters will have to take the time to sit down and write letters to combat this effort. Almost like the greens and anti?s wrote the prescription.

 

What troubles me third is that our Department has not squashed this already.

 

I will attend the meeting in my area so I can write my letter intelligently.

 

Folks, this is one thing you all have to be involved in.

 

There is no common ground for the groups that support road-less, wilderness and wolves.

 

There are greens among us.

 

Lift up your antennas folks.

 

Any time someone that claims to be a hunter or conservationist sides with the Sierra Club, Center For Biological Diversity, Earth First, Animal Defense League of Arizona, Sky Island Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife or the Humane Society we are in big trouble.

 

All the groups I mentioned are religious about their beliefs and their goal is to end all hunting period. There is no room for us to side with them on any issue. Anyone that thinks so is fooling them selves.

 

First comes road-less, then wilderness, then wolves.

 

I hope you all take this to heart, learn the facts and write the letter.

[ghost hunter]

I just read the article and must have missed something. What part of this is detrimental?

[.270]

while i do not mind the fact that they don't want to build any new roads, and are going to remove some old roads, i do have to look, with some jaundice, at the list of organizations that back it. roadless areas don't bother me. i just drove 2000 miles and spent a fair amount of cash for a new mule to get me into roadless areas. but i don't like it when pro hunter groups line up with anti's on anything. if all they do is not build any new roads, ok. but that ain't where it will end. i guarantee there are things detrimental to hunting and fishing hidden in the agenda somewhere. logging in areas that could use it is a good deal. for everyone and everything. this will just make it harder to ever log anywhere. but logging on public land is about dead anyway. most all lumber comes from tree farming now. i don't know exactly where to stand. no new roads doesn't bother me. the folks that support it, well, they scare the $h!t outta me. Lark.

[DesertBull]

Did you notice that they do support building roads in these areas in order to put out fires? That makes no sense at all. If they want to have an area left as natural as possible, then let it burn.

[stanley]

So are these roadless areas the same as the quiet areas? Like the Rattlesnake quiet area in 6A, or are they different? I'm getting the impression that the quiet areas are a different deal. Just curious if anyone knows... Thx.

 

I've not done enough research to know if I support the roadless concept or not yet. While I agree that it would make me uneasy if we, as hunters, needed to align with some of the conservation groups listed above if we we were to support this. I don't agree with not supporting something just because those organizations support it. I will support the idea or not based on what I think it does for hunting, not based on whether there happens to be common ground with these orgs or not.

 

S.

 

[SilentButDeadly]

Drawing a line in the sand and refusing to compromise with any of those groups on any effort only stalemates management decisions that need to be made. Given, those groups are probably most guilty for causing such stalemates.

 

I've seen this sort of thing first hand, having worked for a Federal Agency. I've been a wildland firefighter for five years, and am finishing a master's degree in fire ecology. In my experience with resource managment I have found that everyone has their own agenda, and they use whatever methods that can to pull off their own skeazy underhanded needs.

 

Example: In the Rincon Mountain District of Saguaro National Park (a wilderness area) natural fire (lightning ignition) has been put out for 6 years because of the legalities of a spotted owl being burned and killed by fire. It is illegal for the park to allow an owl to die under the Endangered Species Act. What bothers me most is that the wildlife resource people actually think that keeping fire out of the forest is better for the owls than allowing natural events to take place (as if the owls haven't evolved around a frequent fire regime).

 

And that is from a federal agency without any outside input from the groups you are talking about. The problem is not that these groups are making stupid decisions thinking they are doing the greatest good. Those groups are no different than the wolves they want to protect, they will rabidly and blindly do what they are programmed to do without introspection to who they may be hurting.

 

The USDA Forest Service has been trying to decide what the 'Greatest Good' is for over a century, and along the way they have caused perhaps more damage than help in managing our public lands. Maybe, by allowing this roadless act to pass we will be helping nature more than hurting by simply allowing it to be. Any time human hands touch this land they affect it in unintended ways.

 

My feelings are that there needs to be serious change in government at all levels, and that all of these conflicts we see are simply symptoms of the larger, more gangrenous problem.

 

PS. Here is a nice shed i found in Saguaro - still in the same spot I left it.

[dave]

Stanley,

 

I wish I was as objective as you are. My wife says I am an opinionated-redneck-bigot and she is 100% right. A politician I am not. I also need to get all the facts before I get too twisted.

 

Being from southern Arizona and seeing what the Sky Island Alliance is doing makes me all puckered up about this deal. They are still hard at work trying to make 36B a wilderness. I have not seen the maps yet but from what I have been told many of the forests around Arizona will not have significant major changes however the Coronado down here will have major significant changes.

 

Below is an announcement from the Sky Island Alliance News letter. Makes me pucker right up. You can read all about them on their web site: http://www.skyislandalliance.org/indexSIA.htm

 

The Roadless Campaign: Protect Arizona's Roadless Areas Over the last year, a coalition of conservationists, hunters, anglers, faith groups, businesses, and people that love our forests have been working tirelessly to protect Arizona's roadless areas under a new policy that requires state governors to petition the Forest Service for their protection from continued road building, logging, and construction. Arizona has 1.2 million acres of roadless land in our National Forests that offer a pristine landscape for hikers, birders, hunters, anglers, and campers to enjoy. They also provide critical habitat for 1,500 species of fish and wildlife, including many endangered or threatened plants and animals. In order to keep these precious lands intact for wildlife and future generations to enjoy, we need to support Governor Napolitano through the petition process. Please Act Now!! Now is the time to tell the Arizona Game and Fish Department that you want 100% of Arizona's roadless National Forest lands fully protected. Your participation at public meetings and writing comment letters will assist Govornor Janet Napolitano and the Arizona Game and Fish Department in developing Arizona's petition to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to protect roadless lands in Arizona. What you can do to help: Attend a public meeting--Mark your calendars to be there!! Attending the open house meetings is perhaps the most important way you can support the Governor in this effort. We need lots of people to turn up and voice their support for protecting roadless lands and their value to you and your family. All meetings will be from 6-9 p.m. Wednesday, July 5th-Safford (Coronado and Apache Sitgreaves National Forests), Graham County General Service Bldg. 921 Thatcher Blvd., Safford. Thursday, July 6 - Tucson (Coronado National Forest), Arizona Game and Fish Department Tucson regional office, 555 N. Greasewood Road, Tucson. Click here for entire meeting schedule. Submit a public comment: By mail: Arizona Game and Fish Department - WMHB Attn: Roadless Area Comment 2221 W. Greenway Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85023. By email: roadless@azgfd.gov Written comments will be accepted until August 31st. Write a letter to your newspaper (LTE)- Click here for a list of newspapers and suggestions. Visit www.arizonaroadless.org for more information and spread the word to your friends!

[KGAINES]

I am going to try to attend this meeting ( I am glad they gave us so much time for the meetings ), but now I am interested in what is really going on. I am not saying that there is something going on behind the scenes, but with politicians you never know. I would just like to know what the impacts are and could be, and why there is support from all the special interest groups that are so opposed to hunting, smells fishy.

[donniedent]

I've heard a little about this issue and at face value it seems ok. The problem is they slip little tidbits passed the average joe and we don't realize it until its too late. ANYTHING an anti group has attached its name to is suspect to me. ANYTHING. I do agree that we need to limit road traffic in our National Forests. Not because it should limit public access, because it should limit idiot access. Example: Last fall up on Big Bug mesa, the Forest Service closed all but 1 road on the mesa with signs. The VERY next morning idiots on 4 wheelers had already made paths around the signs, tearing up underbrush just so that they didn't have to walk in. COMPLETE IDIOTS. I'm so sick and tired of seeing our public land torn up by people that don't respect it, its VERY tempting for me to back anything that will limit idiot access!

 

Donnie

[dave]

donnie,

 

I think almost every hunter feels the same way you do about what you just said.

 

I believe the idiots you just mentioned will also find a way around any new rules, signs, or laws.

 

The rules and laws we have now are not enforced. Lets just bulldoze and put a fence in front of every logging or mining road in Arizona and this will solve everything. The same idiots will drive around or cut the fence.

 

We want to grab on to a new idea because we think it will keep the idiot from riding his quad through a meadow picking up sheds in May. I don't think so.

 

I understand that this would in some ways make enforcement easier for the G&F if there are less roads.

 

I don't understand how this in anyway can help game management.

 

Kinda ironic that the United States of America can not solve a small border issue and the state of Arizona will follow suite making new rules that will not be enforced while thousands of illegals cross our borders every day. Heck, if Sky Island and Grihalva can make 36B a wilderness, we won't have to worry about seeing what the wolves eat.

[donniedent]

Dave,

 

You are right about people breaking the rules no matter what they are. I'm sure no matter what the rules are, people will still be slobs. But I don't see anything changing now. So whats gonna change things? What do we do to weed out the bad apples???? A mixed bag of people, some of which I agree with on every issue and some I don't agree with EVER, are trying to change some things to keep Arizona beautiful. Its very hard, after all the idiotic things I've witnessed, not to want to see somebody finally make some changes that will make a difference. Sure, some of the entities inolved make my skin crawl but nobody else is doing anything. Arizona is NEVER gonna stop growing. It hasn't stopped growing since the invention of air conditioning. The more people that come here, the more idiots come right behind them. If we don't make some kind of change now there will be no more untouched places left. There will be a quad trail up and down every mountian and canyon in Arizona and as for your honey holes??? Bye Bye!

 

Also, and I'm not trying to sound condisending, would it be so bad if they created a few more wilderness areas?? I can think of a few areas I would love to see gain that status. So you can't drive right in and start banging away. Wouldn't that help keep some of the lazy ding dongs out. Think of how big some the bucks would get if they saw 10% of the hunters they are seeing now. I've wandered in to some of the wilderness areas around Arizona and what a striking contrast. I couldn't believe some of the untouched country I saw. Examples: THe Juniper Mesa wilderness, Awsome country, Hells Gate wilderness, you get into that one a mile and .... Well never mind... I'll keep that one a secret.

 

Anyway, I don't see anyone else doing anything about problem so until I see some better ideas I'm gonna keep an opened mind on this one.

 

Donnie

[dave]

donnie,

 

It is good to keep an open mind. That is more than I can do.

 

I am 50 now. My pa is 78. We don't have a quad. I can not hike 10 miles a day anymore.

 

I can teach my nephews and nieces how to shoot a bow.

 

I guess we all have the privalage of living in Arizona and making choices about what we do.

 

I guess all the folks that the Department wants to attract will show up shortly.

[billrquimby]

I will be in Australia during the meetings, but I did comment on the proposals. Summarized, I said:

 

-- I do not mind temporary roads for management purposes in roadless areas as long as the roads truly are temporary.

 

-- I do not want to see any existing road closed.

 

Someone on this forum asked how road closures might hurt hunters. The answer is by reducing hunting permits. The primitive roads that land managers love to close are the same roads that distribute hunters. When they're closed, there are fewer camping spots and more pressure on localized areas near those spots. It is only natural that wildlife managers will propose reducing hunting permits even though there are vast areas of a unit that will see few hunters.

 

These proposals seem to come along every few years, each time reducing the number of access roads. It started with the RARE 1 and RARE 2 (Roadless Area Review and Evaluation) proposals of the 1970s and 1980s, which were supposed to decide once and for all which areas could have roads and which roads would be closed. Each time we lose more access.

 

Bill Quimby

[wetmule]

Neo,

"Serious change in the Govt. at all levels", thats funny,even though I agree with you, good luck on that one.

If you are a hunter you definitely don't want any more wilderness areas designated. Once you give it to them

or allow it, you will never get it back even if it turns out to be a horrible mistake.The next thing that will happen is they will want to turn off and bulldoze all the wildlife drinkers in the wilderness and turn it all back over to mother nature. Much like de-listing Wolves - that people on both sides of the wolf issue agree should happen, the politics of it all and the special interest greenies involved - I have my doubts if that will ever happen. When the Sierra Club took out a full page ad in the Flag paper a few years ago requesting comments from their bretheren on the Parashant Natl. Monument and suggesting massive road closures, lobbying for more wilderness in the Strip, suggesting that if you want to ride your horse or mule in the monument that your horse needed to be wearing a diaper to catch the droppings. As much as I'd really like to see Lark ridin around on his new mule wearing pampers (mule wearing pampers not Lark) I don't think he should be forced to diaper ol' Molly. These people are nuts and anything they do or want to do I'm completely against. Call it a hunch, gut feeling or whatever you want but I don't trust these groups at all, especially when they are all aligned with little Janet.

As far as all the idiots that blow by road blocks or take their quads where they are not supposed to be - You can't regulate or legislate idiots, you just have to deal with them - police ourselves, citizens arrest, lobby for huge fines and jail time whatever it takes to make that dude not want to do it again.

[donniedent]

Great thing about discussions like this is that you get to hear alot of good points.

 

After reading back through and considering some of the other points made about this, I've learned one thing.... I've always got more to learn.

 

I should actually know better than to consider anything the greenies do good for anything but kitty litter.

 

Donnie