elkhunter Report post Posted October 12, 2006 I'm down for closures, better hunting and more traditional and def more trophy animals, dang why didn't they include the cornado national forest within this closure? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muleybull Report post Posted October 12, 2006 Im down with closures to a point. But eventually they want all access to the forest closed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rembrant Report post Posted October 12, 2006 Conservation is a good thing, yet conservationists keep taking things way to far. Ain't it just plain weird that the Rodeo Chediski burn on forest and state land didn't get logged, but over on the Apache side it did? So what will happen to the dead standing timber stateside? Well it's starting to fall over because it is rotting. Then it will all become deadfall and slowly return to the nutrient system. Meanwhile the cost of building materials goes up. Why? Because the "conservationists", Sierra Club and others tie up timber contracts in court and the end result is that our natural resources rot. This is not just wasteful; this is sinful. This forest closure thing is similar. A lot of "Conservationists" would really rather have it where animals don't get killed by hunters. And that trees don't get cut and utilized - even if they are already dead. A lot of misguided folks think that if you eliminate people from nature that nature will re-find a pristine state. Pristine is an obsolete word. It no longer applies to this planet. All of our resourses must now be managed. How are people gonna cut firewood if we can't drive down the roads? We recognize that we have too much dead fuel in the forest from 200 years of fire suppression, so we should close roads now and prevent people from harvesting wood and animals? And what would this help? I'll say it again...Weird! Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted October 12, 2006 It's more about ego and power than sound managment. People get a woody when they can tell others what they can and cannot do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bowsniper Report post Posted October 13, 2006 I believe that while some enviros are jumping on board with this, it's really the forest service that is pushing it through. Do you think that the roads were ever intended for recreationalists to use? Heck no, the roads were built for the consumptive users, the loggers, ranchers, and miners. The forest service wants to keep the roads open for the consumptive users, but it's costing them big bucks for maintenance when the majority of the traffic is now coming from recreationalists. You watch, when it's all done, and the roads are locked up, the consumptive users will have gate keys to the locked gates. Mark Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TLH Report post Posted October 13, 2006 I believe that while some enviros are jumping on board with this, it's really the forest service that is pushing it through. Do you think that the roads were ever intended for recreationalists to use? Heck no, the roads were built for the consumptive users, the loggers, ranchers, and miners. The forest service wants to keep the roads open for the consumptive users, but it's costing them big bucks for maintenance when the majority of the traffic is now coming from recreationalists. You watch, when it's all done, and the roads are locked up, the consumptive users will have gate keys to the locked gates. Mark The FS is actually thinking about outsourcing what they do--where does this stand in the equation?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
couestaxi Report post Posted October 13, 2006 Funny we were just talking about this same topic in my studio. I had an archery 3a/3c bull tag this year and took a good bull! The road closure setup was very simple in my unit. If the road was not "posted as open" with a white and brown sign then it was closed. Unfortunatley many hunters and other outdoor folks did not obey the closures. The forest service I was told, was using this as a "test" before applying it to the other forest service lands in Arizona. What I was told by one forest service individual was that this was a start and if people did not obey the closures more restrictive measures may be required. These were said to include a possible ban on ATV use! It was very sad to see vehicle after vehicle driving on roads that were "closed". One individual I spoke with even worked for the forest service and had a cow tag. He acted like the rules didn't apply to him and his son. Every major road coming off the highway has a huge yellow sign detailing the vehicle use rules. They were also posted on the AZGF website. They did allow me to drive to my elk as long as I stayed on an existing 2 track and did not venture off of it. This got me within 100 yds. It's too bad we all have to pay for the disregard of a handfull of individuals that feel rules don't apply to them. With the current vehicle use or abuse I can only see this getting worse. I have noticed in New Mexico if a road is bermed closed people generally do not drive the road. Here in AZ even if there are multiple berms, signs etc. the roads are still driven on. It is amazing what efforts people will go to to drive down a closed road (look at the stupid motorist in PHX when it rains). Unfortunately we all may have to pay for the acts of a few. Maybe our best bet is to police ourselves but you hate to be an @!##$ towards a fellow hunter. On the other hand if we don't we will lose another piece of the pie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
