Home
Basic Dirt Bike How-To's - Video
Dirt Bike How-To's - Video
Living The Moto Life - Video
Bike Tests | Shoot-Outs - Video
Forums
What's new
Latest activity
Log-In
Join
What's new
Menu
Log-In
Join
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Close Menu
Forums
MX, SX & Off-Road Discussions
General Moto | Off-Topic Posts
Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino Forest Plans
Reply to thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
[QUOTE="JWW, post: 75579, member: 17971"] Copy of e-mail I rec'd ============================= Subj: Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino Forest Plans I urge everyone to review these maps, and make an effort to compare the proposed plans (restrictions) with the "Road Inventory" map(s). Even if you do not reside or recreate in Southern California it is an opportunity to learn how the government land management is influenced by settlement agreements and lawsuit resolution requiring future planning oversight by the litigants. There is much to learn from the presentation of the plans and the plan revision process. The first round of public meetings requested "value" and "vision"comments. The cynical observer questions the value of "value and vision" statements when the revision plans have not been released to the public? The first round of meetings may be recorded as public involvement (to honor NEPA) but offered no opportunity to comment on the unreleased revised forest plans (that, as you may realize by reading the maps have been under development, and "oversight," for some time). This second round of public meetings are to gather comments on the "maps" and proposed "transportation plan" impacts (even before the other "plans" have not been released). This is the first opportunity the public has to view a portion of the revision "plan," and the opportunity should not be neglected. A comparison of each map released (to date) is required to reveal the complete scope of planned changes and restrictions. Pay close attention to the existing road system map(s), including the "Unclassified Roads," indicated in yellow on the maps. These unclassified roads are existing open routes (some traveled on a regular, weekly, frequency) that appear to be decommissioned roads on the map. These yellow lines identify existing visible roads (used by mountain bikes and vehicles everyday). These roads must be ignored ("roadless," "non-motorized access," and "potential unroaded") to implement other (more restrictive) plans. If your favored recreation spot (hiking trailhead, rock climb, gem collection site, kite flying spot, dog exercise area, bird watching site, etc.) is accessed by one of these unclassified roads consider that it will be closed to vehicles, unless you specifically ask for it to remain open and give a convincing reason. These MAPS DO NOT IDENTIFY AND ACKNOWLEDGE ALL EXISTING ROUTES. The road inventory map is the best map to use as a baseline for existing conditions, but it is not complete in the total inventory for preexisting features. Do not expect the map to include your favorite site or trail. The alternate plans effectively implement the "closed unless posted open" goal through comprehensive "area" and "route" designation. These alternate plans are not completely out of line to indicate areas where increased habitat protection is warranted, but remember, these plans reflect the 100% (restrictive) goal position of the (overseeing litigant) preservation agenda (less the complete closure of mankind from these areas). These plans are open to public discussion and "compromise." Discussion must influence why recreation is desired and worth the cost to make it compatible with the habitat protection goals agreed to in the CBD Lawsuit settlement. Recreation interests must identify each road, area, and trail we want to remain open and each trail we want to remain open as designated as OHV legal and street legal routes. This includes the roads and trails marked as "forest system roads" and access routes to mining claims and property inholders. We must identify and state the reason for keeping the road open (mine access, meadow access, rock climbing access, mountain bike access, kite flying area access, cross-country skiing access, etc.) and the usage desired (street legal or OHV). If you do not understand yet, this Forest Plan Revision impacts much more than yahoo's in OHV's driving on dirt roads, it will place permanent restrictions on access to all recreation activity in the forests. What can you do: Go to the USFS web site ( [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/index.html[/url] ) and link to the "get involved" web page, and click on the "comment card" for a .pdf comment sheet. Fill out the sheet and request to be added to the mailing list. Make comments regarding the high value of OHV recreation opportunities: "I value OHV (or your favorite) recreation and the support it provides for ecologically responsible dispersed camping and sportsman opportunities." "My vision of the future is an OHV Road and trail system that provides for ecologically responsible family recreation. My vision is a connected designated OHV route system that will provide for legal multi-day family camping. My vision is a network of family accessible campgrounds connected by designated OHV routes." Clubs with GPS maps of their favored campsites (mine claims, gem collecting sites, etc.) and trails are urged to overlay all existing routes and features on printed versions of the road inventory maps. Send the enhanced maps in with a request to incorporate the noted features as "open to the public" areas and a request to assign designated OHV routes to access the desired site. If possible, make the altered maps available on the web for reproduction and inclusion with independent comments (and post on the LUN where to find the maps). Print the road inventory map and draw in (highlight or other method) the route system and trails you want to remain open. Note on the map anyfeature that reinforces a reason to maintain the trail. If you cannot print the website map, use any map you can find to communicate your desired open area or roads. USFS, AAA, and DeLorme maps cover the areas in lesser detail, and are better than no map. Print maps off of [url]www.topozone.com[/url] if you have no other alternative. Include any comments about club trail adoption offers, volunteer help offers, and past volunteer support in the forest. Include the club membership numbers you represent in your comments. Written responses take precedence, and maps offer more detail than written descriptions. Happy Trails! Ed A. Stevens [email]stvns@aol.com[/email] From: "DirtFirst!" <dirtfirst@dirtfirst.com> Subject:: four southern California forests "Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino "Forest Plans." If you use any of the four So Cal. National Forests, I urge you to look at the info on their "new" forest plan. The web site is: [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/index.html[/url] We went to round 2 of the Southern California Forest Plan last night. We attended the Big Bear meeting. They had a series of maps on the wall that should shock you. These maps are available on their web site in the data section. [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/information_stations.htm[/url] Check out the section: "Station 4 - Road System" The forest data I looked at last night was San Bernardino NF but I am sure the situation is much the same with the other 3 forests involved in this latest scheme. For example: check out these maps for San Bernardino NF and imagine them one on top of the other: It is shocking, there will be virtually nothing left open. Potential Unroaded Area Maps *** [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/Maps/spu.jpg[/url] Inventoried Roadless Area Maps (this is the roadless plan) [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/Maps/sir.jpg[/url] Non-Motorized Access Area Maps *** [url]http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/Maps/snmaa.jpg[/url] Items with *** are new "surprises" and the FS staff on hand claimed no knowledge about them. I asked the Head Ranger, "What did the maps do, walk in and attach themselves to the wall?" Answer = No reply. If the maps are not bad enough, here's one of the caveats printed on them: "The Forest Service reserves the right to update, modify, or replace any or all of this data without notifying users." If we do not get our input in before the deadline and their filing of the Notice Of Intent (NOI), we will be swimming up a waterfall not just upstream from that point onward. Dale [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which ocean is California closest to?
Post reply
Forums
MX, SX & Off-Road Discussions
General Moto | Off-Topic Posts
Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino Forest Plans
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
Bottom