Forest Service road destruction on King 5

[grundy53]

I agree.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[bigtex]

A lot of hunters support road decomissioning. There are way too many roads that don't serve a purpose to anyone, including recreationists. I consider roads that aren't brushed out useless. It is good to get rid of useless roads.  Many roads that get decommissioned end up being one of many roads thar go to the same area. The only reason for roads all over the place was for timber harvesting. Now that it is done, the usfs lost its road budgets and has been granted more money to try to resolve the mistakes that happend when raping the forest resources in the 20th century.

If they don't have the money then why waste more money to rip up roads? If anything just let time take it's toll.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Liability.

Those are open public roads. So if the USFS just lets the road grow over and someone decides to take their Subaru up one and somehow gets injured/killed because of the road conditions you can bet that the USFS will be looking at a civil suit...

[grundy53]

A lot of hunters support road decomissioning. There are way too many roads that don't serve a purpose to anyone, including recreationists. I consider roads that aren't brushed out useless. It is good to get rid of useless roads.  Many roads that get decommissioned end up being one of many roads thar go to the same area. The only reason for roads all over the place was for timber harvesting. Now that it is done, the usfs lost its road budgets and has been granted more money to try to resolve the mistakes that happend when raping the forest resources in the 20th century.

If they don't have the money then why waste more money to rip up roads? If anything just let time take it's toll.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Liability.

Those are open public roads. So if the USFS just lets the road grow over and someone decides to take their Subaru up one and somehow gets injured/killed because of the road conditions you can bet that the USFS will be looking at a civil suit...

I think we all know that is not the real reason they are doing it. That might be the excuse they use.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Curly]

If it was simply about liability they could put in tank traps or block the roads in some fashion instead of totally tearing out the roads.

[billythekidrock]

If it was simply about liability they could put in tank traps or block the roads in some fashion instead of totally tearing out the roads.

 

[Naches Sportsman]

If it was simply about liability they could put in tank traps or block the roads in some fashion instead of totally tearing out the roads.

Tearing out roads is the new way of doing things.

[grundy53]

If it was simply about liability they could put in tank traps or block the roads in some fashion instead of totally tearing out the roads.

Tearing out roads is the new way of doing things.

Great explanation.

[fastdam]

This is Agenda 21 in action.

[JimmyHoffa]

This is Agenda 21 in action.

Ironic that the greenies that hasten it for the reason "so my kids/grandkids/great-grandkids can see wild spaces" are only going to make it less so.  You'll probably have to be a member of the Gates/Buffett/Soros/etc families just to see it.

[dscubame]

I wish they would lock every gate and close every road.

Far too many people and far too few places to go.

Profound.     So much said with so few words.  Agree.

[grundy53]

I wish they would lock every gate and close every road.

Far too many people and far too few places to go.

Profound.     So much said with so few words.  Agree.

So you're saying there is far too few places to go and your answer for that is to make even fewer places to go?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[dscubame]

Hmmm...

[dscubame]

Grundy you have corrected me.  There are plenty of places to go that are unmolested by the roads that constantly harrass and reak havack on the wildlife wintering grounds.  Like wilderness areas and high country where most won't get out of there vehicles.  But seriously yes you are correct I recant.

[grundy53]

Hmmm...

You can actually give an answer. I get what you are thinking. However, there is only so far people can go and expect to actually bring the meat out (with out spoiling). Especially during the earlier seasons. When everything is gated you will run into a few problems. 1) EVERYONE will be starting from the gate therefore condensing everyone (as opposed to dispersing evenly through out the area. You thought it was too crowded before....). 2) you will have less huntable land (once again you reach a certain point where you won't be able to realistically get an animal out therefore the amount of land you can hunt is reduced) 3) Hunter numbers will plummet. Even though this sounds great it isn't in the long run. Not if you like hunting.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[grundy53]

Grundy you have corrected me.  There are plenty of places to go that are unmolested by the roads that constantly harrass and reak havack on the wildlife wintering grounds.  Like wilderness areas and high country where most won't get out of there vehicles.  But seriously yes you are correct I recant.

I agree with with you about wintering grounds. I do believe they should be locked up. When the animals are wintering. But not all of the time.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk