Post by: Ripper on August 28, 2012, 09:22:59 PM
Post by: sebek556 on August 28, 2012, 09:31:41 PM
goal 2: cause infighting between groups. pretty much accomplished
goal 3: restrict access to areas, this weeds out the old, disabled, injured etc. pretty much accomplished
goal 4: raise prices, simple cannot afford can't play. getting there
goal 5:reduce seasons further. Shorter time, less appealing.
goal 6: shut it down completely. Now that it has dwindled to such smaller, more disperse groups shutting down will be easier with less conflict.
Post by: Special T on August 28, 2012, 09:35:50 PM
Post by: bobcat on August 28, 2012, 09:42:20 PM
This might help explain:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/em_comm_tribalrelations_order_201029.pdf (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/em_comm_tribalrelations_order_201029.pdf)
Post by: Ripper on August 28, 2012, 10:25:51 PM
:bash: I know this is probably waaaaayyyy out of line but I don't think has anything to do with berries. years ago I saw bears up there every time I went and last year I saw none. I use to see some giant backtails up there, now I hardly see any deer at all. Now they are locking us out. :dunno: Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Post by: Kioti on August 29, 2012, 07:47:44 AM
Some real bright bulbs out there.
Lots more gates now then their use to be.
HAAGL/Hunters Against Ahole Gate Lockers
Post by: CAMPMEAT on August 29, 2012, 08:11:24 AM
Post by: shedcrazy on August 29, 2012, 08:12:43 AM
Post by: grizzlyadams on August 29, 2012, 09:36:13 AM
can't you hike or bike in? Some of the best hunting is behind the gates :twocents:
The gate Ripper is talking about will close off too much land. Almost impossible to hike or bike it and cover the area he wants to be able to cover.
Sorry Ripper :sry: that is a really good spot you have. I've had that happen to a few of my spots in the past but yours is a great area. There needs to be some balance. Some entity that works on our behalf that holds these people accountable. There has to be something we can do. This is happening way to often now!
Post by: Ripper on August 29, 2012, 12:53:13 PM
Post by: FC on August 29, 2012, 01:15:45 PM
Post by: seth30 on August 29, 2012, 01:19:15 PM
Post by: Alchase on August 29, 2012, 01:29:11 PM
How was due process followed?
Post by: woodswalker on August 29, 2012, 02:00:46 PM
can't you hike or bike in? Some of the best hunting is behind the gates :twocents:
That may be so...but with the condition of the knees these days, my days of hiking in 10 miles, taking game and making multiple 10 mile hikes back out with a heavy pack are over.
More it feel like locking it up and excluding those of us who are getting older and dont have unlimited 'spare time' to spend weeks working into the hills. You know...those of us with JOBS?
I wrote a grump about it a while back....different place but still applies: The new Wild Sky Wilderness that has been foisted off on us in actuality meets NOT ONE of the requirements for a WILDERNESS under the federal statutes with which its being promulgated. The lands enclosed in this new playground for the unemployed environmentalists to sign up to take a hike in have been logged, mined, riven with roads, power lines and all manner of other man-made items. They are NOT in the definition of a Wilderness, yet there they are, locked away from access but to the stout of body and expansive of time.
Full grump here: http://woodswalker-daylightintheswamp.blogspot.com/2010/03/kings-forests.html (http://woodswalker-daylightintheswamp.blogspot.com/2010/03/kings-forests.html)
Post by: Ripper on August 29, 2012, 02:36:28 PM
Post by: furiouzgeorge on August 29, 2012, 07:09:09 PM
I've been interested in putting together a group of hunters who could get together every once in a while, pick a trail-head or logging-road and do some clean up. I've seen plenty in my area that could definitely use it. I figured we could weasel some keys out of timber companies and maybe DNR for our 'volunteer' group. If that volunteer group happened to be composed exclusively of die-hard hunters who all need their own copy of the keys so they could go the extra mile and scout for garbage in the high-country...well then we're just going above and beyond, aren't we?
Post by: logger on August 29, 2012, 07:20:33 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on August 29, 2012, 07:53:04 PM
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
-Thomas Jefferson
I have told you many times over the past few years to work with your local agency personnel on your land-use issues. Well, I am not so sure that is an avenue that will bring results today, due to the fact that the local Districts and Administrative officers are no longer free to make any decisions on their own. You may need to go to your elected representative to get your land-use issues resolved. But all hope is not gone, yet. We now have a chance to improve our access to public lands and change the direction of the government agencies with a change in leadership. I feel this is the only chance we will have as multiple-use recreational and resource concerned individuals to correct the problem of environmental endangered species directed resource management. We need to change our leadership on both the Federal and State level to protect our access to our public lands and our public resources judging from the condition of our forests.
With that said, I have--as has the BlueRibbon Coalition--informed you about the changes the Federal Government, namely the USDA Forest Service, wants to make with a new RULE. These changes have the look of simple improvements at first glance, but be wary of changes to simplify processes such as using Categorical Exclusions. The Forest Service believes it is appropriate to establish soil and water restoration categorical exclusions based on NEPA implementing regulations at 40 CFR § 1500.4(p) and 1500.5(k), which identify a Categorical Exclusion as a means to reduce paperwork and delays in project implementation. The fact is that the Rule is being written and changed in the inner circles of government agencies without input from the public, expecting the public then to turn the tide of wrong to right after the fact. The Fact is: Categorical Exclusions have no safeguards built into the process, and to allow dam removal under a CE ("remove, replace or modify water control structures to restore flows into natural channels and floodplains") without extensive study and safeguards is nuts! The same applies to ("restore non-system roads and trails to more natural conditions in order to stabilize habitat") stabilizing the habitat. I thought we were stabilizing the road? They don't do road reclamation with a shovel; they do it with heavy equipment, under contract. Reclaimed roads and trails become Roadless. Brian Hawthorne from BlueRibbon Coalition noted that, "The fact that the agency doesn't want any public involvement means the agency probably doesn't care about any potential recreational uses."
To this point a Chief US. District Judge, Lynn Winmill, has just determined that leaving roads open under the Payette National Forests Travel Management Plan causes erosion and harms fish. This ruling is against Valley County south of McCall, Idaho on the Payette National Forest. The judge said, "The agency review of policy, which effectively closed many roads, adequately considered the history and environmental impact of road usage in the national forest". The Judge went further in saying that, "many roads in the area were user built". Yes they were; with your tax dollars to remove timber. Resource removal roads are built by the timber companies with credits given them on the timber costs. Hence, less dollars for the timber an additional tax on the taxpayer. The intent of leaving these timber haul roads open was for the public to drive and enjoy their national Forests.
Valley County was joined by recreational groups and private citizens in its opposition to the Federal Forest Travel Management Plan, which they contend was implemented without sufficient public process and socioeconomic study. Judge Winmill, however, went on to say that, "given the Forest Service's undisputed findings that designating a limited number of roads would be unrealistically expansive and harm the environment. The agency was not obligated to consider designation of an even greater number of roads. Leaving many roads open was found by the Forest Service to cause erosion, impair the restoration of water quality in streams and adversely affect many fisheries." Now, you know why your forest roads are in such bad shape. Your federal agencies have a legal plan to restrict motorized recreation without public comment. Do you also know that any reclaimed road allows the area to be considered "Roadless?" It then is eligible for Wilderness classification? It makes me very uncomfortable when an agency wins by not doing its job.
As the man said, "are you ready for a change yet?" Changing the present administration and reducing government is the only way to protect your access to public lands. I suggest if you are not in agreement, go trade in your snowmobile, motorcycle, and ATV on a Harley and hit the highway.
"National Forest are for the use of all the people."
-Gifford Pinchot, 19
Post by: bassquatch on August 29, 2012, 08:13:51 PM
anti's goal 1: separate the group into smaller easier to deal with groups. accomplished
goal 2: cause infighting between groups. pretty much accomplished
goal 3: restrict access to areas, this weeds out the old, disabled, injured etc. pretty much accomplished
goal 4: raise prices, simple cannot afford can't play. getting there
goal 5:reduce seasons further. Shorter time, less appealing.
goal 6: shut it down completely. Now that it has dwindled to such smaller, more disperse groups shutting down will be easier with less conflict.
Then one late hot August they are shocked to realize just how flammable all that "special land" can be... :mgun: :tree1: :pee:
Post by: grizzlyadams on August 29, 2012, 08:55:09 PM
That tribal berry picking excuse was a load of crap. They have another agenda. We need to start with getting rid of the current administration. Then create an and fund an anti-liberal watch group. It's something that will take time and dedication. Just as it did for the liberal groups now encroaching on our rights and our hunting lands. I am all in for helping and contributing time but we have to ban together and get it done, not just talk about it.
Post by: bobcat on August 29, 2012, 09:03:03 PM
And yes, I highly doubt they want this area for berry picking. That's just an excuse that sounds good and in their mind is politically correct. I wouldn't be surprised if they really want exclusive access to these state lands so they can have the hunting all to themselves.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on August 29, 2012, 09:09:43 PM
Post by: Special T on August 30, 2012, 09:55:20 AM
Post by: buckfvr on August 30, 2012, 10:29:24 AM
Seems to me like the state is trying to bend over backwards and do anything to make the indians happy. I don't suppose there's any monetary rewards in it for out politicians, do you? Now that many of the tribes have an almost endless supply of money due to their casinos, fireworks sales, tobacco sales, etc, it only makes sense that they are likely paying off many of the state's politicians.
And yes, I highly doubt they want this area for berry picking. That's just an excuse that sounds good and in their mind is politically correct. I wouldn't be surprised if they really want exclusive access to these state lands so they can have the hunting all to themselves.
The tribes are not paying off anyone......the only concession they make is they vote enmass for who ever is the most help for them.
The state bends over backwards becuase they have never settled with the tribes on some very serious entitlements. FIsh and game IS and WILL CONTINUE to be the sacraficial lamb with the tribes. This I was told by persons in the know and at opposite ends of the spectrum from each other, almost word for word, over a year appart.
Thats all Ill say, believe it or not......from what Ive seen in my time, I tend to believe.
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 30, 2012, 10:51:35 AM
Seems to me like the state is trying to bend over backwards and do anything to make the indians happy. I don't suppose there's any monetary rewards in it for out politicians, do you? Now that many of the tribes have an almost endless supply of money due to their casinos, fireworks sales, tobacco sales, etc, it only makes sense that they are likely paying off many of the state's politicians.
And yes, I highly doubt they want this area for berry picking. That's just an excuse that sounds good and in their mind is politically correct. I wouldn't be surprised if they really want exclusive access to these state lands so they can have the hunting all to themselves.
The tribes are not paying off anyone......the only concession they make is they vote enmass for who ever is the most help for them.
The state bends over backwards becuase they have never settled with the tribes on some very serious entitlements. FIsh and game IS and WILL CONTINUE to be the sacraficial lamb with the tribes. This I was told by persons in the know and at opposite ends of the spectrum from each other, almost word for word, over a year appart.
Thats all Ill say, believe it or not......from what Ive seen in my time, I tend to believe.
pretty much sums it up right there. The Tribes have way to much to lose to do something very stupid like pay off somebody. You factor in the loss of many many programs and funding they receive and the majority of them are not willing to risk that just to bribe somebody.
Huckleberries have become a major business in recent years and the encroachment of commercial pickers and the disregard of the bushes on how they harvest the berries is a serious damage to the plant itself. I've been to many areas throughout central wa. and to see the many commercial pickers up there basically cutting the whole plant or raking the limbs bear is saddening and upsetting.
Numerous times i've been up to closed areas of our rez and had 10 to 20 people picking and none of them were Tribal Members. Reporting it did help scare them off and even at the time I was still an L.E.O. and majority of them ran and left their gear. I know the Tribe has helped with increasing fields in the Sawtooth areas and various other fields just so EVERYBODY can have a chance at picking berries but, when you rake a tree or threaten verbally and physically it scares some people off. When I and my family go pick I always carry not because of the fear of wildlife but because some other pickers have made it known to myself or others that when they're there in that field, it's theres and I'm not one to take something like that lightly.
Who knows exactly what's going on and until somebody comes forward we won't know. The hunting exclusivity excuse is really going over board and down right absurd in my opinion and if that's what some want to say or believe then so be it, it's your 2 cents and you can spend it any way you want.
Post by: Ripper on August 30, 2012, 12:51:02 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 30, 2012, 01:01:46 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on August 30, 2012, 01:41:31 PM
Post by: Special T on August 30, 2012, 01:53:00 PM
I didn't even think about the commercial side, isn't it also getting that way sometimes for Mushroom pickers?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on August 30, 2012, 02:26:00 PM
Post by: Ripper on August 30, 2012, 04:18:52 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 30, 2012, 04:36:40 PM
The other situations I cannot speak to because I don't know the regs for the Tribes in regards to sturgeon fishing in the Sound. Until somebody provides facts or details there really is nothing to argue about, it's hearsay and rumors. There's always going to be issues and somebody is always going to disagree one way or the other so that's really all I have to say.
Post by: bobcat on August 30, 2012, 05:22:07 PM
it's not fair but, I also don't think it is for "exclusive hunting" as has been mentioned.
OK, I think it was me who used those words, if you prefer I could change that to "exclusive access," which is what they would have if they have keys to gates and are allowed to drive into the area, in which nobody else can. So, with exclusive access, they also have an area to hunt that nobody else will be hunting. It's just not right, and it sounds like you agree.
It seems there was a similar scenario a year or two ago, where the rumor was a tribe, or tribes, had keys to gates and were allowed to drive into public lands so that they could hunt bears (with bait).
I get really sick of hearing of these things.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on August 30, 2012, 05:25:55 PM
Post by: sled on August 30, 2012, 06:23:09 PM
Post by: FC on August 30, 2012, 06:36:12 PM
If you don't mind can you provide the area that was gated off? I spoke with a member of our wildlife dept. and they are unaware of any areas being locked within our Ceded Areas and not aware of anybody getting keys to any locked gates so, it's not us. I don't know the circumstances and if it's for what you say it is then yes, it's not fair but, I also don't think it is for "exclusive hunting" as has been mentioned. Just because you haven't seen picking doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I also agree with the walking comment.
The other situations I cannot speak to because I don't know the regs for the Tribes in regards to sturgeon fishing in the Sound. Until somebody provides facts or details there really is nothing to argue about, it's hearsay and rumors. There's always going to be issues and somebody is always going to disagree one way or the other so that's really all I have to say.
If you would like I can probably PM you GPS coordinates for the area that has just been gated. I'm not sure if I marked it with my current gps or not, I had it marked prior but had to warranty the unit and lose all of our stored scouting data. Ripper and I both signed on the petition against the current sturgeon fishery in the north sound and both read the final decision on it. The decision made is public record if you care to look it up.
If you want the gps location PM me.
Post by: grizzlyadams on August 30, 2012, 10:01:07 PM
Lets not fight amongst each other. Lets take the fight to the Forest Service and the ones making these decisions!
Post by: bobcat on August 30, 2012, 10:05:43 PM
Just to avoid confusion, let me point out that this is DNR land (state) and not Forest Service, according to the original post in this thread.
So be sure to contact the Department of Natural Resources about this, and not the U.S. Forest Service.
Post by: Curly on August 30, 2012, 10:11:03 PM
This exactly why I will not buy a discover pass, pay the *censored*s and they still lock it up, vote goldmark out and didier in, I think there is something else up their sleeve.
:yeah:
Post by: washelkhunter on August 30, 2012, 10:22:42 PM
Post by: FC on August 30, 2012, 10:31:28 PM
Is it a logging sale perhaps and they want to avoid conflicts with the gen'l public. That happens all the time.
No the top was logged a few years ago. Grizzly is right too, the guy told us the berry-picking thing in a way that sounded like he was just talking smack.
Post by: Kc_Kracker on August 30, 2012, 10:37:50 PM
So that means locking out all non natives?
im a hardcore salmon fisherman, welcome to my world :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: washelkhunter on August 30, 2012, 10:46:17 PM
Post by: Ripper on August 30, 2012, 10:51:42 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on August 30, 2012, 10:57:59 PM
Post by: bobcat on August 30, 2012, 11:02:39 PM
This should be interesting. Lock out the taxpayers in favor of those who dont pay taxes.
:yeah: :bash: :bash:
Post by: MatthewHunter98 on August 30, 2012, 11:57:18 PM
:sry:
Post by: grizzlyadams on August 31, 2012, 12:45:04 AM
grizzly,
Just to avoid confusion, let me point out that this is DNR land (state) and not Forest Service, according to the original post in this thread.
So be sure to contact the Department of Natural Resources about this, and not the U.S. Forest Service.
Bobcat....No confusion. I was there and it is US Forest Lands. We talked with the USFS workers and they were driving USFS trucks. This decision was made at the federal level, it's not a local or state issue.