Old man you and Sinker said it much better than I did!

Good Job to uou both!

It seems a bit silly that so many of you are so opposed to any kind of vehicle access to any forests when most, if not all, of you have not acknowledged the parrallel to using vehicles on our prestine rivers, lakes, estuaries, and other sensitive aquatic areas. Would there be an uproar on this board if boating access to our favorite spots was threatened by government bureaucrats?
This debate is like so many others where I find do-gooders in public office coming up with regulations that punish everyone for the negligent actions of a few.
If we, as folks that have a love affair with the outdoors, were more proactive in keeping the deviants from ruining it for all, such as the wonderful clean-up at Blue Creek ( ), we would not need Aunt Sam to lock us in our room until we promise to be good.

I agree with some of the thoughts in this thread.

I thought I'd add to the commotion a little and maybe even see if I could get "flamed" on this one...

The shrub is good for nothing...that being said - lets move on

I go jeepin as well as fish. What differentiates me from the Tom, Dick, and Harry is that when we do go out in the woods, whatever I bring or anyone else in our club brings gets packed out - NO EXCUSES. I know this is a far cry from the average land abuser. Also, by being in an organized club with other inspired off-roaders, we often get other clubs together and maintain many of the established off-roading areas. Yes, this does mean we pickup a LOT of trash. Another thing we do is maintain the trail system out there. Folks, I'm here to tell you - many times this means some serious physical labor building/repairing bridges, trails and lavatory facilities. I can't beleive some of the damage I've seen - caused by a bunch of idiots.
We do this primarily because if we didn't DNR would shut down those trails and there would be nothing but "outlaw" 4 wheelin left. MOST of us beleive in "Treading Lightly" - and not ruining the outdoors so our kids or others can enjoy it as well.

So, while I may not agree with Dubya on this one, heck - I dont agree with anything he's done, it only takes a few bad apples to mess the whole thing up and give us a bad name.

IMO, they shouldn't be opening up any more land to ORV'ers until today's issues of vandalism, dumping garbage, and destruction by jerks is dealt with.

so - have fun, be safe, and flame away...

This isn't about trails for offroaders or snowmobilers. It isn't about state claims. It is about suing states and the federal government for the right to mine and log in otherwise inaccessible areas. This will give industry that ammunition.

"And in Alaska, the state government contends that even some section lines -- the imaginary grid that marks off every square mile in the nation -- are subject to the provision and can be claimed as roads. Until now, proving that would likely have involved an arduous legal battle."

"But under the new policy, if states, counties or others are able to establish a network of legally recognized "highways" through those acres -- even if the highways are dirt roads or something less -- it would give those fighting the so-called "roadless" proposal ammunition."

In a nut shell if you can show that a couple of miners made a small trail, even if it was a hundred or more years ago, then you can sue to have that area opened up because it is no longer considered roadless.

I just started using a quad 2 yrs ago, am disabled, some, but still hiked the last few hundred yards in to area. Hurt like hell, but did it. Got a 6x5 bull was a pleasure, and my son and I try not to infringe on others hunting, only to have motorcycles run thru the meadows ri9ght at shooting time. Have been on both ends, but am very grateful for the ability to use this mode of trans. now-otherwise my hunting would be very restricted.USFS can't keep up the roads they have now-not to worry about new ones