Pirate 4x4 banner

Route Workshop Sept. 14 in Pville

1K views 12 replies 8 participants last post by  '00Tacosinger 
#1 · (Edited)
#4 ·
twn44s said:
There is also one in Jackson on the 15th too

I hope folks are going to attend these meetings, the first one I went too in folsom only a few wheelers should up

Rusty
It always seems to be the same few people too.
 
#5 ·
Rubicrawler said:
Unfortunately, my work schedule's going to keep me in the Bay Area this week. We need to get as many users to these meetings as possible.
Can't believe you're tired of seeing me already! :flipoff2:

Here's the USFS calendar:
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route/pm-schedule/index.shtml

FWIW, the next coupla meetings are:
September 14 6p.m.-9p.m. Public
Inter-Disciplinary Team Meeting El Dorado County Office of Education Activity Center Building I
6767 Green Valley Road
Placerville, CA

September 15 7p.m.-9p.m. Public
Inter-Disciplinary Team Meeting Amador Senior Center
229 New York Ranch Road
Jackson, CA
 
#7 ·
The USFS made it clear at the beginning of the meeting that the purpose is focused on Wheeled motor vehicle access, and that the meeting was not a place to argue or debate that fact.

Also, when this project is complete, the current court order affecting routes is terminated. Apparently the reason that court order made it was that the El Dorado forest did not develop the trails and rods in a legally defensible way via NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act of 1969).

The purpose of this project is to do that, so that in the future, if the USFA comes under scrutiny regarding Wheeled motor vehicle access, they have a solid defensible position to stand on.
The NEPA laws will dictate how they end up keeping Wheeled access open on roads and trails.

They have a team consisting of specialists in recreation, engineering, environmental analysis, law enforcement, heritage resources, and wildlife each overlay specific criteria based on the NEPA laws. Criteria’s range from endangered species to environmental indicators.

For example, the Terrestrial wildlife expert’s endangered species is the Bald Eagle, the indicator wildlife is the Deer.

Each specialist had similar examples.

The Botanist scared me the most. I got the feeling he thought no one should drive anywhere ….

As far as what we the public specifically participated in last night, it was a brainstorming session. We were able to blurt out sentences that fell in to 2 categories:

Need
Purpose

I don’t have the items that fall under those catogireis.

They are supposed to post the outcome of the meeting, and all the PowerPoint slides on the project website.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route/index.shtml

There was one guy that I really liked, because he did an excellent job of voicing the fact that the National Forest is Public land, and that one of the purpose statements needs to reflect that fact.

Overall, I felt it was a poor turnout. I counted 53 people, and at least 8 to 10 were USFS. So, only 43 of the public out of an estimate 2.1 million visitors the El Dorado Forest gets each year.

I was very surprised that the only people I recognized were Derek and Scott Johnston. But I would say that most in attendance were OHV positive.

Anyway, check out the website to learn about the project plan and what the USFS plan is. They hope to complete the project before 12/2007
 
#9 ·
Regarding my statement of a poor turnout. I felt it was because the USFS did not do a very good job informing the public via local newspapers outside of the Placerville area.

Even though the meeting has been scheduled for a while, most of us did not hear about in a timely manor to plan for it. I was lucky, it was 5 minutes form my house.

The couple who sat next to Derek and I heard about the meeting in the Mountain Democrat.

On my feedback card, I suggested they expand the notifications via Newspapers to at least a 150 mile radius in order to increase the attendance of the public.

If we can spread the link to the project website around, that will help as well.
 
#10 ·
The FS is meeting due diligence to get the announcements out, but I agree that they could do more.

I'll be attending the meeting tonight in Jackson, and dragging a coupla other folks. :D

Randii
 
#11 ·
steveh said:
The USFS made it clear at the beginning of the meeting that the purpose is focused on Wheeled motor vehicle access . . .
I was there and was the one who asked for clarification about wheeled motor vehicle versus motor vehicle definitions. I'm curious what would happen if someone showed up on the trail with something like Mattracks on their rock crawler. I even asked one of the forest service reps. She didn't have an answer but suggested maybe even a hovercraft. :eek:

Fred
 
#12 ·
FAM said:
I was there and was the one who asked for clarification about wheeled motor vehicle versus motor vehicle definitions. I'm curious what would happen if someone showed up on the trail with something like Mattracks on their rock crawler. I even asked one of the forest service reps. She didn't have an answer but suggested maybe even a hovercraft. :eek: Fred
I'm with ya, Fred, I joked last night with Rusty and Mike about hovercraft, and I've been giving Brian jazz about glueing a track to the tank on his Cruiser and welding skis to the axle housing.

Right now I'm still committed to working the system and getting omitted trails included on the inventory, and inventoried trails included on the system, but if the anti-access groups like Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, Center for Biological Diversity, and California Wilderness Coalition (the folks who put the lawsuit in process) keep working the system so successfully against us, we are going to have to get ever more creative and resourceful.

I still hope we can work the Route Designation system to a reasonable end, which is why I drive to Jackson last night. I happy to find a primarily-motorized tilt to the attendees, with good questions asked. We're gonna have to keep going to these meetings, but they have a promising start, IMHO.

Randii
 
#13 ·
steveh said:
The USFS made it clear at the beginning of the meeting that the purpose is focused on Wheeled motor vehicle access, and that the meeting was not a place to argue or debate that fact.

Also, when this project is complete, the current court order affecting routes is terminated. Apparently the reason that court order made it was that the El Dorado forest did not develop the trails and rods in a legally defensible way via NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act of 1969).

The purpose of this project is to do that, so that in the future, if the USFA comes under scrutiny regarding Wheeled motor vehicle access, they have a solid defensible position to stand on.
The NEPA laws will dictate how they end up keeping Wheeled access open on roads and trails.

They have a team consisting of specialists in recreation, engineering, environmental analysis, law enforcement, heritage resources, and wildlife each overlay specific criteria based on the NEPA laws. Criteria’s range from endangered species to environmental indicators.

For example, the Terrestrial wildlife expert’s endangered species is the Bald Eagle, the indicator wildlife is the Deer.

Each specialist had similar examples.

The Botanist scared me the most. I got the feeling he thought no one should drive anywhere ….

As far as what we the public specifically participated in last night, it was a brainstorming session. We were able to blurt out sentences that fell in to 2 categories:

Need
Purpose

I don’t have the items that fall under those catogireis.

They are supposed to post the outcome of the meeting, and all the PowerPoint slides on the project website.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route/index.shtml

There was one guy that I really liked, because he did an excellent job of voicing the fact that the National Forest is Public land, and that one of the purpose statements needs to reflect that fact.

Overall, I felt it was a poor turnout. I counted 53 people, and at least 8 to 10 were USFS. So, only 43 of the public out of an estimate 2.1 million visitors the El Dorado Forest gets each year.

I was very surprised that the only people I recognized were Derek and Scott Johnston. But I would say that most in attendance were OHV positive.

Anyway, check out the website to learn about the project plan and what the USFS plan is. They hope to complete the project before 12/2007
thanks for the update! I hope to make the Dec meeting as I will be able to get out of town earlier than 3 by then. getting out of SF and heading east any time after 2 is insane.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top