BLM Travel management Plan

bobfriesenhahn

Active Member
Of course, They don't - why do you think Al Gore & Bill Clinton came up with Wilderness area's for - To keep us out
It would be nice to think that these guys did the wonderful things (like cold-fusion). But they were not even born yet in 1924, when the Gila Wilderness was created. Wilderness areas have been around for a long time. They are a good thing since they preserve original forest so you can be free to do you off-roading elsewhere.
 
lol
So whenever these petitions and or open forum discussions take place. Every single damn time I’ll show you the result….

9F146CA2-DBA2-4274-81BA-154386584CCE.jpeg
It’s as if they use these discussions to determine which trails to close based on importance of the out door enthusiasts.

I took that picture today. I rode my bike on that trail last week…
 

JT@623

Hooked
When I saw the title of this thread I thought wow Black Lives Matter has there own travel site and assumed it was places whitey didn’t want to go . But after cautiously opening I see it’s our government once again chipping away at our rights and freedom to enjoy our land .
 

Kuboske

Active Member
Do you guys think side x sides and the like… have contributed to more closures through the years?
Yes! They are going to ruin everything.
Cheap rentals all over the West allow any idiot access to trails.
Forest Service guy on top of Imogene Pass told me dirt bikes, ATV's and side-x-sides will end up closing everything.
Said Jeepers were rarely a problem.
This was 10 years ago.
 

Sylvester

Caught the Bug
It would be nice to think that these guys did the wonderful things (like cold-fusion). But they were not even born yet in 1924, when the Gila Wilderness was created. Wilderness areas have been around for a long time. They are a good thing since they preserve original forest so you can be free to do you off-roading elsewhere.
I view Wilderness area's Like the Amendments, I can carry an Semi Auto not Full Auto, Why
I can Take a Horse and Hike in a Wilderness area, not my Jeep, Why
I don't like anything that limits my Rights in any form only a Communist would.
 

bobfriesenhahn

Active Member
I view Wilderness area's Like the Amendments, I can carry an Semi Auto not Full Auto, Why
I can Take a Horse and Hike in a Wilderness area, not my Jeep, Why
I don't like anything that limits my Rights in any form only a Communist would.
It is good that we still have places we can go which are not torn up by your jeep.

By definition, wilderness areas do not have roads. Most never did. Many such areas are too rough and rocky to even make the most primitive Jeep trail.

It is nice to be able to take a Jeep trail to the edge of an area of unblemished natural beauty, and then be able to hike into it. No noisy motorcycles or side-by-sides.

Preservation of what is left of the natural world, and historical sites should be important to us all.

Don't make it easy for the shit-heads to destroy everything.
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
By definition, wilderness areas do not have roads. Most never did. Many such areas are too rough and rocky to even make the most primitive Jeep trail.
This is ignorant of you to say, 100% NOT true and can be proven simply by looking at any AAA map printed before the 1990's. Roads, even ones that have been around over 100 years no longer exists there because access to them is no longer allowed. This isn't just me spouting off what I've read online or have been told by the government but rather, based on what I have personally seen.

ALSO, if you've actually taken the time to try and explore some of these 'wilderness' areas like I have, you may just find that some are completely fenced off and NO ACCESS is allowed by humans - on foot or otherwise. Preservations of land and history needs to exists FOR the people - NOT from the people. And really, the only people who abide by these restrictions are law abiding citizens who've been told by the government that these areas are off limits for their own good. Shitheads will STILL destroy everything.
 
Last edited:

WJCO

Meme King
It is good that we still have places we can go which are not torn up by your jeep.

By definition, wilderness areas do not have roads. Most never did. Many such areas are too rough and rocky to even make the most primitive Jeep trail.

It is nice to be able to take a Jeep trail to the edge of an area of unblemished natural beauty, and then be able to hike into it. No noisy motorcycles or side-by-sides.

Preservation of what is left of the natural world, and historical sites should be important to us all.

Don't make it easy for the shit-heads to destroy everything.
Report back when those hiking trails are no longer allowed to have foot traffic. That's what happens next.
 

Sylvester

Caught the Bug
It is good that we still have places we can go which are not torn up by your jeep.

By definition, wilderness areas do not have roads. Most never did. Many such areas are too rough and rocky to even make the most primitive Jeep trail.

It is nice to be able to take a Jeep trail to the edge of an area of unblemished natural beauty, and then be able to hike into it. No noisy motorcycles or side-by-sides.

Preservation of what is left of the natural world, and historical sites should be important to us all.

Don't make it easy for the shit-heads to destroy everything.
I have come along a bunch of Trails in National Monuments That were mined back in the day and Now there Managed as Wildlife areas - Not sure why you think a Wilderness area is Pristine & Virgin.
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
lol
So whenever these petitions and or open forum discussions take place. Every single damn time I’ll show you the result….

View attachment 379499
It’s as if they use these discussions to determine which trails to close based on importance of the out door enthusiasts.

I took that picture today. I rode my bike on that trail last week…
I just started looking back through the thread, thank you for posting this BS up. I have seen this or worse as well and really, if ALL entry is off limits - than it may as well not exist.
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
Do you guys think side x sides and the like… have contributed to more closures through the years?
As much as I do think SxS are doing a LOT of harm, I would have to say no. Much of what is now closed, wilderness areas anyway, have been in the works for years, decades really and well before SxS were ever around. The harm SxS do today are to routes and areas currently open to the public. Assuming the damage they do continues, they too will be on the chopping block. I guarantee it.

That said and as much as it kills me to say... I'd rather have ALL of it at risk of being destroyed than to be restricted from accessing any of it.
 

NAZ Jeeper

Member
We are having the same problem in Arizona. BLM is implementing travel management in the New River area. The public meetings were held during the Obama administration but all that stopped when Trump was in office. Now they are working to implement this plan.

My complaint is that they just redline trails and areas without any individual justification on why each trail or road should be closed. They provide maps that are illegible and use every trick possible to close off land to motorized recreation. They claim that unautherized roads need to be closed but the roads and trails appear because of years of inattention and mismanagement of the land they are supposed to keep an eye on.

What is really a bunch of BS is that they talk about closing trails by the percentage which has nothing to do with their claimed goal of protecting the environment.

This is the federal government’s way of taking away access to public lands for any recreation activity the bureaucrats do not feel is appropiate like motorized recreation and shooting.
 

bobfriesenhahn

Active Member
I have come along a bunch of Trails in National Monuments That were mined back in the day and Now there Managed as Wildlife areas - Not sure why you think a Wilderness area is Pristine & Virgin.
I am using the term Designated Wilderness Area as per the Wilderness Act of 1964, which was signed by LBJ. It protected 9.1 million acres of federal land which was already essentially similarly protected. One of the rules was that a wilderness could not include already "maintained" roads. Now most of the designated wilderness is in Alaska.

There is no telling what do-gooders at forest stations and BLM offices are doing, but they are not the same thing since it takes an act of Congress. BLM land is not wilderness land.
 

Sylvester

Caught the Bug
I am using the term Designated Wilderness Area as per the Wilderness Act of 1964, which was signed by LBJ. It protected 9.1 million acres of federal land which was already essentially similarly protected. One of the rules was that a wilderness could not include already "maintained" roads. Now most of the designated wilderness is in Alaska.

There is no telling what do-gooders at forest stations and BLM offices are doing, but they are not the same thing since it takes an act of Congress. BLM land is not wilderness land.
I'm not sure The Feds Distinguish Between BLM,National Monument - etc when they designate a Wilderness area. All I know is there is a Sign "Wilderness area"
 

Sylvester

Caught the Bug
As much as I do think SxS are doing a LOT of harm, I would have to say no. Much of what is now closed, wilderness areas anyway, have been in the works for years, decades really and well before SxS were ever around. The harm SxS do today are to routes and areas currently open to the public. Assuming the damage they do continues, they too will be on the chopping block. I guarantee it.

That said and as much as it kills me to say... I'd rather have ALL of it at risk of being destroyed than to be restricted from accessing any of it.
"That said and as much as it kills me to say... I'd rather have ALL of it at risk of being destroyed than to be restricted from accessing any of it."

100% agree
 
Top Bottom