USFS closure reporting

[Jason__G]

Has it been cloudy or was it smoke? I'm in Southern Idaho and we are just starting to be rid of all the smoke from various fires.

Idaho looks like both

 

[WV Mountaineer]

Yes, usually a District Ranger or Forest Supervisor...when its essential to carrying out operations and keeping the public safe. It's rarely done and only done for good reasons, like those I mentioned.

What problem do you have with that?

I'm a big boy and, do not need or enjoy other people trying to decide what is and isn't a safe practice concerning my property. I'm sure you will have something to say about how that is absurd. But, before you do, think about it. It would be no different if your neighbor told you when, how, and with what you were going to mow your grass with. You don't need a neighbor to do that. Nor do I, being a forester that spends more days afield than most every one, needs anyone telling me how to be safe in the woods. If it isn't safe, I'm more than capable of determining that with no ones assistance. Pretty simple really and, blows my mind this might be considered debatable by some people. God Bless men

 

[Trial153]

While we are all confident in the vast ability of the all knowing and seeing West By God Va Mountain Man. I am sure that forest ranger in charge of making a safety assessment of the area has to consider the REI and EMS types that might by chance access the area as well... and I am sure they are not a studious and knowledgeable as you. in fact I am sure none of us are.
God Bless all of you socialist commie pinkos

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Jason__G]

And this is what an official closure looks like. If you are told that an area, road, or trail is closed, get a copy of the closure order in writing. There should always be an official order number with any valid closure, and the closure order should be very clear about when, where, and why. This will eliminate the possibility of a desk jockey making up rules on the spot.

 

[WV Mountaineer]

Well, there you go. That's a class act right there.

 

[Trial153]

A class act wouldn't interject, or infer that every topic should be broached from ones ideology.

 

[BuzzH]

I'm a big boy and, do not need or enjoy other people trying to decide what is and isn't a safe practice concerning my property. I'm sure you will have something to say about how that is absurd. But, before you do, think about it. It would be no different if your neighbor told you when, how, and with what you were going to mow your grass with. You don't need a neighbor to do that. Nor do I, being a forester that spends more days afield than most every one, needs anyone telling me how to be safe in the woods. If it isn't safe, I'm more than capable of determining that with no ones assistance. Pretty simple really and, blows my mind this might be considered debatable by some people. God Bless men

Well, now see that's where you're wrong. Its not just YOUR property, it happens to belong to about 324 million of us. Further, through our elected officials, policy is set via Acts of Congress, Regulations, etc. etc. that grant authority to the Managers of the public domain. Been that way for a long time, and for good reason. That's why you cant just cut a load of green trees off "your" public land to mill some wood for your house. Why you cant just buy some cattle or sheep and throw them out on the public domain. Why you cant just haul your double wide up to the nearest piece of "your" public land and squat there for 50 years.

The land management agencies are required by the public, via Congress, to keep people safe and to manage our public lands.

Since there are 324 million co-owners of "your" land, it would make sense that not all of them are up to speed on what hazards may exist on our land (see my initial post). As such, to avoid injuries, deaths, etc. and also to avoid litigation, the Land Managers have been granted authority, for just reasons, to prohibit certain uses of some of our lands. I'm good with that as are a vast majority of the public land owners.

I know that you think you're "special" and should be afforded more privilege than all the rest of us public land owners, but that isn't the way it works.

Frankly, I could give a chit if you wanted to bury yourself under an inch of dirt in an active logging sale in the middle of a skid trail on "YOUR" public land. Or even walk through an active forest fire on "YOUR" public land after bathing in drip torch fuel. Roll in bacon grease and hide under the carcass of a dead moose that's being fed on by a grizzly...as long as you waive your right to litigate. But, what I do care about, are the rest of the public land owners who may not be as special as you...I want them to have a safe and rewarding experience on our lands.

I get it, you hate anything to do with federal lands and federal land management agencies. That's fine, but that doesn't grant you special privilege over any other public land owner, no matter how many days you spend in the woods in West Virginia.

I spend 200+ days a year on our public lands, have done so for the last 30 years, and I don't expect any special privileges over my fellow public land owners. I also abide by the rules, regulations, laws, and acts when using public lands.

Not sure what makes you think you're so special...your mama may think you're special, but nobody else does.

 

[WV Mountaineer]

It'd be a lot easier if that were true Trail




Buzz, there is no bigger supporter of public lands and it's management then myself. None. And, I do own public land. Just like you and every other American citizen. I find your reply as stupid and ignorant to say different. Never have I said it's management is not proper. If you'd been in this discussion long enough, you'd know I'm a huge supporter of federal management of these resources. It just so easy for you to be ignorant of the whole situation when you are looking to push an agenda. Which you express every time you type on your keyboard. So, you can stop your dumb speech's and condescending tone. It's pathetic.



I find it ironic that two of the poster boys for changing current multiple use managed land doctrine, assert anyone who doesn't agree with them is wrong for having principles and an ideaology that interest groups aren't the saving grace of our public land heritage. You are both ignorant of history, reality, and of what you propose. But, that's not a surprise either.




So, let's get on board for closing access to our public owned and public used land. While the cowboys, ranchers, and anyone else who wants to rides all over it on their atv's, trucks, building camp fires while herding, runnig saws, etc.... Yeah, that's just grand. Hunters too stupid but everyone else has it covered perfectly.




Good day to everyone and God Bless men.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, there is no bigger supporter of public lands and it's management then myself. None. And, I do own public land. Just like you and every other American citizen. I find your reply as stupid and ignorant to say different. Never have I said it's management is not proper.

Really?

How does this statement, by you, support your assertion that you support the Government with current management of public lands?

WVmountaineer said, "But, if they close the breaks to hunting, it's just a great example why the government shouldn't have management of public lands. "

 

[kicker338]

Well, now see that's where you're wrong. Its not just YOUR property, it happens to belong to about 324 million of us. Further, through our elected officials, policy is set via Acts of Congress, Regulations, etc. etc. that grant authority to the Managers of the public domain. Been that way for a long time, and for good reason. That's why you cant just cut a load of green trees off "your" public land to mill some wood for your house. Why you cant just buy some cattle or sheep and throw them out on the public domain. Why you cant just haul your double wide up to the nearest piece of "your" public land and squat there for 50 years.

The land management agencies are required by the public, via Congress, to keep people safe and to manage our public lands.

Since there are 324 million co-owners of "your" land, it would make sense that not all of them are up to speed on what hazards may exist on our land (see my initial post). As such, to avoid injuries, deaths, etc. and also to avoid litigation, the Land Managers have been granted authority, for just reasons, to prohibit certain uses of some of our lands. I'm good with that as are a vast majority of the public land owners.

I know that you think you're "special" and should be afforded more privilege than all the rest of us public land owners, but that isn't the way it works.

Frankly, I could give a chit if you wanted to bury yourself under an inch of dirt in an active logging sale in the middle of a skid trail on "YOUR" public land. Or even walk through an active forest fire on "YOUR" public land after bathing in drip torch fuel. Roll in bacon grease and hide under the carcass of a dead moose that's being fed on by a grizzly...as long as you waive your right to litigate. But, what I do care about, are the rest of the public land owners who may not be as special as you...I want them to have a safe and rewarding experience on our lands.

I get it, you hate anything to do with federal lands and federal land management agencies. That's fine, but that doesn't grant you special privilege over any other public land owner, no matter how many days you spend in the woods in West Virginia.

I spend 200+ days a year on our public lands, have done so for the last 30 years, and I don't expect any special privileges over my fellow public land owners. I also abide by the rules, regulations, laws, and acts when using public lands.

Not sure what makes you think you're so special...your mama may think you're special, but nobody else does.

Geez Buzz if your that conserned about being in the woods maybe you should just stay home, safer there.

 

[BuzzH]

Geez Buzz if your that conserned about being in the woods maybe you should just stay home, safer there.

Not concerned at all...just tired of the bitching and moaning when the FS closes a few areas off for safety reasons.

 

[maninthemaze]

I'm a big boy and, do not need or enjoy other people trying to decide what is and isn't a safe practice concerning my property. I'm sure you will have something to say about how that is absurd. But, before you do, think about it. It would be no different if your neighbor told you when, how, and with what you were going to mow your grass with. You don't need a neighbor to do that. Nor do I, being a forester that spends more days afield than most every one, needs anyone telling me how to be safe in the woods. If it isn't safe, I'm more than capable of determining that with no ones assistance. Pretty simple really and, blows my mind this might be considered debatable by some people. God Bless men

Boy you'd be really upset to travel across the country to visit the Ptarmigan Tunnel in Glacier National Park. Only to find out that trail is closed because of grizzly bears in the area. We ended up just hiking different trails and never got to see the Ptarmigan Tunnel.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk