From: Patrick.Martin@f825.n102.z1.fidonet.org (Patrick Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles.dirt
Subject: Re: Smear
Date: 5 Nov 1992 16:40:08 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

 
...continued from previous posting with same subject dated 5 Oct 92
 
>Then I went and got a degree in Wildlife Biology, and worked for the
>USFS for a number of years before I quit in disgust.  I no longer ride
>dirt, but I ride on the street, and ride mountain bikes (which are
>facing as much land closure pressure as OHVs it seems).  So I've seen
>the land use issue from all sides.  I support land closures where there
 
Diversified background, I'd have to say.  On threatened species:  more
often than not threatened species are just a TOOL to close land.  We're
going to be battling this one for a LONG time.  I know for a fact the
Sierra Club and others have a big backlog of potential inclusions to the
threatened and endangered species listing.  The off-roader will get
nickel-and-dimed with this for many years to come!
 
The northern spotted owl is a PRIME example of threatened species ABUSE!
Everytime we turn around the timber industry is getting shut down due to
potential damage to northern spotted owl habitat.  According to
enviro-groups, spotted owls can only live in "old-growth" forests.  Then
we find a nested-pair of spotted owls living in the rafters of an
old-growth K-Mart.  Hmmm.  Then we have other studies indicating spotted
owls live better inb second-growth forests, etc.  Then we have newer
reports that the spotted owl is more in numbers than thought before and
is really doing much better.  In the meantime, the timber industry in
northern CA has been stifled!  All based on unsound science.
 
>But what really irks me is that our natural resources agencies are
>mostly give-away organizations for logging, ranching and mining
>interests.  The forest service builds roads for logging companies,
>sells them the trees for much less than their true worth, and then
>re-plants the logged ground for them.  The BLM (and the FS) sells
 
This MAY have been the case back when you were with the USFS...  I have
a couple friends working for PALCO (Pacific Lumber), they cut their own
roads, basically always have, and THEY replant at a ratio of about 10 to
1, or something like that (I have the specific numbers available on my
BBS).  With this in mind, your above para sounded a bit misinformed,
possibly even smeary itself.
 
>grazing rights for $1.25 a cow-calf 'unit', when the going rate on
>private land is $20 or more.  Mineral rights on federal lands are sold
>at a price that was set in the late 1800s (I forget the exact price,
>but it's again a fraction of the market value).  It's not the agencie's
 
I'm not up to speed on the cost of grazing or mining, though I do have
files available on this also, SOMEWHERE...  So maybe the price needs to
be adjusted (and maybe it doesn't)...Would you still be against cattle
grazing on public land if the price of grazing permits were increased?
 
The cost of mining on public land is MUCH more than you imply and there
are specific restoration clauses imposed.
 
>I could go on forever on this, but here's the point:  I think that OHV
>use is a valid use of some of our federal land.  I think that
>federaly-subsidized for-profit ABuse of federal land is wrong.
>I don't want to see pro-OHV groups supported by these people, because
>then I have to go against them.  I don't like the "if they're against
>environmentalists they're on our side" mentality because I think it
>drags the OHV cause down by lumping it with the real land-rapers.
 
In other words, you don't want to see the pro-land-use OHV community
combine forces with mining, timber, cattle, ranchers and pro-gun
efforts.  I suspect this is based on the potential strength of the
combined effort...  It's a moot point anyway. It's already happened.
Sahara Club started out as basically an OHV group attempting to restore
the Barstow-to-Vegas Hare and Hound.  That was in October of 1990.  Our
initial membership back then was just a few hundred and primarily from
the OHV community.  Our membership is now somewhere around 5,000, and
quite well diversified.
 
The bottom line here is:  According to the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (FLPMA - 1976) our public lands are to be managed for
"multiple-use with a sustained yield."  Yes, we need to do it wisely and
smartly, based on sound science, and not abuse the system.  We ALSO
don't need to be abused by enviro-groups with all the lies, threats,
distortions, and 'possibly' threatened sub-species.
 
Yes, I know MANY of the enviro-groups are no longer happy with FLPMA,
even though they thought it was the greatest thing since pizza &
beer back in 1976.
 
Along with many pressing issues for the 103rd Congress to look at,
expect to see senators Boxer and Feinstein introduce a follow-up to
S.21, better known as the Cadaver's (Cranston's) Desert Lockout Bill.
This will close roughly 15 Million acres of southern California public
land (desert) to OHV, mining, cattle, and more.
 
What will follow this attack?  Combined efforts are the ONLY way to
battle these attempted lockouts from public land and the sooner the MC
industry wakes up and realizes this the better off the OHV community
will be...
 
Regards, Patrick Martin... SysOp / Sahara Club BBS
 
---RyPacker v2.42 e
--  
: Patrick Martin - via mcws.fidonet.org Public Access (818)352-2993
: ARPA/INTERNET: Patrick.Martin@f825.n102.z1.fidonet.org
: UUCP: ...!{elroy,oxy}!mcws!825!Patrick.Martin
: Compu$erve: >internet:Patrick.Martin@f825.n102.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles.dirt