PDA

View Full Version : H.R. 1925 9 million acres in Utah to be declared "wilderness" closing MOAB call reps


anthonyca
10-01-2009, 12:23 AM
I did a search and came up empty. I can not find anything about firearms but if you can't ride a horse there I don't think you can shoot after this passes.

We need to take action now.

http://www.rockymountainextreme.com/showthread.php?p=639183
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1925.IH:

"Utah -- was introduced by New York Representative Maurice Hinchey.


However, not a single Representative from Utah is supporting H.R.1925.

Specifically, H.R. 1925 would designate more than nine million more acres as federally protected "Wilderness," and directly affect the Moab, San Rafael Swell and Chimney Rock areas (to name a few) in Utah.

These popular OHV areas represent some of the most important remaining OHV recreation areas in Utah, and are some of the most popular with responsible OHV riders. The proposed Wilderness designation would also make the land off limits to ATV riders, mountain bikers and horseback
riders."


on edit; I know I spelled declared wrong.

dantodd
10-01-2009, 12:34 AM
Maybe we should declare Capitol Hill a "wilderness area" it might be the only way to stop these stupid lawmakers from passing stupid laws.

anthonyca
10-01-2009, 12:39 AM
Look at all the co sponsors. My "rep" jackie spier is one.:mad::mad::mad:

CnCFunFactory
10-01-2009, 2:35 AM
When will this crap end....:mad:

cadurand
10-01-2009, 7:03 AM
It's our land, let us use it.

Mitch
10-01-2009, 10:03 AM
I don't see anything related to firearms either. What's this doing here?

There are a number of Federally designated Wilderness Areas within an hour's drive of Los Angeles. I used to patrol in one of them for the Forest Service, including during the deer season opening weekend when San Gorgonio Wilderness welcomed hunters (season starts 10 October this year).

I believe the Wilderness Act of 1964 prohibits wheeled vehicles or machines of any kind in Wilderness Areas (trail maintenance must be done with hand tools, for example). There's nothing in there about horseback riding, but local district managers are free to make their own rules.

Army
10-01-2009, 10:17 AM
I don't see anything related to firearms either. What's this doing here?
Creating "wilderness" areas effectively shut down hunting and target shooting within the boundaries.

New programs and staff must be created to control and watch over the area. New F&G or park ranger staff...or simply overburdening existing staff...must be hired, along with new budgets for offices and equipment. All this to ensure the 'wilderness" critters do not get molested by the mean ol' hunters.

BigBamBoo
10-01-2009, 10:28 AM
............

Paladin01
10-01-2009, 10:37 AM
Rep has been contacted......

sv_1
10-01-2009, 10:52 AM
They are going to have a hard time catching me on my " wheeled vehicle" when they are patroling on foot.;) I've been writing these letters for years and they continue to fall on deaf ears... You can't reason with stupid.
they always seem to go like this:
Thanks for writing. Now go be a good worker bee and return to starbucks to read your issued communist manifesto like the rest of the good sheep

MudCamper
10-01-2009, 11:05 AM
I did a search and came up empty. I can not find anything about firearms but if you can't ride a horse there I don't think you can shoot after this passes.

While I agree with you that we should not be closing down even more areas to OHV use, firearms possession cannot be prohibited in Wilderness Areas. If the local NF administrator wants, he can ban shooting in Wilderness Areas, but even that's not a given. See Firearms in Forests and Parks (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=186457).

Mitch
10-01-2009, 11:11 AM
Creating "wilderness" areas effectively shut down hunting and target shooting within the boundaries.

Link?

As I said above, Wilderness Areas do not preclude hunting, you can hunt in the San Gorgonio Wilderness, for example. I know because I used to patrol there for the Forest Service, including during opening weekend.

Hunting is also permitted throughout the Angeles National Forest, which includes three Federal Wilderness Areas.

Hunting enforcement is conducted by state game wardens, not the Forest Service. Other firearms-related enforcement (like morons shooting at signs and stuff) is usually handled by the local sheriff department.

Army
10-01-2009, 11:17 AM
Moab area is off limits to vehicles. The place you hunt is 12 miles in. Now you have to walk there.

Hunting has been effectively eliminated.

Mitch
10-01-2009, 11:18 AM
Moab area is off limits to vehicles. The place you hunt is 12 miles in. Now you have to walk there.

Hunting has been effectively eliminated.

You can't walk 12 miles?

I used to see guys do it every year at San G. Hard core.

Army
10-01-2009, 8:58 PM
Well of course "I" can walk 12 miles...but Joe Average hunter that is used to motoring all the way to camp and back, won't.

They didn't STOP hunting in the condor areas, but forced you to use special ammo. Hunting in the condor areas is way down from normal. Out of state hunters are also no longer coming to these zones, opting for the northern zones so they can use their normal ammo.

Hunting has certainly been curtailed, and the eco-idiots are trying for the whole state.

Same thing.

anthonyca
10-01-2009, 10:01 PM
You can't walk 12 miles?

I used to see guys do it every year at San G. Hard core.

You can get a gun in Chicago but...... It's our land and the most beautiful parts are already protected.

spddrcr
10-01-2009, 10:09 PM
You can't walk 12 miles?

I used to see guys do it every year at San G. Hard core.

well mitch as a matter of fact I cant walk 12 miles, i suffer from muscular dystrophy and 5 ankle reconstructions and while i can do a couple miles there's no way i can do 12. Should i be excluded from hunting there?

what about the other places within CA that they have already closed using these same tactics? what happens when they come to close your favorite hunting/shooting/ohv area, by that time it might be to late for anyone to do anything to stop them. look at the overall picture, just because it doesnt affect you now doesnt mean it wont in the future:rolleyes:

bsquared
10-01-2009, 10:22 PM
Moab is up there with the Rubicon Trail here in CA in terms of a 4 wheeling destination, some of the best trails around. Being an avid 4 wheeler as well as a shooter (as are lots of folks I wheel with), I'd like the opportunity to visit and experience the place firsthand and not have it off limits to me or my family. They'll make if off limits to vehicles first, then what else????

Whether you access it by vehicle or foot, they are trying to limit access to YOUR land. Shooting, wheeling, whatever - once access is gone, it's not gonna be easy to get back. I encourage everyone to take the 30 seconds and send an email.

anthonyca
10-01-2009, 10:23 PM
well mitch as a matter of fact I cant walk 12 miles, i suffer from muscular dystrophy and 5 ankle reconstructions and while i can do a couple miles there's no way i can do 12. Should i be excluded from hunting there?

what about the other places within CA that they have already closed using these same tactics? what happens when they come to close your favorite hunting/shooting/ohv area, by that time it might be to late for anyone to do anything to stop them. look at the overall picture, just because it doesnt affect you now doesnt mean it wont in the future:rolleyes:

Exactly. I have sent this to many people and told many about it. You would be suprized to hear people say things such as, Utah? I dont care I am not going all the way to MOAB to wheel when the Rubicon is so close and I will just go to Nevada to shoot on BLM land. The Rubicon is under attack also.

These are the same people who say they dont need an EBR to hunt, then their turkey gun gets banned and they are pissed.:confused:

Mitch
10-02-2009, 6:41 AM
well mitch as a matter of fact I cant walk 12 miles, i suffer from muscular dystrophy and 5 ankle reconstructions and while i can do a couple miles there's no way i can do 12. Should i be excluded from hunting there?

Maybe, if the area is declared Wilderness.

You can't get to the top of Mt San Gorgonio, sounds like, or to the top of Mt Baldy or Mt San Jacinto or any of hundreds of peaks in the Sierra Nevada. But other people can, and do.

No doubt everyone has their points of view, but I, for one, would not advocate running paved roads deep into Wilderness Areas so that those who are unable to walk a few miles can see the sights. It would be interesting to hear what special accommodation you think should be made for people with your mobility issues.

Most good hunting areas aren't car-accessible at any rate, Wilderness or not. Do guys really hunt from campground parking lots?

Anyway, aside from the prohibition of vehicles, hunting is not banned Wilderness Areas as a matter of course.

YubaRiver
10-02-2009, 8:47 AM
Come a day, I won't be able to hike in to wilderness areas, but
for now they are my favorite places to hunt. No drunk road hunting slobs,
the backcountry tends to be very beautiful and the extra challenge is great.

Horses are allowed in wilderness areas, just no mechanical or motor transportation. There may be exceptions for a specific area.

The criptobiotic soil around Moab is very fragil. Footsteps can remain for
years, Tracks from WWII vehicals still remain. The slick rock is very durable
however.

I would listen to Land managers to decide the best interest for the area.

bulgron
10-02-2009, 9:20 AM
No doubt everyone has their points of view, but I, for one, would not advocate running paved roads deep into Wilderness Areas

Who said anything about paved roads?

In the Political Arena, this is what we call 'a strawman'. You shouldn't do that.

The way things are going, most of our back country places will no longer be accessible to anyone except for die-hard hikers with lots of time on their hands, and pot farmers. Only the pot farmers will win.

Paladin01
10-02-2009, 9:22 AM
People from other states should not get to decide how UT wants to manage their land. Keep in mind that no representatives from UT support this proposal.

YubaRiver
10-02-2009, 9:30 AM
People from other states should not get to decide how UT wants to manage their land. Keep in mind that no representatives from UT support this proposal.

It is Federal Land, our land, that's how we get a say in it.

Paladin01
10-02-2009, 9:36 AM
Yuba River - Are you in support of closing down OHV trails in the Moab / Grand Staircase area? Just curious...

jdberger
10-02-2009, 10:13 AM
well mitch as a matter of fact I cant walk 12 miles, i suffer from muscular dystrophy and 5 ankle reconstructions and while i can do a couple miles there's no way i can do 12. Should i be excluded from hunting there?



You actually sound like a great plaintiff!

You could use the Americans With Disabilities Act against these fools (assuming that this becomes law).

Legal Jiu-Jitsu. Use their strengths against them. Exploit their weaknesses.

dwtt
10-02-2009, 1:47 PM
It's our land, let us use it.

With the election of a strong Democrat majority in both houses of congress, the public land belongs to the Sierra Club and other environmental groups who profess to protect the environment, but are really nothing more than another special interest group who want to exclude others from public land. They think the outdoors is entirely theirs to use, and any other use like mountain biking or motorcycling is bad and evil, so they label such use environmentally unfriendly and get it banned. My mountain bike does less damage to the outdoors than most hikers I've come across. At least I stay on the trails, but hikers think they are doing no harm by trampling the off trail fauna.

The Wingnut
10-02-2009, 2:13 PM
Why is a representative from NEW YORK attempting to create wilderness areas in UTAH?

This jack@#$ needs a swift kick to the head.

GuyW
10-02-2009, 2:41 PM
You can't walk 12 miles?

I used to see guys do it every year at San G. Hard core.

Yeah - carrying out a SoCal mulie that cleans out at 80 lbs is one thing, toting out an elk that cleans up at 800 lbs is another...

.

bulgron
10-02-2009, 4:47 PM
So the only people allowed to hunt are the hard core young toughs who are in great shape and who have the time for a multi-day hike into the wilderness? Is that really the position that people in the pro-hunting culture want to take?

Meplat
10-02-2009, 5:25 PM
This is a gun forum, WTH is an OHV?

I actually doubt this would ban guns, but if it bans horse, bike and ATV travel I will help oppose it. But please try not to exaggerate to get support.:rolleyes: We (users and stake holders of all sorts of public lands) need to support each other even if we do not have a personal stake in each infringement.

I did a search and came up empty. I can not find anything about firearms but if you can't ride a horse there I don't think you can shoot after this passes.

We need to take action now.

http://www.rockymountainextreme.com/showthread.php?p=639183
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1925.IH:

"Utah -- was introduced by New York Representative Maurice Hinchey.


However, not a single Representative from Utah is supporting H.R.1925.

Specifically, H.R. 1925 would designate more than nine million more acres as federally protected "Wilderness," and directly affect the Moab, San Rafael Swell and Chimney Rock areas (to name a few) in Utah.

These popular OHV areas represent some of the most important remaining OHV recreation areas in Utah, and are some of the most popular with responsible OHV riders. The proposed Wilderness designation would also make the land off limits to ATV riders, mountain bikers and horseback
riders."


on edit; I know I spelled declared wrong.

Meplat
10-02-2009, 5:31 PM
I don't see anything related to firearms either. What's this doing here?


It's about mutual support, but the OP is going about it in a less than frank way.:TFH:

Meplat
10-02-2009, 5:34 PM
Creating "wilderness" areas effectively shut down hunting and target shooting within the boundaries.


Negitiv.:fud:

anthonyca
10-02-2009, 9:28 PM
Negitiv.:fud:

Google wilderness area target shooting. Can you honestly tell me that this will have no effect on target shooting now or in the future?

anthonyca
10-02-2009, 9:30 PM
This is a gun forum, WTH is an OHV?

I actually doubt this would ban guns, but if it bans horse, bike and ATV travel I will help oppose it. But please try not to exaggerate to get support.:rolleyes: We (users and stake holders of all sorts of public lands) need to support each other even if we do not have a personal stake in each infringement.

That is how this stuff gets passed. I don't hunt but I support that right. Many of my friends who hunt don't care if we can take an EBR out and do a mag dump on some target way out there that can't be done at a range. Just because some wilderness areas allow hunting does not mean the rest of us can practice RKBA on our lands out in the middle of nowhere.

As I said before, it's the same as a guy saying he doesn't care about assault weapons because he doesn't need an EBR to hunt. Then he is pissed that his turkey gun is banned.

Meplat
10-03-2009, 11:04 AM
That is how this stuff gets passed. I don't hunt but I support that right. Many of my friends who hunt don't care if we can take an EBR out and do a mag dump on some target way out there that can't be done at a range. Just because some wilderness areas allow hunting does not mean the rest of us can practice RKBA on our lands out in the middle of nowhere.

As I said before, it's the same as a guy saying he doesn't care about assault weapons because he doesn't need an EBR to hunt. Then he is pissed that his turkey gun is banned.

Hay! I'm on your side!

anthonyca
10-03-2009, 11:58 AM
Hay! I'm on your side!

Sorry if it looked like I was being a ****. I am just so upset that we are loosing more access to our lands.

Meplat
10-03-2009, 2:22 PM
Me too! This is not about protecting anything. It is not about what group comes out on top. But the antis will use those things to divide and conquer.

What must be recognized is that the ultimate goal is to deny our economy access to the resources we need to survive as a free people; to stifle commerce in rural areas that cater to hunters, shooters, off roaders, and other users of public land. Another goal is to stifle, through increased expense and regulation, activities and lifestyles that tend to promote independence, and self reliance.

This is part of an overall assault on our culture, and our country. To understand that fact is to be part of the solution, to not understand it is to be a useful idiot.
Sorry if it looked like I was being a ****. I am just so upset that we are loosing more access to our lands.

advocatusdiaboli
10-03-2009, 4:44 PM
e too! This is not about protecting anything.

While I am sorry to see such bans, I don't agree with you at all--numerous studies have attributed a lot of soil and habitat erosion of varying degrees depending on the vehicles depending how careful the driver is. And the more vehicles, the more damage. It is an undeniable fact we have to live with.

The problem is not most of us, but that small group that wants to do donuts in their CJ5 or ATV and then riles the people who like wilderness fairly pristine. ATVs are the worst and most abused of the three--a lot of people just cannot resist tearing it up and they are noisy to boot. I wouldn't be sorry to see them go from a lot of places that would be a lot quieter--leaf blowers and jet skis too but that's another story ;-). Sometimes just because we can take a certain vehicle into the wilderness doesn't mean we should and since enough people have been having a hard time with that decision, we are now seeing a backlash.

I would think they'd have achieved 95% of their goal with banning just ATVs but I'll bet they felt they need to not show bias and so nailed everyone. It's a shame and a sorry event anyway but it speaks as much about human nature and selfishness as it does over reaction.

dantodd
10-03-2009, 5:31 PM
Well of course "I" can walk 12 miles...but Joe Average hunter that is used to motoring all the way to camp and back, won't.

You gonna hump a deer out 12 miles too? Not saying it can't be done but this would put a severe cramp in hunting in the area. I would not be surprised to see this become a new mechanism to attempt limiting our 2A rights. Of course, post-incorporation it will be difficult to justify banning firearms even if hunting banned or nearly so. I do not think you will find the second amendment will be construed to mean that hunting is a constitutionally protected activity.

dantodd
10-03-2009, 5:35 PM
I wouldn't be sorry to see them go from a lot of places that would be a lot quieter--leaf blowers and jet skis too but that's another story ;-). Sometimes just because we can take a certain vehicle into the wilderness doesn't mean we should and since enough people have been having a hard time with that decision, we are now seeing a backlash.

Wow. I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.

Meplat
10-03-2009, 9:15 PM
Wow. I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.

Please reference my previous comments on divide and conquer, and useful idiots!

advocatusdiaboli
10-03-2009, 9:35 PM
Wow. I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.

I am not for taking away your right to access the land or be there--I am for enforcing how you access the land--if you don't see the difference, then you need to think on it more. BTW the "useful idiots" name calling is not helpful--I am neither useful nor an idiot. I view you more in that light.

In other words, you have the same right to access, it's just how you access given the fragility of the earth that matters. Do we as a society view it important to let you run super fuel dragsters on the interstate during rush hour (or ever)? No. Are we then useful idiots? No. Emphatically No. But there are those firebrands who try to label it that way--wrongly and obviously to most of us. In their view everyone should be able to anything they damn well please anywhere and any time.

Most of us realize there are limits to what we allow one person to do because their activities affect all of us collectively. why do we have limits on game? We all know why deep down without my having to spell it out.

Same here--you can all access it, but due to the environment, you are limited in how but not how often or when or for how long or for what purpose. I don;'t see how that is so bad at all.

sv_1
10-03-2009, 10:01 PM
I sure hope you walk everywhere you go.

I'm sure you are aware that there used to be trees and frogs and butterflies everywhere those beautiful ribbons of pavement we call roads now lie.

As a lifelong motorcycle enthusiast and an avid backpacker, your post gets me going.

How about if you don't hike in my OHV area and I won't roost you in your pristine wilderness? My registration funds pay for the upkeep of the land my taxes pay for. If you don't like them, stay away.

Divide and conquer indeed. It's just a shame that the burden of proof always falls on the guys without money...

C'mon BRC.


While I am sorry to see such bans, I don't agree with you at all--numerous studies have attributed a lot of soil and habitat erosion of varying degrees depending on the vehicles depending how careful the driver is. And the more vehicles, the more damage. It is an undeniable fact we have to live with.

The problem is not most of us, but that small group that wants to do donuts in their CJ5 or ATV and then riles the people who like wilderness fairly pristine. ATVs are the worst and most abused of the three--a lot of people just cannot resist tearing it up and they are noisy to boot. I wouldn't be sorry to see them go from a lot of places that would be a lot quieter--leaf blowers and jet skis too but that's another story ;-). Sometimes just because we can take a certain vehicle into the wilderness doesn't mean we should and since enough people have been having a hard time with that decision, we are now seeing a backlash.

I would think they'd have achieved 95% of their goal with banning just ATVs but I'll bet they felt they need to not show bias and so nailed everyone. It's a shame and a sorry event anyway but it speaks as much about human nature and selfishness as it does over reaction.

dantodd
10-03-2009, 10:41 PM
I am not for taking away your right to access the land or be there--I am for enforcing how you access the land--if you don't see the difference, then you need to think on it more. BTW the "useful idiots" name calling is not helpful--I am neither useful nor an idiot. I view you more in that light.

You may, in fact, view me that way but I would suggest knowing to whom you are replying when you call another an idiot. In less polite company doing otherwise might warrant a rather offensive rebuff.

bulgron
10-03-2009, 10:53 PM
While I am sorry to see such bans, I don't agree with you at all--numerous studies have attributed a lot of soil and habitat erosion of varying degrees depending on the vehicles depending how careful the driver is. And the more vehicles, the more damage. It is an undeniable fact we have to live with.

The problem is not most of us, but that small group that wants to do donuts in their CJ5 or ATV and then riles the people who like wilderness fairly pristine. ATVs are the worst and most abused of the three--a lot of people just cannot resist tearing it up and they are noisy to boot. I wouldn't be sorry to see them go from a lot of places that would be a lot quieter--leaf blowers and jet skis too but that's another story ;-). Sometimes just because we can take a certain vehicle into the wilderness doesn't mean we should and since enough people have been having a hard time with that decision, we are now seeing a backlash.

I would think they'd have achieved 95% of their goal with banning just ATVs but I'll bet they felt they need to not show bias and so nailed everyone. It's a shame and a sorry event anyway but it speaks as much about human nature and selfishness as it does over reaction.

You do have a point. Every time someone on a wheeled vehicle does something irresponsible and/or irritating, it gives statists an excuse to call for a ban. I used to see this happen all the time in my mountain biking days. Hikers could pass a hundred polite, well-behaved mountain bikers and never make a peep. But let one jerk go bombing down a single track, scattering hikers and scaring Sierra Club members, and next thing you know that whole area would be closed to mountain bikers.

The same thing goes with the few drunken, arrogant, jerks that occasionally pop up on ATVs, 4x4s, etc. It just takes one for the statists to go running off to Sacramento looking to get rid of all of them.

I in no way support any attempt to close wilderness areas to wheeled vehicles. That said, wheeled vehicle enthusiasts need to learn the same painful lesson we had to learn in the gun culture: it takes exactly one jerk to give the other side an excuse to ban your passion.

Hopefully there are those within the four wheeling community who understand this, and who are doing their best to police their own community.

advocatusdiaboli
10-04-2009, 6:39 AM
You do have a point. Every time someone on a wheeled vehicle does something irresponsible and/or irritating, it gives statists an excuse to call for a ban. I used to see this happen all the time in my mountain biking days. Hikers could pass a hundred polite, well-behaved mountain bikers and never make a peep. But let one jerk go bombing down a single track, scattering hikers and scaring Sierra Club members, and next thing you know that whole area would be closed to mountain bikers.

The same thing goes with the few drunken, arrogant, jerks that occasionally pop up on ATVs, 4x4s, etc. It just takes one for the statists to go running off to Sacramento looking to get rid of all of them.

I in no way support any attempt to close wilderness areas to wheeled vehicles. That said, wheeled vehicle enthusiasts need to learn the same painful lesson we had to learn in the gun culture: it takes exactly one jerk to give the other side an excuse to ban your passion.

Hopefully there are those within the four wheeling community who understand this, and who are doing their best to police their own community.

You stated succinctly what I was ineffective in trying to get across. Why do many cities have leash laws--because among the many responsible dog owners with well-behaved dogs they keep under control, there are the few who aren't, whose dogs aren't, and who don't. And the problem with a commons is that the many pay for the sins of the few--the cheapest way to save the commons is restricting behavior. The only alternative to restricting behavior's low maintenance and cost model for preserving the commons is rigorous policing--and not only does that cost a lot more (meaning expensive access fees and higher taxes) but it turns our outdoor experience into a visit to a police state. So I view restricting access to some degree the lesser of two evil options.

BTW, to the backpacking guy, I am a mountaineer and backcountry camper and fisher so in fact I do walk everywhere in the backcountry--have for many years and hope to many more. I don't begrudge horses back there for traditional reasons and also for the weak and infirm even though I dislike stepping in turd dust. But I am glad we don't have ATVs in the Sierra backcountry because while most would be conscientious, there would be those few that would guarantee I'd have beer bottles, cans, and tire ruts in my next picture of Clyde Minaret and Cecile Lake.

And dantodd--my apology--I should be more careful on the replies.

All this invective, what happened to civil debate in this country? Loud volume, name calling, and short tempers have become the norm rather than the exception and the polarization so marked that issues are barely discussed. So without reasoned debate and compromise, which ever side gets the slightest edge, rams their view down the others throats with no quarter given. This great nations is losing it's unity and belief in democracy and that's very first thing we had going for us and we are in increasing trouble as we lose it.

Timberline
10-04-2009, 8:27 AM
Who said anything about paved roads?

In the Political Arena, this is what we call 'a strawman'. You shouldn't do that.

The way things are going, most of our back country places will no longer be accessible to anyone except for die-hard hikers with lots of time on their hands, and pot farmers. Only the pot farmers will win.

Speaking of straw men...

The proposals for Utah, coming up for their first hearings in the House, are for land that's worthy of Wilderness designation. The land agencies have made careful evaluations, and this opportunity to preserve these special places should not be allowed to pass.

Timberline
10-04-2009, 8:30 AM
Wow. I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.

What Constitutional Rights are denied when land is given Wilderness designation?

Timberline
10-04-2009, 8:42 AM
You gonna hump a deer out 12 miles too? Not saying it can't be done but this would put a severe cramp in hunting in the area. I would not be surprised to see this become a new mechanism to attempt limiting our 2A rights. Of course, post-incorporation it will be difficult to justify banning firearms even if hunting banned or nearly so. I do not think you will find the second amendment will be construed to mean that hunting is a constitutionally protected activity.

I've seen many deer hunters humping out their kills on the western slopes of the Sierra. Kills made back in wilderness areas, with either firearms (in National Forest) or arrows (when crossing through National Park lands). Sure, their packs were heavy and dripping with blood, but it can be done.

Mitch
10-04-2009, 11:12 AM
Come a day, I won't be able to hike in to wilderness areas, but
for now they are my favorite places to hunt. No drunk road hunting slobs,
the backcountry tends to be very beautiful and the extra challenge is great.

Yep, when I was patrolling I would ask the hunters why they were up there so far from the trail head. All of them said it was to avoid the dangerous yahoos down near the car campgrounds.

Sure enough, come sunset, we could sit up in the mountains and listen to the rifle discharges down near the highway. What the hell they were shooting at in the dark I will never know.

Horses are allowed in wilderness areas, just no mechanical or motor transportation. There may be exceptions for a specific area.

Most of the guys who hunt in the San Gorgonio Wilderness are horse packers. Lot easier to carry a deer out when you have a horse or mule.

Mitch
10-04-2009, 11:15 AM
Wow. I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.

You have a right to drive a vehicle anywhere you want? WTF?

Paladin01
10-04-2009, 11:50 AM
"You have a right to drive a vehicle anywhere you want? WTF?"

No - We're talking about hundreds of well established trails that have been enjoyed by responsible 4 wheelers for generations. Many of these routes were trails cut when the area was mined for uranium.

RRangel
10-04-2009, 11:51 AM
You have a right to drive a vehicle anywhere you want? WTF?

It's a free country and all. Was your comment an attempt at being facetious?

Millions of acres of public land should not be sealed off because bubble world elitists don't want the "rubes" on it.

Mitch
10-04-2009, 12:11 PM
It's a free country and all. Was your comment an attempt at being facetious?

No, it was a reply to the suggestion that civil rights are being "taken away" by the establishment of Wilderness Areas. That's arrant nonsense.

You did see the text I quoted in my response, didn't you? I'll repeat it here:

I'm a little surprised to find someone here fighting for their own 2A rights so ready and willing to take away the rights of others so cavalierly.