PDA

View Full Version : NEW PROJECT: Fixing Apparent USFS FUD - NEED HELP PLEASE


oaklander
04-05-2011, 5:39 AM
OK - to save me the trouble of wading through what looks like hundreds of posts in several threads, I need the following:

1) The name of any gun range or other location where USFS has apparently spread disinformation (FUD);

2) If applicable, the name(s) of the owners and/or managers of that gun range (you can PM me that information, if you wish) OR;

3) If on public land, the specific location and time of day that USFS was "spotted" giving out bad information;

4) The names/offices of the USFS "officers" involved.

Once I get that information, I will investigate and:

1) Find out exactly what is going on, and;

2) FIX it.

-------

That's all I want. Don't argue with me about this, and don't post crap "defending" the USFS here. I'll have your post deleted.

We've worked long and hard to get the STATE to listen to us about the law - so I'm starting to get somewhat irritated that we now have mis-informed FEDERAL LE who are apparently trying to mis-enforce their mis-perception of state law. That alone contains multiple levels of FAIL.

The phrase "1983 lawsuit" comes to mind. Seriously. This. Is. Teeing. Me. Off.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 6:20 AM
I've also reached out to some people I know. This will be interesting. Expect movement very soon.

Purple K
04-05-2011, 7:59 AM
Lytle Creek comes to mind. They claim that their lease with USFS prevents them from allowing use of pre-ban high-cap magazines

r3dn3ck
04-05-2011, 8:07 AM
please oaklander do it to it.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 8:30 AM
Wow! That's just insane!

My guess is that the lease has a general provision against "doing anything illegal on the property." That's just boilerplate language that is contained in every property lease.

At some point, someone simply decided that LEGAL magazines are now ILLEGAL magazines.

The problem is that whoever did this is likely not a lawyer, and likely does not even understand the law - and the issue here is that their apparent incompetence is hampering the ability of law-abiding gun owners to use their legally owned property.

This is the kind of dumbcluck ignorance that made me want to go to law school in the first place (I got tired of seeing people do stupid crap).

I'm now getting PM's from people who have more information, and like I mentioned - I have reached out to people who may be in a position to fix this - without my intervention.

IF I have to intervene, it won't be pretty - the reason is that I will start naming names of apparent wrongdoers, and pointing out exactly who messed up, and why. I have no problem posting everything I find out, everywhere - starting with a detailed "exposť" on CGN. Let's see what scrutiny does to ignorance. Should be entertaining.

As you know, truth is a defense to libel - and this is the kind of stuff that may even warrant media attention. . .

Lytle Creek comes to mind. They claim that their lease with USFS prevents them from allowing use of pre-ban high-cap magazines

That lease is a public document, BTW. This could get really nasty, and it's my sincere hope that people will do the right thing here.

Untamed1972
04-05-2011, 8:48 AM
IF I have to intervene, it won't be pretty - the reason is that I will start naming names of apparent wrongdoers, and pointing out exactly who messed up, and why. I have no problem posting everything I find out, everywhere - starting with a detailed "exposť" on CGN. Let's see what scrutiny does to ignorance. Should be entertaining.

As you know, truth is a defense to libel - and this is the kind of stuff that may even warrant media attention. . .



That lease is a public document, BTW. This could get really nasty, and it's my sincere hope that people will do the right thing here.

Nice to see some fire building and that individual agents of the gov't will start being outted publicly for their abuse of power.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 8:54 AM
Yes, I would prefer to NOT have to out people for their apparent mistakes.

BUT - I have no problem doing it, and in fact - kind of like doing it.

Nice to see some fire building and that individual agents of the gov't will start being outted publicly for their abuse of power.

hawk1
04-05-2011, 9:09 AM
...
IF I have to intervene, it won't be pretty - the reason is that I will start naming names of apparent wrongdoers, and pointing out exactly who messed up, and why. I have no problem posting everything I find out, everywhere - starting with a detailed "exposť" on CGN. Let's see what scrutiny does to ignorance. Should be entertaining.

As you know, truth is a defense to libel - and this is the kind of stuff that may even warrant media attention. . .


So a legal smack down is out of the question? :confused:

Why play games with them? By their threatening behavior (to law abiding individuals) they deserve nothing less.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 9:17 AM
Legal smackdowns are:

1) expensive
2) not always needed
3) not ethical, unless there is a clear reason to bring suit

I can't just start bringing suits every time I see something wrong. I'd be suing half of California!!!! Not only that, but a typical lawsuit can take years to wind through the system. It's usually only a tool of last resort.

Most entities (government or otherwise) like to minimize legal risk, and it's always proper to allow them a chance to get "back inside" the law.

Also - I can't commit any organization to sponsor this suit, without all sorts of approval - and we most organizations that I know are totally buried in pro-active litigation right now. . .

On the scale of "importance," this whole thing is irritating, but not of large consequence - since it's so easy to fix.

So a legal smack down is out of the question? :confused:

Why play games with them? By their threatening behavior (to law abiding individuals) they deserve nothing less.

paul0660
04-05-2011, 9:20 AM
Man, you woke up early and PO'd!

FLIGHT762
04-05-2011, 9:26 AM
I'm glad to see something is being done about this. There has been several threads involving USFS and BLM enforcement employees overstepping their authority, attempting to enforce California laws, which they don't fully understand.

I would be quite disturbed by a L/E Officer telling me I have to show proof of purchase / Receipts to use my scores of 20 and 30 rd. magazines I purchased legally in the 70's and 80's when that is not written in the law.

To comply with the law, I registered a number of AW's. As cindynles does, I also carry a copy of my AW registration to avoid getting my RAW confiscated, especially if the AFS computer system is down as it occasionally is, even though the law as written, doesn't require it.

It just shows how stupid the Legislators are who do not understand the sport and who enact "do good" policies that effect the law abiding person, not the Criminal.

A lot of us who are / were L/E get very frustrated with silly laws that cannot be enforced.

Good luck with your project, I'll be looking forward to reading the results.

Untamed1972
04-05-2011, 9:27 AM
Yes, I would prefer to NOT have to out people for their apparent mistakes.

BUT - I have no problem doing it, and in fact - kind of like doing it.

I think it's an important piece of the puzzle though. becuase as long as agents of the gov't can hide anonymously behind their agency and it's policies there is not much incentive to the individual agent to put for the effort to make sure they actually know what they're doing.

When you start outting people an incentive starts to emerge to inspire agents as individuals to make sure they're doing things correctly, to educate themselves and so on. Fear of personal loss, be it loss of reputation or financial loss or whatever can be a great personal motivator.....these gov't agents have become too insulated from the consequences of their actions. It's time for that to start changing.

wildhawker
04-05-2011, 9:34 AM
Oak, obeygiant has some intel on this; I know he's been swamped with work but he'll respond to email (PM/email me if you don't have it).

-BC

moleculo
04-05-2011, 9:39 AM
Keep in mind that most of the USFS "Rangers" doing these visits or "inspections" that have been reported here are likely Volunteer Rangers. I talked to a close friend last week who works as a Volunteer Ranger with the USFS in the San Gabriel mountain areas about what has been going on. He told me that there is really only a couple of full time USFS Rangers in the whole area, the rest are all volunteers. He also mentioned that he knows of only one actual Officer who can write citations for the Angeles National Forest. I realize that Lytle Creek is in SBNF, but it's probably safe to assume that there is a similar situation over there.

Now, these Volunteer Rangers undergo quite a bit of training and are acting in an official capacity, so the USFS is ultimately responsible for their actions. The point I'm making is, that this situation might be easily fixed by notifying some actual USFS employed Rangers or their office, educating & working with them, instead of just "smacking" them around. There is a good possibility that the USFS doesn't know what is happening in the field in this case if the volunteers are the ones perpetuating this nonsense.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 9:44 AM
I agree with this. That's why I'm using my contacts, first - before we are forced to do anything more "public."

The issue here is that this is NOT like the guy at the local tire shop who didn't get enough training, and ends up not balancing your "tires" correctly. The apparent under-training here is apparently resulting in civil rights violations.

We as gun owners, tend to take the Constitution very seriously.

I really wish government agencies would STOP being so cavalier about civil rights. It seems that most of the 1960's was spent trying to fix civil rights, and now 50 years later, we are still trying to fix civil rights. I guess that's the problem with government, they tend to not "like" civil rights - since by definition, the flexing of "rights" limits government powers.

The problem here is that we have people who are apparently too XXXXX to understand this dynamic. And they have arrest powers. Not good.

Keep in mind that most of the USFS "Rangers" doing these visits or "inspections" that have been reported here are likely Volunteer Rangers. I talked to a close friend last week who works as a Volunteer Ranger with the USFS in the San Gabriel Mountains about what has been going on. He told me that there is really only a couple of full time USFS Rangers in the whole area, the rest are all volunteers. He also mentioned that he knows of only one actual Officer who can write citations for the Angeles National Forest. I realize that Lytle Creek is in SBNF, but it's probably safe to assume that there is a similar situation over there.

Now, these Volunteer Rangers undergo quite a bit of training and are acting in an official capacity, so the USFS is ultimately responsible for their actions. The point I'm making is, that this situation might be easily fixed by notifying some actual USFS employed Rangers or their office, educating & working with them, instead of just "smacking" them around. There is a good possibility that the USFS doesn't know what is happening in the field in this case if the volunteers are the ones perpetuating this nonsense.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 9:46 AM
Awesome! Yes - I have his email addy from the flowchart thing last year. Good person to have on this - he's very good at intel. . .

I will reach out.

Oak, obeygiant has some intel on this; I know he's been swamped with work but he'll respond to email (PM/email me if you don't have it).

-BC

NotEnufGarage
04-05-2011, 11:40 AM
Keep in mind that most of the USFS "Rangers" doing these visits or "inspections" that have been reported here are likely Volunteer Rangers. I talked to a close friend last week who works as a Volunteer Ranger with the USFS in the San Gabriel mountain areas about what has been going on. He told me that there is really only a couple of full time USFS Rangers in the whole area, the rest are all volunteers. He also mentioned that he knows of only one actual Officer who can write citations for the Angeles National Forest. I realize that Lytle Creek is in SBNF, but it's probably safe to assume that there is a similar situation over there.

Now, these Volunteer Rangers undergo quite a bit of training and are acting in an official capacity, so the USFS is ultimately responsible for their actions. The point I'm making is, that this situation might be easily fixed by notifying some actual USFS employed Rangers or their office, educating & working with them, instead of just "smacking" them around. There is a good possibility that the USFS doesn't know what is happening in the field in this case if the volunteers are the ones perpetuating this nonsense.

Could it be that the volunteers are not so much operating on the basis of lack of information and knowledge, but have volunteered specifically to promote a political agenda? I wouldn't put it past some of the environmental nazi's out there to do such a thing.

If this is the case, a smackdown is most certainly in order, and it should be personal, expensive and hopefully involve jailtime for them.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 11:40 AM
OK - wanted to update. I spoke with someone who is aware of the issues, and has been in communication with the appropriate people -- and what we need NOW is "information" - so if YOU have had problems with USFS, please contact me CONFIDENTIALLY via PM or email (use the one in my profile).

I will keep all communications between you and me confidential, unless you state otherwise.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 11:50 AM
LOL - yup - this is what happens when I don't get enough sleep!

Seriously, though - me and Bill and Gene and Brandon and hundreds of other people have worked REALLY hard to get us where we are today - and it quite frankly pisses me off that some anonymous government agency, which is not even tasked with enforcing California law, is now starting to screw things up for us. If I'm doing something LEGAL, and someone who isn't even supposed to CARE, starts telling me mistakenly and ignorantly that I am doing something ILLEGAL, that makes me mad.

Man, you woke up early and PO'd!

IrishPirate
04-05-2011, 11:53 AM
I'm not sure who runs the Oroville Clay Pits off Rabe rd, but I've seen guys harrassed there for hi-caps and 10/30's. I've seen some LEO's run serial numbers when they make contact, but only on AR's, AK's and other "AW's" that they decide to stop and ask about mags, BB's, etc. I've never had an issue, but guys on benches next to me have gone through the ringer quite a few times. It's been a few months since i've been there so i don't know if it's still going on, or if they are actually doing anything illegal....just thought you'd like to know.

Thanks for putting your foot down for the rest of us!!!

:cheers2:

Rock6.3
04-05-2011, 11:54 AM
Is this for USFS land only, or would BLM public lands also be of interest?

oaklander
04-05-2011, 11:59 AM
According to the person I spoke to, who is aware of all of the issues - the main focus is USFS right now. That being said, I would also be interested in hearing about any BLM problems.

I'm realizing the problem now is more serious than I thought. It's not just a "gun" issue - it's a states' rights issue, since the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN'T GENERALLY ENFORCE STATE LAWS. This whole thing smells real bad at this point.

Is this for USFS land only, or would BLM public lands also be of interest?

Untamed1972
04-05-2011, 12:22 PM
According to the person I spoke to, who is aware of all of the issues - the main focus is USFS right now. That being said, I would also be interested in hearing about any BLM problems.

I'm realizing the problem now is more serious than I thought. It's not just a "gun" issue - it's a states' rights issue, since the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN'T GENERALLY ENFORCE STATE LAWS. This whole thing smells real bad at this point.


If this is the case how is it that BLM/USFS rangers have been writing citations and making arrests for CA vehicle code violations in the SoCal deserts for decades? I was under the impression the Fed. LEOs could be "cross-sworn" to enforce state laws....at least this is reason I was given in the past for rangers writing tickets and making arrests for CVC violations.

cindynles
04-05-2011, 12:45 PM
PM sent with info regarding Feb. 5, 2011 incident at Bee Canyon.

Southwest Chuck
04-05-2011, 12:52 PM
If this is the case how is it that BLM/USFS rangers have been writing citations and making arrests for CA vehicle code violations in the SoCal deserts for decades? I was under the impression the Fed. LEOs could be "cross-sworn" to enforce state laws....at least this is reason I was given in the past for rangers writing tickets and making arrests for CVC violations.

I believe this to be true, but they MUST be "actively" cross-sworn and authorized by a CA LEA to enforce State or Local laws. I recall reading this in MudCamper's Firearms in Forests and Parks (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=186457)thread a while back and I believe one of the posts had some citations attached. Hum, guess I'll have to peruse that again

Hold on. My memory is coming back now. I seem to recall that for this to be a valid path for a Fed to be cross-sworn, one of the requirements per Statute was that they MUST be P.O.S.T. certified, which from my understanding, very few if any actually are. I could be mistaken, though...It's a memory thing :o but worth researching further, for sure.

PsychGuy274
04-05-2011, 1:15 PM
Oaklander the Traitor!!!

:D

Southwest Chuck
04-05-2011, 1:28 PM
Ok, I found the post by BigDogatPlay that I ran across in This (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=160624) thread.

You should be interested in this Oak and if an agreement exists, maybe get a copy of the MOU?


BLM Rangers are federal LEOs however they are limited in their scope by the Penal Code within 830.8 which conveys California peace officer powers on federal LEOs. Bolded below for emphasis...

830.8. (a) Federal criminal investigators and law enforcement
officers are not California peace officers, but may exercise the
powers of arrest of a peace officer in any of the following
circumstances:
(1) Any circumstances specified in Section 836 or Section 5150 of
the Welfare and Institutions Code for violations of state or local
laws.
(2) When these investigators and law enforcement officers are
engaged in the enforcement of federal criminal laws and exercise the
arrest powers only incidental to the performance of these duties.
(3) When requested by a California law enforcement agency to be
involved in a joint task force or criminal investigation.
(4) When probable cause exists to believe that a public offense
that involves immediate danger to persons or property has just
occurred or is being committed.
In all of these instances, the provisions of Section 847 shall
apply. These investigators and law enforcement officers, prior to
the exercise of these arrest powers, shall have been certified by
their agency heads as having satisfied the training requirements of
Section 832, or the equivalent thereof.
This subdivision does not apply to federal officers of the Bureau
of Land Management or the Forest Service of the Department of
Agriculture. These officers have no authority to enforce California
statutes without the written consent of the sheriff or the chief of
police in whose jurisdiction they are assigned.

It depends on the county they are in, and what MOUs have been done between BLM and the local authority. You could probably find out from the local authority... maybe.

As to trying to ascribe peace officer status or authority on whether or not the uniformed officer is armed, I wouldn't make such an assumption. I can think of any number of California and US park rangers, peace officers each and every one, who don't bother going armed out of choice. It's an image thing with some of them. Bear in mind also that the local BLM district could always set a policy that their people go unarmed.

They might use #4 above as an excuse, but it's a fail in my opinion since they still need "Probable Cause", and even then, they MUST have written permission from the CLEO of the jurisdiction in question. Also, they MUST be P.O.S.T. certified (or equivalent) to exercise their arrest powers per 832 ..

."In all of these instances, the provisions of Section 847 shall
apply. These investigators and law enforcement officers, prior to
the exercise of these arrest powers, shall have been certified by
their agency heads as having satisfied the training requirements of
Section 832, or the equivalent thereof."

Drivedabizness
04-05-2011, 1:35 PM
Ya know, I try to be respectful and appreciative to LE in general. But there really isn't any excuse for the types of ongoing abuses we continue to see.

How about we give 'em about three heartbeats do the right thing and then pick a good test case to make an example of. It won't take any time at all for those worthy of being there straighten up.

N6ATF
04-05-2011, 1:58 PM
Nobody wants to be the first to be sued. Everyone wants to be the second, because the first 1) delays subsequent cases years if not decades and 2) case could moot subsequent cases.

rodeoflyer
04-05-2011, 4:11 PM
FWIW -

A Place to Shoot still has the AW paperwork requirement on their site:

http://www.aplacetoshoot.net/

MasterYong
04-05-2011, 4:15 PM
Man, you woke up early and PO'd!

I've never been convinced that Oak even SLEEPS.

oaklander
04-05-2011, 4:19 PM
About 5 hours! LOL.

Between being a new husband, and my "day job," the the "gun stuff," and my old car, and bike, and dogs, etc. . . very busy - but that's good!!!!

I AM getting ready to take my wife (SierraApril) out for an early dinner, and I think I might take a break from CGN this evening!!!

I've never been convinced that Oak even SLEEPS.

furyous68
04-05-2011, 4:42 PM
Go take your wife to dinner... she deserves it.. you don't, but she does :D

oaklander
04-05-2011, 5:39 PM
LOL - we are heading out *right now* to a friend's house to BBQ some tri-tip and make some potato salad.

Life is good!!!!

Go take your wife to dinner... she deserves it.. you don't, but she does :D

mag360
04-06-2011, 12:33 AM
subscribing, nothing to add at *this* point. Thank you Oaklander for taking this on.

oaklander
04-06-2011, 11:15 AM
Welcome!

Here is the status report:

1) I talked to two of The Right People yesterday.

2) I also received some PM's with detailed information.

3) I am talking to more people today.

The bottom line is that this (apparent USFS problems) is a real issue. And it's happening on both SoCal and NorCal. There also appear to be problems with BLM, even though they are entirely two different entities.

We are hoping that these are merely training issues, at this point. I will update people when I know more.

ALSO - if you have information - please PM or call me. I would also like to speak to anyone who has contacts within either USFS or BLM. If we can stop this now, it will be less expensive for everyone concerned.

subscribing, nothing to add at *this* point. Thank you Oaklander for taking this on.

sfpcservice
04-06-2011, 11:57 AM
oak,

It's not USFS, but BLM in our area that arbitrarily closed the Knoxeville Recreation Area range indefinitely citing "safety concerns", whatever that meant. That's the only public place to shoot in the Solano/Napa Area as far as I can tell. If that could be reversed it would be fantastic.

1BigPea
04-06-2011, 12:22 PM
This thread is full of awesome!

Thanks Oak!

CHS
04-06-2011, 5:07 PM
I'm only posting here in order to bump this thread to get more eyes on it :)

Munk
04-06-2011, 5:23 PM
I'll be keeping an eye on this, since over 90% of my shooting is on BLM land. I havne't had ANY encounters, let alone a negative one with any BLM agents yet....

oaklander
04-06-2011, 5:29 PM
Yes, I think the vast majority of USFS and BLM employees are professional and knowledgeable. If there's a training/policy issue, we will certainly fix it.

But I don't want anyone to think that we do not respect the vast majority of USFS/BLM employees who are just trying to do their jobs. I will edit my posts, if I sounded too cranky yesterday.

The problems we have appear to be with management. . . That's all I can say at this point.

With the above being said, I have great concerns when a federal agency tries to enforce state law without an applicable and legal MOU, etc. . .

I'll be keeping an eye on this, since over 90% of my shooting is on BLM land. I havne't had ANY encounters, let alone a negative one with any BLM agents yet....

Southwest Chuck
04-06-2011, 5:30 PM
I'll be keeping an eye on this, since over 90% of my shooting is on BLM land. I havne't had ANY encounters, let alone a negative one with any BLM agents yet....

^^ x's 2

snoopy
04-06-2011, 8:47 PM
+1, though I never personally experienced a problem on BLM land, this is a great cause.

I'm planning a National Forest visit in the next couple weeks and was surprised that the current laws and regulations that I have been reviewing seem (I'm not a lawyer) to grant a large amount of discretion to the regional Forest Service/BLM authorities as far as if and where to allow firearm usage. So the polite approach first is probably a good idea. As near as I could tell, they just have to post a few no shooting signs and we have to move along.

I'd guess, if Forest Service types respond to your inquiries by taking places off limits, there would be a few Republican congressmen who would love to score NRA points by getting involved/hold hearings/etc. on how the executive branch, via the US Forest Service, was taking away gun rights on public lands.

oaklander
04-06-2011, 11:48 PM
Good point!

On a related note - anyone here into "off roading?" I think we may have some commonality with groups that use public lands for legal motorsports, etc. . .

:)

I'd guess, if Forest Service types respond to your inquiries by taking places off limits, there would be a few Republican congressmen who would love to score NRA points by getting involved/hold hearings/etc. on how the executive branch, via the US Forest Service, was taking away gun rights on public lands.

obeygiant
04-07-2011, 12:16 AM
Oak, obeygiant has some intel on this; I know he's been swamped with work but he'll respond to email (PM/email me if you don't have it).

-BC

Awesome! Yes - I have his email addy from the flowchart thing last year. Good person to have on this - he's very good at intel. . .

I will reach out.

:43:

Phone,Fax and Email for the following has already been sent.
Dept. of the Interior
Secretary
Deputy Secretary
Assistant Secretary - Land and Minerals Management
Bureau of Land Management
Acting State Director of BLM for California
Assistant Secretary - Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Deputy Director for Operations
National Park Service
Director of the National Park Service
Park Directories and Superintendents
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Law Enforcement
Professional Responsibility Unit
Working on the USFS now.

oaklander
04-07-2011, 12:36 AM
Did I say that I love you?

:D

:43:

Phone,Fax and Email for the following has already been sent.
Dept. of the Interior
Secretary
Deputy Secretary
Assistant Secretary - Land and Minerals Management
Bureau of Land Management
Acting State Director of BLM for California
Assistant Secretary - Fish, Wildlife and Parks
Deputy Director for Operations
National Park Service
Director of the National Park Service
Park Directories and Superintendents
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Law Enforcement
Professional Responsibility Unit
Working on the USFS now.

obeygiant
04-07-2011, 1:43 AM
USFS Contacts for Region 5

Angeles
Cleveland
Eldorado
Inyo
Klamath
Lake Tahoe Basin
Lassen
Los Padres
Mendocino
Modoc
Plumas
San Bernardino
Sequoia
Shasta-Trinity
Sierra
Six Rivers
Stanislaus
Tahoe


has been sent, check your email.

oaklander
04-07-2011, 1:54 AM
WINNING!

USFS Contacts for Region 5

Angeles
Cleveland
Eldorado
Inyo
Klamath
Lake Tahoe Basin
Lassen
Los Padres
Mendocino
Modoc
Plumas
San Bernardino
Sequoia
Shasta-Trinity
Sierra
Six Rivers
Stanislaus
Tahoe


has been sent, check your email.

oaklander
04-07-2011, 12:03 PM
FOLKS!

We are getting pro-active now - please see this thread:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=6156305#post6156305

And provide us with the confidential information we need to fix this.

CHS
04-07-2011, 12:14 PM
I have a man-crush on you Oaklander :)

oaklander
04-07-2011, 12:20 PM
It's like a love triangle at this point!!!

I have a man-crush on you Oaklander :)

Fyathyrio
04-07-2011, 6:28 PM
Good point!

On a related note - anyone here into "off roading?" I think we may have some commonality with groups that use public lands for legal motorsports, etc. . .

:)

My wife and I use our Jeeps to go shoot in the desert, or use our guns as an excuse to go drive through the desert. We're happy either way. There are many congruent purposes with offroaders, we want access to public lands also. My favorite place to shoot is BLM land north of I-8 and east of Anza Borrego state park, in a wash/trail that connects that desert with the park trail system. The only interaction I've had with any form of LE is the planes or helos that I suspect are Border Patrol out on routine flights...but they almost always come back for a low pass over my site. I guess I've checked out OK so far as no people have shown up yet.

I've never seen any negative reaction to my having my guns near the trail, and it can have a surprising amount of traffic on a weekend. Most offroaders I know shoot or at least support those that do. Most larger offroad forums have a specific shooting sub-section, or at least several active threads pertaining to hunting and recreational shooting. I was pointed to Calguns by an offroad forum when I asked some of my initial CA specific questions.

A few issues with offroad groups is we are somewhat fractured. For minor reasons, the different styles don't play well together at times. The largest split seems to be between street legal v. non-street legal. Also, east v. west comes into play as there is very little public land east of the Mississippi. We're also not as organized yet as the NRA or similar national gun rights groups, most are regional vice national. I can give you a few of the better ones if interested.

With the huge amounts of the people's land getting designated as wilderness that doesn't meet the original definition of wilderness, and constant bills introduced in congress to add more, shooters as well as offroaders are losing places to recreate. That's likely the best way to form an alliance if interested.

mag360
04-07-2011, 7:04 PM
There are definitely opportunities for alliances on this. OHV owners are for the most part shooting friendly, from dirtbikes to 4x4's.

emtmark
04-07-2011, 9:05 PM
Good point!

On a related note - anyone here into "off roading?" I think we may have some commonality with groups that use public lands for legal motorsports, etc. . .



Originally Posted by snoopy
I'd guess, if Forest Service types respond to your inquiries by taking places off limits, there would be a few Republican congressmen who would love to score NRA points by getting involved/hold hearings/etc. on how the executive branch, via the US Forest Service, was taking away gun rights on public lands.
Yes and you have just scratched the surface:( they closing trails and lands left and right

Fyathyrio
04-27-2011, 6:03 PM
On April 15th, our own Rep, Kevin McCarthy, has proposed a bill...To release wilderness study areas administered by the Bureau of Land Management that are not suitable for wilderness designation from continued management as defacto wilderness areas and to release inventoried roadless areas within the National Forest System that are not recommended for wilderness designation from the land use restrictions of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Final Rule and the 2005 State Petitions for Inventoried Roadless Area Management Final Rule, and for other purposes.

This is an area where our interests as shooters on public lands coincides with off roaders interests to access trails. While there may be possible minor conflicts of interest, we can all agree that access to OUR lands is a must. Please take a moment to write your congress critter asking for support, and to sign the petition linked below.

Full text available here. (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-1581)

Link to Blue Ribbon Coalition petition here. (http://www.savethetrails.us/Default.aspx?PetitionID=49)

CHS
04-27-2011, 6:07 PM
On April 15th, our own Rep, Kevin McCarthy, has proposed a bill...

This is an area where our interests as shooters on public lands coincides with off roaders interests to access trails. While there may be possible minor conflicts of interest, we can all agree that access to OUR lands is a must. Please take a moment to write your congress critter asking for support, and to sign the petition linked below.


As a camper, shooter, hiker AND offroader, I am extremely pleased.

Southwest Chuck
04-27-2011, 7:39 PM
As a camper, shooter, hiker AND offroader, I am extremely pleased.

I will 2nd that sentiment. This is great!

Dutch3
04-27-2011, 8:04 PM
I'm not sure who runs the Oroville Clay Pits off Rabe rd, but I've seen guys harrassed there for hi-caps and 10/30's. I've seen some LEO's run serial numbers when they make contact, but only on AR's, AK's and other "AW's" that they decide to stop and ask about mags, BB's, etc. I've never had an issue, but guys on benches next to me have gone through the ringer quite a few times.

As I understand it, the Oroville clay pit range is operated by the state Department of Water Resources under license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as part of the "recreational use" stipulation in the license agreement covering all of the Oroville Dam and related facililties.

Although operated by DWR, the range is managed by the state Department of Fish and Game because it is located within the Oroville Wildlife Area.

Munk
04-27-2011, 9:07 PM
As a camper, shooter, hiker AND offroader, I am extremely pleased.

I will 2nd that sentiment. This is great!

Absolutely

(d) Prohibition- The Secretary of Agriculture may not promulgate or issue any system-wide regulation, directive, or order that would direct management of the National Forest System lands released by subsection (a) in a manner contrary to the applicable land and resource management plan

that means, no pulling sneaky bastard closures on lands that aren't "Wilderness" as declared by congress.

I like this bill so very much. It guarantees that wilderness areas are still afforded their proper protections, and wild areas that aren't official wilderness are fair game for recreation and prospecting.