"The Case for Destroying Old Forest Roads"

Pdzoller

WKR
Joined
Feb 27, 2021
Messages
376
Location
Oregon
Where I live those old roads just become a place where people try to “Live off grid” and dump trash everywhere. I’d prefer gates and walk in access or decommission them all together in key habitat areas. I like areas like that because not as many people find it appealing.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2021
Messages
1,821
Location
Montana
In the 70s there was a road built inside a designated wilderness area by mistake. It was reclaimed and on that success an effort was started to reclaim every road to pre-existing status and then propose it for wilderness. Sadly the old roads had a surface width of 10-12 ft while most of the new ones are twice that.

The old ones often have a grass to clover covering which provided great habitat for big game and grouse. Much of the 70s and 80s were spent by the FS completely obliturated these older roads while the modern roads remained.

Now they are reopening many of those roads to todays standards. The original roads provided habitat and foot access to many areas.

I agree gates for many of these areas are a better choice as the quads of today go everywhere- legal or otherwise. Less pressure by vehicles makes hunting success a little easier for all of us in the mountains. Elk seem to be about a mile behind a gate.
 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,903
Wait a second, so if we don’t have a road we are stuck only exploring urban areas? I’m all for rewinding many old forest service roads, keep the ones open that are used for recreation for jeeps, atv’s and motorcycles but that only accounts for maybe 10%. If it is a dead end road off a main road it should be closed off and let nature take it back.

We all have legs last I checked.
 

MHWASH

WKR
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
837
Location
S.E.WA
It's a huge waste of money in my opinion. I'm all for closing down old logging roads, but there are more economical ways to do it. Add a gate, or boulders, heck even tear out the first 100 yards of the road. Why spend the money to tear out 2 mile of road, when the access can be eliminated with a few hours of work.
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
8,049
Location
S. UTAH
Anytime you see words like "rewilding", or efforts to restrict human access like this, you're seeing into a mindset that thinks the only good earth is one untouched by humanity.
Sadly this has truth to it. Humans wreck everything they touch. Not all humans, but it takes a surprisingly small number of people to completely trash a place. I am all for closing down more roads.
 

SharkDog

FNG
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
48
Location
Denver
That article is over the top and filled with superlatives, but yeah, the spaces described in the article are better without roads.
 

Azone

WKR
Joined
Apr 21, 2018
Messages
1,563
Location
Northern Nevada
What few roads were in the area of my old stomping grounds turned into trash infested parking lots during and after Covid. Some if not most people need to stay in town until they learn how to pickup after themselves.
I’m not anti road but we don’t need roads everywhere.
 

NMJM

FNG
Joined
Aug 2, 2022
Messages
75
Location
New Mexico
Where I live those old roads just become a place where people try to “Live off grid” and dump trash everywhere. I’d prefer gates and walk in access or decommission them all together in key habitat areas. I like areas like that because not as many people find it appealing.
Very true in New Mexico
 

JohnB

WKR
Joined
Aug 28, 2019
Messages
474
It's a huge waste of money in my opinion. I'm all for closing down old logging roads, but there are more economical ways to do it. Add a gate, or boulders, heck even tear out the first 100 yards of the road. Why spend the money to tear out 2 mile of road, when the access can be eliminated with a few hours of work.
Roads that have significant drainage ditches in the hill slope side serve to intercept slow moving ground water and speed it's path once in the surface. This has the affect of increasing spring runoff and decreasing summer baseflows which are quite important for fish.

Roads with culverts will also have frequent issues where debris will plug culverts and will result in road bed failures where materials wash into streams. This diminishes habitat for fish and also alters river/stream behavior.
 
Last edited:

MHWASH

WKR
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
837
Location
S.E.WA
Roads that have significant drainage ditches in the Hill slope side serve to intercept slow moving ground water and speed it's path once in the surface. This has the affect of increasing spring runoff and decreasing summer baseflows which are quite important for fish.

Roads with culverts will also have frequent issues where debris will plug culverts and will result in road bed failures where materials wash into streams. This diminishes habitat for fish and also alters river/stream behavior.
That's a good point John. I can see where it could be necessary to tear out the culverts, but leave the majority of the road in place. It will reclaim it's self at no cost.
 

JeffP_Or

WKR
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Messages
357
Location
PDX
They use all sorts of approaches here in Oregon - revert, gate, maintain, nothing.

Even with gates, people cut new access around and continue to use and dump on them. Seems there is a different approach for different circumstances - many are maintained or maintained and gated to provide fire fighting access or strategic fire breaks.

As usual, the more difficult thing is who decides and for what reason are they deciding?
 

rideold

WKR
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
375
Location
Front Range of Colorado
I'm all for closing off/reclaiming/whatever old roads (and maybe some of the newer ones too!). How to do it is a conundrum for sure. I've seen folks on 4 wheelers destroy an area detouring around a hefty gate with trucks parked in front of it and very obvious "No Motorized Access" signs. People just ignore things and do whatever the heck they want. Reclaiming the road entirely is almost the only option in some cases.
 

cjdewese

WKR
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
586
There are several sections of land that used to be owned by an old man that built an incredible sustainable lifestyle on top of the mountain.

When he died his wife sold it all back to the national forest and moved back to India. Within a month they had all of his structures taken down and the head of forestry in our area has a good buddy that owns a construction company. He gave him the contract to go and "remove the road."

He went backwards from the end of the road back to the initial access point digging holes and moving rocks into the road. It's caused some huge erosion issues and all it did was make it a 4x4 trail that people test their rigs on.

I wish they would have just made it a reserve or something and kept all that he built. It was pretty awesome to see what a man and his 100 lb wife could achieve over time.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
1,767
I'm all for closing off/reclaiming/whatever old roads (and maybe some of the newer ones too!). How to do it is a conundrum for sure. I've seen folks on 4 wheelers destroy an area detouring around a hefty gate with trucks parked in front of it and very obvious "No Motorized Access" signs. People just ignore things and do whatever the heck they want. Reclaiming the road entirely is almost the only option in some cases.


Yeah, there's assholes everywhere. The Tonto National Forest tried to boulder a rode behind the ranch where I live and all the assholes from town, in their quads, Razors and even some trucks, climbed around the barrier and continued ruining the place. Jerkoffs all.
 

Macintosh

WKR
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Messages
2,754
most of the NF management plans I've read over the past few years include very detailed plans for which roads are required to be surfaced for log trucks and will remain over time to access an entire large area, and those remain, possibly gated; other roads are not meant to be permanent, those are generally planned from the beginning to be reclaimed aferward so they are not accessible to an ATV, and dont become a conduit for erosion problems, invasive species, or drmatically increased concentrated use. I'm totally fine reclaiming non-permanent log roads, and I think as a hunter the area is better for that and I am better off as well. Where there arent existing roads, I am all for active forest management there, and I am also all for NOT making that area accessible by vehicle in the future--that's a one-way street that leads only downhill. What I'm not ok with is the move to do away with active management in general. Sometimes it's hard to tell what is driving an article like this (I didnt read it all), and the soundbite can sound very similar, but these are two totally different issues that really need to not be conflated. Unfortunately, like many issues, this one needs to have some nuance applied.
 
Top