USFS Land now a Mtn. Bike Park? WT?

[SkiParkGuy]

Think I'd rather have them log it than rip the Sh!t out of it building trails and jumps. Since when has responsible logging been bad? It grows back and provides quality habitat. Not sure a MT bike playground does the same.

Point taken. I should’ve said clear cut logged, which happens here where I’m at in California on private land. (Also I was thinking about how the FS historically managed land. They definitely weren’t practicing modern logging in the 70s and before.) As to ripping the shit out of the land? I work with logging crews and would argue a Timbco does a little more damage than a few thousands MTBers. But no worries man. Your points are valid and I’m not looking to argue. Yes, a modern thinning project would be far less impactful to wildlife than a crowded MTB park.

 

[displacedtexan]

I agree with Mcintosh about the logging, MUCH better option!!
Be like a deer magnet in a year or two.

But deer population isn't THE goal of the FS...

 

[NorthIDHunter]

I agree with Mcintosh about the logging, MUCH better option!!
Be like a deer magnet in a year or two.

My mom passed away on May 28th. Dang that was rough.
I miss her.

Going to try and go back home to visit some family this weekend.
And of course, check out the NF. If things work out, hope to be
hunting there this fall. It's been a while.

Wish me luck.

Sorry for your loss, praying for peace and comfort for you and your family. Hope you get back to that NF soon.

 

[Crghss]

All my great hunting spots as a kid have been paved over or developed for housing developments.

More and more people crowding on to less land. Hate to see what kids born today will have available when they reach my age. Probably not much will be available, if any, for hunting.

 

[Stubborn_bowhunter]

They're doing that in my town. Wild canyons even if you can't hunt in them they keep the place natural.

People are trying to literally build a mountain bike park in them, expand trails, and put buildings along the trails.
They say it's to improve the trails, but it trashes habitat.

Then when people who grew up here, or have been here for a long time show up to oppose it they freak out about it.

Seems like eventually they screw the awesome natural towns, and leave to go screw another one.

 

[Macintosh]

Point taken. I should’ve said clear cut logged, which happens here where I’m at in California on private land. (Also I was thinking about how the FS historically managed land. They definitely weren’t practicing modern logging in the 70s and before.) As to ripping the shit out of the land? I work with logging crews and would argue a Timbco does a little more damage than a few thousands MTBers. But no worries man. Your points are valid and I’m not looking to argue. Yes, a modern thinning project would be far less impactful to wildlife than a crowded MTB park.

So, not to pick on you, but I do think it's worth pointing out a few things because the reaction is normal.

First, I think you are off base in your broad-brush characterization of clearcuts versus thinning. "Clearcut logging" is not a bad thing across the board, and "modern logging" is not synonymous with selective cutting or thinning. I dont know california and it may or may not be a similar case there, but in many areas of the country clearcuts are one of the only places on national forest where you'll find younger age-class forests (critical habitat for all sorts of animals, not just game animals), which historically (i.e. pre-colonization) in my area of the country would have been around 10-15% of the total forested area on a landscape scale, some of which would have happened along edges and in small openings, but some of which would have occurred across much larger areas depending on the natural disturbance that caused them. Depending on the area, a mixture of selective and clear cut harvests are required to achieve the most-natural regeneration of important tree species and to maintain a natural variety of forest-types in order to support the year-round needs of all of the animal species.

Second, regarding the damage from a timber harvest versus a few thousand mtn bikers. From my personal experience in both the rockies and the east, the damage caused by the dense trail network is far more impactful over the long term than even a pretty aggressive logging job simply because the damage is cumulative and it lasts a long, long time, rather than being done in a season or two and then growing back. It's the difference between a heavy blow that goes away quickly, versus a death by a thousand cuts over multiple decades. Regardless of whether one impact is better or worse, I just dont think it makes sense to downplay the affect of these trail networks, downplaying this impact is the entire root of the problem--the affect is there, it is scientifically well-documented and it's clearly a negative affect, so lets just acknowledge the long-term impact both biking and logging have and go into the conversation with eyes wide open about what the real benefits and the real COSTS are of any of these activities?

 

[FLATHEAD]

On a much better note, I got up there this weekend and got to see my old stomping grounds.
There is NO off road/mtn. bike park!!!!! Hallelujah!!! Not even showing on Google now either.
The whole area looks just like it did the last time I was there years ago, although it
looks like a fire ran through there and now it's really grown up (good for deer).
* That 4.5 hr. one way trip is rough on this old body now.
* I either need to get my old Landcruiser up there or go trade my 2500 2WD
in on a 4WD of some flavor.

 

[Rokbar]

Short version. Grew up near a NF that I learned to love after many years.
Life happened, moved away but still would hunt it on return trips back home.
Then more life happened, my Mom Divorced and has recently had serious health
issues. Past 3/4 years I have been her primary caregiver, she lives with us and
I havent been able to get up to do any hunting in the NF.
Saw a chance to go up after Christmas and did some google map scouting only
to find that my camping spot has been turned in to a 100+ acre Mtn. Biking and
Hiking Park. And apparently, one of my favorite hunting spots is now an "Off Grid
Retreat" with those raised platforms and Yurts scattered throughout the area.
Rumor is that the Yurt thing was a land swap with the FS
and an adjacent landowner. But the Mtn. Bike Park must be all FS as some
of the comments on the website say "Thank you FS". Mind you, this used to be such
a pristine area, the campground was just a couple acres of flat ground at the
base of a Mtn. with no facilities, just a place you could camp. But you could walk
from camp and be in excellent deer and turkey hunting.
Pardon my Rant but this area was my sanctuary away from civilization, my old
stomping grounds, this was a special place to me.
Does the FS normally do stuff like this? I thought the FS was in the Forestry business.

But, are you still allowed to hunt there?

 

[Rokbar]

I live near the Mt. Bike mecca in WNC. What most bikers don't realize is without the logging of the forests around here in the 70s and 80s the biking would not be what it is today. The FS did not just build the miles and miles of logging roads for entertainment. They were built to get the logging trucks to and fro the clearcuts. Now the bikers and hikers use them, which is fine. But don't bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[JR Greenhorn]

If you watch the bicycle websites, it sounds like funding for some bicycle trail projects was included in some of the spending spree bills passed at the federal level over the last couple of years. Some was "greenway stimulus," and some was just earmarks for specific projects. There appeared to be a focus on "connecting existing opportunities," which could mean anything from new trails to parking areas and vault toilets. Further, the Biking On Long-distance Trails Act passed about a year ago, which specifically develops bicycle routes (although not likely dense MTB parks). Regardless, enough has passed at the federal level recently that I think we can expect to see bicycle projects popping up all over for a few years.



Additionally, I've got to second most of the comments on logging in this thread. If you don't understand forestry, clear cut logging looks like devastation. However, if you spend 10-15 years going to the same area at least twice a year for recreation, you get to see the process play out on its own scale, and you come to understand that it can be a net positive. Clear cutting and reseeding different parcels over several years means that ares of the forest are always in different phases of growth, and provide ample food and cover to the wildlife. I consistently see more wildlife and more variety in forestry land than I do in designated wilderness. Nature's greatest power is in regeneration.

The forest that taught me the above was used for paper production. However, the eagerness these days to "save a tree" and not print on paper drove down demand for paper, which reduced the value of the forest. That land ended up being sold. All of the trees were harvested, the slash shredded and trucked away, and the stumps grubbed out. Irrigation lines were plowed in, and now the whole area is potato fields.

 

[Pony Soldier]

Losing a little land when there is so little is devastating. An area I hunted for 20 years was suddenly on the butcher block. Over a hundred miles of new roads. Roughly 30% was clearcut in a checkerboard pattern. We adjusted and then they cut more for root rot in the firs. Now over 50% was clearcut. Every two years they cut more for various until most of it was clearcut. This covers the better part of 4 drainages. This was 40 years ago. Now they are cutting everything that was left. It should have suitable habitat by the next century.

At one time I maintained 12 areas that I hunted. I came home one year from my remote work areas only to discover that there was active logging in 10 of them. Pickens was thin that year.

Since then I try to develop a new area every other year. This way I am prepared for new surprises. The most painful was the abandonment of the trail system is western Montana.

I moved and maintain trails in three hunting districts. Each year I try to explore new areas for future areas to hunt.

Two years ago about half of my long time hunting area burned. About 29,000 acres. I'm still sorting out the changes that that has caused. Even in the west change is something you have to assume it is coming and prepare for it.

 

[Pikespeak]

Short version. Grew up near a NF that I learned to love after many years.
Life happened, moved away but still would hunt it on return trips back home.
Then more life happened, my Mom Divorced and has recently had serious health
issues. Past 3/4 years I have been her primary caregiver, she lives with us and
I havent been able to get up to do any hunting in the NF.
Saw a chance to go up after Christmas and did some google map scouting only
to find that my camping spot has been turned in to a 100+ acre Mtn. Biking and
Hiking Park. And apparently, one of my favorite hunting spots is now an "Off Grid
Retreat" with those raised platforms and Yurts scattered throughout the area.
Rumor is that the Yurt thing was a land swap with the FS
and an adjacent landowner. But the Mtn. Bike Park must be all FS as some
of the comments on the website say "Thank you FS". Mind you, this used to be such
a pristine area, the campground was just a couple acres of flat ground at the
base of a Mtn. with no facilities, just a place you could camp. But you could walk
from camp and be in excellent deer and turkey hunting.
Pardon my Rant but this area was my sanctuary away from civilization, my old
stomping grounds, this was a special place to me.
Does the FS normally do stuff like this? I thought the FS was in the Forestry business.

There’s no such thing as a hike and bike park. Once an area becomes a biking area it pushes all the hikers out and it’s just a bike park no matter how inclusive they claim to make it.

 

[Pikespeak]

They're doing that in my town. Wild canyons even if you can't hunt in them they keep the place natural.

People are trying to literally build a mountain bike park in them, expand trails, and put buildings along the trails.
They say it's to improve the trails, but it trashes habitat.

Then when people who grew up here, or have been here for a long time show up to oppose it they freak out about it.

Seems like eventually they screw the awesome natural towns, and leave to go screw another one.

Once of the biggest obstacles is that society somehow accepts the logic that building trails is somehow an environmental endeavor.

 

[Mustang06]

The absolute best way to ruin a wild place....build a trail to it.

 

[logan123]

Designated wilderness areas are amazing for this reason. No wheels allowed, regardless of whether they’re human or engine powered. No engines either, so even the FS guys have to use two man cross cuts. Reduced use is nice but zero logging allows for massive fuel buildup and natures great purifier follows, as it always has.

Cyclists are typically obnoxious on pavement, I’d imagine they’re worse when they’ve got the mass and inertia advantages.

 

[Brando']

The FS manages the land for “many uses”. Be thankful they didn’t log the land, which is historically their main purpose. Now they’re getting more into the recreation side. Where I’m at the FS is using local trail builders to construct new trails for MTB and hiking use. They’ve built several trail networks that are free for the public to use rather than something like a ski resort that charges for the use of the land/facilities. Where I’m at, at least so far, they’ve been building these trails in areas close to town and it’s actually pretty cool. They unfortunately have plans to develop an area that currently has no trail access, which keeps out all but a few people. It’s prime hunting grounds and I’ll be going to every meeting to oppose expansion even though I volunteer my time to help build the other trails.

Timber harvest are one of the best wildlife management tools we have. The more early successional habitat on the landscape the more wildlife. The FS really fails hunters and wildlife viewers by not doing more timber management by utilizing timber harvest and prescribed burning. And unfortunately somewhere along the line a lot of people (including hunters) have been fooled into believing that forest management (timber harvest/prescribed burning) is a bad thing for wildlife.

Anyways, yeah the mountain bike park thing would be pretty rare for FS. I've never heard of that before.

 

[big.eds]

whats the elevation?

 

[Pikespeak]

Timber harvest are one of the best wildlife management tools we have. The more early successional habitat on the landscape the more wildlife. The FS really fails hunters and wildlife viewers by not doing more timber management by utilizing timber harvest and prescribed burning. And unfortunately somewhere along the line a lot of people (including hunters) have been fooled into believing that forest management (timber harvest/prescribed burning) is a bad thing for wildlife.

Anyways, yeah the mountain bike park thing would be pretty rare for FS. I've never heard of that before.

I know when they come back through and plant a tree every 6 inches its bad. There's no habitat in those thickets that result.

 

[DC10Tyler*]

With the change in the political shift in the last several years a lot of forestry and water ways are bought by the US government. I think that trend is the biggest reason I see this happening. Wither to prevent drilling for oil, or "preserving" the habitat. Interesting comments on Mtn bike trails. Ny family and I have visited Northwest Arkansas for that specific purpose several times.