F/S Has Handed Down Trial Restrictions...

[boardbysled]

x2... I've actualy started to get burnt out anyways.. So we'll see what happens. Good news is Tahuya is still good with as fat as you wanna be. :flipoff:

Not quite, there is a 90 somethin inch width restriction.

 

[JOOP]

Not quite, there is a 90 somethin inch width restriction.

I'm good.

 

[boardbysled]

I'm good.

I have a greater than 90" width. If i'm sliding sideways
:haha:

 

[Horus]

Not quite, there is a 90 somethin inch width restriction.

The point is 99% of the wheelers can use Tahuya. Only 15% of us can use Evans anymore.

The Little Rattlesnake road was built with small and narrow rigs in mind. I understand that and support the restrictions set by the trail builders. There is NO REASON vehicles up to and over 85 inches wide should not be allowed to use Evans.

My rig is 82 at the rear axle. The PNW4WDA wants nothing to do with me or anyone like me, this "silent majority." If they do want our support they are doing absolutely pathetic job of conveying it, especially on the actual trails and within the internet forums.

 

[Damnyankee]

Reiter is on DNR land not FS...

dnr has no land, they are only land managers.

the forest service has ulimate control if i'm not mistaken.

it will trickle up hill, or down hill which ever way you see it.:beer:

 

[Damnyankee]

From now on I shall consider the Forest Service an enemy of America and the freedom it is supposed to represent.

as a VET, i owe you a beer mike.:beer:

 

[boardbysled]

dnr has no land, they are only land managers.

the forest service has ulimate control if i'm not mistaken.

it will trickle up hill, or down hill which ever way you see it.:beer:

DNR does own the land, but, recreation (the part of DNR that we work with) doesn't own land, they "rent" or something to that effect from DNR Lands. Personally, I don't see DNR going that way. I see them helping us build the trails for built rigs. "Build the trail for the rig, not the rig for the trail."

The DNR is working with us currently at 4 different ORV parks (Tahuya, Elbe, Reiter, and Walker [With a 5th possible being Yacolt Burn, but it seems that that area is pretty PNWee:eeek to add difficulty to our trail systems.

 

[boardbysled]

this "silent majority." .

I understand you 100% and agree with you 100%. The thing now is that this silent majority isnt so silent.:awesomework:

 

[Damnyankee]

buddy, i'd check again, on the DNR.
im not saying that i'm 100 percent correc, but they are apointed to take car of the land...

again, somebody correct me if i'm wrong,

 

[Horus]

as a VET, i owe you a beer mike.:beer:

I am a firm believer that no American Veterans owe me anything. It is in fact to them I am indebted. This is why I hate to see their freedoms abolished by terrorists here at home while they fight them overseas.

 

[Toyota_corey]

x2... I've actualy started to get burnt out anyways.. So we'll see what happens. Good news is Tahuya is still good with as fat as you wanna be. :flipoff:

takes every last bit of fun out of it..... and is not getting worth the hassle...shouldnt have to be that hard to just go have some fun...


and tahuya is cool for about day.....

 

[dirtygoat]

Apparently, my generalization about DNR and FS wasn't taken as I expected...

Yes, DNR are stewards of land owned by someone else...

And, FS are enforcers of Federal owned land...

 

[zukkev]

DNR does own the land, but, recreation (the part of DNR that we work with) doesn't own land, they "rent" or something to that effect from DNR Lands. Personally, I don't see DNR going that way. I see them helping us build the trails for built rigs. "Build the trail for the rig, not the rig for the trail."

The DNR is working with us currently at 4 different ORV parks (Tahuya, Elbe, Reiter, and Walker [With a 5th possible being Yacolt Burn, but it seems that that area is pretty PNWee:eeek to add difficulty to our trail systems.

You drinkin' again???:eeek: There are a lot of PNW clubs, and individuals that come out to help with all sorts of projects.:awesomework:

 

[Binder]

Some of you guys are funny blaming the PNW for the FS width restrictions.:haha: It just shows how shallow you are. Why don't you just blame black people as there are barely any of them to defend themselves?

 

[nowires]

Some of you guys are funny blaming the PNW for the FS width restrictions.:haha: It just shows how shallow you are. Why don't you just blame black people as there are barely any of them to defend themselves?

So now we are narrowing it down to PNW black people :haha:



I think that we need to just be happy that a trail was opened and go foward in life


Trails are opening, trails are getting rebuilt and added to current parks. From my eyes everything is going our way. I know there is some things that we don't like but none the less, things are going foward

 

[Damnyankee]

So now we are narrowing it down to PNW black people :haha:



I think that we need to just be happy that a trail was opened and go foward in life


Trails are opening, trails are getting rebuilt and added to current parks. From my eyes everything is going our way. I know there is some things that we don't like but none the less, things are going foward

charlie, one was opened, and 10 were effectively closed with a 72" width restriction.

even the jeeps aren't that narrow. (unless shes a stocker)

 

[billulsund]

Again I've been around for a long time and this is not accurate. I know for a fact the PNW has been trying to get the width restriction made wider.
Yes it will happen to all FS trails.

The PNW is pushing for an 80" width restriction and WOW is pushing for 85" so the PNW guys are at least trying to get it a little more realistic than the current 72" restriction. I think that any increase would be good. I also dont want to have to buy new rims.

 

[Jaydog]

That's easy. When they can't wheel any more without being a fugitive then they will start to pay more attention. Right now it's easy to blame groups like PNW but reality is if you're not directly involved no need to look any farther than the closest mirror.....Myself included.:cheer:

I was involved and got tired of arguing tire size and width limits in the PNW4WDA members forum, and finally called it quits because my opinion was far outweighed by the other members and I could see that my progressive attitude wasn't welcome there, but don't take my word for it, just get involved go to the meetings and you will see for yourself :awesomework:

 

[Jaydog]

The PNW is pushing for an 80" width restriction and WOW is pushing for 85" so the PNW guys are at least trying to get it a little more realistic than the current 72" restriction. I think that any increase would be good. I also dont want to have to buy new rims.

They should all be pushing for no limits, the trees and trail corridor will limit those that are too big. Just tell them no limits or we will build our own trails.

 

[billulsund]

They should all be pushing for no limits, the trees and trail corridor will limit those that are too big. Just tell them no limits or we will build our own trails.

I'm with ya Jaydog. I prefer more hardcore wheeling and no limits would be fine with me. Problem is the FS decides whether or not there is a restriction and not me. If the FS requires we set a width limit any increase over the current 72" rule would be an improvement. If I am not mistaken the 72" restriction at Evans has been in the books since the late 70s when most wheelers were Jeepers and they all fit within that width. Now a brand new wrangler is 73.7" wide. No width restriction at Evans is pretty unrealistic due to the trail design and FS rules. I am with WOW and agree on our reccomendation of 85". You can't please all the people all the time. I have wheeled every trail at Evans many times and feel that 85" is pretty much the widest you could be and still fit through everything without hurting trees or damaging the trails. In my opinion there has to be some kind of limit at Evans and the PNW guys just aren't quite progressive enough with their 80" width reccomendation (even though I am less than 80").