BucksnDucks
Well-known member
I don't disagree with what you're saying in general, but I don't recall a blanket closure for every NF in just one state.
All Nat’l Forest Closed
- Thread starter Runnin_Chupacabra
- Start date
rke
Well-known member
My oldest drew J14, my other son has a D8. The J14 tag is late Nov. so there is some hope things will open up by then. However, I don't buy the 2 week closure. Last year it was the same and then every 2 weeks they extended it.
cahunter805
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,527
I’d be pretty shocked if it wasn’t open by the J14 season. Most NF last year that didn’t have a big burn area in them opened October.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
For those who wonder how these decisions are made, a couple of examples of the type of plans in place. It is far from a willy-nilly, unilateral decision. Coordination Groups made up of officials from multiple agencies, state and local officials, local fire and emergency planners...lots of people are involved, and they review weather forecasts, fuels data, vegetation data, public usage data, resource availability and more, all of which are weighed against pre-established thresholds. I can't find links to some of the appendices, but you get the idea.
https://gacc.nifc.gov/oscc/ecc/lpcc...ency Closure Plan_2018_v2 Signed Digially.pdf
https://gacc.nifc.gov/nrcc/nrcg/restrictions_closures/areaplans/2017-19 Missoula Area R&C Plan.pdf
Note the authority to implement large-scale closures does not solely rest with any single agency. From the Montana Plan:
https://gacc.nifc.gov/oscc/ecc/lpcc...ency Closure Plan_2018_v2 Signed Digially.pdf
https://gacc.nifc.gov/nrcc/nrcg/restrictions_closures/areaplans/2017-19 Missoula Area R&C Plan.pdf
Note the authority to implement large-scale closures does not solely rest with any single agency. From the Montana Plan:
BucksnDucks
Well-known member
Thanks for the info and above links. The first is an example of a "stand alone" plan for the Los Padres Forest. My question is were the plans for each individual forest in the state followed by looking at the factors you listed or just a blanket closure because resources are thin?
I live and work in Nor Cal and I'm very familiar with the NFs up here. Like I said previously I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. My concern is a precedent being set for blanket closures when there are big differences in conditions throughout the state. I believe if the question of closing or not was up to the local managers we would not see 100% shut down. I think it is fair to say the fire situation is critical but also fair to say closing every forest is the "easy" way to deal with the situation.
Muley Buck
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2018
- Messages
- 46
Is a solution to a problem that doesn't fix the problem actually a solution?
BucksnDucks
Well-known member
In California that is status quo. Politicians are full of solutions just searching for a problem.
BrentD
Well-known member
Sounds like a partial solution to a problem that can't be fixed in simplistic fashion except by internet experts on public forums.
BucksnDucks
Well-known member
Just an internet discussion on a hunting forum, regarding a hunting issue by a professional who lives and works in the area. If you care to add any insight to the partial solution, I would appreciate the discussion. Short of that is merely a snarky, simplistic jab that apparently lowers yourself to our level of internet experts. I believe my point, as well as others getting flack on this is a statewide closure of ALL forests is about as simplistic of a "solution" as possible.
BrentD
Well-known member
You work hard at trying not to understand. I didn't say it was the solution. Read it again.
BucksnDucks
Well-known member
Please explain what indeed you said if you like, so I can understand without working too hard.
Both your replies appear as low key insults, but maybe you know best or maybe you should read it again
Muley Buck
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2018
- Messages
- 46
I never said that I personally had a solution. Also, no sir, I am by no means an "internet expert" and never claimed to be. I am someone just like the people who are commenting on this thread who have interest in our forest lands. These public forums are a great place to voice all of our opinions as you have so eloquently shown. Your opinion and interest in this is just as valuable as mine or anyone else. Although, you might even disagree with that very premise. I have no way of knowing, but that too is/could be your opinion as well. Either way I'm not going to name call and demean. I will on the other hand address the topic of this thread.
I think it's safe to say that most California hunters are very weary of blanket closures across the state. No other western state by far has enacted closures to the extent that California has done the last two years. I do want to say and make clear that I definitely understand and respect legitimate fire closures that can cause imminent danger. Though, to close entire Forests that aren't burning is unnecessary and that doesn't seem to be policy in any of the other western states. I do talk with and am informed by local forest service law enforcement officials. They do not agree with the way it is being handled either. These closures do come from the state of California as they run the Districts.
There is no short term answer at this point. We are most definitely between a rock and a hard place. Anything that can and will produce positive results concerning California forests won't happen overnight, there needs to be long term solutions. It is my belief that for starters we need to look no further than our very own western state neighbors, and take a page or two from their playbook as far as forest management goes. Realistically that can't even happen until all the California red tape is cut. Sadly and unfortunately that isn't probably a reality either. So, frustratingly we as California hunters are now faced with bad decisions in the form of wrongful closures that are a product of many years of piss poor management.
These are my opinions on this issue and they are formed by actual long term USFS employees based in California.
Last edited:
BucksnDucks
Well-known member
Imagine that, thoughtful opinion expressed on a forum based on lived experience in the area and conversations with local experts
Slightball
Active member
Just spent the long weekend hiking in triple digits every day. We dropped 1/3 for our hunting party. I should have dropped a second but by the time I confirmed it was legal, he disappeared in the brush and I never saw him again.Sure, but where do you think the money comes from to pay those government employees?
I don't want to make this a political debate. I'll just keep my fingers crossed that the NF will reopen on 9/17 so I can get out for my annual A Zone backpack hunt, hike my ass off, and get skunked like usual.
Beau_G
Member
Glad you guys were able to capitalize! I tried to get creative and archery hunted a patch of BLM in another unit I drew this year. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a VERY popular trail and I was overrun with loud hikers and bikers by 6:15am.
lastlight
Well-known member
Wow they opened the forest early! Finally a breath of fresh air amongst all the shit going on in this state....
Beau_G
Member
Well, some of them at least
4 SoCal national forests remain closed as most others in the state reopen Wednesday
All but five of California’s national forests will reopen on Wednesday after regional closures were put into place two weeks ago due to wildfires raging in the state, the U.S. Forest Service …
ktla.com
Similar threads
