Behind the decision to allow chain saws in Southwest Colorado wilderness areas

[PrairieHunter]

This is why I stated thin skin. Your overreaction is your downfall.

LOL.

I don't think people building homes close to wilderness is a reason to allow chainsaw use. If you want to believe that is overreaction so be it.

What's really going on here is so ironic as you are a government employee who is upset about my comments. Try to hide it better next time.

Did you have an option on the chainsaws or were you just here because you were upset I pointed out that USFS crews were supervising and not actually doing the work?

 

[Deleted member 28227]

 

[PrairieHunter]

Was this intentional hyperbole?

You are trying way to hard.

At least attempt to talk about the subject as it's obvious you are one of the 3 government employees who are upset about my comments that they are contracting out this work.

 

[TheJason]

@Boomerusaf

It's part of his act. He does this all the time.

"Now you're upset"

"Get pissy"

"Resort to swearing"

"Try better next time"

 

[Deleted member 38069]

LOL.

I don't think people building homes close to wilderness is a reason to allow chainsaw use. If you want to believe that is overreaction so be it.

What's really going on here is so ironic as you are a government employee who is upset about my comments. Try to hide it better next time.

Did you have an option on the chainsaws or were you just here because you were upset I pointed out that USFS crews were supervising and not actually doing the work?

Government employee? That title ended when I received my 214. You clearly create threads looking for a fight.

Noted.

 

[TheJason]

You are trying way to hard.

At least attempt to talk about the subject as it's obvious you are one of the 3 government employees who are upset about my comments that they are contracting out this work.

Actually, it was a legitimate question.

I'm not trying hard at anything. I'm just a lazy government employee coasting out my last 12 years. (Footnote - this is intentional hyperbole)

I really don't care if they contract out the trail work or not, nor do I care about your comments relative to the contracting out of said work. Sometimes it's more efficient to contract certain projects out, particularly if there is grant money available for said work.

 

[Deleted member 38069]

@Boomerusaf

It's part of his act. He does this all the time.

"Now you're upset"

"Get pissy"

"Resort to swearing"

"Try better next time"

I'll avoid next time.

 

[TheJason]

Back to the question at hand. Should chainsaws be allowed for this?

I agree with Buzz. Get in, get the work done. I've seen trails in the Scapegoat that were all but abandoned following the Canyon Creek fire. Large scale burns, like above Gates Park in the North Fork of the Sun River in the Bob Marshall have become a complete labor suck on trail crews. Every year, a torrential rainstorm and windstorm comes through, rendering the trail completely impassable.

I talked to a crew one year who were trying open up a trail to the Chinese Wall. They made some great progress, only to have a thunderstorm come through, forcing them to stop and cut their way back to the work center. Given limited crews and limited budgets, I'm not sure it isn't justifiable in some instances to allow chainsaws for opening up and maintaining some of these trails.

We've cut plenty of trails open over the years, sometimes only to cut our way back out depending on weather. It'll be a never ending battle and not easily answerable. From a pure wilderness perspective, allowing them to meld into the forest might be the best answer. From the user perspective (particularly outfitters and horsepackers) the chainsaw alternative is much more palatable.

 

[rideold]

It seems to me that trail access is a poor reason to bend/break the wilderness act regulations. If there is a big blowdown, fire or tree die off then isn't the point of a wilderness area that it goes that natural route? Maybe I'm missing something here and taking the wilderness thing too black and white. Others seem to have more background than I do. Not trying to pick a fight just don't get it I guess.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

I can give you numerous examples of government agencies contracting out work they could do, this is a perfect example. Surely there are USFS crews who could do this without relying on contractors.

Who is going to do the work? When you don't have a trail crew hired, pretty tough to do trail work. Further, when you don't have funding for multiple years, what do you pay crews with, promises?

My brother is a USFS trail crew member in Bozeman, I know exactly what they do. Funny how you always forget that part as you pretend how hard working the government employees are.

You know exactly what ONE trail crew does, more to the point ONE member of a trail crew does. I've worked with/around trail crews on several districts in regions 1, 2, and 4. I wouldn't classify them as lazy, not a single one. Hard working and doing a job that is paid out at the lower GS level of the pay scale? Absolutely.

Other examples are projects I have witnessed at NWR's and one of the worst is Job Corps. They can't get the teachers hired for so many jobs and they end up having to use contractors for all sorts of things. Contractors take advantage of the government, plain and simple. Like taking candy from a baby.

Again, not in my experience. I've inspected contracts for all kinds of work and if the work isn't done correctly, they don't get paid. I've denied payment for sub-par work until its done right.

I can imagine you have a different opinion as a lifetime government employee. That's ok. Government employees always seem to think they know a lot.

I don't have an opinion, I have facts, because I know what goes on having been there and done that. Since you seem to like to pick shit with the chickens, I wont question or have an opinion on your area of expertise and I suggest you don't question mine. Facts trump opinions.

Pretty obvious who the government employees are, they get pissy when you point out how lazy they can be. The reason they get mad is because it's true.

The only one getting "pissy on this entire thread is you. Generalizations like the ones you've made with that statement only further illustrate your lack of knowledge and expose your bias on unfairly painting government employees with your broad brush. I don't experience high numbers of lazy government employees in my line of work, in fact, just the opposite. I've also not experienced trail crews that are lazy, but, hey, I've only got 30+ years experience to draw from, unlike your ZERO years of experience. WTF would I know?

You really think watching 500+ people do nothing at fires like we had in the snowies last year was worthwhile? It's a badly broken system IMO. Even many of the people who work at those places like fires and job corps will tell you the same things. You just try to defend all government employees as overworked and underpaid, which is funny as hell. Sure some are hard working, and many really never do much work and what little they do stops at about 50 while they coast for 20 years before retiring.

Its not unusual for the appearance of fire crews to be "standing around" by the public when in fact, they are often on call and need to be ready at a moments notice. I fought a shit load of fire from 1987-1994 and when you're on a fire, or on-call, you cant be off in the woods somewhere...you have to be available. Many times the "standing around" is during shift changes, when crews are de-mobilized or re-assigned. Many times they are at safety briefings, fire briefings, or waiting to be told what their mission is that day. I'm sure it looked like we were often times "standing around" while waiting to be ferried via helicopter to the line every day and doing the things I described above.

So why do you think the USFS crews were not used for this work?

I would guess because the Forest may have received soft/grant funding and doesn't have the time or resources to get a trail crew up and running. Hiring is a 4 week process, minimum and if you don't know you have the funds for sure, you cant hire a crew. Because budgets, in particular recreation and trail work in particular, have had serious budget cuts for at least the last decade, its probably not real easy to find good qualified people. Trail work isn't just cutting trees, there are specifications for grade, water drainage, blasting, etc. etc. Many of those people have either taken other jobs, retired, or moved on.

But, I don't think you want legitimate answers, you wont to grind the axe and live for the feud.

Your crap gets old...and many are growing weary of it.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

 

[COEngineer]

I don't like the precedent of using chainsaws in Wilderness. As others have said, it's not so much the damage that might be done to the wilderness character in this particular case, but the idea that, "Hey, we're short of money and manpower so let's cut some corners." That is going to be the case infinitely many times in the future and each time we decide it's ok will be one more excuse each subsequent time we have to decide.

What are CO rules on using prisoners to do hard labor? Kind of joking, but there have to be other out-of-the-box ideas we can find. It cannot simply be chainsaws or nothing.

 

[BWALKER77]

If there ever was an issue that's a non issue its using chainsaws to clear trails in wilderness areas..

 

[Straight Arrow]

"I don't like the precedent of using chainsaws in Wilderness. As others have said, it's not so much the damage that might be done to the wilderness character in this particular case, but the idea that, "Hey, we're short of money and manpower so let's cut some corners." That is going to be the case infinitely many times in the future and each time we decide it's ok will be one more excuse each subsequent time we have to decide."

Yep, and each time it gets easier. It is another slippery slope issue. IMO there is already enough pressure, enough grandfathered special exceptions, and enough "if we can't motor and machine it, then it lacks access" to spell the doom of "wilderness" and perhaps even the meaning of "pristine".

 

[one ate E grain]

I could care less about someone making money off Wilderness, that's not what wilderness is for. Anyone using a chain saw ought to lose outfitting privileges for a few decades. I don't like trails, trails allow the riff raff in. No signage, no bridges. Wilderness.

 

[Dinkshooter]

Circa 1994, I'm ripping away on a back-cut for a big nasty beetle killed spruce (1950s killed) with a chainsaw(I'm a member of a FS trail crew). They are so big that when they fall there is absolutely no way a future trail crew is going to show up with a crosscut saw and remove it, we would walk down the trail and drop every giant snag we thought could ever block the trail.

All of a sudden some woman taps me on the shoulder and yells over the saw noise, "this is the wilderness", I nod yes "you can't use a chainsaw in the wilderness" I nod again in reply still cutting away on the back cut. She shuffles off. The snag crashes to the ground then we have to go over and talk to her about why we are doing what we are doing. This is a true story, but I'm not going to name forests or districts

 

[Straight Arrow]

They are so big that when they fall there is absolutely no way a trail crew is going to show up with a crosscut saw and remove it.

Because they lack the patience, the stamina, and the techniques employed by their grandfathers who routinely cut those large conifers with a crosscut ... while telling yarns, chewin, and spittin.

 

[gouch]

I once heard a fire crew call dispatch to ask permission to use a chainsaw to cut a burning snag in the wilderness area. Dispatch said she would ask the district ranger. Five minutes later she came back and said the answer was no. A couple of minutes later dispatch called back. No answer just radio silence. Everyone knew the reason they didn't answer was because they didn't want anyone to hear the chainsaw in the background. But of course nobody said anything. Then three years ago I hiked up into a wilderness area where there had been a fire a couple of years earlier. I was surprised to see that a chainsaw had been used to cut the fire line. Many of the wilderness areas around here have been enlarged to include thousands of acers of land that has been previously logged, even clear cut. complete with roads. So I don't see much of a problem in using chainsaws to maintain trails. Get a lot more done with what little money used for trail maintenance.

 

[Dinkshooter]

Because they lack the patience, the stamina, and the techniques employed by their grandfathers who routinely cut those large conifers with a crosscut ... while telling yarns, chewin, and spittin.

Possibly, but we spent a lot of time using stamina, techniques, teling yarns and chewing cope while we cleared 10xs of miles of trails while a back back crew would have cleared 1xs of miles.

Good thing there was no location services in this pic.



Wall tents and steaks vs Ramen and leaky pup tents

This ponies name was Colorado, I mean Utah, wait I mean Wyoming.

 

[PrairieHunter]

Who is going to do the work? When you don't have a trail crew hired, pretty tough to do trail work. Further, when you don't have funding for multiple years, what do you pay crews with, promises?



You know exactly what ONE trail crew does, more to the point ONE member of a trail crew does. I've worked with/around trail crews on several districts in regions 1, 2, and 4. I wouldn't classify them as lazy, not a single one. Hard working and doing a job that is paid out at the lower GS level of the pay scale? Absolutely.



Again, not in my experience. I've inspected contracts for all kinds of work and if the work isn't done correctly, they don't get paid. I've denied payment for sub-par work until its done right.



I don't have an opinion, I have facts, because I know what goes on having been there and done that. Since you seem to like to pick shit with the chickens, I wont question or have an opinion on your area of expertise and I suggest you don't question mine. Facts trump opinions.



The only one getting "pissy on this entire thread is you. Generalizations like the ones you've made with that statement only further illustrate your lack of knowledge and expose your bias on unfairly painting government employees with your broad brush. I don't experience high numbers of lazy government employees in my line of work, in fact, just the opposite. I've also not experienced trail crews that are lazy, but, hey, I've only got 30+ years experience to draw from, unlike your ZERO years of experience. WTF would I know?


Its not unusual for the appearance of fire crews to be "standing around" by the public when in fact, they are often on call and need to be ready at a moments notice. I fought a shit load of fire from 1987-1994 and when you're on a fire, or on-call, you cant be off in the woods somewhere...you have to be available. Many times the "standing around" is during shift changes, when crews are de-mobilized or re-assigned. Many times they are at safety briefings, fire briefings, or waiting to be told what their mission is that day. I'm sure it looked like we were often times "standing around" while waiting to be ferried via helicopter to the line every day and doing the things I described above.



I would guess because the Forest may have received soft/grant funding and doesn't have the time or resources to get a trail crew up and running. Hiring is a 4 week process, minimum and if you don't know you have the funds for sure, you cant hire a crew. Because budgets, in particular recreation and trail work in particular, have had serious budget cuts for at least the last decade, its probably not real easy to find good qualified people. Trail work isn't just cutting trees, there are specifications for grade, water drainage, blasting, etc. etc. Many of those people have either taken other jobs, retired, or moved on.

But, I don't think you want legitimate answers, you wont to grind the axe and live for the feud.

Your crap gets old...and many are growing weary of it.

LOL. Wow, guess it's safe to say Buzz got a little upset. And yest Buzz these are just your opinions, just like mine. Funny how you seem to think your opinions are facts. They aren't.

I can assure you that I am not the only person who has rolled into a USFS fire camp and thought to my self WTF are all these people doing sitting around here doing nothing. But if you want to pretend that the government is efficient by all means go for it, just don't be superposed when a lot of people dont' agree with your opinion.

The reason it makes you mad is because deep down you know it's true. I just love watching you squirm.

In the end having the USFS crews using chainsaws in the wilderness is one thing, having contractors running chainsaws in the wilderness openers up a whole bag of worms.

And no I do not think that people building next to the wilderness is grounds to throw out the restrictions and allow chainsaws to be used in wilderness.

You are the biggest jerk on hunting forums now that TG is gone, hilarious that you are telling me how to act. Your act of pretending to know it all as a low level government employee gets old. Believe it or not some of us might actually know more than you have managed to learn as a low level government employee for your entire life. But by all means keep white knighting, it's hilarious to watch government employees defend each other and pretend they are all just a bunch of hard working, over worked, and under paid geniuses. If you didn't think what I said was true you would not get upset, that fact that what I said is true is what makes you so mad. Funny how that works. You aren't very good at hiding your emotions.

We both know the USFS has people who are trained for this. They just choose to send those out to jobs where the work is easier and they can run up the bill on a fire. This is different, which is why contractors are brought in. Happens all the time.

Keep up the fine work Buzz.