More Good News for Hunters on Public Lands

[Nemont]

September 15, 2005


Ban on motorized travel in Front supported
Associated Press

HELENA - State fish and wildlife officials in Great Falls advocate ending motorized travel on Rocky Mountain Front trails that will be covered by a management plan the Forest Service is preparing.

That action would be best for wildlife and watersheds, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks' regional supervisor wrote in a nine-page statement given to the Forest Service recently.

"I find the natural values of the Front so compelling that I think this very small portion of Montana should be spared the risk of unnecessary harm," supervisor Mike Aderhold wrote.


Lewis and Clark National Forest officials are preparing to replace a 1988 plan for management of travel on about 392,000 acres of Front lands in the national forest system.

The Front, where the mountains meet the plains, extends south of Glacier National Park.


Motorized travel prohibition

A prohibition on motorized travel on trails is in the third of five management options for the Front, options the Forest Service spelled out in a draft environmental impact statement unveiled in June. Motorized travel on some roads would continue.

A less restrictive option would separate the Front's motorized trail users from those moving on foot or horseback. Another would leave existing regulations unchanged.

Lewis and Clark National Forest officials received tens of thousands of written comments on the management alternatives and those comments, submitted by a deadline last month, are being reviewed, the deputy forest supervisor said Wednesday.

"We are going through and figuring out ... what is the general public support for one choice or the other," Allen Rowley said.

It is likely a final environmental impact statement will be released this winter and formal selection of a management plan will occur soon afterward, possibly in February or March, Rowley said.

The statement Aderhold submitted was prepared after he talked to state wildlife biologists and game wardens who work along the Front, and to fisheries and wildlife managers.


No further comment

Aderhold could not be reached for further comment Wednesday. He was on the Front, according to a recorded message at his office.

Efforts to reach representatives of the Montana Trail Vehicle Riders Association also were unsuccessful.

Rowley said the Fish, Wildlife and Parks position came as no surprise.

"We walked over to their office in Great Falls and had a face to face with the regional director and his staff, and talked through candidly - 'What do you think?' " he said. "We have a strong working relationship."

A 1970-1985 study by state and federal officials found irrefutably that roads and motorized activities on them affect elk, Aderhold wrote.

"Likewise in 20 years of grizzly (bear) research, the impacts of roads and motorized activity is clear," he said. "The activity changes the wild character of a piece of country, causes fragmentation and displaces animals."

 

[Muledeer4me]

"A prohibition on motorized travel on trails is in the third of five management options for the Front, options the Forest Service spelled out in a draft environmental impact statement unveiled in June. Motorized travel on some roads would continue.

A less restrictive option would separate the Front's motorized trail users from those moving on foot or horseback. Another would leave existing regulations unchanged. "



I dont think there is any doubt that we are in a stage where we need to make changes in the management of our lands.
I look forward to seeing these groups work together to find the right balance.
We all have areas that should be off limits to motorized travel,or at best need some good tweeking.

 

[JoseCuervo]

I look forward to seeing the Fat-Assed ATV riders keep losing MORE places to ruin hunting!!!!

 

[Ten Bears]

As the pendulum so swings to the right, it will also swing back to the left.

 

[Nemont]

As the pendulum so swings to the right, it will also swing back to the left.

Ten Bears,

ATV's have no place on the Rocky Mountain front, period. It is a unique and highly valuable area. There is no compelling reason not to prohibit ATV's from the RMF. The travel plan is going to do that and I am in favor of it.

Please explain why anyone would need to travel on an ATV on the RMF.

Nemont

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ten Bears,

Please explain why anyone would need to travel on an ATV on the RMF.

Nemont

Because if we allow bans on ATVs, we will soon have bans on guns, bans on hunting, bans on carry guns on airplanes, bans on driving while drunk, bans on who we can marry, bans on what religion can be practiced, bans on who we can vote for......

Why if we let ATVs be banned, we will soon have Communists running all over.....

 

[FAIRCHASEBEN]

We don't need to ban ATV's we need to ban lazyness , then the slobs who take them off-road would have to buy stairmasters and actually walk while hunting , what a bizarre concept this must be to all the 3rd and 4th generation road hunters .