Ocala Forest is a Land of Contrasts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Star banner
By Susan Latham Carr

OCALA NATIONAL FOREST - You and your neighbors own 384,000 acres known as the Ocala National Forest. And this mighty land holding will celebrate its 100th anniversary on Nov. 24, 2008.
This forest, like some of its human neighbors, has survived fires, droughts, hurricanes, the Great Depression, the backlash of foreign wars and various federal administrations, not to mention expansions, Rainbow people and changes in lifestyles and technology.
For Marion County residents, "the Forest," as it is commonly called, is an accepted part of the landscape. But mention it in conversation, and one quickly fmds that it means different things to different people.
Some believe the Forest should be used and enjoyed by the citizens, who own it. Others feel it should be preserved as the natural wonder it is for future generations.
"We have always had that identity problem,"• said Rick lint, Ocala National Forest district ranger. "It's a forest of contrasts:'
For some, this 100-year-old national treasure is home. For many, it is a playground. For others, it represents a livelihood. Some find it is a relief from the pressures of daily life, a nature sanctuary. Some use it for target practice. For others, it is a graveyard. Some even use it as a hiding spot or a place to do their dirty deeds.
Lint is charged with trying to balance all the competing ideas for the public land that spreads across three Florida counties, most of it in Marion County.
"We want people to use the Forest, but how do we, at the same time, protect it so the uses can be sustained?" lint asked.

You really think they are going to do more, blinded by the light so to speak..

Do you really want to spend the money on a hotel when the only place you can ride is the power lines. Better bring all identification you will need it. Those rangers are always stopping everyone.

good luck to a confusing trail system. It was better when you use a gps

A year ago Wildlaw has this to say about the designation of trails in the ONF. I see if you look at the comments from 2006 and compare it with today of what has happened in the ONF, you tell me who rules the forest? The only violation that seems to have not occured yet is the designation of roads not necessary, and I hear rumors the boys are working on that also.

Clients: Save Our Big Scrub, Wild South
Attorney: Brett Paben
Main Issues: NFMA (Forest Plan), NEPA, OHV regulations/Executive Orders
Status: Appeal filed March 3, 2006; decision pending
Description: Although we supported the Forest Service’s decision to designate trails for OHVs and appreciate the thoroughness of the analyses, we had a number of concerns for this project which we would like to hold up as a model for the rest of the Forests to follow. These concerns are: (1) violations of the Forest Plan – (a) the designation of a 37-acre OHV “concentrated use” (i.e., impact) area and (b) the designation of roads not necessary; (2) violations of the OHV regulations by not “minimizing” impacts to Forest resources; (3) inadequate enforcement and monitoring; and (4) some NEPA concerns.

I have heard that there was a lot of wet areas. Seeing as we have had a dry season, that should not be the case.

Defensive GrizzlyBear - it seems prairie master is only asking questions? UHMMM who did make this law? Grizz you should know, I believe you sit on the committee, aren't they who made this law, or started this law, as a matter of fact started this whole procedure of getting everyone certified to ride for 75.00.

how right you are -- one step closer, can't the ONFA do something about this, partnering with the forest

First off the power lines are not forest property, or are they now. Second the rent a cop could have just given a warning, but they probably have orders to be in your face so you don't show up again. Mission accomplished Mr Phelps.

But then again I saw the rent a cop and the campground host kick people out of the picninc table area, not even in the campground, the concrete table out by the little building, threatening to give them a fine. So in your face..

Currently no fees are in effect for the Phase II (central portion) of the forest. Pending a decision, trails will be designated and fees will apply.

It sounds like they will want more money out of your pocket when phase II is complete?

I was at the Umitilla meeting and was told that 80% would go back to the forest for maintenance on the system, not necessarily for grooming of trails, it could be for facility maintanence, picninc tables, etc. So who has the correct answer, or should it be who is lying. That is also what is in the federal register

Interesting read on Blue Ribbon Coalition http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/07/blue_ribbon_bedfellows.html

It is just another way to force everyone out of the Forest.

Hate to be the sort thumb in this, if you sue the greenies you will run out of money before anything happens, they know that. Where does the organization stand on this issue, isn't lswjth2 part of that organization. You need not only organize the ATV people, which is a chore in itself, but also all the OHV organizations. Then pull all people together and find out what talents lie where, and where you can be the most effective.

Taken from Star Tribune.
http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/07/03/news/regional/9144c5380b9599a88725730a00210c08.txt

By JEFF BARNARD
AP environmental writer Tuesday, July 03, 2007

GRANTS PASS, Ore. -- Calling off-road vehicles the top threat to public lands, a conservation watchdog group is launching a campaign to toughen enforcement against outlaw riders who carve up delicate ecosystems.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER, announced last week the formation of a coalition of former public lands rangers and administrators that will work for tougher rules.

The group, called Rangers for Responsible Recreation, includes former BLM national director Jim Baca, former U.S. Forest Service deputy chief Jim Furnish, and former Nevada BLM director Bob Abbey.

"I think they are the most damaging thing that can happen on public lands," Baca, now natural resources trustee for the state of New Mexico, said from Albuquerque in a telephone press conference. "I think people in the field really want to do something, but their hands are tied. There is a lack of funding to enforce any meaningful kind of thing."

The group is seeking laws allowing confiscation of off-road vehicles used in violations and jail time for repeat offenders; greater funding for enforcement, and a congressional inquiry into the actual costs of erosion and wildlife harassment caused by off-road vehicles.

PEER cited BLM statistics for fiscal year 2005 showing off-road vehicles violations was the top law enforcement category nationally, with more than 5,000.

BLM spokeswoman Celia Boddington said enforcement of OHV regulations is a "key activity" of BLM law enforcement, and is particularly effective on the Imperial Dunes in California.

Frustrated by the sprawl of illegal trails, the Forest Service announced in 2005 that all-terrain vehicles, dirt bikes and other off-road vehicles would be allowed only on designated roads and trails in all 155 national forests and 20 grasslands.

Those plans are to be completed on each national forest by 2009, said Forest Service Northwest regional spokesman Jim Sachet in Portland.

He added that the Mount Hood National Forest outside of Portland closed an area to public access when outlaw trails showed up in 2005, and forests around the region are working with local authorities to boost enforcement.

BLM in Oregon and Washington has designated some special areas for ORVs, but still allows them to go anywhere in open areas where no special designations exist, said spokeswoman Jody Weil. At the urging of citizen advisory groups, the agency is considering closing more areas, and recently issued a plan for Steens Mountain that designates which areas are closed and open to ORVs.

More than a third of the 1,336 off-road vehicle violations from 2000 through 2006 in the region were for going off trails and into closed areas, she said. In general, off-road vehicles accounted for 13 percent of violations on BLM lands in Oregon and Washington, ranking behind illegal dumping and vandalism.

Off-road vehicles can spread noxious weeds, which harm habitat for sage grouse and wild horses, added BLM spokeswoman Maya Fuller.

Brian Hawthorne of the BlueRibbon Coalition, which represents off-road vehicle riders, dealers and manufacturers, said he thought PEER was philosophically opposed to all off-road vehicles on public lands.

Hawthorne acknowledged there was an outlaw element, which should be controlled, but added that most riders are responsible and in many states pay registration fees that go to trail maintenance and enforcement.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility and others recently warned the Forest Service that they will sue if more isn't done to curb off-road vehicles causing erosion that harms brook trout habitat on the Nantahala National Forest in North Carolina and Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee.

Good question isn't that called a conflict of interest. It is amazing how no one else knew of this vacancy, but yet someone in the ONF did? How did ONFA get this job and not the State wide organization? I would assume the ONFA would have their hands full being at the table for the phase II trail system, or maybe they are not there.

Good job speaking grizzley too bad nothing you want will be done. Nice to sugar coat everything. I was at both meetings where were you. For some one who is suppose to be standing up for the two forums, you should have made a presence at the meetings.

There was about a dozen people that showed up at both meetings, that is pretty poor. The item that you neglected to talk about is the speed limits, not more than 15 mph on the trail?

I asked several questions to the rangers that were there. One was enforcement on 300 miles of trails, the answer, compliance.. You know the answer to that as well as I do. The second question was maintance of trails, didn't have an answer for that one. The third question was crossing state road 40, that seems to be where the black bear corridor will come into play.

BTW it is rumored the Black Bear Corridor's viewshed is the ONF, not part but whole. Interesting.

Grizzley it sounds like sugar coating the truth. 240 miles of trails and 100 miles of those trails have speed limits on them.

With 240 miles of trails to groom what will the fee be, i bet it will be expensive?

If the trails system didn't have places to camp and get gas, uuuuuhmmm I wouldn't be able to do a 100 mile corridor to get to the other trail system..

Let's get real petition for ATV use from the black bear corridor, an environmentalist group that wants to proctect the black bears, do you really think they want atv's anywhere near the corridor?

UUUUHMMMM I didn't say anything about the mods or who locked it, now did I, I guess it was hard to read

instead of locking the interesting series of events, why not just delete it like some many of the other threads you seem to delete.

Can the Ocala be far  behind

Ken Smith and my screen name is pink floyd --- you got a problem with that go scratch

Protest --- rally --- no backbone, no wonder you will never get a place to ride

LMAO, you are funny. Why dont you get a back bone and post under your real name. Oh yeah and people will be there speaking up for us.

why don't you post under your real name hotshot.... Yea, someone to speak for you, that person must not have a lot to say, if they are going to speak for you

Protest --- rally --- no backbone, no wonder you will never get a place to ride

Protest rally... main enterance..... who is willing