Posted on 11/16/2011 6:56:44 AM PST by Second Amendment First
Carry on public lands for self protection - yes. Target practice or other types of shooting on public lands - no. Similarly, no farming on public lands.
Over five pages, the draft BLM regulations raise concerns about how shooting can cause a "public disturbance." They also raise worries about how shooting and shooters can hurt plants and litter public lands.This is the clause that will end shooting on public lands. I agree with most that the danger to bystanders is nil, assuming of course, appropriate location and proper backstop.This is the key paragraph foes say could lead to shooters being kicked off public lands:
"When the authorized officer determines that a site or area on BLM-managed lands used on a regular basis for recreational shooting is creating public disturbance, or is creating risk to other persons on public lands; is contributing to the defacement, removal or destruction of natural features, native plants, cultural resources, historic structures or government and/or private property; is facilitating or creating a condition of littering, refuse accumulation and abandoned personal property is violating existing use restrictions, closure and restriction orders, or supplementary rules notices, and reasonable attempts to reduce or eliminate the violations by the BLM have been unsuccessful, the authorized officer will close the affected area to recreational shooting."
As someone who has occasionally used a gravel pit on our own local public land area... "our" stewardship of this land has not been good.
Look at these pictures... Look at the amount of garbage, spent shell casings, shot-up garbage in the range area (an unbelievable amount of glass out there) and crap left behind. Our new targets brought with us are the paper targets, one near and one far against the hill. The rest of course, was already there.
I wondered, when we were there last time, why the state (this is state land) has not shut this site down already. It is a complete mess. The only explanation we could think of was that they were viewing it as a sacrifice area that should be left open lest shooters just go find a new place to junk up. If so... I guess that's smart management.
But it's not real good PR, that this gravel pit is one of the first turnoffs when entering our state forest land. One that people looking for a little time in the outdoors might stumble upon, if they miss the turn to the public trailhead.
If there are places that are at risk of closure, an offer of cleanup and good 'pack it in, pack it out' practices might go a long way toward keeping it open.
Pinging others in the pics with me ;~)
LOL! Well played, sir.
Think about the impact of Obama in his second term. WE will see this kind of sweeping legislation and Executive Order with a strict discipline and agenda. This will be known as Carter and Clinton on Meth! We won't be able to do much about it either. Hunters make up less than 20% of the population.
If all you were after was the shooting and burning all you needed to do was move 100 miles east across the Cascades.
Yeah. But it was more than that. ;)
I was born east of the Cascades, btw.
Some of the best times of my youth were spent in the high desert BLM land east of San Diego, camping and shooting ground squirrels and jack rabbitts. Never saw any hikers or ‘dog walkers’, just the occasional guy panning for gold on his claim.
BO wants to keep federal lands safe for pot growers and illegal aliens....
Sarcasm? You forgot the sarcasm tag?
He adds that urbanites "freak out" when they hear shooting on public lands.
Then they should be required to seek treatment for their mental illness. Hoplophobia is Curable.
FUBO!!!!!!!!
It is a gravel pit, not Mount Rushmore. Other than shooting, there isn’t a reason to stop there at all.
It is a garbage dump. And now, useless as a gravel pit. (you want that as your road bed?) If you don’t see that as a problem, then that’s why these sites will close. They’re being abused.
These places don’t take care of themselves. People have to be responsible with them.
The riding trails around the same area are maintained with much volunteer effort by the users. Brush is cut back, poop and garbage is removed from the trailhead.
Users of the shooting area would be wise to do the same. Adopt a gravel pit. Clean up the visible garbage, and you might be surprised that more people wouldn’t pack out their own. Right now, it looks like a lost cause, and people treat it that way.
Metrosexual #2: "I don't know but I just spilled my lait on my L. L. Bean cardigan."
Metrosexual #3: "I don't know about you guys but I am headed back to the Prius. It could be those teabaggers out shooting those evil guns again. When are they going to outlaw those mean things?"
The vast majority of BLM land is a garbage dump. That is why no one else wanted it.
That site is fine for shooting. Use it as such, and ignore it if you don’t want to shoot.
I don’t ride my horses on a shooting range, and most shooters don’t shoot out on riding trails.
The riding trails aren’t near the gravel pit, you’re missing the point. The point was an example of good stewardship by the users of those areas, to keep them nice.
I obviously like to shoot. We don’t have the right to treat public lands as a garbage dump.
I hear about more people in the inner city being hit by stray bullets than on BLM by a huge margin. This is just BS.
It’s gun control...pure and simple.
BINGO on post 17 for the best one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.