Skip to comments.Cabin owners 'deeply alarmed' by forest plan
Posted on 03/01/2002 9:37:48 AM PST by farmfriendEdited on 04/12/2004 5:33:32 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The proposed Sierra Nevada framework is regularly characterized as a dispute between pro- and anti-logging interests. However, because the plan would restrict human activity more than any previous forest plan, recreational interests, including cabin owners, would be adversely affected if this framework is upheld. Members of the National Forest Homeowners are deeply alarmed.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I may have made "D"s in spelling but I made "A"s in Trig.
Waspman, a new word.
Shore nuff! I rites phunky alla the danged time!
Hay! The "Sierra Nevada Framework," has never been nuthin but a dad blamed "Sierra Nevada FRAME-UP!"
Hay! It was forced on the USFS over the last 10 years by the same people that used "ballot box planning" to convert road rage over traffic congestion, coupled with a seige of litigation, into striking down the GREENEST master plan a County government had ever adopted in CA's history!
This used to be a pretty "good natured" place. I noticed a discussion of Prop #40 today by city slickers on the radio and they talked about how your drinking water quality MUST be improved with all of that bond money to buy up that land that their water runs through to keep it clean.
They talked as if they were desperate to get everyone off this land up here to protect their precious water quality. The idiots will never understand they been drinkin water that's been through someone else's kidneys, upstream, all of their lives.
I guess they really still believe that bears don't poop or pee in the woods. They wish we humans didn't exist up here and I call that a "hate crime!" Wildlife don't use septic systems!!! (Of course, neither do enviro-rafters who act like wildlife quite often)
This makes no sense to me at all, so I wonder if either the paper is misreading the law, or (probably just as likely) this is the law, however inane it may be. Ephermeral streams are a nearly constant prescence in a mountainous area, with little ones down every hollow on ridge-slope. Such a law would exclude human prescence from most of the mountains- probably the goal, aye?
The forest dept. burned a Boy Scott lodge because THEIR survey showed its foundation was two feet within Forest property. This was in the Sierra's in the early 80s. They have no respect for private ownership, use or recreation of the land. They are the privilege few and all others get out. I had owned one of those cabins for 8 years down here in Los Angeles. This plan has slowly been formed to get rid of all private ownership and private use of forestry land over the last twenty years whether it church camps, road side cafe, restaurants, cabins, etc. Soon, they've also been trying to force adjoining private land owners to sell to government as their eco regulations extend past forestry boundaries. If you want to experience life in a police state, own one of these cabins.
The cabin owners do more to protect the forest and lives than those professional eco-Nazis. Forestry personnel go home when it gets dark. We were the ones that called in the road accidents, fires, looting and vandalism of Government property (usually to the Sheriff dept, since the Forestry only had an answering machine from 5 pm to 9 am). I got the message that it was time to leave when we had a small brush fire threaten our cabins and the Forestry pulled their equipment back to protect the road and their water tanks and were willing to let us burn. Fortunately, Cabin owners have learned not to expect help from anyone in a uniform and we had our own fire hoses. As a result, my neighbor had a scorched carport (which the forestry initially forbade him to fix, but he did anyway).
Now our local forest require a parking permit to stop within the forestry boundaries, so don't break down if you're traveling through any forest land in southern Calif. and don't expect help from any ranger with a gun on his belt and ticket book in his back pocket.
See what happens when you talk to me, you start spelling funny. Civil Engineering was my goal at the time. I think I will remain an advocate at this point. What kind of Engineering are you in.
Click here for the California State Grange's policy on the Propositions.
$1,275.0 Land, Air, and Water Conservation
$1,057.5 Parks and Recreation
$267.5 Historical and Cultural Resources Preservation
I thought the top flycasters, such as yourself, could land a mayfly in a puddle from that distance...
But, when he tried to level it afterwards to return it to pasture, the feds told him the whole place was now a federally protected wetland. And couldn't be used as a pasture even when bone-dry.
IMO the press is incapable of reporting accurately on any legal issue more complicated than a jury saying guilty or not guilty.
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.