Forum Discussion

19 Replies

  • Does anyone have information on both sides of the story?

    It sure sounds like there is more to the story.
  • We ,the public all own and should have concern for preservation of our lands.

    Use of public land for personal or business gain is prohibited. Use of lands are for business purpose are for fee.

    A camp owner in the Black Hills was bankrupted because they LED horse trail rides into bhfs and CSP state lands.

    On our recent snowbird trip to Az, the camp in Bouse, Az, emphazied free daily led excursions by a camp compensated ambassador. I brought it to the attention of the new owner that he should research his policy. Camp led rides and compensation for the ambassador ended the next day.

    Enjoy and use our lands. The mantra of leave ony your foot prints, not tire tracks will become the norm and law.

    Where the designee is licensed to use the lands, such as a concessionaire, protection of sensitive areas is guaranteed.

    Not so with authorized or unauthorized motorized travel. I see a trouble arising.
  • Sadly, these forest service people forget who pays the bills - us. I've seen it here in AZ where a self-serving forest ranger decided, single handedly, to evict 160 single-wide trailers and make room for RV's at an AZ lake. The trailer owners fought him and won in court. Other federal rangers have told us that we're lucky they let us onto their lake (Roosevelt near Phoenix). Frankly, I have little use for these park rangers who think they own the forest.
  • Your apology is accepted. For all who care I don't have a "side" I was simply seeking information in order to better understand the issue.
  • bgum wrote:
    To the moderator:

    Everything I said was respectful. All issues like this have more than one thing going on. I asked a question about why it was where it is. My question was more respectful than your biased reply. You are a moderator. Moderate don't inject your opinions in a somewhat heavy handed manner.

    I have opinions. I'm sorry you find them heavy handed. Truly I am. That's not a sarcastic response.

    This is a topic that is near and dear to me. Access to public lands is a topic that has been discussed often over the years and it's truly crucial to the Toy Hauler community.

    The interesting thing about this specific issue is the symbiotic crossover between the OHV community and ... I'm kind of struggling for the right word(s) here ... I guess a picture is worth 1,000 words in this case. I don't want to use any pejorative labels (because I don't think negatively about this group), but if you look at the photo of the volunteers, they look diametrically opposed to the typical OHV enthusiast. These are two very different demographics whose Venn diagrams intersect in a meaningful way. It's fascinating to me. Look at their picture and then envision the average OHV enthusiast; they're very different critters.

    As far as my request to try to cordon off this conversation and limit it to the Toy Hauler community, this isn't a unique situation here on RV.NET. Discussions often go off the rails when someone unfamiliar with the topic (and I don't think that's an unfair description of you in this case--respectfully) joins a conversation within a group they are unfamiliar with. We see it here all the time when someone with a Class A joins a Truck Camping conversation or someone with a Travel Trailer posts about 5th Wheel hitches.

    Each of the specific forums has a characteristic style and point of view. And each forum has topics that make a lot more sense to the members who have not only participated in the discussions for years but traveled and camped in the areas being discussed and have unique firsthand experience.

    You have my sincere apology that my comments seemed heavy handed, but I don't apologize for having an opinion (and even a bias) on a topic that affects my ability to recreate. I'm not just a moderator, but a participant.

    As a moderator, my objective is to keep the discussion on topic and even prevent any discord before it occurs. Maybe it wasn't your intent (or perhaps it was), but your comment about hearing from the other side came off as nay-saying. As the moderator, that catches my attention and I try to head off any conflicts before they occur.

    Again, I meant no disrespect and I hope this discussion will continue as constructively as possible.
  • To the moderator:

    Everything I said was respectful. All issues like this have more than one thing going on. I asked a question about why it was where it is. My question was more respectful than your biased reply. You are a moderator. Moderate don't inject your opinions in a somewhat heavy handed manner.
  • bgum wrote:
    Now let's hear the other view point. I'll bet free speech isn't the only issue. Why is there in toy haulers?


    It's a legitimate topic for Toy Haulers. Many (most?) of us use our RVs to access and enjoy public lands.

    If you represent the other point of view, please respectfully provide it. Otherwise, this is a topic for the Toy Hauler members who have so much at stake with access to these public trails. Please respect our forum and our area to discuss matters that affect us so much.
  • Now let's hear the other view point. I'll bet free speech isn't the only issue. Why is there in toy haulers?