I would welcome any kind of info on back trails.
I am with Kevin (toolsrus) on the roads. I camp two ways. I can use the minimum that I can stuff into the 80 in a rough area. Or as at Fossil Creek, I can haul the max comfort that I can get into the trailer.
Camping rough and light is easiest on the terrain. Any place where I can bring the trailer and the whole gypsy hacienda is a place where every moron can go with Mom's car, (such as Fossil Creek).
It is nice to camp in a group with a shade pavilion and a full kitchen and commode. But the places where we can do that are polluted by those who have no respect.
If the FS would maintain fewer roads into the forest areas, those areas would be better preserved for our kids.
When a guy has to invest money in a truck to reach a special place, he tends to respect the place more. When a place is opened to every Dodge Neon or Honda Civic, it tends to get trashed.
It is a nice idea to make public lands available to all of the public. Does that mean that we have to let the idiots trash the most beautiful places?
We as taxpayers spend a lot of money to maintain roads leading into remote areas. Is this really wise? Maybe we should stop maintaining all but a few of the roads. Those who want to reach the best places should show the ability to afford a vehicle that can handle an unmaintained road. If we want to make the trip, we should be able to support the truck that can take us there. We should also show the willingness to help to maintain those roads for others. Public lands are not parks.
Like home ownership, access to public lands is a part of the American dream. We forget that the American Dream is a reward for hard work, not an entitlement. We do not get to own homes just because we are born breathing American air. We have to earn them. Access to public land should be similar. Earn the ability to get there, or don't go there. We who work hard should not pay to allow access to those who trash our public lands.