Kaibab Forest cuts 380 miles of trails.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Joined
Jan 30, 2003
Threads
181
Messages
13,506
Location
All over Arizona
Howdy! I know it's a long way from most of us in the Phoenix/Tuscon areas, but they have published the "new plan" for us. I don't personally know the area at all. Those who do travel in the Kaibab may be wise to check it out. I am pretty sure it will end up just like all the other National Forests, which is: " All roads and trails are considered CLOSED unless posted OPEN. " If the OPEN sign is missing, then you MAY be cited for being on an UNPOSTED trail. I have verified this with several FS rangers. So, if the GREENIES use the OPEN sign for kindling, you're out of luck!!
img011.webp
img012.webp
 
thanks John for the info - what a shame. Its happening all over. I see at least the hunters can legally go off road to gather their legal Elk carcass.
 
Coconino National Forest is working on closing a major part of they forest service roads. Plus Coconino has been a open forest fro years. Which means unless posted you could travel off road as long as you didn't leave a mark. You can thank the changes to the greenies and the ATVs. They just can't say on the trails. I lost count of all the new Atv trails I;ve seen show up since I bought a place up there in 2002. Around mile post 302 on highway 87 there is a large ranch to the east. A few forest services roads ran thru it. About five year ago the owners put up six foot chain link fence across the roads with a sign stated that for over fourty years that they have kept the roads open. But now since ATVs and dirts bikes can't stay on the roads that have closed them. I have forest service maps of Coconino National Forest from 1970. If you look at where you wer able to travel back then it makes you want to cry. I use to travel up Doyle saddle in the San Francisco Peaks legally. That road has been closed for around twenty-five years. I move to Flagstaff in 1971, bought my first FJ40 a few years later. I was like a kid in a candy store. A few miles out of town in any direction and you drive for ever on forest service roads.
 
It's sad to see happen, but it's always going to be a #'s issue with offroad travel. I know from what i've experienced in person and with following on the forum that we all pick up after ourselves and sometimes other people also. Though the percentage of people that offroad in a truck or on an ATV/dirtbike that don't pick up after themselves is alarming and affects us all negatively. All it takes is some overzealous greenie that hates motor vehicles other than subarus to start getting their green tea drinking buddies together to bring these issues in a given area to the attention of the forrest service. Is there an AZ based organization that is trying to defend the right to use "public" land the way people have been for over 50 years?? I know numerous clubs do trail clean ups and the such but what about fighting legally?
 
Howdy! The Arizona State Association of Four Wheel Drive Clubs is probably the most active/effective group in the state. Been around a long time and actually has people that go to Washington DC and fight for our access rights. There are about 3 dozen 4wd clubs active in it. Unfortunately, CSC is not one of them. I encourage all 4wheelers to get active in these issues. Blue Ribbon Coalition is probably the biggest/best on the national scale. Even if you can't go to meetings, write your congressman, volunteer on cleanup projects, etc, the more organizations that you belong to, the bigger your footprint is in the effort to keep trails open. There are also a lot of peripheral organizations that are becoming more concerned with access, such as hunting and fishing groups, gun and shooting groups, rock collecting and prospecting groups. We are all being affected by these closures. John
 
I know that clean ups help but I see a bigger problem in ATVs. There is a road that leads into the forest from the subdivision where my cabin is. We take our dogs for walks in the forest. Last time up there we were walking down a trail that had some trash which we picked up. The big problem is that this trail was down a wash that had a sign where it started saying no motorized vehicles. Picking up the trash doesn't make the trail go away. Once a ATV heads off the trail is seems all the other ones that come later just have to follow. I have lost count of how many cabin owners have cut gates into the fence at the back of property and create a person trail into the forest instead of using the road in the subdivision. Someone throws a beer can out, some one else picks it up. The problem that beer can created was fixed. Someone creates a new trail there is no easy way to fix that.

The Forest Service budget has been being cut for the last few years. They don't have the man power to patrol that they use to. The easiest fix is to cut down the area they have to watch. They really don't need the greenies pushing them. All this new unauthorized trails is all the amno they need. Before the budget cuts the Forest service operated a vistor center at Clint's well. They had posters all over saying keep you ATVs on established trails. In years past it was the loggers who were creating roads where ever they pleased. Now it ATVs who create trails where they want. It's the poor guy who willing to stay on the established trails and not throw out his trash who gets penalized. It just doesn't seem fair.
 
Again, it's all about #'s. About the only plus of the economy is that hobbies are the first to go and hopefully it will thin out the people who shouldn't ride anyway. Anyone who rides knows just the morons I refer to. Usually they stand out by not wearing a helmet or riding like a goon.
 
Again, it's all about #'s. About the only plus of the economy is that hobbies are the first to go and hopefully it will thin out the people who shouldn't ride anyway. Anyone who rides knows just the morons I refer to. Usually they stand out by not wearing a helmet or riding like a goon.
Your right. The numbers are scary. The off-road miles driven by quads now days is far more that the miles driven by 4x4 rigs. I'm pretty sure that the Phoenix area far exceeds any other major metro area in quad ownership as a % of the population. It would take a HUGE increase in enforcement to really do any good, but unfortunately, I don't see any of the land use/control agencies leaning that way. It is just so much easier for them to close up the vast majority of the outdoors and then turn them loose in a controlled area like The Rolls. I really don't expect that area to survive more than about 10 years until there are so many injuries and so much erosion that it has to be closed up also. John
 
I guess I should say I don't think all ATV riders are the bad guys. When I retire up to my cabin I have kicked around the idea of buying one myself. But it does seem to more bad ATVers than just a few. I do seen to notice that alot of these bad ATV riders run in packs so they create trails easier. They just play follow the leader when driving offroad.
 
My opinion comes from attending a bunch of meetings, dealing with rangers, attempting to setup volunteer projects, etc. I agree that there is a huge problem, but most of the problems are illegal now and not enforced. So government does what it does best, passes more laws that it has no intention/capacity/will to enforce. This just penalizes the users who know/obey the law and has little effect on those who don’t care (the ones causing the problems now).

One example on enforcement: The forest has been under a high fire restriction, no fires, shooting, etc. In June there were 5 fires in Tonto, 3 proven to be caused by shooters. A few volunteers were out riding, saw shooter groups, stopped had friendly talks about the restrictions and most packed up and left. One group at Sycamore gave them the finger, later they stopped and talked to a ranger gave him the info on the group, said it would be handled, they were ready to leave, so followed the ranger out. When they got to the shooter group, who were still actively shooting, the ranger slowed, looked and kept going, got to Beeline and turned right!:o

The volunteer was a bit confused, so at the first opportunity called his contact at Tonto and told the story. The reply was; the judges have been throwing out forest shooting citations, so no reason to writing them. Why not stop and have a discussion about the rules? We don’t want to risk a confrontation with armed, drunk, rednecks if we can’t write a ticket! WTF, it’s good if volunteers have the balls to do it, but the paid law enforcement can’t be bothered to do it?:mad:

They always claim that budget is the problem. They say they would like to put up more signage, have more brochures, educational outreach, etc, no budget, but they have plenty of $$$ to run bulldozers? They have spent an obscene amount on this travel management boondoggle thingy and love to spend huge $$$ on silly certification training programs.

They are all about certification/training programs, some examples: One of the plans being discussed is civilian patrols, the certification list is huge, including but not limited to; vehicle operation (needed for anything but a truck), radio commutations, conduct, first aid, CPR, correct reporting procedures, etc, etc.

At the last meet there was a report from some who got the quad certification/training. They met at the south Bulldog entrance, the trainer, some fire fighters who were also getting certified and a big trailer with forest service quads. Unloaded the quads, the trainer gave a speech on operation/dangers of the units. Showed how, where to add fuel, check oil, tire pressure, etc, demonstrated how to start/turn them off, where the brakes, throttle, etc, were. Had them get on the quads and rock them side to side to show they could balance them, then rode to the big wash/clearing, ate lunch, back to the trailer and loaded the quads. Reported that it was fun, but felt a bit ridiculous, most are older retired guys, who have been riding motorcycles/three wheelers/quads pretty much forever.

Next up was the expense spreadsheet read by the ranger rep. The private trainer cost ~$800 per person (12-15 were trained), the truck/trailer/quad maintenance, truck driver and helper, etc. Ended in a huge number, but they now only need a few more training days and will have some new “certified volunteers”.

One project mentioned was to repair/open a trail closed by the spring storm/flood. The immediate reply from the ranger was; this will need to be done outside of “official” volunteering, because there is dead fall that will require a chain saw. Some of us were ignorant to what this means, so the question was asked, why? Apparently the chain saw certification/training is a multi step process, the first step requires 40hr of training and that only allows use of a short bar/low power saw on simple, small branches on the ground. To become fully certified takes most rangers 2 years!

You would think that there would be tons of jobs that volunteers could easily do? Like installing the little brown trail sign markers, nope, requires a certification/training day. Pretty much the only thing is picking up trash and I bet they are working on trailing protocol for that! Most of the meeting time is spent on protocol, very little on actual project planning. I doubt that this is unique to volunteer meetings, it seems that this is way of biz for them, so all forest biz works this way, huge $$$ spent on protocol, little on actual projects?
 
One thing that the forest service doesn’t get, refuses to comprehend is, lots of users look for some challenge in their back roads travel. It’s my understanding that (outside of “ORV areas” Rolls, Sycamore, etc) most roads that will remain open will be maintained to a 2 wheel drive pickup standard, graded, 2 lane. This will cause the very problems that they are complaining about. Smoother roads allow for more traffic, at higher speed, more dust, accidents, higher percentage of inexperienced users, more trash, more will go off trail looking for a challenge, etc, etc.

My understanding is open roads will be indicated by the little brown posts with FR numbers on them, If there is the post, open, no post closed. This is dumb, they are regularly taken, destroyed, missing now. In the future maps, etc, wont matter, the post is your indicator, if someone removes it the road is illegal to drive on, even if someone removes it while you are on the road, you could be cited.

The majority of the “closed” roads will still see traffic, they have to, they go places, cattle tanks, mine claims, etc, so “permitted users”, ranchers, claim holders, etc, will be driving on them. So the less informed, uncaring, user is tooling down the graded road sees a road that looks more fun, bigger bumps, fresh tracks, they are likely to take it, where more experienced users won’t use it. At least now there is a mix of responsible users and uncaring, the more caring, pickup the trash, help with recovery, somewhat lead by example, more often report problems, etc. Under the new program these areas will be populated by the uncaring, so problems will become worse.

My guess is this causes some experienced law abiding users to switch sides. Get tired of riding on graded roads, remember that great trail, it has tracks, no enforcement around, driving it. I bet “enforcement” will mainly be when rigs break, get stuck, accidents, etc, a ticket will come with rescue, little to none otherwise. It’s almost like they are setting this thing up to fail.:mad:
 
I know that clean ups help but I see a bigger problem in ATVs. ...

They see all ORV as a problem, but also see that organizations are actively attempting to improve the situation, Tread Lightly, etc.

I deal mainly with Tonto, they have a big hard on for shooting and rightly so. You can't continue to cart 25 tons of mainly shooter crap out of 4 Peaks alone each year.

It's the biggest, enforcement, cleanup, dollar drain, etc, right now. From what I gather, the biggest problem is attitude, when contacted they become defensive, it's our right to shoot, shooters are great outdoors men, etc. None of the companies/organizations are willing to man up, admit there is a problem or do anything significant about it.:o

I fully expect to lose the privilege to shoot on forest lands, soon. In talking to some it's like it's a done deal, in process, the only shooting will be in taking game.:mad:
 
Tools, learning more about the processes, and the people involved, can be helpful in making forward progress with the FS. For example, you cite that a "ranger" turned a blind eye to a shooting problem.

If it was a closure, and the "ranger" was driving a vehicle marked "law enforcement", and was wearing a duty belt, there was possibly some kind of failure there. In that case, acquiring tag numbers, vehicle numbers, names, badge no.'s, etc., then contacting the officer's superviser would be in order.

If the individual was driving a standard FS rig, and wearing a FS shirt, and small brass badge, with no duty belt, they are, by policy, not obligated to contact folks with guns in the forest. Sad but true, bambi is not the only one in the woods these days, and the FS doesn't require other than law enforcement to contact people with firearms.

Whomever told you that it takes that long to get a sawyer certification probably miscommunicated something. Are they referring to how often the class is offered (i.e. it takes two years to get sawyer certified because they only offer it every two years in this area?) or are they saying that it takes that long to get a cert that allows to cut a decent sized tree? If one was to attempt to certify on a saw and did so by contacting the fire crews and fire training cadre in a given area, I would suspect that you could get certified to run a saw on everything but the big ones in a pretty short amount of time.

As with anything, there is a major learning curve with the FS. It is just like learning how to work on a vehicle you have never wrenched on. Like pulling your first birfield, but not nearly as fun or interesting. Learning about the different positions, their responsibilities, and what they can and can't do prevents alot of misperception and frustration with the FS.

It's no longer 1903, when every FS employee was a ranger, packed a gun, and road a horse into the backcountry. That is sad, but true. I see it all of the time. Because someone is in the FS, they are automatically perceived to be the person specializing in whatever that person who is unfamiliar with the service thinks they should be doing. Kind of like going up to a check out clerk in wally world, and asking for your prescriptions. Well, that person works in wally world, right? Why aren't they certified in pharmaceuticals?

Learning the basic lingo, volunteering, and getting involved are the best things you can do to prevent frustration with the FS. You absolutely can make a difference and influence the managers of these areas. Getting educated about the system, and involving yourself as a proactive American tax paying citizen is highly admirable IMO. Firing off generalizations, and listing reasons for being pissed off about changes in the system without listing solutions helps nothing.

I think you are heading down the right path asking questions and attempting to learn about the FS. The more people that learn about the gov't the more people can affect real change. Generalizations and attacks based on ideals are not a proactive response.

Just my .02, and the best of luck to you, hats off to you for showing enough concern to post on the subject and get people thinking.
 
Dirtyboots, you have four posts on this site. Yet, you feel compelled to chide some highly experienced guys about their opinions and concerns.:confused: The people people in this club have hundreds of hours of volunteer time with agencies in this and several other jurisdictions and states.

I don't mean to bust your balls pal, but if you have any expertise in this area, you might want to clue us in.:meh::hhmm: Otherwise, you might want to establish some credibility before you jump on the soapbox.
 
Last edited:
I read some posts sometimes and just want to help, no offense intended. I am not trying to chide anyone and apologize if I come across that way.

When you sound educated about an organization, and attempt to communicate with them, it will go alot further. There are very rarely any positions in the FS any more that have a position description of "ranger". The district ranger is the office manager these days and if you see one out of the office you may want to take a picture. It is like seeing a trophy elk. As a matter of fact, I may start drafting tags for district ranger sightings. I digress.

My point being that when you go to a meeting, or are on a volunteer crew, and address a FS employee with their job title, such as "rec tech", etc., you sound more informed, and that is empowering to our position as a community.


Mud and expo are the most civil off road boards I have seen today on the web. I applaud everyone that attempts to be as professional as possible. The more positive and professional we are as a community the more forward progress we will make.

Dually noted, you don't know who I am, and I have a lowly post count. Unfortunately I am in no position to provide that information. Just take it for what it is worth, just someone trying to help out the community with a couple of tips and a little insight.
 
Well said Dirtyboots. We are pretty accommodating on this site but unfortunately, the toll patrol has to stay on alert. You might want to go to the thread at the top and introduce yourself. Welcome aboard.:cheers:
 
Tools, learning more about the processes, and the people involved, can be helpful in making forward progress with the FS. For example, you cite that a "ranger" turned a blind eye to a shooting problem.

If it was a closure, and the "ranger" was driving a vehicle marked "law enforcement", and was wearing a duty belt, there was possibly some kind of failure there. In that case, acquiring tag numbers, vehicle numbers, names, badge no.'s, etc., then contacting the officer's superviser would be in order.

If the individual was driving a standard FS rig, and wearing a FS shirt, and small brass badge, with no duty belt, they are, by policy, not obligated to contact folks with guns in the forest. Sad but true, bambi is not the only one in the woods these days, and the FS doesn't require other than law enforcement to contact people with firearms..

I read some posts sometimes and just want to help, no offense intended. I am not trying to chide anyone and apologize if I come across that way.

When you sound educated about an organization, and attempt to communicate with them, it will go alot further. There are very rarely any positions in the FS any more that have a position description of "ranger". The district ranger is the office manager these days and if you see one out of the office you may want to take a picture. It is like seeing a trophy elk. As a matter of fact, I may start drafting tags for district ranger sightings. I digress. ...

I guess I’m lazy/ignorant. When out and interact with a forest service/park official, I use the generic term “ranger” to describe the event, I find that most understand this term? Sorry if that is insulting, maybe a better term would be; government employee, attached to the forest service, of unknown rank/seniority/authority or geafsursa for breviary. I’m well aware that all government agencies have hierarchy structures. If it’s so important that the average user/volunteer properly address the geafsursa with the proper title with in the hierarchy, maybe they should have a training/certification to properly interrogate/identify the geafsursa to determine proper title? :hillbilly:

Anyway, back to the story, I guess I’m not a very good story teller. The story was testimony/discussion relayed by another, so my testimony is as I recall it. The person telling the story is a much more experienced volunteer that I, so likely knew that geafsursa by name, but this wasn’t divulged and no one (including a couple of geafsursa in attendance) interrogated him on the subject, most likely because that detail is irrelevant to the story? The event on the trail with the geafsursa, caused a phone call to the volunteer's contact (a geafsursa who is presumably higher up the hierarchy), who divulged that the judges were tossing out the tickets/citations or whatever the proper terminology is for the infraction report, so they weren’t enforcing the ban. There was some discussion about bringing a lawsuit against the court to force them to enforce the law, but my guess is, that was largely in jest.
 
… Whomever told you that it takes that long to get a sawyer certification probably miscommunicated something. Are they referring to how often the class is offered (i.e. it takes two years to get sawyer certified because they only offer it every two years in this area?) or are they saying that it takes that long to get a cert that allows to cut a decent sized tree? If one was to attempt to certify on a saw and did so by contacting the fire crews and fire training cadre in a given area, I would suspect that you could get certified to run a saw on everything but the big ones in a pretty short amount of time.
...

There are two geafsursa that we interact with at the meetings, One appears to be higher in the hierarchy, there was some banter at the last meeting about this geafsursa getting promoted to “district ranger” (I hope that is proper terminology, protocol?), so my guess is relatively high in the hierarchy? This is the one who relayed the info about the saw certification. I didn’t take it as, nor do I believe anyone else there took it to mean that a geafsursa would toil full time for 2yrs to become certified. I would guess that they have other duties to perform, training scheduling, etc. My take was the geafsursa was attempting to say that it was a large commitment of time, resources, that they were not willing to make for a volunteer, so any work that needed a chainsaw would need to be done outside of “official volunteering activities”? :hillbilly:
 
Back
Top Bottom