yes.Loudpawlz said:1) What was the format of the meeting (discussion? small groups?)
(3?)3) What groups are representing and how well-organized are they
well they asked each group to report on the top two issues raised, and if your group's issues were already raised you were asked to go further down the list to avoid repetition and get a broader representation. again, pretty effective.2) What topics/trends/agendas are rising to the surface
back at ya'... thanks for showing up. :thumbsup:snowskilz said:it was a very good meeting. nice to meet you gotdirt
Just bring your ideas and concerns as they relate to how the forests are and could be managed. And GO!gotdirt said:yes.
besides the obligatory "here's what we're doing here tonight" spiel from the facilitator, the majority of the night was spent in small groups, randomly assigned, which then later presented back to the entire group. pretty effective actually.
i'd say it is worth attending for the forthcoming meetings/locations-- definitely early in the process, but best to get our voices heard now, on the record. thankfully i didn't hear too much opposition to bikes and multi-use, though i'm sure there were pockets of folks scattered about the room.
indeed... as i was leaving in my overbuilt, gas-guzzling jeep (what can i say? i like the mountains) i had the heat cranked up full blast and once again realized i'm not worthy-- when you consider that dave rides that (SS) bike *everywhere*, any time of day or night, in any weather.edemtbs said:And finally I'd like to point out that amongst the dozens of parked cars owned by all these environmentalists and concerned for the forest citizens, there was just one bike; slowerthensnot's.
This will be the mountain biker battle of this plan. Mountain bikers at future meetings need to leave comments that mountain bikes are not a form of motorized use. As long as mountain bikers remain ungrouped with motorized, this plan will not significantly impact mountain bike use in the PSINF.edemtbs said:In the general presentations after our groups got together, the most opposition I heard was towards motorized use, not a surprise. There generally was a feeling that they should be limited and made to stay in designated areas. One person brought up "mechanized" use obviously including bikes and such.
Cool, thanks for attending and reporting! I guess Loud missed it too??Nickle said:Apparently I'm somewhat narrow-minded and naive because there were points addressed that I had never even considered. For instance, topics like how to effectively control forest age and density, how to preserve sensitive areas, water shed, wildlife, etc. Some points were very good ones while others made me wonder.
I think my one complaint was that if a topic had already been made mention of, the next group had to propose two new topics. I would have preferred that we present our two more important topics because, well, they're most important to us and they are the ones we want to have heard. It was probably a good thing though because out of 25 tables, probably at least 20 had some form trail management as one of their top two. That wouldn't have produced much variety... but it would have emphasized the importance to the group as a whole.
...don't forget though that all of the worksheets were turned in and will be "tallied", so to speak, so your top two issues will be heard, but in the public forum it definitely made for a better meeting to have the variety presented instead of the same 3-4 topics repeated by each group.Nickle said:I think my one complaint was that if a topic had already been made mention of, the next group had to propose two new topics. I would have preferred that we present our two more important topics because, well, they're most important to us and they are the ones we want to have heard.
The yellow sheet has a mailing address on it. People were told to mail in comments if they did not have a chance to fill it out. I think that is a good idea.jasonb said:I was there too and left (early) with a blank comment worksheet. I inquired today as to how the FS would like to receive comments from individuals who were not at the meeting and when I have a response I will circulate the appropriate material. Hopefully we can generate a lot of comments from mountain bikers in a helpful and appropriate way.
Let's hear it for the reintroduction of the moose!! About the only thing left on our list that wasn't covered (my idea BTW).Nickle said:Yeah, I got in just under the cutoff. Heckler_ASX and I both did. We were the only two MTBRer's that I recognized there.
Hey,Loudpawlz said:Let's hear it for the reintroduction of the moose!! About the only thing left on our list that wasn't covered (my idea BTW).
I saw you guys come in, but you hot-tailed it out of there when the flag was dropped. I had to drink alone.
Curious if anyone has heard anything in the meetings about extraction i.e., timber, oil/mineral leases, grazing leases? Seems most everyone is voicing concerns about recreation and one of the FS roles is being overlooked. These forests don't have much of a logging industry, but there is grazing, mining and some fossile fuel reserves.
And for you Joe...