Flathead Nation Forest shut down after March 15th....

[TIM]

here is a scare tactic that worked here in north idaho. Write letters to the local paper complaining about the terrorist in the area.

The local eco terrorist will than ask for protection because they feel for there lives with all the wacko's around.

This happened in priest river and Mark Spengal was actually scared for his life, becasue of all the militia style people who live in the north west. Nothing really happens but it is fun.

tim

 

[Rush44]

I just got off the phone with Keith Hammer, who returned my message I had left for him earlier this morning. Keith is an absolute hypocrite.... to the fullest extent. I was very calm and respectful of what he had to say about his side of the issue and he mostly re-affirmed everything posted on his site for the Swan View Coalition.

I asked him about fairness and sharing the backcountry, to which he quickly stated (do not quote directly, it's paraphrase) "I don't think motorized vehicles have any place in the backcountry, at all. They shouldn't be allowed there.". Keith is very adamate about having absolute quiet in the backcountry at all times.... constantly. No motorized use, no sharing, no nothing. He told me about times he could go on top of peaks in the Swan Range and hear snowmobiles hi-marking several peaks away (which is a popular use area). He really showed his colors when I asked him about Wilderness areas and places already set aside for quiet non-motorized use. He said it's stupid that people have to drive somewhere to experiance his version of a backcountry. Everyone should be able to walk out thier back door and climb the mountain behind them and shouldn't be able to hear a thing. Doesn't every other recreational sport or activity require some form of travel?

When I asked him about sharing he said that we should all share the backcountry with each other. But when Keith says share, he means it in his own terms. He wants to share only his version of the forest with us, his way on his terms. To me, that doesn't sound like sharing at all.

 

[Nate]

I just got off the phone with Keith Hammer, who returned my message I had left for him earlier this morning. Keith is an absolute hypocrite.... to the fullest extent. I was very calm and respectful of what he had to say about his side of the issue and he mostly re-affirmed everything posted on his site for the Swan View Coalition.

I asked him about fairness and sharing the backcountry, to which he quickly stated (do not quote directly, it's paraphrase) "I don't think motorized vehicles have any place in the backcountry, at all. They shouldn't be allowed there.". Keith is very adamate about having absolute quiet in the backcountry at all times.... constantly. No motorized use, no sharing, no nothing. He told me about times he could go on top of peaks in the Swan Range and hear snowmobiles hi-marking several peaks away (which is a popular use area). He really showed his colors when I asked him about Wilderness areas and places already set aside for quiet non-motorized use. He said it's stupid that people have to drive somewhere to experiance his version of a backcountry. Everyone should be able to walk out thier back door and climb the mountain behind them and shouldn't be able to hear a thing. Doesn't every other recreational sport or activity require some form of travel?

When I asked him about sharing he said that we should all share the backcountry with each other. But when Keith says share, he means it in his own terms. He wants to share only his version of the forest with us, his way on his terms. To me, that doesn't sound like sharing at all.

You still gonna buy that 08 M1000?

 

[ragincajun]

people like this need to be shot! it really pisses me off when they try to say we ran over bears and chase them! for god sake people!...pull your heads out and take into consideration of the amount of snow is in the mtns in March and the fact that the bears are probably burried under it all and people need to remember that their food sources are down low(deer elk cows sheep etc.) because they dont want to deal with the snow and the fact that there isnt any food for them! we have our places to ride(PUBLIC land) and they have their places (wildernes) to be gay at. here is an idea...if anyone has a disabled family member...call up the disabled peoples association if thats what its called(sorry i have no clue about their org. name) and get them involved because in a way that would be discrimination because they would not be able to access the back country so that could be someone to get involved!


here is a ? for yall.....how many animals has everyone actually seen snowmobiling EVER? me...i saw one flipin rabbit all year long! not any deer, elk, mtn. lions or BEARS!

 

[Wade]

He logs and shuts down logging, shuts out motorized users.

He's probably only logs private land. And, probably sees private land as a resource, and public land as some "king's forest" idealistic nirvana. Yha, he's a selfish idiot. His idea of sharing the forest, is skiers using trail machines to access hills for skiing.

When you disenfranchise a huge percentage of the public (ie. motorized users, bikes, horseman) you might have a hard time getting their support, when the very existence of the thing you hold so precious is under attack. Does he actually think I'm going to help protect public land, if the public lands hold no value to me? If I have no stakee in it, I say cut it up into 10 acre ranchettes. Pay off the national debt. See how the grizzlies like that.

History will hold that some environmentalist cleaned up rivers from oil and mercury, cleared the skies so that we could breath better, and cleaned up trash. While other people like Keith Hammer, wasted his (and everyone else's) energy fighting for useless idealistic fairy tales, while real problems went unnoticed. Very sad, he must have some form of little-man syndrome.

 

[Xrider]

I suppose he'd like to cease all air traffic within earshot too. Man these people are really whacked, really messed up in the head!

 

[CleElum Sledhead]

FYI.

______________________________________________

May 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 93)]
[Notices]
[Page 27490-27491]


Idaho Panhandle/Kootenai/Lolo National Forests; Lincoln and
Sanders Counties, MT; Boundary and Bonner Counties, ID; and Pend
Oreille County, WA; Forest Plan Amendments for Motorized Access
Management within the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery
Zones

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a supplemental environmental impact
statement to amend land and resource management plans for the Idaho
Panhandle, Kootenai and Lolo National Forests.

SUMMARY: The Forest Service will prepare a Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (SEIS) for Motorized Access Management within the
Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones to present
additional information on grizzly bear mortality and population trends
and account for uncertainty in relevant grizzly bear research. The SEIS
will include a detailed analysis of Alternative D Modified and
Alternative E that reflect the current condition of habitat security
for grizzly bears. The Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS was
published in the Federal Register (66 FR 57717) on November 16, 2001
and notice of the Final EIS (67 FR 11692) was published on March 15,
2002. On March 24, 2004, the Record of Decision (ROD) was signed that
amended the Forest Plans for the Kootenai, Lolo and Idaho Panhandle
National Forests. The ROD amended the objectives, standards, and
guidelines that address grizzly bear management within the Selkirk and
Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zones.
Alternative E was selected for implementation, with the
incorporation of terms and conditions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's (USFWS) Biological Opinion.
On December 13, 2006, U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy ruled
against the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
in a lawsuit brought by the Cabinet Resource Group, Great Bear
Foundation, Idaho Conservation League, Natural Resources Defense
Council, and Selkirk Conservation Alliance. Judge Molloy ordered that
the 2002 Final Environmental Impact Statement and 2004 Record of
Decision be set aside as contrary to law and that the matter be
remanded to the Forest Service for preparation of a new environmental
analysis that complies with 40 CFR 1502.22 (a) and (b). As a result of
an action considered no longer valid, on May 17, 2007, the USFWS
withdrew its Biological Opinion for the Forest Service's proposed
action.

DATES: Scoping is not required for supplements to environmental impact
statements (40 CFR 1 502.9(c)(4)). There was extensive public
involvement in the development of the proposed action, the 2001 Draft
ETS and the 2002 Final EIS, and the Forest Service is not inviting
comments at this time. The agency expects to file a Draft SETS with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and make it available for public,
agency and tribal government comment in July 2008. A Final SETS is
expected to be filed in April 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Paul Bradford, Forest Supervisor,
Kootenai National Forest, 31374 U.S. Hwy 2 West, Libby, MT 59923-3022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirsten Kaiser, Grizzly Bear Access
Amendment Interdisciplinary Team Leader (406) 283-7659.
Responsible Officials: Ranotta McNair, Idaho Panhandle National
Forests-Forest Supervisor; Paul Bradford, Kootenai National Forest-
Forest Supervisor; and Deborah Austin, Lob National Forest-Forest
Supervisor.

 

[TIM]

cle elum

grizzly bears where talked about during the caribou meeting i attened at the idaho fish and game a couple of months ago.

The selkirk mountain winter travel managment plan will take into account mountain caribou, canandian lynx, wolverine and grizzly bears.

all bears when coming out of the den feed on grasses and forbs for awhile. Once deer and elk start calving then the bears will look for calves. this would be in june.

tim

 

[Ultra]

Just hammer spews his nonsense didn't get this area closed down. Take a look at the judge. I am sure others are a lot more knowledgeable on this topic than I am but I keep hearing this is a judge that is bought and paid for with green dollars? This judge has a track record which most always rules in the green favor. That's why these groups keep getting their cases in front of him. Its a combination that works for them. Someone correct me if I am wrong?

 

[jim]

"We've been effective because we focus on a few issues, a defined geographic area that I know and hike and love, and because we've studied how the science and the law works. We've carefully chosen our shots. Then, when we decide to move on an issue, we've been relentless. Just relentless. Also, I work only a few hours a day. That contributes a lot to my effectiveness. A lot of our problems stem from our obsession with what we do rather than who we are."

He makes it sound like he's a genius...fact is, the laws are so stacked in the environmentalists favor that they have to be idiots to lose anything anymore. Completely naive, uninformed, non-scientific people can go in and close areas based on random baseless claims. They can do this because the FS will side with them without any research to back up claims. Why? Because anytime the FS rules in our favor, the green $$$ machine will sue and some judge will hear a "if we don't save this now, we'll lose it forever" claim and side that way. The FS has learned to just side with enviros the first time and avoid massive $$$ losses through appeals litigation. What really sucks is that environmentalism is becoming so PC...all potential candidates for president support the green agenda. I'm not sure what to do...we write letters, present solid cases and keep losing time after time on baseless claims. I think ultimately it will just come down to how effectively they can enforce the closures because people are beginning to and will continue to ignore these closed areas. It's too bad...not sure what else to do in these fights. One example...the FS person in charge of McCall closures fully admitted that they had not read all the comments when they were called up on a major point many sledders made on keeping land open up there...chances are it will get closed regardless of our letters and fighting. How do we stand a chance when it's pre-determined like this? What to do...sad part of history for this country. But, some people do nothing but create laws and litigation...tough to keep up.

 

[9fingerracing]

Idiots

Malloy is the judge out of uber liberal greenie missoula. He consistently rules in favor of these morons. Hammer has been a thorn in our sides for quite some time. He is the one who spearheaded the demolition and extreme destruction of the peters ridge trail. Including tank traps falling trees across the trail and making it far worse than it ever was before. I am supprised that he has been allowed to keep on breathing in this area after all the trouble he's created here. If anyone wanted to find him and give him a piece of their mind him and his douchebag greenie buddies meet for breakfast at the echo lake cafe on sunday mornings for their "nature" hikes. There was a write up in the paper about these morons and all the leftist *** backward ways.

 

[kinney31]

I hope Keith hammer gets eatin by a Grizzly then he can really enjoy them

 

[AdrenalineAddict]

I think we are rapidly approaching the day when Civil Disobedience as mentioned by somebody earlier will become the norm. I already see it day after day and find it quite amusing to say the least. Living in Nevada and owning/riding a snowmobile in our National Forest and staying legal has become quite a challenge. We have only one Mountain Range left out of several rideable mountains, the rest have been closed for years. The only areas remaining are predominantly below the snow line. The hypocrite you mention here living as far out of town at the end particular development is quite humorous and hypocritical, but really not that unusual. Selfish self centered tunnel vision introverts such as this Keith fella are found everywhere, look at celebrities such as Robert Redford for instance. Robert developed his own mountain but speaks out against others that want to do the same. Living in a community where an overwhelming majority has absolute disdain for the feds and their silly uncomprising rules is very interesting to say the least.

 

[Rush44]

I plan on following the rules a little more closely now.... but I don't know what I'm going to do come March 16th. I think the main reason Hammer and his crew can continue to do what they do is that the general public just doesn't know what's really going on. Most people I know have a dirt bike, an atv, or a snowmobile in their garage (if not all 3). Most of these people also walk, camp, and fish without the aide of a motorized vehicle. We don't use them every single time we go into the woods.

We need to better inform the general public, especially on the local level, about what's happening to their access. The people who favor motorized access far outweigh the purists, especially in my area. I'm worried I won't someday be able to take my children snowmobiling with me. I'm worried for the future of our sport.