Yep, send that kind of stuff right on to him, and he'll make darn sure those sherrif's are there a-waiting whenever he smells something!

There's a world of difference between kissing arse and flaming the guy. Nothing wrong with "we think you're wrong to have shut us down, but we can get over it. So you need a proposal in hand next year so this doesn't happen again?"

Nothing wrong with "the guidelines for needing a permit seem somewhat vague, can you help up out in understanding this?"

And everything right with going to FS meetings etc.

But 68 people sending in messages saying "Ranger rick, you suck!" will not only make him ignore us, but derail any of Rob's (?)efforts to go over his head, since he'll show that to his boss(es), and they'll realize we're nuthin but a bunch of cheap beer swillin' rednecks who is all dummer 'dan a post!

(I personally am a *expensive* beer swilling redneck... )

I guess my vague wandering point is to protest all ya want, but do it professionally. Much harder to ignore that way.

 

Scott,
Yeah, I agree. I'm just venting here on the forum. Any direct correspondence to Randy would have quite a bit more professionalism.

Now if he were to "spy" on us here, then decide to post...he would be fair game. "Fresh fish! Fresh Fish! Fresh Fish!" (a la Shawshank Redemption)

Jim

 

I have always loved the outdoors and this is the first time I have ever been denied access. Not only were we told to not hold the event but were threatened with fines. All he had to do was give us options. He could have said camping out is ok but please do not let us catch you holding the event. He would never have known in that case if we had camped,went on runs, and played on the ramp. I am guessing he expected to see balloons,clowns,monkeys, and a big top tent. It has been posted that he had rangers not to mention deputies on the look out for us. He treated us like bad guys from the first "access denied" email. The closest he has gotten to see the "bad guys" has been hot tempers due the the fact of his negligence. It was totally uncalled for and makes it hard for us to treat him as even being human. To me he is a road block that in the future we will just have to take a detour around.

 

Just so you know, we used absolutely $0 from the church. We had no budget to run this event. We raised every dollar by searching for sponsors. We lost some money on the event and I sucked it up personally.

BTW, most churches dont have "deep pockets" especially for stuff like a 4x4 event... We certainly don't.

 

BTW, I think you guys are probably taking this very professionally and I think Rob and the other organizers did a fantastic job in setting up this event. Getting input from various side can help those running the event get different points to consider and thus make a decision to go forward.

I'd bet that if you dealt nicely (not butt kissing) with the Forest Service next years event would not require a permit and would go over just fine.

48 rigs is a very large outing, not just a little more than usual. Usual is 6-10 rigs.

Rob, I understand how you feel personally attacked by the forest service. I had a very similar thing happen last year on out July 4th event. They eliminated our abilty to hold the events on private property even after they approved it - TWICE. We were furious but quickly realized that a couple of very pointed but professional letters got the point across about our disappointment and frustation. We even got some of our expenses reimbursed as a result. We knew that we would need the city's support in the future for more important issues and decided to lose the battle to win the war. It was a good decision despite having to swallow my pride. Fighting on principal is a quality character trait and something I've never questioned about you (despite our disagreements on other points of view ). Just make sure that eveyone involved keeps the ultimate goal in view.

 

Jim, I agree with this completely. This is a public internet forum and voice opinions about Ranger Randy is perfectly appropropriate and he if or others feel the need to snoop or contribute, they are fair game ON THE FORUM. I'd bet that he'd read the post and be a lurker at best.

 

I just wanted to throw my 2 cents in here after reading this thread. I have kind of a split view on this. I am an off road enthusiast (that sounds so PC) but I also used to work for the Federal Gov, not as a ranger but in a similar tree-hugging capacity. For those of you saying they can't limit access or stop you from holding an event because this is public land I say nonsense. This is their responsibility, they take it seriously, and they are empowered to make sure you do what they think is in the best interest for the area. This means you can be ticketed or arrested if things get out of hand. I'm not saying that's right, I'm just saying that's how it is. The rules for use of national forests is probably written out somewhere if you look hard enough, but most likely it would be impossible to understand or interpret in the same way the rangers would interpret it. My advice, and this is just my advice, is to vent all you like on the forum and get it out of your system. Then contact the rangers and let them know now that you are planning another similar event for next year. Ask them what will be required (permits, waivers) and get it in writing. Take the steps they say are required to put on this event and ensure it goes smoothly. I have not met this person but I can almost guarantee he is not "out to get us" or thinks the trails are for Jeeps only. He is covering his butt as far a liability goes for an event this size. Work with him, get permits if that is what he says must be done, and have a great event. Again, my advice only, but I've been on both sides of this argument and I know how it always turns out.

 

So, if I am reading that correctly, what you are saying is that we should not bother looking for clarity in the rules because we will find them incomprehensible, but instead we should trust in the general goodness of the rangers and throw ourselves on the mercy of their whims?

I am sorry, but I find that a bit preposterous.

You have a couple of things taken out of context in your opinion, first, "For those of you saying they can't limit access or stop you from holding an event because this is public land I say nonsense."

In reality, actual case law has been decided in both directions on this. The courts have detirmined that decisions made by the Forest Circus are not infallible and they have repeatedly faced legal consequences as the result of denying citizens the use of the land. I will grant you that there also cases to the contrary, lots of them, but even within this district alone there have been previous allegations of their having unlawfully denied citizens the use of public land.

Secondly, "I can almost guarantee he is not "out to get us" or thinks the trails are for Jeeps only." I don't think anyone is seriously stating either of those. However, I would counter your "can't we all just get along" urgings, with some "what if's?".

What if Ranger Randy really does consider the district to be "HIS"? What if he now thinks of us as bad guys? What if the previous accusations against him and his district are true? What if... He did not prove himself to be an honorable person in our last exchange, so I believe he will not suddenly become one in the future. I guess I am just not as forgiving of that as you are.

From my perspective, rather than just saying "well, it's not like there is anything we can do about it, it's Randy's land to do with as he pleases", the right thing to do is to express displeasure with the way that OUR government handled this situation and ask that this situation be rectified.

 

I've been reading all this and staying kindof silent. I won't soapbox a lot, but I wanted to bring up one point...

One of the things that I talked about in my diatribe about the meeting that Rob and I attended was that we both left with the impression that the rangers were really hosting the public forum based on them HAVING to do it.

i.e., they didn't give a rat's backside about what was brought up by the public.


In the aftermath of the cancellation of YotaJam 2003, I keep looking back on what was projected for 2 1/2 hours in a room with 10 rangers and 70 members of the concerned public. Bottom line: 10 rangers were putting in their time listening to 70 members of the concerned public "blowing air".

I seriously doubt that anything that the public brought up that night will be dealt with by the rangers. Or if it is, then it will be absorbed by the rangers as a plan of their own.

It was SUCH a load of BS... Was it a waste of time? No, not at all, and I still would like to continue going to meetings. It was knowledge gained; it was knowledge that we can use to formulate a game plan to make things better.

If you speak in a loud enough voice, people will listen - they will HAVE to. And I'm using "volume" as a figure of speech - I'm talking about numbers of folks that share a common viewpoint, not the loudness of or anger in your words.


With that experience as my "inspiration", I side VERY strongly with Rob on this. if anything is to change, and that "change" is topped (in my opinion) by the rangers understanding that they are a goverment REPRESENTATIVE for PUBLIC land, then it will only happen by applying pressure - from any side that you can.

If Ranger Randy gets pressure from the immediate public about things that are wrong or mishandled in his district, that's good. If Ranger Randy gets pressure from _above_ that things are wrong in his district, that's even better.

There is no profanity, there are no threats, the effort that Rob has put forth here is all flat out logic and experience. It's about opening people's eyes to what's been happening around them for who knows how long and joining forces to make a change.


Kudos to the effort... "Prayer" for change... "Crossing fingers" that it will actually happen.

If enough people join voice, it WILL happen. No doubt.

 

 

That has always been what I consider the beauty of the law. The ranger types may have their interpretation, but we will have ours as well. It will fall to someone higher up to hear both interpretations and determine who has come closes to the intent of the law.

Cool. I hope it didn't sound too much like I was flaming you. I just get tired of hearing what sounds like "the Federal Government knows best" and that is what I thought you were saying.

I AM prepared to file suit if it appears that is the only way that I am going to see any movement toward my stated goals. I would prefer to do the groundwork and let it do the work, but I am in this for the long haul, if required.

I am not pretending that I can make any calls about the quality of people we are dealing with. But I can certainly judge them on the quality of their actions when they are acting in an "official" capacity. They are supposed to be there to represent me and I am disappointed by the "service" I have received.

This is an excellent dialogue folks... lets keep it going.

 

Very well said Rob!

 

No offense taken. I could see by your response that I wasn't very clear in my first post and just wanted to try to clear things up. Looks like I will most likely be moving back to Seattle in the next 6 months or so, so this will not be the distant concern that it seems from here in Maine. I'm still trying to be optimistic in hoping that this is all worked out by the time I get back there, but if not you can count me in to do what I can to make this right. In the mean time I will look back through the posts to get appropriate E mail addresses and send my thoughts on to Randy and his peers.

 

Cool. We can certainly use someone with your cool head and knowledge of "the system" on our side. Look me up when you get into town and I will buy you a beverage to appologize for the misunderstanding.

The more mail the merrier. Randy just keeps going on about the original conversation being unclear or inaccurate with regards to the scope of the event and while that might be what Lloyd "Mike" Hiler is telling him, it is WHOLEY incorrect. I personally discussed the event with Mike and was abuntantly clear about what we had planned. I feared this sort of eventuality from the Forest Circus and had my worst suspicions confirmed. The next time I deal with them, ALL my calls go on tape and all the written correspondance goes into the file.

 

I saw you spoke of seeing a post or two with comments that Randy is out to get us and he's more than likely a Jeep lover. That was more than likely me making those comments. I was just trying to shed some humor while making my opinions heard. I dont know that for a fact on the subject of him being out to get us or loving Jeeps. Its hard to just sit back while everyone with the proper knowledge is on the front lines. I just fealt like getting my opinions out there right or wrong funny or not. I hope I didnt start a wave with what I may have said. I am glad you guys are cool now.

 

I just got back into town from the very sucessful CO thing. I want to share my take on the whole deal.

The Forest Service never knew about our Jam. I think the only time we encountered a NFS ranger was at lunch one day. My group of 8 trucks rolled into a parking area and kinda cleared up a little trash that was blowing around. Then we sat down for lunch. During lunch the ranger asked us to move one vehicle that was blocking other vehicles in. He talked to some drivers while I continued to collect trash from the picnic area and parking lot. When I came to the tables the ranger thanked me for cleaning up the trash.

His exact words were, "We need more people like you up here."

Later during that same break I was talking to a uniformed volunteer worker. I stopped in mid sentence to run away and grab some trash that was blowing by. He also thanked me for the effort and said he was impressed.

They still don't know that we were throwing a good sized jamboree type event. They just know that a bunch of Toyota drivers were driving around and picking up trash as we went.

When you ask if you need a permit you basicly are asking them if they want you to donate a bunch of money to them. Of course the answer will be YES.

Don't ask, don't tell

My $.02

 

This has been my train of thought since this happened.
And very good of you guy's to be picking up trash Matt.

 

Matt,
Glad to hear the Colorado ride went well. Being visible and doing good deeds goes a long way towards being welcome in the future. I agree to a point that they can't say no if you never ask a question, but it still concerns me that they have the power to make you leave or ticket you for questionable infractions if they please. Even if I'm not going to ask before doing something on public land, I still want to know if what I'm doing is wrong in the eyes of rangers or other enforcement people. Maybe I'm getting old and want to be a do-gooder for once. Right now nobody seems very clear on what is permissible, including the rangers. Reminds me too much of areas here in Maine called Maine Public Reserve Lands, where nobody really knows what they are reserved for, but luckily nobody knows who has jurisdiction either so there is basically no enforcement. It's possible that YotaJam would have gone on fine if nobody had talked to the rangers in WA. I respect Rob for trying to do the right thing and work things out ahead of time, but I'm guessing from what has transpired and the reactions of the officials that there would have been trouble if the event was staged secretly and then somehow the rangers found out. I guess I'm overly cautious these days.

 

Ranger Randy has been having more fun.

Closing trails due to exhausts posibly igniting fires.
Only if a low rider with it's tip draggin' on the forest floor is going to ignite a fire.

 

Wait Corey, check the date on that first post (8.7.03) - this is an old closing.

Mark