I found this survey being done by the Silver Star Vision Plan Steering Committee. It has questions on the Yacolt Burn Area and the Silver Star Area. Hope it gets some good input and some action after the fact.
Article: https://tdn.com/news/local/public-comme ... 88aec.html
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/72QQ6GP
Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
- dmthomas49
- Posts: 267
- Joined: May 16th, 2013, 6:51 am
Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
"The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness."
— John Muir
— John Muir
Re: Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
Wow. That "survey" was so chocked with ads and spam and bullshit, I aborted. It was probably pointless anyway. Authorities decide what they're going to do, then twist and manipulate "public feedback" to justify it.
Re: Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
Chip: I agree 100%. The public process is followed because it's required, not because they are really interested in public opinion.
The worst case of this was the original Catherine Creek usage proposal back in the mid-90s. USFS had a public comment period to consider Option A or Option B. Soon after the comment period ended, USFS presented Option C. Knowing how long it takes to jump through the hurdles in a federal bureaucracy, it was pretty much common knowledge that they had already settled on this mystery option when the public comment period started.
The only exception that I have found is the mid-90s restrictive entry for Mt. Hood which resulted in a 94-96% non-compliance feedback USFS received which forced them to reconsider such a proposal. Trail users to day have no idea how Draconian this proposal was. It was pushing for a 10% usage rate of that time period's hikers....or 3 or 4 groups of 2-6 hikers per group per trail. It most certainly would have guaranteed solitude, but the proposal provided no plan for what to do with all of the other hikers who wanted to walk on public lands. 10% of today's trail usage would have been 100-125% of the mid-90's trail usage.
The worst case of this was the original Catherine Creek usage proposal back in the mid-90s. USFS had a public comment period to consider Option A or Option B. Soon after the comment period ended, USFS presented Option C. Knowing how long it takes to jump through the hurdles in a federal bureaucracy, it was pretty much common knowledge that they had already settled on this mystery option when the public comment period started.
The only exception that I have found is the mid-90s restrictive entry for Mt. Hood which resulted in a 94-96% non-compliance feedback USFS received which forced them to reconsider such a proposal. Trail users to day have no idea how Draconian this proposal was. It was pushing for a 10% usage rate of that time period's hikers....or 3 or 4 groups of 2-6 hikers per group per trail. It most certainly would have guaranteed solitude, but the proposal provided no plan for what to do with all of the other hikers who wanted to walk on public lands. 10% of today's trail usage would have been 100-125% of the mid-90's trail usage.
Re: Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
Interesting. Ad-Block Plus worked perfectly for me. But it is disappointing that there were any ads to block.
As for the planning effort, it is largely an opportunity for the different volunteer groups and the agencies to talk. As the government has less time to steward public places, segments of the public are taking up the slack. It helps if everyone is on the same page.
Jeremy VanGelder - Friends of Road 4109
Re: Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
Holy crap. I've never heard of this. I'm flabbergasted that someone thought that would even be possible.BigBear wrote: ↑August 1st, 2021, 7:24 pmThe only exception that I have found is the mid-90s restrictive entry for Mt. Hood which resulted in a 94-96% non-compliance feedback USFS received which forced them to reconsider such a proposal. Trail users to day have no idea how Draconian this proposal was. It was pushing for a 10% usage rate of that time period's hikers....or 3 or 4 groups of 2-6 hikers per group per trail. It most certainly would have guaranteed solitude, but the proposal provided no plan for what to do with all of the other hikers who wanted to walk on public lands. 10% of today's trail usage would have been 100-125% of the mid-90's trail usage.
Believe it or not, I barely ever ride a mountain bike.
Re: Survey for Silver Star/Yacolt Burn Area Development
It did happen at Alpine Lakes near Leavenworth, and a couple of trails in Central Oregon at that time, and now something like (but not as Draconian) it is happening in the Jefferson-Washington-Sisters wilderness area. It was the extremeness of the solitude that was so unappetizing after public land had been open to all.