The Forest Service is requesting comments on widening some trails to 66" from the current 50" to allow larger vehicles, massive SXS's, in the park. They're also considering logging in the park which would make some of the trails into roads so the big equipment can get in there to cut old growth trees down. Even if you have never been there everyone of us has seen what widening a trail system can do. Every one of us has seen a drunk idiot being super reckless because they have a cage to protect them, screw everyone else on the trail. Everyone of us has seen a clear cut on the side of a hill, there is plenty of other acreage in the Mark Twain Forest they can cut. Please contact the forest service and let them know how you feel. You can copy the following if you're against trail widening and logging:
I'm in opposition to both widening of trails and logging in the Chadwick Motorcycle/ATV Use Area. Both of these activities will increase erosion, decrease vegetative diversity, and cause degradation of user experience.
Respond here: https://cara.fs2c.usda.gov/Public//CommentInput?Project=63131
grew up going here every summer as a kid in the early 90's. coming from flat Louisiana, was such a rad experience. loved it.
just sent them a mini novel of disapproval. thanks for sharing.
I can agree with your stance on the widening and the sxs guys. However your wrong about the logging. Various positive outcomes from logging. It will increase the vegetative diversity air quality and remaining timber. Also give the animals more food.
SXS’s ruining riding spots nation wide. Ocotillo sucks now because of them
It's been years since I've been there...and it's only an hour from my house. There were always too many idiots there...and that was way before an SXS 'sat foot' there.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Free shipping: VITALMX
Sure, if you like green briar and poison ivy.
Multiple scientific studies say otherwise, I tried keeping an open mind on it while researching for my response to the forest service. But they've known since at least the 70's that logging causes more harm than recreational use of forest land. Prescribed burning would be much better for controlling excessive fuel, undergrowth vegetation, and maintenance of old growth trees in the park. There's lots of acerage outside of the riding area they can clear cut.
Trust the science right? As the owner of a large portion of land and logging is what I do for a living I'll just say you're wrong. I'll be happy to debate with someone with real world experience on the subject. This is a subject that someone living in the city looking things up on the internet is very far off on. Sure they can cut the land outside the riding area too but I don't think you realize how much income they will receive from cutting that area. Why waste prime timber? Why waste income that they won't ever get without doing it?
Because it takes 40-50 years for a good stand of hardwood to grow back for a little state income to waste on some crap.
I bet you have a ton of experience on this subject living in university heights.
I do actually
How many feet have you cut? How many acres do you own?
Ive been watching a couple hundred acres grow back after being logged a couple times as long as I've been alive.
My point exactly. 0 experience
What did I say that's inaccurate?
I have been going there since the fee was $5/day and the trails were so narrow....now - not so much.
Lets give them a shot with their plans. At least we have a place to ride. What is that place like 1,200 acres +/- ?
I - unlike many - I trust our government. Hopefully the have a plan that can be discussed on an open forum - changes applied - co-operate. The last time there were changes - they were open and receptive. I Don't want to loose that place.
Spread the ashes of many friends on the top of Dairy Queen Hill.
Logging is what you do for a living and your opinion is logging is the better for the local ecosystem than leaving old growth alone? Color me shocked.
A little more background on this. The logging is only being considered in the area of the ohv trails. There are 1290 acres slated for "commercial thinning" which means they cut down anything bigger than 9" in diameter at breast height. Tree tops and other branches (slash) would be piled along the side of the trail so that you can't go off trail. All user generated trails (single track) would be eliminated. One of the purposes is "mitigate tree related hazards"...ok. Trails would be used for access for cutting equipment and tree skids.
The proposal can be found here.
https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/mtnf/?project=63131
After trees reach a certain age or maturity they are no longer helpful or good for the environment.
This is funny because its like the threads when someone is injured. I saw the accident from my TV I know what's best over the doctors.
Early claims to have a ton of experience on the subject. His experience "watching a couple hundred acres grow back" Thats like saying ive watched supercross I know how to ride it and what goes on better than someone who does it for a living. Honestly not surprised here.
Pit Row
So you think cutting every tree over 9" (and killing many of the others) over 1300 acres is going to make the area better for riding?
I've talked to more logging salesmen than the average person. What they don't tell you is how they'll leave the tops criss-crossed in an ungodly labyrinth and the skidders leave ruts 3ft deep. It costs as much in time and equipment to get the forest usable again as you got paid as the landowner for the lumber.
No but if you're upset with what they do with land that you do not own maybe you should buy your own land to ride on and do as you please. Some parts yes it will be better they will remove the dangerous trees. There simply doing what's best for the environment and safety of people.
Thats funny, where do you think I talk to the salesmen?
I'll probably never ride at this place but I think it's important for people that do use it to know what's going on, which is why I hunted down the forest service proposal and posted the link.
Good thing they pointed out stuff I also mentioned. I'm glad vital is full of forestry experts. Especially ones with no acreage or forestry experience who care what other people do with their land.
Yeah old growth forests are real shitholes until loggers come through.
I hope you get the bid on the project.
Since you edited your comment ill reply to the last part. Since "you talked to more logging salesmen than the average person." You'd think you would know you get paid for stumpage not lumber. What you would also know is they only do whats in the contracts and negotiated beforehand. If you want all the tops gone they do it. If you want low impact they also do that. There's even guys with horse and mule logging that specialize in this.
Yeah, you start asking about removing the tops or doing anything low impact and they either lose interest or your quote goes way down. Also, that wasnt much of an option 30 years ago during contract negotiations. Land clearing is a different story. I've seen horse drawn logging but only in very small sensitive areas around national parks.
Point is, you log this riding area and it's going to significantly change the atmosphere of the place for the rest of most of our lives. But it sounds like the forest service is interested in using the logging as a way to change the place, eliminate non-sanctioned trails, and establish wider trails for easier maintenance and to accommodate side by sides.
Please explain how old growth trees are bad for the environment. This makes zero sense to me, how did any forest ever survive back when trees were allowed to live hundreds to even thousands of years. Old growth trees in Chadwick aren't even 100 years old yet.
Well do you think they should work to remove the tops for free? Should they just eat the financial loss they get for low impact? That's not how business works.
Once trees get so old or decline in health instead of absorbing carbon they admit it. Every bit of carbon that tree absorbed it now releases it. They also block out and hog sunlight and nutrients for the new growth. Killing off a lot of the younger trees. They survived but they didn't thrive like forests are now. We have more hardwoods and they're growing at a faster rate now than we can harvest them. Thanks to actual forest management.
Of course not, which is why I pointed out earlier that it costs so much to get the forest back to a usable condition as a land owner if you want a nice place. If you got thousands of acres you probably have some pieces you don't much care about.
I question if it's a good idea for what seems like a nice tourist destination in Missouri to be changed in this way but like I said reading between the lines it seems like the plan is really to make some changes to better accommodate the side by sides, which if you take off your dirtbike rider glasses and think about it from an economic and logistical point of view is objectively not a bad idea. And if it keeps the place open for everyone that's a good thing and maybe they can build better more fun trails.
Maybe I talked myself around haha, but it will come down to execution. Minds are likely made up at this point on how the project will progress anyway.
That's only really relevant if you are looking to keep growing new trees instead of letting mature ones stand. As far as carbon who gives a shit.
Post a reply to: Chadwick Motorcycle/ATV Use Area in Missouri