Reiter name?

[crash]

So does anybody know where the DNR came up with the new name for the area? Reiter Foothills Forest

Its funny how we try to keep an open contact with the DNR and they still keep us in the dark on stuff.. It has never made sense to me...

[jobless]

So does anybody know where the DNR came up with the new name for the area? Reiter Foothills Forest

Its funny how we try to keep an open contact with the DNR and they still keep us in the dark on stuff.. It has never made sense to me...

As much as you and everyone else try, the DNR is under no obligation to be forthcoming with info regarding their lands.

If you remember last nights presentation they stated they have three main focus areas.

1. Resource management ($$$)
2. Environmental issues
3. Public use...guess why it was listed last, becuase it is the least of their concerns and by far the most problematic.

Consider yourself "priveledged" that they acknowledge us at all.

As for the name, lets face it, they have to come up with something that is PC and non-biased based on the muliple user groups that frequent Reiter.

Reiter Pit is definately out...

as is Reiter Trails...

[crash]

I fully agree....

I see alot of changes coming down the pipe--and like you I am sure there not all going to be good.....

Now the question lies is there a single thing we can do to aid on our benefit? I thin k we can but not to the amount that we would want I am sure......

[jobless]

Yep, changes are coming...as per their plan they may start as early as June of 2009.

I say may, because unless they have grant money to implement what they are currently collecting info on for their plan (last nights meeting, etc...over the next 12 months) the only thing that will happen in June of 2009 is likley to be nothing positive for us or the other motorized users.

The bikes may have a fighting chance as they already maintain a lot of their trails to current DNR standards...

[Boxboy]

Yep, changes are coming...as per their plan they may start as early as June of 2009.

I say may, because unless they have grant money to implement what they are currently collecting info on for their plan (last nights meeting, etc...over the next 12 months) the only thing that will happen in June of 2009 is likley to be nothing positive for us or the other motorized users.

The bikes may have a fighting chance as they already maintain a lot of their trails to current DNR standards...

First off I agree 100%. But I was chatting with one of the DNR reps about wild sky and some of the anti-ORV groups. These groups are starting to get the picture that even if you close everything down we are still going to find a place to go and/or we will be fighting the wild sky’s and other groups plans... I think they have the picture ORV users are very abundant and here to stay... So it sounded like there are many parties (non ORV even) involved which would like to see Reiter become a managed multi-user ORV area.

[jobless]

So it sounded like there are many parties (non ORV even) involved which would like to see Reiter become a managed multi-user ORV area.


I agree, but you have to understand that just because Reiter becomes a legit ORV area doesn't mean that, for example only, trails will not be closed.

I can see the good and the bad coming from all of this, all we can hope for is some happy middle ground :D

[Binder]

I can see the good and the bad coming from all of this, all we can hope for is some happy middle ground :D

Please elaborate. I'm not seeing the good but I was not at the meeting so maybe I missed something?

[Kat JK]

Good being that most of the trails are open, Good being that we might get more money to keep the trails open and safe for EVERYBODY, Good that we can actually get together and talk out all our problems and have a middle ground that everybody will be happy with.

[Binder]

Good being that most of the trails are open, They're open now. Will they be when the ORV park opens? Will they stay open after that?
Good being that we might get more money to keep the trails open .Do you know this or assume it? If you do get more money does that mean that trails will stay open that may otherwise have closed?
Good that we can actually get together and talk out all our problems and have a middle ground that everybody will be happy with. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Will there be more communication once the park opens? Will anyone be obligated to listen to us? What exactly is going to change between now and after the park opens?

[CrustyJeep]

If you do get more money does that mean that trails will stay open that may otherwise have closed?Maybe, maybe not. It does mean we'll have more money with which to maintain trails properly. That means a couple of bridges on sac up, for starters. Bridges on sac up are good because they will keep silt from being deposited into the streams and we've all seen what a silty stream can do for our trails. Maybe, just maybe, it would give us a chance to get the tighties up to snuff and opened back up, as well.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Will there be more communication once the park opens? Will anyone be obligated to listen to us? What exactly is going to change between now and after the park opens?Most definitely. They've already opened an email address specific to Reiter, they *claim* to be making changes to the DNR web site, and already there is information there about Reiter that wasn't there a month or two ago.

You'd know this if you'd come to the meeting *poke poke* :D

[jobless]

Maybe, maybe not. It does mean we'll have more money with which to maintain trails properly. That means a couple of bridges on sac up, for starters. Bridges on sac up are good because they will keep silt from being deposited into the streams and we've all seen what a silty stream can do for our trails. Maybe, just maybe, it would give us a chance to get the tighties up to snuff and opened back up, as well.

Most definitely. They've already opened an email address specific to Reiter, they *claim* to be making changes to the DNR web site, and already there is information there about Reiter that wasn't there a month or two ago.

You'd know this if you'd come to the meeting *poke poke* :D


Just becuase Reiter go's "official" DOESN'T mean that there is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow to spend

[CrustyJeep]

Just becuase Reiter go's "official" DOESN'T mean that there is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow to spendDidn't say that at all. This is all relative. There will be more money than these is now, and we'll have a better chance of having access to some of it.

[jobless]

[QUOTE=CrustyJeep;624] It does mean we'll have more money /QUOTE]


You did say we wil have more money...more money from where?

Do you think they just give it away becuase they have an official ORV area?

Do you have any idea of how hard it is writing grants and getting them approved to actually get the more money you speak of?

[CrustyJeep]

You did say we wil have more money...more money from where?And THEY said. IIRC, they said they had 600K in grants to use between Reiter and Ahtunum.

Do you think they just give it away becuase they have an official ORV area?Yes :flipoff:

Do you have any idea of how hard it is writing grants and getting them approved to actually get the more money you speak of?Maybe I'm delusional, but I'm under the impression that the DNR receives certain amounts of money to operate these areas without the user themselves having to do much of anything. That would imply that some poor bastard within the DNR has to write grant proposals every so often, but it's just part of doing business for the DNR. Now, for us users to be able to put that money to use, we just have to show interest and some sort of action plan that the DNR approves.

Essentially, we're just a way for the DNR to save lots of money. They can either pay crews lots of money to maintain trails (which they couldn't possibly afford), or they can let us do all the work for free.

Now, maybe for something above and beyond, like a fancy new bridge over May Creek, there would be a lot more work involved to get enough money. But I'm not talking about anything of that caliber.

[jobless]

And THEY said. IIRC, they said they had 600K in grants to use between Reiter and Ahtunum.

Yes :flipoff:

Maybe I'm delusional, but I'm under the impression that the DNR receives certain amounts of money to operate these areas without the user themselves having to do much of anything. That would imply that some poor bastard within the DNR has to write grant proposals every so often, but it's just part of doing business for the DNR. Now, for us users to be able to put that money to use, we just have to show interest and some sort of action plan that the DNR approves.

Essentially, we're just a way for the DNR to save lots of money. They can either pay crews lots of money to maintain trails (which they couldn't possibly afford), or they can let us do all the work for free.

Now, maybe for something above and beyond, like a fancy new bridge over May Creek, there would be a lot more work involved to get enough money. But I'm not talking about anything of that caliber.

So they have 600k for grants right now...they cannot spend a dime on Reiter until after the June 2009 implementation date. What is the sechedule for the other area? For all we know it could be gone by then...

The way I understand it is that ALL money for our type of activities must come from grants...there is no funding provided by the state through the DNR but I could be wrong on this.

Why would the DNR right proposals for grants? They don't wheel, do they?

That poor bastard you speak of that writes grants are the users, that would be us. I believe the DNR may assist but from what I remember of Walker Valley the burden is on us.

The DNR doesn't pay anyone to work on ORV trails, that's all us as well. Especially since that would be a waste of grant $$$ that you are going to spend all your time applying for.

[jobless]

This is all the info that people need to know before they go off saying that a designated ORV park is the way to go...

After you write a grant to get money, do you know how long it may take to get the grant approved?

Weeks...


Months...


Years...

[crash]

Again it boils down to users being involved...

[jobless]

Again it boils down to users being involved...

We are not fighting a war where we need an army of ignorant grunts to sacrifice themselves.

We need people that have knowledge and experience, the learning curve will kill us.

[crash]

They're open now. Will they be when the ORV park opens? Will they stay open after that?
Do you know this or assume it? If you do get more money does that mean that trails will stay open that may otherwise have closed?
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Will there be more communication once the park opens? Will anyone be obligated to listen to us? What exactly is going to change between now and after the park opens?

Well sure ---more funds will aid in both trail building and trail maintenance-- I don't understand why you are making that argument except to stir the pot..

Lets use elbe as an example---Look at the $$$ that has gone into both trail maintenace and trail building there---it shows. Also look at the comunication between the main usergroup heading up the work there and the DNR... Sure I am sure there is stuff the DNR won't tell or say--but thats just a dumb argument that has no end to it or conclusion

[crash]

We are not fighting a war where we need an army of ignorant grunts to sacrifice themselves.

We need people that have knowledge and experience, the learning curve will kill us.

So are you saying we don't need users being involved? I don't understand the argument--without user interface with the DNR nothing good will come..

[Binder]

Doesn't there need to be some sort of environmental study before all of these bridges are built? What's the word on this?

[Binder]

I don't understand why you are making that argument except to stir the pot..


I'm not arguing anything here. These are legitimate questions.;)

[crash]

Doesn't there need to be some sort of environmental study before all of these bridgers are built? What's the word on this?


Part of the time line. I don't know if the DNR is going to throw all of that onto the net or not--but it was all there at the meeting. I don't have any of the info so I can't verify exactly what is going to happen when---but they had it mapped out to pulling the trigger as a GO for the orv status like june of 09'

[crash]

Here is the only official info I could find on DNR's web site

http://www.dnr.wa.gov/htdocs/adm/comm/2007_news_releases/nr08_013.html

[jobless]

So are you saying we don't need users being involved? I don't understand the argument--without user interface with the DNR nothing good will come..

I said, we need knowledgeable experienced users to be involved directly with the DNR.

You can make whatever assumptions, and read that any way you want.

Having a bunch of folks badgering the DNR that do have a clue will not help anything, agreed?

For example: That fine young gentleman at the RTW meeting last night that openly admits to accessing closed areas in an ORV. That may be the extreme end of the spectrum but that is no one I want involved...at all!

[jobless]

Part of the time line. I don't know if the DNR is going to throw all of that onto the net or not--but it was all there at the meeting. I don't have any of the info so I can't verify exactly what is going to happen when---but they had it mapped out to pulling the trigger as a GO for the orv status like june of 09'

Yes, kind of. The last part of the plan before implementation can occur is the State Environmental study.

[Binder]

Yes, kind of. The last part of the plan before implementation can occur is the State Environmental study.


I assume alot of things will hinge on this study, like what trails will remain open and which are initially closed?

[jobless]

I assume alot of things will hinge on this study, like what trails will remain open and which are initially closed?

All part of the process...

[crash]

I assume alot of things will hinge on this study, like what trails will remain open and which are initially closed?

Basicly

[crash]

I said, we need knowledgeable experienced users to be involved directly with the DNR.

You can make whatever assumptions, and read that any way you want.

Having a bunch of folks badgering the DNR that do have a clue will not help anything, agreed?

For example: That fine young gentleman at the RTW meeting last night that openly admits to accessing closed areas in an ORV. That may be the extreme end of the spectrum but that is no one I want involved...at all!


Then why didn't you say it like that....

And I have to agree..

If you look at any group who is involved with the DNR-ELBE WALKER EVANS CREEK-there are always a few key people to deal directly with the DNR--and thats how it should be..... And I am pretty sure thats how the DNR likes to do it as well--at least thats what I have seen from working with them over the years

[Binder]

-there are always a few key people to deal directly with the DNR--and thats how it should be.....


Who decides who these people should be?

[crash]

Who decides who these people should be?

I don't think "who decides" is the correct term--its who ever wants to take on the responsability..

All I know is somebody of each user group needs to step up to the plate.. But for who ever does--they need to make sure to take input from others and not make choices by what "they" feel is right/wrong..

But again that boils down to user involvement--not sitting on the sidelines and complaining about "what is"--thats going to get nobody noplace...

[jobless]

There were "applications" of sorts you can fill out and submit to the DNR for the position of representing your user group.

At this stage of the game that would be the one person that would attend their meetings and interact during their 7 phase plan leading up to the summer of next year.

Right now, for this process, they (the DNR) choose who from each user group will be involved directly.

[crash]

There were "applications" of sorts you can fill out and submit to the DNR for the position of representing your user group.

At this stage of the game that would be the one person that would attend their meetings and interact during their 7 phase plan leading up to the summer of next year.

Right now, for this process, they (the DNR) choose who from each user group will be involved directly.


And thats just durring the planning stage--I think rick was refering to after that once the ORV status is there--at least thats what I thought he was asking..

[Binder]

And thats just durring the planning stage--I think rick was refering to after that once the ORV status is there--at least thats what I thought he was asking..


Well actually both. I don't know anything about the process.

[CrustyJeep]

Doesn't there need to be some sort of environmental study before all of these bridges are built? What's the word on this?I talked to Jim specifically, although briefly about bridges.

First off, the bridging of a stream must be approved by Fish and WL. Once that approval comes, we can choose to install a culvert or a bridge.

If you go culvert, you just buy a chunk (with some if that magic money), drop it in the stream, and build trail over it.

If you want to build a bridge, then there is some engineering that will have to be done. He also said we could generally use old train cars without an engineer because I remembered that being brought up on one of the boards.

That's my very basic understanding.

[Binder]

Train cars?

[CrustyJeep]

Train cars?Yeah, you know, old retired flat cars. Dunno where to get 'em, how much they're worth, or how the fawk to get 'em onto the trail, I just know they're acceptable :p

[Kat JK]

WOW GUYS, i did not know i could stir up such a discussion. I was just going by what i got out of the meeting tuesday night. To me discussion is very important so we ALL know where everybody stands and if we get this correct and our ways are seen by the DNR and the other groups with a well verised person we (4x4 comunity) could get mostly everything we want. I do realize there WILL be comprmises and yes we might have to give up somethings but other things are also used by other user groups and should not go anywhere.

Kat

[mark]

Yeah, you know, old retired flat cars. Dunno where to get 'em, how much they're worth, or how the fawk to get 'em onto the trail, I just know they're acceptable :p

Semi-trailers might be easier (and cheaper) to get.

And since the have wheels you can drag them up there, pull them across, cut off the axles and plop them down.




Or f-the engineering, drop a few couple 16"-20" logs across (like Isabel) or just two and plank between them. In 10-20 years when they rot out, do it again. Environmentally safe and appealing, and renewable :D

[jobless]

Semi-trailers might be easier (and cheaper) to get.

And since the have wheels you can drag them up there, pull them across, cut off the axles and plop them down.




Or f-the engineering, drop a few couple 16"-20" logs across (like Isabel) or just two and plank between them. In 10-20 years when they rot out, do it again. Environmentally safe and appealing, and renewable :D


But are they approved for use as bridges by the DNR?

[mark]

But are they approved for use as bridges by the DNR?
Don't know, that would be a question to ask. Don't see why they wouldn't be, I suspect it would take 50+ years for one to rust out to the point of being unable.


I would wonder if the rail-car trailer thing came about as a "Heavy Use" bridge, i.e. log trucks, equipment etc... so I would hypothesis that a semi-trailer, for use in a 4x4 environment would be more than sufficient.


Guess one would have to ask "the authority having jurisdiction".

[Comet]

First about funding. I seriously doubt the DNR would just magically come out and say "Reiter is now an official ORV park" without some plan and funding to support it. That makes absolutely no sense. And yes many studies will have to be done.
As for the original topic about the name, Reiter Foothills is of the greater DNR area, not the name of the ORV trail system that just happens to be inside of that greater area. Doesn't mean the name of the ORV park will be Reiter Foothills. It might, but right now the DNR does not have a name for the ORV park because it does not exist.

[Tod701]

Funding clues:

The DNR currently recieves between $1.5m - $2m annual from gax tax revenue based on nonhighway vehicle usage estimates. They can use some of these funds on Reiter if they choose to. They might or they might not. It is hard to find out what they currently spend this money on currently, even harder to guess where they will spend it in the future.

The other funding source is the state Recreation and Conservation Office (formerly known as the Inter-Agency Committee for Outdoor Recreation.

The DNR can apply for Non-Highway and Offroad Vehicle Activities (NOVA) grants. These are funded by ORV license tabs and gax tax revenue. The DNR and organizations can also apply for National Recreational Trails Program grants. These are funded by federal gas tax revenue.

This year there are more grants than money. That did not used to be the case, but more government agencies are getting better at going after "free money".

Volunteer hours are used in these grant applications as "matching funds". Your volunteer hours are very important when the RCO committees review and rank grant applications.

The bottom line is that the DNR needs to be prepared to submit grant application for trail construction / repair next spring or the Reiter process stall for a year.

Currently the DNR cannot get grant funds for ORV use at Reiter because is not a legal ORV use area. This is why getting Reiter approved is critical to getting funding and keeping it open.
Tod