WEATHER »

Comments by BeBe

Page 1 of 2 | Next

Posted on January 23 at 6:50 a.m.

YOU DON'T SHOOT A DOG!

I don't care where the owner was or if the little dog was barking or not. This wasn't a pitbull attacking a baby, this wasn't an out of control foaming at the mouth dog........

YOU DON'T SHOOT A DOG!

These hunters should lose their gun license and I think there is legal action that could be taken against them.

YOU DON'T SHOOT A DOG!

On Dog Shot and Killed on Santa Cruz Trail

Posted on January 18 at 11:35 a.m.

This is Bryan, thanks for the mostly kind words. The business model was thrown away years ago, its now much more of a passion model. And to get nit-picky the "paper" is not tree based but rather a recycled plastic product. Which might be worse for the environment, but I get your point. I still see the need for printed products but I have spent some time researching ways to get the maps onto the iPhone or GPS devices. So far the business model for that approach doesn't jive with my passion model - but perhaps sometime in the future. Good advice and I appreciate the suggestions. DrDan - What issues did you have with the Matilija? Curious.

On Dick Smith Map Revised

Posted on August 10 at 8:49 a.m.

The Forest Service is not the enemy at all on this, they are doing what they need to do to help the frogs and cover their behinds. If it is safe for the frogs to have people cross the river on foot then the FS really should move the gate closer to the river. Right now its four miles from where the gate is to the river.

On Presence of Endangered Amphibians Prompts Major Road Closure

Posted on August 9 at 5:40 p.m.

I can understand closing the crossing for the frogs, but if that is the case then the FS needs to build a gate on the south side of the crossing and provide ample parking for PEOPLE to mtn bike and hike into the Upper Santa Ynez. Blocking people at Divide Peak will make the Upper Santa Ynez essentially inaccessible for the year. Not acceptable.

On Presence of Endangered Amphibians Prompts Major Road Closure

Posted on March 29 at 11:52 a.m.

Late to the dance, maybe Jeff or someone can help me understand a bit better:

1) If these fire breaks have been cleared annually for the past forever, then what features exist within these breaks that would attract these migratory birds? It would seem there wouldn't be trees, since its been cleared and stripped of trees. Am I correct to think that these breaks are vacant of migratory birds and have been so for many decades?

2) Does the FS have an official stance as to why they can't do the clearing in the summer? Makes sense that the risk of fire during that time, or the lack of resources (since most fire personnel might be needed elsewhere) are reasons - but I'd like to hear that from the FS directly. Or did I miss that somewhere?

On Fuel Break Squabble

Posted on March 8 at 2:46 p.m.

The forest roads that would be opened to OHV use as a result of this bill run through potreros, near creeks and connect to remote wilderness trailheads. Go visit any designated OHV area anywhere in our forest and you’ll see the destruction that goes with that designation. Hillsides turned into jump parks. Meadows turned into berm tracks. Wilderness trails with dirtbike tracks running illegally along them. I hate to categorize an entire group of outdoor users, but OHVers will absolutely destroy any of the pristine areas that these roads run through. Unfortunately there are bad apples who will go illegally off trail or rooster donuts in the meadows off the roads. There is not enough Forest Service presence to protect from the bad apples. If you really want what wilderness stands for, then this bill needs to be rejected. The additional protected lands is not worth the destruction of the land and air that will occur adjacent to the Forest Roads. Just go visit any OHV area and apply that to all 69miles of Forest Roads that would open up. This bill is a bad thing from top to bottom. Reject and go back to the drawing board. There is a solution that will appease all groups, this is not it.

On More Wilderness and Off-Roading?

Posted on March 7 at 9:39 p.m.

This is bad stuff everyone. Gallegly is playing us all against each other, meanwhile the only winner will be United Water at Piru. If a zero environmental and zero recreation politician all of a sudden throws both groups a bone - you know something is not right. If it seems too good to be true, well it most likely is. We've been had.

This is dirty, it should have never been started, we (including the groups who initiated this bill) should wash our hands of this bill, reject it and start over. We've been had by another politician. Realize it, you tried and it failed. Back to the drawing board.

On Protecting Los Padres Wilderness — and Dirt Bikes?

Posted on February 29 at 6:53 p.m.

This is NOT A GOOD THING. The roar of motorcycles will be heard from Manzana Narrows to Santa Cruz, and from Mono Creek to Big Caliente. Look at the maps. Motorcycles will be ripping across far too many ridges. I applaud the effort for more wilderness, but it comes at too high a cost in this case.

On Protecting Los Padres Wilderness — and Dirt Bikes?

Posted on November 18 at 1:38 p.m.

Does this mean that the Chumash will be using tumols for their "cultural and ceremonial fishing and gathering".

On Chumash Ask to be Excluded from Marine Protected Areas

Posted on August 22 at 7:58 a.m.

Welcome aboard Peggy! The forest is going to need a lot of love over the next few years. I know you'll give it the attention it requires! Congrats and welcome to the Good Land!

On Peggy Hernandez Selected New Forest Supervisor

Page 1 of 2 | Next