282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

That's what we're here for.

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby tenbsmith » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:46 pm

It'll be interesting to see what Robin finds out.

On the one hand, if the Army get's the land, they may limit access. OTOH, a couple of years back I rode trails on military land near camp lejeun. It was owned by military but not on the base proper. There were "enter at your own risk signs" that were pretty intimidating, but nothing saying you couldn't ride there. I also got questioned by some marines at one point. Still had a nice ride.
wind whistles in an empty ear
tenbsmith
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 2862
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:00 pm

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby RamX » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:27 pm

tenbsmith wrote:I rode trails on military land near camp lejeun. It was owned by military but not on the base proper. There were "enter at your own risk signs" that were pretty intimidating, but nothing saying you couldn't ride there. I also got questioned by some marines at one point. Still had a nice ride.



My Son is in the Marines (Quick Reaction Security Force) staitoned at Camp Lajeun. Could you relay me any details you have on this trail. I'm heading over there later this year and may want to get in a couple of miles.
User avatar
RamX
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 656
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:00 pm
Location: State of Confusion

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby psychobillycadillac » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:27 am

mtntriathlete wrote:I have personally been following this issue for some time now and really see nothing to get alarmed over. My supporting data? The bill itself, the law, and the location of the 282 acres in question.
Land Grab: This is in no way a "Land Grab" or an issue of eminent domain. The Government owns the lands already. The transfer is from departments. DOA to DOD. This is administrative change alone will save millions of taxpayer dollars in the long run. The only true issue here is $. This should really be the major concern here.


Exactly how do you think that transfering anything from the DOA to the DOD is going to save millions of taxpayer dollars? Sorry to be a skeptic but the timing of your joining the forum and this being the only thing that you've commented on is a bit suspect. Not looking to ruffle feathers just saying it raises an eyebrow. Either way welcome aboard, why not tell us about yourself.
User avatar
psychobillycadillac
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 3263
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:00 pm
Location: out yonder

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby grog » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:40 am

psychobillycadillac wrote:Exactly how do you think that transfering anything from the DOA to the DOD is going to save millions of taxpayer dollars? Sorry to be a skeptic but the timing of your joining the forum and this being the only thing that you've commented on is a bit suspect. Not looking to ruffle feathers just saying it raises an eyebrow. Either way welcome aboard, why not tell us about yourself.


Playing devil's advocate, he may be referring to the part of the article that talks about the FS running studies costing $3m before doing work requested by the Army whereas the Army would just do the work without the studies. Let me see if I can find that section . . .

Dano wrote: . . . The answer from supporters: It’s not the land they need, but the right to improve it without Forest Service approval. Collins said the Forest Service has delayed projects such as tree trimming and sewer maintenance for additional studies that have cost taxpayers at least $3 million. . .


or possibly this:

Dano wrote:The two government departments could have agreed to a land swap, and Collins said they were close last year, when the Forest Service could have scored some prime property bordering Lake Lanier. But Collins said the Army balked when the Forest Service asked for an additional $10 million to pay for buildings on the new property.


I don't know that's the case - just throwing the possibility out there . . .
User avatar
grog
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 4034
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:00 pm
Location: Canton, GA

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby mtntriathlete » Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:22 am

Ah the conspiracy theory grows....ha.ha...OK, psychobillycadillac here you go......

About me.....I have recently joined SORBA in the attempt of trying to get our "Local Riders" organized and involved with the trail maintenance being conducted by the CTHA on the Jake and Bull Mountain trails. By locals I mean Lumpkin County. I have been living near this area (by living near I mean I live 5 minutes from the Jake parking lot), running and riding these trails since the late 80s. I can usually be found in the morning running there and the evenings 4-5 days a week riding my single speed there and even help lead group rides (including a Wed night beginners ride). So you could say I'm pretty familiar with the area. This is the first post I've made because this is the first one I feel is really being misrepresented here. Its a non issue for us as cyclists. If you disagree with the legislation, cool, I get it. But most of the issues I have read being brought up don't address the real issue, money.
mtntriathlete
Training Wheel Tyke
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:34 am

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby tenbsmith » Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:55 pm

RamX, For riding in the East NC area check out sir-bikes-alot's website where I got my info...
http://sirbikesalot.com/

It's been a few years but here's what I remember.
1. There were trails in camp lejeune, but you needed a military sponsor to meet you at the gate and ride with you, so i never rode there.
2. The trails to which I rode may have been on the grounds of a different military base near camp lejeune, an airbase, but I don't recall the name.
3. The trails to which I referred in point 2 were not that great. There were better places to ride in that area.
Keep in mind this may have all changed.
wind whistles in an empty ear
tenbsmith
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 2862
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:00 pm

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby iride » Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:15 pm

http://www.gafw.org/news_feature.html

from this article, i draw several concerns: the potential for the DoD to sell it off should they decide to be finished with the land; the fact that these kinds of transfers are already regulated by the act from '56 and somehow in this case it's as if they are not; and the precedent that's established if the amendment remains in the new act being pushed through congress and that act, in fact, passes.

these are things, especially my last two points of contention, that should not be taken lightly. these are examples of the government getting things to which it is not entitled simply because....it can and without any concern for due process.
clearly it's entirely too technical...

**currently tied with Lance Armstrong on Tour de France wins.**
User avatar
iride
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 4454
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 7:43 pm
Location: playing with the kitty...

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby mtntriathlete » Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:25 pm

The fact that the Army has been training there for well over 50 years, and has been trying to deal with USFS for a land swap for at least 10 or more of those of those is probably a pretty good indicator that the intent isn't to sell. Its Federal property regardless of which Department regulates it and the Army isn't in the real estate business. I would venture to say that the intent is to improve and modernize the facilities and reduce the overhead cost to do so. Who in their right mind is going to sink millions in property they are leasing (rhetorical question). I also point out the the USFS supported the Army owning this land this when they were after the million dollar piece real estate on Lake Lanier but dropped negotiations when the realized Army couldn't give 10 million to build their new offices on the lake. I agree there has to be public dialog, but statements like "282 Acres of Bull Complex at Risk" misrepresents the entire issue. In my opinion what the Army is really trying to do is in the public interest. Its saving us money. Once again....my opinion on the facts as I know them.
mtntriathlete
Training Wheel Tyke
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:34 am

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby Dano » Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:53 pm

mtntriathlete wrote:The fact that the Army has been training there for well over 50 years, and has been trying to deal with USFS for a land swap for at least 10 or more of those of those is probably a pretty good indicator that the intent isn't to sell. Its Federal property regardless of which Department regulates it and the Army isn't in the real estate business. I would venture to say that the intent is to improve and modernize the facilities and reduce the overhead cost to do so. Who in their right mind is going to sink millions in property they are leasing (rhetorical question). I also point out the the USFS supported the Army owning this land this when they were after the million dollar piece real estate on Lake Lanier but dropped negotiations when the realized Army couldn't give 10 million to build their new offices on the lake. I agree there has to be public dialog, but statements like "282 Acres of Bull Complex at Risk" misrepresents the entire issue. In my opinion what the Army is really trying to do is in the public interest. Its saving us money. Once again....my opinion on the facts as I know them.

Bull Spit
‎"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." – James Madison
User avatar
Dano
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 8:00 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby mtntriathlete » Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:32 pm

I assume the "Bull Spit" reply represents the facts as you know them? Everyone is entitled to their opinon my friend....
mtntriathlete
Training Wheel Tyke
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:34 am

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby iride » Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:33 pm

mtntriathlete wrote:The fact that the Army has been training there for well over 50 years, and has been trying to deal with USFS for a land swap for at least 10 or more of those of those is probably a pretty good indicator that the intent isn't to sell. Its Federal property regardless of which Department regulates it and the Army isn't in the real estate business. I would venture to say that the intent is to improve and modernize the facilities and reduce the overhead cost to do so. Who in their right mind is going to sink millions in property they are leasing (rhetorical question). I also point out the the USFS supported the Army owning this land this when they were after the million dollar piece real estate on Lake Lanier but dropped negotiations when the realized Army couldn't give 10 million to build their new offices on the lake. I agree there has to be public dialog, but statements like "282 Acres of Bull Complex at Risk" misrepresents the entire issue. In my opinion what the Army is really trying to do is in the public interest. Its saving us money. Once again....my opinion on the facts as I know them.


sooo... you live right there. it's highly suspect (to me) that you're sole reason for wanting this is a yet-to-be-legitimately-explained taxpayer savings, that were the monetary situation moot you'd have no opinion (this is how you make it seem, you've not said such) one way or the other. what's your angle?
clearly it's entirely too technical...

**currently tied with Lance Armstrong on Tour de France wins.**
User avatar
iride
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 4454
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 7:43 pm
Location: playing with the kitty...

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby mtntriathlete » Thu Jul 25, 2013 11:02 pm

Suspect? really? ha..ha... Why because I disagree with the original post? Or is it because I know for a fact that this has NOTHING to to with Bull Mountain as Dano's original post alluded to? Read my posts my friend, the things I have mentioned are in Dano's original post and subsuquent posts. The fact I live there and am a "Local" cyclist I would think would be appreciated since this is taking place in the county where I live. Unlike most I don't look or see a conspiracy with every little thing especially when the only thing I real thing I know about the issue is what I learned from a Blog, or some petition. Here's what I do know is FACT. This has nothing to do with Bull Mountain or ANY of the trails connected to it. The rest of my statements I have made are my OPINIONs. But obviously, one man's opinion is another man's conspiracy.
mtntriathlete
Training Wheel Tyke
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:34 am

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby Dano » Fri Jul 26, 2013 5:43 am

Too early to go back up & read my exact words, but I believe I referred to the Bull Mtn Comlpex which incorporates all the trails, FS roads, & gravel roads in the area. Thought that was assumed.
‎"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." – James Madison
User avatar
Dano
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 8:00 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby mtntriathlete » Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:24 pm

Dano wrote:I'll try to paste this, but the Congressman from Gainesville is offering legislation that gives Camp Merrill the ownership of the 282 acres it is currently leasing. That means we lose miles of FS access like 141, Montgomery Creek Falls trail, and other popular trails. Time to make a little noise?



Make noise for sure, but a better idea is ensure said noise is based on fact. Not hype.
282 Acres can hardly result in the loss of "miles of FS access like 141, Montgomery Creek Falls trail, and other popular trails" Would love to know which popular trails criss cross Camp Merrill. I'd'like to ride them. :)
mtntriathlete
Training Wheel Tyke
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:34 am

Re: 282 Acres of Bull Complex at risk!!!!

Postby Eddie O » Tue Aug 13, 2013 2:43 pm

Limiting access to FS 141 would certainly impact the Fool's Gold route, not that this route has much priority for either of these entities. I'm still not sure when or why the Montgomery Creek became a non-inventoried trail for the USFS, but that's another issue.

My only other concerns would be environmental impact of whatever the Army is hoping to do with infrastructure improvements to the base and why the back door approach to the land exchange? The USFS has a much better history as land stewards vs Army and this 282 acres is the head waters of the Etowah River.


Eddie O
User avatar
Eddie O
Rock Hopper
 
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Atlanta

Previous

Return to Mountain Biking

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users