Closing USFS Roads

Don Baccus dhogaza at pacifier.com
Thu Apr 16 17:21:56 EST 1998


In article <3536746B.1EF at livingston.net>,
Don Staples  <dstaples at livingston.net> wrote:

>My presumptions and prejudices?  About a federal boondoggle? 

The very fact that you leap to the conclusion that it's a
boondoggle is, indeed, based on the presumption that closing
roads only requires barricading them and a general prejudice
against the USFS.

>Get real

Clearly I am.  Real and on your case, Staples.


>> >Get a life.  It is a federal boondogle, of the first nature.  Should
>> >some roads be closed and ripped?  Sure.  Should some be closed by
>> >abandonment? More likely.

>> Since this is EXACTLY what the USFS will be doing (along with
>> rebuilding and improving at least some of the roads that won't be
>> closed), how then is this a federal boondogle?  Shit, they're
>> doing exactly what you say should be done.

>At $65,000 a mile, that is a boondoggle of the first order, or maybe
>your in the ripping business?

When was the last time you constructed a road in a remote, rugged
area?  When was the last time you took one apart, removing culverts,
ripping the bed, etc?  

I'm not in the business so I'm in no position to say whether or
not this is an unreasonable cost.

Neither are you, Staples.  You're presuming it's a boondoggle
because the figure seems high to you.  You've not presented any
data, just your own intuition, yet you insist over and over again
"it is a boondoggle!  it is a boondoggle!"

That is ... a presumption on your part.  So, yes, we do know
at least one of your presumptions because you trot it out over
and over again.

-- 

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, at http://donb.photo.net



More information about the Ag-forst mailing list