rpost215

This is the cleanest quad for sale you will find. I know everyone says so but if you see it you will know it to be true. The bike belongs to my ex-wife who has not ridden the quad in 2 years since we split. It has a total of 4-5 rides on it and they were easy rides. The quad is set up nicely with a Pro Design / K&N air intake, CT racing full exhaust system, AC Racing Nerf Bars and the Cam Mod. Otherwise it is stock. It also comes with a full set of ITP Sand Star tires, front and back. She is in need of selling the quad so please only serious buyers please. Call 702-375-4556 and ask for Ron for more info and to set up time to see quad.

Hey!!! That's not nice!

Is my Welsh flag OK? I know I don't want to be a racist like those who fly the rebel flag or like those who fly the nazi/german flags... Brit, you seem to be well informed on the topic since you are someone that looks in from the outside so can you please set us all straight. I am sure no one here on DDR wants to be a racist...

IT'S THE CHEMTRAILS!!!!

Even in the case of a dog, probable cause is still required to initiate a search. Routine traffic stops do not constitute probable cause for search and even with a dog, there must be reasonable suspicion of an illegal act or crime. None the less, the point is to never give consent. Whether you have or do not have anything to hide, make them jump through the hoops necessary to catch you. It is your 4th amendment right. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Here is some information for you all. I learned this the hard way so I am certain of it's accuracy. 1st: It is not illegal to buy the fireworks in NYE County. 2nd: It IS illegal to light them off in Nye County, Clark Co., or California. 3rd: It is illegal to transport them across county and state line. 4th: It is a FEDERAL Crime to transport an 'explosive' device across state lines. 5th: Dumont is governed by the BLM which is a Federal Agency so federal laws apply. 6th: The initial/lowest fine is $75 to $500. It is at the LEO's discretion. 7th: At the LEO's discretion, you can be charged with; transportation across state lines, possession, and use of an 'explosive device', all of which can be federal felonies with heavy fines or jail time. Also, on a different note, you do not have to allow a search of vehicle with out probable cause. A traffic stop for speeding and such does not constitute probable cause and you have the right to refuse a search. Do not allow the law enforcement officers tell you otherwise. With out valid probable cause, you have a right against search. This I also know first hand as I was driving back on route 160 just before the 4th of July and was stopped. After a very long wait on the side of the road, and several State Police, BLM Rangers and Metro showed up, I was allowed to leave with out a search as no warrant was issued and no legal probable cause was cited. An exception to this is the Agri. Check Points. I would advise against the use of fireworks at Dumont. Just find a good spot on one of the high hills and watch the show that others are willing to take the risk to put on.

More importantly, if you are from CA and happen to have the right permits to carry/posses a firearm, you still will face significant penalties for shooting in a restricted area. If you are from Nevada or anywhere else, there is NO RECIPROCITY for carry concealed permits for hand guns. You are also not allowed to carry a rifle or shotgun across the state line except by special permit during hunting season. There are very stiff felony penalties that will have sever impact your future. Don't risk it. By the way, I support our 2nd Amendment Right.

Just my 2 cents.

Just a collection of comments that I agree with. I personally go to Dumont on the holiday weekends for the show, the tailgating and the party at comp. The riding is not all that fun on a holiday weekend with so many people out there and all the rough tracks after a day or two. When I want to get my ride on, I go on the off weekends. I agree that there is a problem with comp on the big holiday weekends with trash, glass and such. I also have in the past made a point to those I see leaving trash and and glass and such to pick up their sh#t. I have also picked up others trash that was been left behind and will continue to do so. Beyond that, each individual has a right to enjoy the dunes how he/she sees fit. Abide by the rules and the rest is up to the individual. If you are not comfortable with the crowd and it offends you sensibilities to see a stripper pole, if you are too afraid that something bad is going to happen to you because of people having fun and partying, then don't go. It is your individual right to choose not to go just as it is another's right to go. If you do go, do your part in 'helping' those who don't get it to get it, the clean up aspect that is.

I agree. This is the heart of the issue. However, where there is clearly open access to the top of the dune, and someone takes it upon themselves to tear down the tape, then they are as much a part of the problem as those who are on the other side blocking the access. The lack of respect shown on both sides only leads to more lack of respect. I also do not believe legislating the behavior is the right answer. This is a nuisance issue. The more rules we pass on nuisance issues, and not substantive issues, just become more of a distraction that the LEO's have to deal with. They should be focusing on the real dangerous issues like DUI, open containers, reckless riding around camps, firebombs and people who leave their trash behind. Just my 2cents.

GPS.

What is amazing is the sense of entitlement by some. It appears that some of you feel it is your right to determine for others where and how they should enjoy the dunes. It seems you have forgotten that one individuals rights begin where another's end. It is entirely acceptable for people with kids to camp near the finger dunes if they choose. It is also entirely acceptable, imho, to mark the area for safety. What materials used to mark the area should be considered and should not endanger people passing by in any way. Also, out of respect, if one chooses to camp near the finger dunes, they should not block access to the top of the dune where most people ride. It is an open riding area after all. For those of you who feel the need to tear down others tape and cones and what not, I hope you are not unfortunate enough to tear down mine. I generally do not camp near the finger dunes as I like as much peace and quite at night as possible. You will never hear me complain about the noise @ 1:00, 2:00 or even 5:30 am. However, I have friends who like to camp near the finger dunes and on occasion I have camped with them. There always seem to be someone who thinks they are the "finger dune Police" and my friend's tape has been pulled down. I can tell you that the area marked off has never been unreasonable, has never limited access to or the ability to ride on the dune. Red cones and yellow glow in the dark tape is what was used. On several occasions where the opportunity existed, they were caught and made to return and put the tape back up. What we need to remember is that an ounce of common sense, and a little respect for others is all it takes for us all to have a good time, even when we disagree on certain issues. Just my two cents.

Thanks.

What time? I will attend. I will also make available a car-pool for others who want to go. I have room for three other individuals. Let's see if we can get the word out and get people motivated to attend.

How does one get appointed or approved to serve on the TRT? When or at what intervals dose the TRT change the members? Can the TRT be expanded? Am I correct in that there is only one member from Nevada? If so, can we get additional member representation from Nevada? Also, are the TRT meetings open to the public? Is there a public hearing forum so that individuals can speak? How is the agenda determined? Is there a mechanism for getting issues on the meeting agenda either by way of petition or formal request? I am just looking to understand how one can have a greater level of involvement or a greater impact on getting out the issues to the public. Thanks in advance for a detailed response. Ron

Final out come not known, but encouraging, Date of report 7-27-07 http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01...007/07-3674.htm Summary: Summary of Changes From Previously Designated Critical Habitat The areas identified in this proposed rule constitute a proposed revision of the areas we proposed to designate as critical habitat for Astragalus magdalenae var. peirsonii on August 5, 2003 (68 FR 46143), and designated on August 4, 2004 (69 FR 47330). The main differences include the following: 1. This proposed revision includes 16,108 ac (6,519 ha) of land in Imperial County, California, a reduction of 36,672 acre (14,840 ha) from the 2003 proposed rule (68 FR 46143) and 5,728 ac (2,329 ha) from the 2004 final critical habitat rule (69 FR 47330). The differences in data and selection criteria between the currently designated critical habitat and this proposed revision are described further below. 2. The reduction in total acreage from the 2003 proposed critical habitat designation is primarily the result of a revised methodology to delineate critical habitat. The public hearing was held Sept. 25, 2007. As far as I can tell, they have not published their final decision. I don't expect anything soon as the plan itself has to be reviewed and then the legal challenges must be ruled on. Could be months or years before final outcome. Still leads me to have hope that things can be reversed.

Another link. Not necessarily a win yet, however with a unanimous vote by the county board of supervisors, it gives me hope and the notion that reversing prior closures is not impossible, maybe even probable. http://kxoradio.com/local-news/county-peti...rom-list-2.html

Read the following links: The first is the effort to get the butterfly listed under the ESA. The second is the closure in March of 2007. The third, May 2007, is the finding by the US Fish and Wildlife stating the listing in not warranted. Whether recognized or not, this was a win for pro-access. http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/uncommon-groun...mountain-b.html http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660206255,00.html http://www.fws.gov/nevada/highlights/news_..._050207_smb.pdf

1. General tactic. It has been used in Riverside County, Orange County and San Diego County specifically. In the Riverside County, I do have specific knowledge. 2. A fence helps the environmental protectionist in several ways. First, it is part of the classic 'domino effect'. By erecting a fence, no matter where it is, you delineate a boundary that is clear and fixed. You now have a starting point by which to move the boundary. Currently, there is an established boundary but not too many people have clear understanding of where that boundary is because it was established some time ago and it is not clearly marked. By erecting a fence, it becomes that much harder to move the boundary back because it just become accepted as fixed. It becomes much easier to move a fence outward instead of inward. Question? Is it a wonder that this action only comes on the heals of the 'loss' the environmental protectionists took over the milk vetch and the butterfly? Once the fence is put up, it will make it that much harder to fight to re-open areas as the expense of putting up the fence would wasted. There are many other ways it benefits the opposition but I am not trying to be Biblical in length. 3. Harassment. I agree that anyone not respecting the boundaries should be ticketed. Repeat offenders should have an escalating fine and quiet possibly jail. I believe in protection of nature where there is a proven necessity and reason that serves the greater good. However, some of the protections are unnecessary and discriminatory. When they inhibit the freedoms of any one group without good cause, that is injustice. In Riverside County, the environmentalist protection movement set a course of first creating the fences, then they set up observation posts to track the movements of people riding in the area, whether in legal boundaries or not, and finally worked in coordination with local law enforcement sympathetic to the cause to ticket anyone riding out of bounds. However, there are several instances where individuals were ticketed on their own private property and had to go to court to dismiss the violations, there were several instances where people riding 'in-bounds' who were ticketed and had to go to court to dismiss the charges. I was also privy to a discussion where it was stated that what was needed was to quote, "harass the riding community such that they would go find somewhere else to ride". The people proposing the fence would have you believe that the problem of riding out of bounds is far worse than it actually is. They would also have you believe that the fence, and I think I am referencing one of your posts, that it would lead to less manpower. It is not the case as they will now need to patrol the fence to protect the fence itself. I am not denying the logic of a fence to protect the at risk areas. I am calling into question the motives.

First, let me say that I appreciate your passion. It must get very frustrating being a 'lightning rod' and having to take the brunt of most of the complaints. However, and I do say this with respect, I think you are misinformed. I have clients who are very deep in the environmental protection movement and I can tell you first hand that the issue of 'the fence' is only one of several steps in an otherwise coordinated plan for ultimate closure. To use your term, conspiracy, is exactly what we are facing. It is done at all levels of government when it comes to environmental issues. The Endangered Species Act was just that. While the argument that riding in closed area's and the damage caused by that element in our riding community is a logical one, it is not as pervasive as they would have you believe. In addition, the fact that it is being touted that a fence would lead to lower maintenance costs by way of freeing up law enforcement to patrol more of the open area's there by leading to an overall reduction in the manpower needed is a farce. They will still need to dedicate as many officers to protection the fence as they currently need to patrolling the closed areas. This same argument was made in Riverside County when they built the fences there. However, I know personally first hand that there was an increase in cost for law enforcement. One of my client's son was instrumental in the fight in Riverside to put the fences up. They then petitioned law enforcement to patrol with civilian volunteers that would sit high on the hills with telescopes and spot the riders and call down to the officers on the ground the locations so that they could ticket and arrest the riders. One of the stated mission objectives of the environmental protection movement is that of harassment. That being said, here is my solution to the immediate problem as well potential action to be taken to fight for our rights. 1. Education. Not my original thought but a very good one none the less. We need to educate our community about respect of others, responsibility for our own actions and how to be good caretakers of the community. We need better education on the rules and regulations and the boundaries themselves. I have been going to Dumont for 5 years and only know of a few of the off limit riding areas. We also need to educate our community about activism. We need to educate our community about the laws that are written and how to change them. We need to educate our community about the power of solicitation of our elected representatives and how to put pressure on them to pass legislation in our favor. 2. Volunteerism. We need to rally the community into action by way of volunteers that will show up for the clean up days. Those of you are DDR have done a great job of this and I hope you will continue the good work. We need volunteers to pass out materials on the rules and riding areas and the issues facing our community at every major weekend as well as the off weekends. I am not opposed to volunteer patrols of the off limit riding areas. This in its self would be a good deterrent to that element of our community who do not respect themselves much less the rights of the rest of us. 3. Organization. Again, DDR has done a great job of bringing the community together in an informal fashion, but we need a more formal level of organization in order to form the strength to fight for our rights. In a previous post one of the posters talked about a greater need for coordination between the various groups that represent us, DDr, FoDD, TRT, ASA ect. Other than the TRT meeting in Barstow, I have not heard of any formal meetings held here in Las Vegas to discuss the issues facing our community. We do not have a formal level of representation that presents to us the topics for discussion with a planned mechanism to address our concerns and a way to present them to the decision makers of the policy. Also, we do not have a formal organization that researches the issues and looks for ways to overcome the opposition. We need a formal structure, much the same as GreenPeace or The Sierra Club, with local and national chapters that will be able to organize our community into a powerful voice. 4. Activism. First, we need a formal way to raise the dollars necessary to produce the educational materials required to get out the message. Second, we need to develop a plan of action that will coordinate the volunteer effort and get people mobilized. Much the same way the 'Clean Up' weekends have worked. Third, we need to raise the dollars necessary to do the research the issues and hire the legal professionals that can formally present our side of the issues when necessary. Fourth we need better communication about when the issues are being decided so we can show up and have our collective voice heard. Fifth, we need to become more proactive about soliciting our representatives at the local, state and federal level to hear us and to take action for us. The only way this can be done is to threaten them with voting power. Finally, we need to take an activist approach to the issues as they are presented. An absolute stance that shows that we are determined to not go away, to go the distance and fight until we have gained all that we want. That means, No Fences, No Closures, No Fees, (That is what we pay taxes for) etc. In addition, instead of fighting a protectionist fight, we need to fight an offensive fight. We need to fight for re-opening of closed riding areas. While I agree that some closures and fences and fees seem necessary, it is only in an absolute stance that we will protect ourselves. We need to fight for re-assessment of those areas that are closed and why they are closed and what can be done to re-open them. In this fight, the opposition will need to engage on that level and divert their resources to that fight and not to closing more areas or putting up more fences or raising more fees. You get the point. I apologize for the Biblical length of my response. I have been silent for a long time because I felt it necessary not to rock the boat for business purposes. No longer. I am willing to follow through on every one of the action steps listed above. I just don't have the network to begin. I would need help from those of you who have already been fighting the good fight so to speak. I am open to suggestions from any and all but if we are going to have a chance at overcoming the opposition we will need to do it as one consolidated community.

What the individuals speaking for the rights of all of us do not understand is that the opposition, those who want to close the riding areas permanently, has a strategy of "attrition". What that means is that they work for compromise on an issue, win some level of capitulation, then they attack another issue, work for compromise, win some level of capitulation, and so on... Each and every time we give a little, we are losing the war so to speak. If we allow the approval of a fence, then we will have to fight as to where the boundaries are. As evidenced in many of the posts, the boundaries are not clearly marked and many of us do not know actually where they are. So when it comes time to determine where the fence line should be established, it will be far more expansive than originally thought. I have been very close to some environmental lobbyist who are client of mine, and I can tell you that what we need is a stronger voice when it comes to these issues. We need greater communication on the topics that effect us as a community. We need a proactive approach to getting out the information so the community as a whole can rally and show our support against the action being taken against us. Our opponents are in this for the long haul. They are not going to stop. Their agenda is to push us off the land completely. Does this sound familiar? 1. Cut funding while raising the expense. 2. Pass the cost of support to the individuals there by making it cost prohibitive to engage in the activity. 3. Limit access to the activity and the land the activity is engaged upon there by limiting the amount of participants that can effectively use the recreational area. The environmentalist will keep 'circling' this strategy until the riding area's are completely closed off. My suggestion, on the fence issue. While it makes logical sense to build a fence to cordon off the "off Limit" areas, we must oppose the use of our funds for the cost of construction and maintenance. If it is that important that a fence be constructed, let the other side find the way to pay for it. We must insist that our funds be used to better our experience and not be used against us. I know I am new here and I am not trying to call out those of you who have done a good job trying to protect us. But more can be done. We need to stop trying to negotiate and start finding ways to impose some of our rights. Negotiation will only end in a limiting of our rights and the eventual closing of our riding areas.