JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
For reference, it looks like the firearm closures are described in the Recreation Management Area (RMA) framework section. Overall it seems only "backcountry" designated sites remain open for target shooting or hunting.

It appears the closure decisions were made in part by Travel Oregon, Inc. This is an independent corporation created by the Oregon legislature to promote tourism. Curiously though they're funded by a 1% statewide lodging tax.

Example:
http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/rmpswesternoregon/files/rma/Coos_Bay_RMA.zip

The videos suggest Travel Oregon is trying to designate each BLM site towards a particular usage - mountain biking, camping, etc - so-called "destination development". Shooting is probably seen as incompatible with some of those usages? Overall it might be good to have a firearm or hunting advocate on the tourism board here:


Also might be good to notify ODFW about this. They need more hunters and hence huntable habitat. The tourism board might also listen more to ODFW.
 
Last Edited:
For reference, it looks like the firearm closures are described in the Recreation Management Area (RMA) framework section. Overall it seems only "backcountry" designated sites remain open for target shooting or hunting.

It appears the closure decisions were made in part by Travel Oregon, Inc. This is an independent corporation created by the Oregon legislature to promote tourism. Curiously though they're funded by a 1% statewide lodging tax.

Example:
http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/rmpswesternoregon/files/rma/Coos_Bay_RMA.zip

The videos suggest Travel Oregon is trying to designate each BLM site towards a particular usage - mountain biking, camping, etc - so-called "destination development". Shooting is probably seen as incompatible with some of those usages? Overall it might be good to have a firearm or hunting advocate on the tourism board here:


Also might be good to notify ODFW about this. They need more hunters and hence huntable habitat. The tourism board might also listen more to ODFW.
Good report. Thank you! Nice work.
 
This land's not your land, this land's not my land,
From California to the Sauvie Island;
From the Wallowa Mountains to the Pacific waters
This land has no more Liberty.
 
Like the DMZ between Liberty and Tyranny.

Ironically, when I leave my house if I turn left I'm deep in suburbia and headed towards hazy polluted skies and the progressive micro management of Big Government in Portland. If I turn right, it's fresh slightly cow scented air, farms, pastures, forests, and freedom (except, of course, for anything that might offend Travel Oregon).
 
I should just ignore this, but it is un-ignorable. Perhaps I misread, @Stomper, and you actually meant this post as sarcasm. I hope that is the case! If not, then here is my response:

SERIOUSLY? When I moved into a metropolitan area, it was because that's where I CHOSE to live. People move to the population centers because that is where the jobs are. Employers move to the population centers because that is where the people are. Cities have been growing since before the Roman Empire. There is no conspiratorial effort of some overlord society of nefarious leaders to herd sheeple into a pen for easier control. Give me a break!


Yeah, seriously. You CHOSE to live Metro. Checked out zoning regs for rural areas? 90 acre minimums for a single house so only the rediculously wealthy can move "out". Lock out the forest to ALL activity under an impossible to navigate leviathan of "regulations"? Where else ya gonna go 'cept the metro areas?

Tyrants have endeavored to stack their "subjects" on top of each other so they could have maximum control since the days of Nimrod and his city of Babel.

I've been around the world a few times on military missions and seen it first hand. Having said that, do I think I know EVERYTHING? No. So think what you want otherwise, it's your priveledge (for now).
 
We are not 'THE' desirable recreationalist in the woods. We don't seem to have that 'Make you feel good' type of persona they want to see. They prefer to attract the green hikers and pure naturalists who's carbon doesn't rub off. Like a Starbucks cafe, they want the trendy Frappuccino loungers.

Being the underdog means we have to work harder to win. We've got to figure out how to get the ball across the goal line. We need to revisit our game book and design new plans to score some goals. Somehow, we need to ramp up our image a notch or two. We're working on that with the clean ups and information program but that's not enough.

We need more ideas on how to help build credibility into the sport of recreational target shooting. They need to start seeing that we actually do care about our natural resources, are firmly against the destructive conduct of some people in the woods and are willing to help make it better for all to enjoy.

I don't see it as us fighting against them. I see it as us working with them. However it seems, most of 'them' see it from a different perspective. We need to change our image and actions with out compromising our rights. We need to stand firm but show responsibility, comradery and work to build credibility.

Ideas?
 
Yeah, seriously. You CHOSE to live Metro. Checked out zoning regs for rural areas? 90 acre minimums for a single house so only the rediculously wealthy can move "out".
Source?
I've been property/house shopping(rural) for a while now, and I've seen 2, 5, 10, and 20 acre Minimums. Never 90. From what I can tell(due to location), it seems like that's to protect our farmlands from being developed.
Maybe I'm wrong but that's been my observation.
 
Can't remember where specifically, but that was back in the 90's or so when I got a snoot full of that zoning rule... I nearly dropped my teeth! I also thought I remember some place out past Sandy where it was a 45 acre minimums in that area, that was back in the 90's as well. I can't imagine the required blocks getting smaller either, as the civil "planners" are trying to crowd people into the UGB and higher density areas.
 
Taking the thread off-topic, but Oregon does have land-use rules. They were enacted in 1974 by Republican governor and WWII Navy veteran Tom McCall. The same governor also enacted the Beach Bill which guarantees our public access to ocean shore. (Unlike California)

http://www.ohs.org/education/focus/governor-tom-mccall.cfm

Overall land-use laws keep farming viable in near-urban communities. They're also good for hunting by avoiding fracturing timberland and habitat into mini-ranches. Again, see Cali for the opposite example.

Anyway I think ODFW is the best route for getting hunting/shooting on the map with the tourist board. It means more license $$ for them after all.
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top