Peavine Congested Area

[Edit (6-2-07): The following post has generated some discussion amongst the Poedunk membership in the comments. I (Mike) would like to add that the opinions expressed in the letter do not represent the position of this club and the Poedunks have not advocated, taken action, or contacted any public offices regarding this matter. I posted this in order to illustrate the issue pertinent to trail recreation on Peavine and to spark a public, transparent discussion.]

Got this email from Shawn O’Meara on the shooting on Peavine. The area he’s concerned with is the trailhead parking zone near the radio towers @ the end of Hoge road.

The problem is that the definition of a congested area according to chapter 50.094 is the list of congested areas in 50.096. There doesn’t seem to be an actual set of criteria for determining congested areas. But there are a lot of people going through there .

For anybody who thinks the shooting on the Peavine foothills is getting out of control. I’m trying to get a congested area designation on the lower flanks where all the multi-use recreation is taking place.
There’s a lot of reasons this needs to happen. The first and most obvious is public safety. Two years ago I almost got shot up on Peavine, just above three trees. He had set his target up on rattle snake alley. I carefully confronted the guy, he made no apologies and said I didn’t belong up there during hunting season. WHAT! Second along with the shooting comes the dumping. Shooters bring all that crap up to shoot holes in and when they’re done, they leave it. Noise pollution, destruction of public property and so on.
I raised this issue at a town hall meeting with Pete Spfrazza a month or two ago. He said he would get it on the agenda at a county commissioner meeting. He got it on June 12th. A HUGE problem is I’ll be out of the country. I need someone who is willing to stand up at the meeting and express our concerns.
The most important thing is a huge showing of people supporting the issue. This is going to be hard because they have the meetings at 2:00pm. The same issue was brought before the commission for one of the North Valleys and the NRA grass roots machine organized a big turn out of people opposing the proposition. I’m not trying to threaten any body’s “2nd Amendment Rights”. I just don’t think lower Peavine is an appropriate place to be discharging firearms anymore. It truly is a congested area.
Please forward this to anybody who uses enjoys Peavine in a non-destructive manor.

The Commissioners meet in the County Commission Chambers, located at:
1001 E. Ninth Street, Building A
Reno, NV 89512
County Commission meetings are held three times a month on the second, third and fourth Tuesdays of each month.
Second Tuesday: 2:00 p.m.
Third Tuesday: 2:00 p.m.
Fourth Tuesday: 2:00 p.m.
Commission meetings are televised live and replayed on TV-17.
The public is encouraged to comment at the beginning of the commission meeting. Comments are limited to two minutes per person. People are invited to submit comments in writing on agenda items and/or attend and make comment on that item at the Commission meeting.


8 Responses

  1. How high should the line be drawn? most of “lower peavine” is already part of The Greater Truckee meadows congested area…the problem the trails go up into the middle and sometimes the top. should the congested area should be expanded? To familiarize yourself ck out teh county’s GIS website and browse the layers for congested areas. -R

  2. I think this goes along with our musings on trailhead facilities for the Hoge Road Access point. Better signage, parking w/o mud, perhapse a toilet.

    Having a gateway would definately provide better direction for users. When I go to that meeting I’m going to try to talk to the gun guys. The congested area is probably necessary(maybe just in the basin below Goddess Point (hippy cairn), but we can probably handle a lot of the rest of it ourselves. i.e. Coordinate with the shooters where they want to shoot, show them our map, put their spots on our map and come up with an encounter protocol.


  3. Poedunkers,

    I’m very concerned that taking a political stance on issues like this will have a negative effect on our ability to promote trail building on Peavine. I fully respect the fact that every individual is entitled to their own opinion – I just don’t think that a trail building club is the venue to voice them. We risk too much in alienating fellow mountain bikers, volunteers, land managers, politicians, members of the public, other user groups and club members.


  4. Steve you have a good point and I have to say I agree. However, I feel the intention of this post was not for the Poedunks to take an official stance on this issue but engage in the discussion. Personally I am not anti shooting I am for responsible shooting. While I do have some issues with the letter that was posted I agree that the congested area could be revised and that the current laws should be enforced. I think Mike’s comments clearly show his intent to take a proactive vs. reactionary approach to this issue.

  5. Yeah, That’s why I set the page brake before the letter and put in as many links as I could find.

    There’s a lot of interest in getting the shooters a designated place on peavine to shoot that they can maintain and we can avoid. But there has to be more than a pile of junk to let us know.

    By keeping quiet we risk not being part of the discussion. By keeping the discussion private we risk appearing ministerial and secretive.

    Poedunks are and continue to be responsible for increased user activity in this area, and I think we should make efforts to keep thinks happy. Things like parking spaces, congested areas, trailheads, and more hikers will just discourage the problem shooters from shooting in bad areas. The rest of the shooters already don’t like to shoot there because it’s congested. If we can coordinate with the good shooters, we can avoid their areas and if we have a strong trail building/maintenance machine we discourage bootlegging in areas that create conflict while creating more trail in areas that are already appropriate. Let’s not forget that we essentially want to restrict MTBers from running amok too. Exactly what we’re asking of the shooters.

    I’m going to go to that meeting and make some personal comments. But on behalf of Poedunks (and the fact that I’m writing an article on this issue) I will pick out the fiercest commenter on the other side, walk up to him/her after the meeting, smile, put out a hand and introduce myself.

    Thanks for the comment Steve. I think this public forum is a good thing!


  6. hmmm …. this doesn’t feel like a forum to me – it feels like the agenda is already set. What do you think Dale?

  7. steve what agenda are you referring to? the only agenda i am aware of here is building and riding sustainable & legal trails. Is it totally off base to try and partner with the shooters to resolve future conflict between trail users and shooters? i did edit my previous comments to take out the word “we” i had no intention to speak for anyone but myself my intention was to suggest some questions that I believe are worth asking. your right it does not feel like a forum with only 3 people talking thanks for speaking up -Randy

  8. You hit the nail on the head Randy: my only agenda is building and riding sustainable & legal trails.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: