Off-highway vehicles are valued today in Nevada for recreation and transportation, like horses were 75/90 years ago. Many of us rely on "back roads, " public roads across our public domain, commonly referred to as Public Land, where our young, old, and handicapped sportsman/ women can use their off/highway vehicles. Almost every county in the state of Nevada have single track, pathways and/or other trails that have been HISTORICALLY used by the public. Todays access to" PUBLIC LANDS" for recreation is of great importance to us and the economy. Recreational access to Public Lands for the off-highway user are much more important today than 75/80 years ago as recreational income has to take the place of lost revenue to the state because of the decline in ranching and mining. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) states in part as follows: That Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that... goals and objectives be established by law and guidelines for public land use planning, and that management be on the basis of MULTIPLE USE and SUSTAINED yield unless otherwise specified by LAW..... The roadless initiative violates the Multiple USE concept of FLPMA and only the CONGRESS can pass a " LAW ". Many of us (old timers) in Nevada were of the understanding that when the wilderness areas were designated in the 80's, there would be no more for several years , but roadless initiative are no different than Rare II was before the previous designation. The U.S. Forest and B.L.M. were asked, "When the definition of a road differs from the F.S. / B.L.M. definition, what definition would you follow?" Their reply was they would follow the COUNTY'S definition. Title 23 of the U.S. Code (USC) The term "public roads" is defined as follows: "means any road/roads or street under the Jurisdiction of and Maintained by a public authority and open to public travel." " Public Authority" is defined as " Federal, State, County, Town/Township, Indian Tribe, Municipal or other local government or instrumentality with authority to finance, build, operate or maintain toll-free facilities." The U.S.Of A. Constitution only allows the federal government the ability to create post offices and post roads. Establishment and maintenance of public roads was left to the STATES. The Supreme Court has ruled : "State officials cannot consent to the enlargement of the powers of Congress beyond those enumerated in the Constitution". The Supreme Court even went further and ruled : "If a state ratified or gives consent to any authority which is not specifically granted by U.S. Constitution it is NULL and VOID". Even if we wanted to support the "Roadless Initiative" the Supreme Court ruling must be adhered to. A great many peoples recreation and livelihood depend on the use of Public Land/Roads in Nevada. Many people in America consider public land access as an unalienable right protected by the Constitution. Many of us believe the roadless initiative/ land closures are in violation of the Constitution. There is a lot of "hostility and mistrust in Nevada aimed at the U.S. Forest/B.L.M service because of denied access to public land. The animosity is fueled by certain individuals within the goverment/state agencies misinterpreting federal law, regulations, court decisions and state law . ("Trust is not a given, it must be earned") When trust is developed, the " Hostility " will go away. Roadless initiative/land closures curcumvent Public Law 104-208 of 1997, section 108 which states: "no final rule or regulation of any agency of the federal government pertaining to the recognition, management or validity of a right-of-way pursuant to RS2477(43U.S.C.932) shall take effect unless EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED by an act of Congress subsequent to the date of enactment of this Act." General council of the G E O reported that Congress intended section 108 to be permanent. Declaring an area roadless while a valid county right-of-way exists is unlawful. In the Repulic known as the United State Of America, all legislative powers are vested in the Congress of the United State, which consists of the Senate and a House of Representatives. So the Supreme Court has told us many times. The administrative branch of our government does not have legislative powers. The Supreme Court has ruled the Constitution's division of power among the three branches is violated where one branch invades the territory of another whether or not the encroached-upon branch approves the encroachment. The President of the U.S. of A. had to take an oath before he entered the office to preserve,protect and DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. Nowhere in the Constitution can we find where the President has the power to issue such a directive as this roadless initiative. The Supreme Court ruled years ago that an unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it created no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. This is another reason we should oppose all land and road closures. More quotes to follow another time. Loomis PAVED ROADS: A fine example of needless government spending.