OutdoorWire

Extreme Terrain



New on Access Central
H.R. 659: To establish a gun buyback grant program.
by outdoorwire. 01/18/19 11:09 PM
Amendments to CEQA Guidelines Now in Effect
by outdoorwire. 01/17/19 05:06 PM
Support OutdoorWire...
More News on the 'Wire

4x4Voice
4x4Wire
MUIRNet-News
Forum Statistics
Forums19
Topics1,573
Posts1,629
Members45
Most Online261
Dec 17th, 2018
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 132 guests, and0 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Active Threads | Active Posts | Unanswered Today | Since Yesterday | This Week
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 11:29 PM
H.R. 664: To protect the right of individuals to bear arms at water resources development projects administered by the Secretary of the Army, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 17, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 17, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 17, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 9 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 11:27 PM
H.R. 687: To provide for the mandatory licensing and registration of handguns, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 17, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 17, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 17, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 6 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 11:26 PM
H.R. 686: To require face-to-face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.

Introduced: Jan 17, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 17, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 17, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 10 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 11:09 PM
H.R. 659: To establish a gun buyback grant program.

Introduced: Jan 17, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 17, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 17, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 15 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 11:05 PM
H.R. 606: To require the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make video recordings of the examination and testing of firearms and ammunition, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 16, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 16, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 16, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 14 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/18/19 10:54 PM
H.R. 606: To require the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make video recordings of the examination and testing of firearms and ammunition, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 16, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 16, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 16, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 8 see more
Access Roundtable
01/17/19 05:06 PM
California Natural Resources Agency adopts final amendments to CEQA Guidelines, providing additional clarifying revisions to GHG impacts, baseline, and deferral of mitigation amendments.

The California Office of Administrative Law recently approved a suite of amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, which are now in effect. Latham wrote about these amendments last year, when the Natural Resources Agency began the rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedures Act. During this rulemaking process, the California Natural Resources Agency (Agency) considered comments on the proposed amendments from members of the public, responded to those comments, and made some slight revisions to the amendments. The final adopted text of the amendments is available here.

Relevant revisions to the amendments made during the rulemaking process include:

-- Section 15064.4 (Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Impacts): The Agency clarified that a project’s incremental contribution to climate change impacts should not be compared to state, national, or global GHG emissions to determine whether the project’s emissions are cumulatively considerable. Further, if using consistency with state goals and policies as a means to determine significance, the lead agency should explain how the project’s emissions are consistent with those goals.

-- Section 15125 (Baseline): The Agency clarified that the procedural requirement to justify a baseline other than existing conditions does not apply to reliance on historic conditions. Rather, the procedural requirement applies only to use of future conditions as a sole baseline.

-- Section 15126.4 (Deferral of Mitigation): The Agency proposed to clarify when mitigation may be permissibly deferred until after project approval, consistent with case law. In response to comments, the Agency clarified that if details are deferred, a lead agency must identify at least the types of measures that are known to be feasible and that will achieve an adopted performance standard — rather than simply provide a list of possible mitigation actions that will be considered, analyzed, and potentially incorporated.

Additionally, the Agency’s shift in approach for assessing a project’s potential transportation impacts from Level of Service to Vehicle Miles Traveled will apply prospectively as described in CEQA Guidelines section 15007. A lead agency may elect to be governed by the new Section 15064.3 immediately, but beginning on July 1, 2020, the requirements to analyze Vehicle Miles Traveled will apply statewide.

Source: Lexology
0 60 see more
All About Water
01/17/19 04:53 PM
The United States EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers are proposing to redefine—and significantly limit—the scope of “Waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) that are subject to federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.

Affected industries include land and infrastructure developers; linear projects such as roads, pipelines, and transmission lines; petroleum and chemical storage facilities subject to spill prevention and containment requirements; and a wide range of industries subject to stormwater management requirements.

A comparison between the current rule and the proposed rule is provided below. The agencies propose as a “baseline concept” that “waters of the United States” are waters within the ordinary meaning of the term, such as oceans, rivers, streams, lakes and ponds, and wetlands, and that not all waters are “waters of the United States.” The stated intent of the revisions is to establish “bright line jurisdictional boundaries” that are “easily implementable.” Notable changes include the following:

Limiting the category of “adjacent waters” to “adjacent wetlands,” and limiting "adjacent wetlands” to those that abut a jurisdictional water or have a “continuous surface water connection” to one;
Excluding “ephemeral streams” and “ephemeral features” altogether;
Excluding most ditches and other man-made water bodies; and
Eliminating “case by case” jurisdictional determinations.

Formal notice of the proposed rule will be published in the Federal Register shortly, opening a 60-day comment period. We expect a contentious and highly publicized rulemaking, with legal challenges to any final rule a certainty.

In addition to considering whether to comment on the proposed redefinition, clients subject to Clean Water Act regulatory programs should consider the potential effect of any final rule on existing jurisdictional determinations, permits, and compliance plans. As federal requirements contract, such documents should be reviewed to ensure they do not retain unnecessary obligations or liabilities. This is important, because non-compliance with any element of such documents—potentially including elements no longer required—could create exposure to citizen-enforcement suits and significant federal statutory penalties.

Comparison Between Current WOTUS Rule and Proposed Redefinition
[Linked Image]
0 26 see more
All About Water
01/17/19 04:34 PM
On December 11, 2018, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the “Corps”) proposed new regulations that would sharply curtail the Corps’ permitting authority under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) (the “New WOTUS Rule”). The Agencies propose to do so in two-steps. Step 1 would rescind a WOTUS rule promulgated by the agencies during the Obama administration (the “2015 WOTUS Rule”), whose expansive interpretation of the Corps’ permitting jurisdiction has been the subject of litigation throughout the country. Step 2 would adopt a new definitional rule that would significantly limit the areas that are subject to permitting requirements under the CWA.

No issue of statutory interpretation in environmental law has generated more controversy, or been in dispute longer, than the CWA’s definition of “navigable waters.” CWA Section 502(7) defines the term as “waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.” This definition is fundamental to the scope of federal regulation under the statute, because it sets the jurisdictional boundaries of the permitting programs and numerous other legal requirements that the CWA imposes. Specifically, under CWA Section 301(a), the discharge of a pollutant (including dredged and fill materials) into “navigable waters” is prohibited except in compliance with a permit issued under the CWA. Thus, the federal government’s permission is only required when a discharge is into CWA “navigable waters.”1

Among the permits whose jurisdictional scope is set by the CWA’s “navigable waters” definition are CWA Section 404 permits issued by the Corps for dredging and filling activities. Under Section 320.4(a) of the Corps regulations, the Corps has broad discretion in deciding whether an application for a Section 404 permit should be granted because the regulation allows the Corps to balance environmental, economic, safety and other factors to determine whether the proposed permitted activity is in the public interest. In addition, the Corps must comply with the environmental review requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act before granting a Section 404 permit. Thus, the Section 404 permit process can be time consuming, costly and uncertain. The controversy over defining “waters of the United States” has centered on the whether the Corps’ authority under Section 404 extends to areas that do not fit neatly into the traditional meaning of “navigable waters.”

As the rulemaking for the New WOTUS Rule proceeds in 2019, the best way to understand the issues surrounding the proposed regulations is to consider the most recent Supreme Court precedent on the jurisdictional scope of the CWA.

In Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S 715 (2006), the Supreme Court reviewed a Sixth Circuit decision upholding the Corps’ decision to require a Section 404 permit for dredge and fill activities in wetlands adjacent to man-made ditches that ultimately emptied into traditional navigable waters. The Corps made its determination in accordance with regulations and policies that required permits for activities not only in traditional navigable waters, but also in many other categories of waters, tributaries of such waters (which could be natural or man-made, and continuously flowing or intermittent or ephemeral) and wetlands “adjacent” to such waters and tributaries. The term “adjacent” was interpreted broadly to include wetlands that are “bordering, contiguous [to], or neighboring waters of the United States” – even where separated from such waters by man-made features like berms or dikes.

In Rapanos, the Sixth Circuit upheld the Corps’ actions, citing a “significant nexus” consisting of a “hydrologic connection” between the wetlands at issue and traditional navigable waters. Five members of the Court agreed that the standard applied by the Sixth Circuit was the wrong one, and remanded the cases for further proceedings. However, the five member majority could not agree on why the Sixth Circuit standard was incorrect; instead, the Court issued two opinions setting forth different reasons for the remand, reflecting diverging views on the reach of the Corps’ authority under the CWA. It is worth discussing those two opinions because Justice Kennedy’s is the foundation for the 2015 WOTUS Rule and the other, Justice Scalia’s, is the template for step 2 of the New WOTUS Rule.

According to Justice Scalia, writing for a plurality of four justices, the Corps’ interpretation of its regulations “stretched the term ‘waters of the United States’ beyond parody” by requiring permits for activities in “storm drains, roadside ditches, ripples of sand in the desert that may contain water once a year, and lands that are covered by floodwaters once every 100 years.” He acknowledged that the Court had long interpreted the phrase “navigable waters of the United States” in predecessor statutes to the CWA as including waters that are navigable in fact or readily capable of being made so. He also cited with favor Supreme Court precedent upholding Corps jurisdiction over wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters where a “significant nexus” was found to exist – but only under circumstances where the area was “characterized by saturated soil conditions and wetland vegetation [that] extended … to . . . a navigable waterway.” He rejected the proposition that a wetland constitutes “waters of the United States” whenever there is a nexus consisting of a “hydrologic connection” between the wetland area and the navigable waters. Emphasizing that a distinction must be drawn between “water of the United States” and “waters of the United States,” he concluded that only “relatively permanent, standing or flowing bodies of water” (i.e., “waters”) and adjacent areas that share “a continuous surface connection” with such waters may be included within the latter phrase.

Justice Kennedy, writing only for himself, concurred in the judgment vacating the Sixth Circuit decision. His opinion sought to bridge the divide between Justice Scalia’s narrow interpretation of “waters of the United States” and the broader interpretation of the four dissenters who would have upheld the Sixth Circuit decision. Justice Kennedy concluded that a wetland falls within the meaning of “waters of the United States” if it possesses a “significant nexus” to traditionally navigable waters, but that the Sixth Circuit erred in failing to consider all of the factors necessary to determine whether the lands at issue had such a nexus. Drawing upon the purposes of the CWA, the unique characteristics of wetlands, and their potential importance to the aquatic environment of traditional navigable waters, he opined that a wetlands could be considered “waters of the United States” where “either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, [the wetlands] significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as ‘navigable.’”

The issue before the Court in Rapanos was the validity of the Corps’ interpretation of its regulations to require permits for the activities at issue, not the regulations themselves. Accordingly, those regulations, which had last been amended in 1986, remained in effect subsequent to the Court’s decision. However, the dueling opinions in Rapanos cast a shadow over the Corps’ 404 permit decision-making and set the stage for a series of regulatory activities attempting to “clarify” the jurisdictional scope of the CWA, a quest that is now continuing into 2019 with the proposed New WOTUS Rule.

On June 29, 2015, EPA and the Corps adopted the 2015 WOTUS Rule built around Justice Kennedy’s analysis in Rapanos. As its preamble makes clear, “the final rule interprets the CWA to cover those waters that require protection in order to restore and maintain the chemical, physical or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters.” The agencies defined the term “significant nexus” to reflect this expansive interpretation, and with that yardstick, identified eight categories of waters and wetlands that constitute “waters of the United States.”

A few examples illustrate the breadth of the 2015 WOTUS Rule’s jurisdictional reach. Covered “tributaries” include waters (whether natural or man-made) that contribute flow, either directly or indirectly, to a traditional water. Their flow can be continual, perennial, intermittent or ephemeral (i.e., flowing only when it rains) – and they even can be dry if they have indicators of the prior existence of a bed, bank or high water mark. “Adjacent” and “neighboring” wetlands constituting jurisdictional waters include not only areas within 100 feet of a traditional water, but also those located within a 100 year floodplain of a traditional navigable water that are no more than 1,500 feet from the high water mark of the traditional water. Indeed, areas as far as 4,000 feet from a traditional navigable water may be found to be jurisdictional waters if they are determined to have a “significant nexus” on a case-by-case basis.

As originally adopted, the 2015 WOTUS rule was to be applicable as of August 28, 2015.

The litigation that ensued from this “clarification,” along with subsequent administrative actions, have created a regulatory morass. The U.S. District Court for North Dakota issued a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the 2015 WOTUS Rule in 13 states,2 and the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed the rule nationwide – but that nationwide stay was thereafter vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court, which held that challenges to the 2015 WOTUS Rule must be filed in the district courts.3 Meanwhile the agencies under the Trump administration adopted a final rule amending the effective date of the 2015 WOTUS Rule to February 6, 2020, essentially rendering it a nullity until that date.4 But more litigation followed, and the U.S. District Court for South Carolina has issued an order enjoining the new effective date in several states.5 While appeals to that order are pending, the 2015 WOTUS Rule remains in effect in 22 states, and the agencies are making case-by-case determinations in the others. The quest for regulatory clarity remains elusive.6

On February 28, 2017, President Trump issue an Executive Order entitled “Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United States’ Rule.”7 That order directs the agencies to “consider interpreting the term ‘navigable waters’ … in a manner consistent with the opinion of Justice Antonin Scalia in Rapanos.”

The New WOTUS Rule was proposed in accordance with that directive. In Step 1, the agencies have proposed to rescind the 2015 WOTUS Rule, and revert to the regulatory regime that had existed under the 1986 regulations, as interpreted by agency guidance and Supreme Court precedent. Among the reasons put forward for this proposal is that the agencies have more than 30 years of experience in making jurisdictional determinations under the 1986 regulations, and are well versed in the judicial decisions – including Rapanos and other Supreme Court precedent – that have considered those regulations. In Step 2, the agencies have proposed to adopt a new definitional rule consistent with Justice Scalia’s plurality opinion in Rapanos. Among other things, that proposed rule would limit “adjacent wetlands” subject to CWA jurisdiction to those that “abut or have a direct hydrologic surface connection” to a traditional navigable water “in a typical year.” The definition of a “tributary” is limited to a “river, stream, or similar naturally occurring surface water channel that contributes perennial or intermittent flow” to a traditional water.

The proposed rule has not yet been published in the Federal Register. Comments on step 2 of the proposed New WOTUS Rule will be due within 60 days of publication.8

To view all formatting for this article (eg, tables, footnotes), please access the original here.

Source: Lexology
0 27 see more
Federal Legislation
01/16/19 08:01 PM
H.R. 580: To amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to improve the transparency and oversight of land conveyances involving disposal or acquisition of National Forest System lands or Bureau of Land Management public lands, to provide protections and certainty for private landowners ...

... related to resurveying such public lands, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 15, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 15, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 15, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

GovTrack
0 30 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/16/19 07:57 PM
H.R. 569: To protect victims of stalking from gun violence.

Introduced: Jan 15, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 15, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 15, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

GovTrack
0 21 see more
Federal Legislation
01/16/19 07:55 PM
H.R. 572: To release certain Federal land in California from wilderness study, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 15, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 15, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 15, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

GovTrack
0 37 see more
Federal Legislation
01/16/19 07:53 PM
H.R. 548: To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to vest in the Secretary of the Interior functions under that Act with respect to species of fish that spawn in fresh or estuarine waters and migrate to ocean waters, and species of fish that spawn in ocean waters and migrate to fresh waters.

Introduced: Jan 15, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 15, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 15, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.


Source: GovTrack
0 45 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/11/19 03:52 PM
H.R. 435: To provide for a coordinated national research program to examine the nature, causes, consequences, and prevention of violence and unintended injury and death relating to gun ownership, use, and trafficking, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 10, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 10, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 10, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 54 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/11/19 03:40 PM
S. 94: A bill to amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded public target ranges in certain States.

Introduced: Jan 10, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 10, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 10, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 49 see more
Federal Legislation
01/11/19 03:29 PM
H.R. 363: To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to authorize assignment to States of Federal agency environmental review responsibilities, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 85 see more
Federal Legislation
01/11/19 03:27 PM
H.R. 403: To establish the Clear Creek National Recreation Area in San Benito and Fresno Counties, California, to designate the Joaquin Rocks Wilderness in such counties, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 77 see more
Federal Legislation
01/11/19 03:25 PM
S. 67: A bill to provide for conservation, enhanced recreation opportunities, and development of renewable energy in the California Desert Conservation Area, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 79 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/11/19 03:23 PM
S. 66: A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 61 see more
Federal Legislation
01/11/19 03:05 PM
H.R. 376: To provide for conservation, enhanced recreation opportunities, and development of renewable energy in the California Desert Conservation Area, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 116 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/11/19 03:03 PM
S. 69: A bill to allow reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.

Introduced: Jan 9, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 9, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 9, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 28 see more
Federal Legislation
01/09/19 06:25 PM
H.R. 316: To authorize the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to issue permits for recreation services on lands managed by Federal agencies, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 8, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 8, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 8, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 102 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/09/19 06:22 PM
H.R. 8: To require a background check for every firearm sale.

Introduced: Jan 8, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 8, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 8, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 42 see more
Federal Legislation
01/09/19 06:20 PM
S. 47: A bill to provide for the management of the natural resources of the United States, and for other purposes.

Introduced: Jan 8, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 8, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 8, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.


Source: GovTrack
0 69 see more
Federal Legislation - Firearms
01/09/19 06:14 PM
H.R. 282: To improve public safety through sensible reforms to firearms regulations.

Introduced: Jan 8, 2019
Status: Introduced on Jan 8, 2019

This bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was introduced into Congress on January 8, 2019. It will typically be considered by committee next before it is possibly sent on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Source: GovTrack
0 55 see more
Page 1 of 2 1 2

OutdoorWire Websites

OutdoorWire

OutdoorWire

Portal page for OutdoorWire Access and Landuse Central Read More
4x4Voice

4x4Voice

California off road recreation news and information Read More
MUIRNet News

MUIRNet News

News and information about issues affecting outdoor recreation Read More
4x4Wire

4x4Wire

Off road recreation and 4x4 Technical news and information Read More
TrailTalk

TrailTalk

4x4Wire TrailTalk Forums for a variety of 4x4 tech information Read More

4x4Wire Tech Section

Jeep 4x4 Tech

Jeep 4x4 Tech

Jeep Tech from JeepWire - Mods, Maintenance, Tech and more... Read More
Isuzu 4x4 Tech

Isuzu 4x4 Tech

Isuzu Tech from 4x4Wire - Mods, Maintenance, Tech and more... Read More



4x4Wire Social:

| 4x4Wire on FaceBook | Google+4x4Wire on Google+|


OutdoorWire, 4x4Wire, JeepWire, TrailTalk, MUIRNet-News, and 4x4Voice are all trademarks and publications of OutdoorWire, Inc. and MUIRNet Consulting.
Copyright (c) 1999-2018 OutdoorWire, Inc and MUIRNet Consulting - All Rights Reserved, no part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without express written permission
You may link freely to this site, but no further use is allowed without the express written permission of the owner of this material.
All corporate trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Page Time: 0.010s Queries: 6 (0.004s) Memory: 1.0583 MB (Peak: 1.1009 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2019-01-20 04:40:31 UTC