Ithaca 37
New member
Gates equate to discrimination.
I respect and applaud everyone's opinions and wishes to close off the White Cloud ranges. I can see a need to keep such areas undeveloped and pristine. The only thing I cannot get behind is blatant elitism and discrimination.
You see, I am a disabled vet and have been an active hunter, fisherman and camper all of my life. My injury involves my left knee, and I am left with a severe mobility impairment that will only get worse as I age.
I do possess a handicapped hunter's permit, but this does no good when my only access points (roads) are gated and locked.
You say you want to preserve the area for your children. That is noble; however, have you ever looked into your child's teary eyes and said, "Sorry daughter, we can't go up that road, they don't want Daddy in there." This is my life when dealing with wilderness designations and locked Forest Service gates.
While I agree with the idea of restricted access, I do not support the implementation. Removing motorized access to these areas is not an option. That only ensures that the healthy, fully mobile, and rich will be able to visit and enjoy the wilderness.
I, too, am appalled at the destruction and abuse of the forests by off-road users that have no respect for their surroundings. These users do give the rest of us a bad name. Please, understand not all of us are that way.
I offer the following compromise:
• Place vehicle size restrictions: ATVs and motorcycle-sized, and smaller vehicles only.
• Vehicle access only for those with valid handicapped hunter's and handicapped parking permits and their families/hunting partners.
• Place and enforce speed limits: 15 mph or slower.
• On-trail limits: all vehicles, including bicycles, must stay on existing/approved trails.
• Noise restrictions: all motorized vehicles must meet strict noise-output requirements.
• Camping in improved locations only. This will ensure safety and reduce fires.
• Increase enforcement and impose severe penalties for violating any of these rules.
While considering these options, please stop and think — what if you had an accident and could no longer get around like you once were able to?
Thanks for your time.
Brian Griffiths of Boise is a disabled veteran and handicapped sportsman.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040804/NEWS0503/408040316/1052/NEWS05
**********************************************
I'm afraid Brian is pretty unrealistic. Enforce speed limits and allow motorized access to all the handicapped hunter's friends and family, too?
We already have thousand of miles of roads and trails open to Brian-----more than he could ride in ten years of hunting seasons if he only goes 15 mph (his suggested speed limit).
And I never knew wilderness areas were only for the rich! "That only ensures that the healthy, fully mobile, and rich will be able to visit and enjoy the wilderness."
I respect and applaud everyone's opinions and wishes to close off the White Cloud ranges. I can see a need to keep such areas undeveloped and pristine. The only thing I cannot get behind is blatant elitism and discrimination.
You see, I am a disabled vet and have been an active hunter, fisherman and camper all of my life. My injury involves my left knee, and I am left with a severe mobility impairment that will only get worse as I age.
I do possess a handicapped hunter's permit, but this does no good when my only access points (roads) are gated and locked.
You say you want to preserve the area for your children. That is noble; however, have you ever looked into your child's teary eyes and said, "Sorry daughter, we can't go up that road, they don't want Daddy in there." This is my life when dealing with wilderness designations and locked Forest Service gates.
While I agree with the idea of restricted access, I do not support the implementation. Removing motorized access to these areas is not an option. That only ensures that the healthy, fully mobile, and rich will be able to visit and enjoy the wilderness.
I, too, am appalled at the destruction and abuse of the forests by off-road users that have no respect for their surroundings. These users do give the rest of us a bad name. Please, understand not all of us are that way.
I offer the following compromise:
• Place vehicle size restrictions: ATVs and motorcycle-sized, and smaller vehicles only.
• Vehicle access only for those with valid handicapped hunter's and handicapped parking permits and their families/hunting partners.
• Place and enforce speed limits: 15 mph or slower.
• On-trail limits: all vehicles, including bicycles, must stay on existing/approved trails.
• Noise restrictions: all motorized vehicles must meet strict noise-output requirements.
• Camping in improved locations only. This will ensure safety and reduce fires.
• Increase enforcement and impose severe penalties for violating any of these rules.
While considering these options, please stop and think — what if you had an accident and could no longer get around like you once were able to?
Thanks for your time.
Brian Griffiths of Boise is a disabled veteran and handicapped sportsman.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040804/NEWS0503/408040316/1052/NEWS05
**********************************************
I'm afraid Brian is pretty unrealistic. Enforce speed limits and allow motorized access to all the handicapped hunter's friends and family, too?
We already have thousand of miles of roads and trails open to Brian-----more than he could ride in ten years of hunting seasons if he only goes 15 mph (his suggested speed limit).
And I never knew wilderness areas were only for the rich! "That only ensures that the healthy, fully mobile, and rich will be able to visit and enjoy the wilderness."