As I see it in all reality sepa should not even let it open even even for a temp small area--I think its smoke and mirrors really. This should have been thought out well before it was even closed and as I have always said the lower area should have been kept open and the upper closed. This would have still help substain recreation and alot of other issues.
What we want is an area that substainable for use for a number of years. Something that we can put our hard work into that we know will be there for use in the future and not something that we put our hard work into to only have for a short time.
Some of us have already done that for some time with "nothing" to show for it. And I can there are a number of folks who in the past have lived by this and hence why they never came out to help--something I understand.
I think we can all agree that they should have done all this "research", "planning" and "footwork" BEFORE they closed it. Then build/rebuilt new trails and open and closed things as they went along.
They (the DNR) screwed up big time IMO with the course of action they have taken. I don't know why it was suddenly so important to shut it all down NOW, theeeennnn look into fixing the problem. Now they have alot of frustrated and angry wheelers and recreationists.
Current budget crap doesn't help naturally. And yes, I also agree there is a metric ****-ton of Political and "higher up agenda" crap in play. But the lip service that Stan and the lady (who's name is escaping me at the time) who were the head DRN reps at this walk though was encouraging. Seems to me THEY have been tasked with the job of reopening ORV use at the "Reiter" area... whether they want to or not (they flat out said that the available areas in "Reiter" are not ideal to ORV use... but its what they have to work with). Whether or not the rug is pulled out from under them, or they have been set up for failure remains to be seen. But like I said, the lip service they gave us told me they are committed to doing it. Which is encouraging.
It will be harder to close if they open ANYTHING back up vs. just keeping it closed indefinitely.
This I don't agree with for a number of reasons.
The first being the pressure being put onto the DNR by the towns/citys down the sky valley.
The second the focus that has been put onto the DNR to pull something off. The DNR has invested alot of $$ into this even though there is no FOR SURE PLAN yet but for them to keep it closed forever is a HUGE slap in the face and one I don't think the DNR wants.
You can be as skeptable as much as you want--something is going to happen but the political BS is going to make it a slow uphill battle.
This I don't agree with for a number of reasons.
The first being the pressure being put onto the DNR by the towns/citys down the sky valley.
The second the focus that has been put onto the DNR to pull something off. The DNR has invested alot of $$ into this even though there is no FOR SURE PLAN yet but for them to keep it closed forever is a HUGE slap in the face and one I don't think the DNR wants.
You can be as skeptical as much as you want--something is going to happen but the political BS is going to make it a slow uphill battle.
Let me clarify a little bit of my previous assessment (that Mike quoted above). Just to make sure we are on the same page.
It is my OPINION, that if they open up ANYTHING, even a small section this summer like they have stated there desires to. This could potentially make is more difficult to close it down again. From a political, physical etc standpoint.
This is in comparison to just LEAVING it closed (it current state) for a longer, extended period of time that just makes it EASIER to bag the whole thing should budget, politics whatever come into play.
Or another way of putting it, the longer its closed, the less optimistic I would be of ANYTHING opening.
