whatthe?
Well-Known Member
Its been my experience that working with such scofflaws is much more expedient then going through the prosecution headaches.(when possible). It doesn't really matter if you feel that they don't represent you because in the real world we all get painted with the same brush regardless of the reality. In some aspects use doesn't reflect damage but once again it doesn't really matter what we think its what those in charge think. As much as I enjoy trying to keep trails open its people with attitudes like yours that keep getting things closed. Working with the powers that are in "charge" and sometimes against them in the proper way is the only way we have what we have now. Compare what we have with just about any other state and you will see we have much more use of our public lands. Hate to tell you but its from being involved and working the system for our benefit.
It does matter that these people don't represent me. That's one of the big failures of your groups. The FS and other enviro groups have got you to believe that illegal mudders represent you. You believe this and pass it along. They got you doing their dirty work of lumping us all together. If a guy shoots a cop, do you believe this represents all gun owners? Gun groups don't support this notion.
People with my attitude have not caused a single trail to be closed. The seasonal closure started because of "resource damage" and people going off trail (which I don't support). So how did my attitude spawn a seasonal closure? Prior to the seasonal closure my beliefs aligned with the law so how did that result in a closure?
I appreciate your efforts to keep trails open but all your doing is slowing the rate of closure. Your also helpful to the FS because when they do something (seasonal closure) they get your rubber stamp of approval. If the enviro FS want it closed it will happen. It used to be that woodsmen went into the FS, now people with biology degrees who want to save the world from people are running the show. Take the Quilomene for example, there wasn't enough "resource damage" to close the area so they came up with the reason of protecting wintering elk. They did a study and found it made no difference but kept the closure in place anyways. That is what your fighting your losing battle against. So in light of this, I choose not to follow all the rules. Public land is there for use (not abuse). Mother Nature is there to be touched.