Don't remember the date of the last blog... about 3 weeks ago...
We are truly becoming a liberal communist society... or will if we allow it to happen around us.
Take a look at two recent bills introduced:
This first one in NY. Is this red China?!
Please see http://www.dec.ny.gov/regulations/2359.html#Proposed_Regulations
Written comments for Part 190 will be accepted through July 5th 2008 and should be directed to:
David M. Forness
NYS DEC, Bureau of State Land Management
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-4255
Telephone: (518) 402-9428 (for Part 190 only)
E-mail: lf190reg@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Of particular interest;
| Quote: |
| (dd) On State land, no person shall sponsor, conduct or participate in any organized event of twenty or more people, except under permit from the department. Examples of organized events include, but are not limited to: sponsored hikes; archery and fishing tournaments; snowmobile; bicycle, horse and orienteering races, runs, rides or competitions (including biathlons and triathlons); encampments; and re-enactments. (ff) On State land, no person shall sponsor, conduct or participate in advertising, weddings or film making and other such events, except under permit from the department. |
I mean WTF!!
Then this one in MA:
Senate bill 2772
http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/185/st02/st02772.htm
Its a bit of a read if you go from top to bottom. Some memorable points.
SECTION 5 Said section 20 of said chapter 90B, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out the definition of “Recreation vehicle” and inserting in place thereof, the following 2 definitions:-
“Recreation vehicle”, “off-highway vehicle” or “off-road vehicle”, any motor vehicle designed or modified for use over unimproved terrain for recreation or pleasure while not being operated on a public way as defined in chapter 90, including but not limited to, all terrain vehicles, off-highway motorcycles, dirt bikes, recreation utility vehicles, utility vehicles and all legally registered motor vehicles while not being operated on a public way as defined in said chapter 90,
SECTION 9. Said section 24 of said chapter 90B, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by striking out the second and third paragraphs and inserting in place thereof the following 2 paragraphs:- No snow vehicle and no recreation vehicle shall be operated which emits obnoxious fumes or which makes an unusual or excessive noise.SECTION 10. Said chapter 90B is hereby further amended by inserting after section 24 the following section:-
Section 24A. Whoever violates any provision of sections 21 to 24, inclusive, or any rule or regulation made thereunder, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $500.
SECTION 13. Said chapter 90B is hereby further amended by inserting after section 25 the following 7 sections:-
Section 25A. No person shall operate or ride in or on a recreation vehicle or a snow vehicle, or a sled attached thereto, without wearing protective headgear that conforms to such minimum standards for construction and performance as the registrar of motor vehicles may prescribe.
(see definition above: when we are in a state forest, on state land and even on private land and in the act of "wheeling", we are considered a "recreation vehicle". Yes, the above means that when wheeling, even on private land, we will need to wear helmets. If we are on a public way/road, we should be ok tho WTF!?)
Section 25B. No person under 14 years of age shall operate all terrain vehicle or recreation utility vehicle.
This section shall not apply to any person under 14 years of age operating a recreation vehicle or snow vehicle in a sanctioned race, rally or organized event which is supervised by a person aged 18 or older and has been authorized or approved by any municipal permitting authority. It shall be an affirmative defense to this paragraph that such person was operating such vehicle in preparation for such a sanctioned event, if: such person was so operating such a vehicle while under direct supervision, as defined by section 25C, by a person aged 18 or older; the operation occurred within 21 days of such sanctioned event; and the operator was a registered participant therein or did in fact participate therein.
Section 25C. No person between the age of 14 years of age and 16 years of age shall operate an all terrain vehicle or recreation utility vehicle with an engine capacity greater than 90 cubic centimeters unless directly supervised by an adult that is 18 years of age or older. For the purposes of this section, “direct supervision” shall mean that the supervising adult shall be sufficiently close to an operator at all times that the vehicle is in operation, such that a reasonable person under the totality of the circumstances including, but not limited to, vehicle and ambient noise, the landscape and geography of the location, and the operator’s wearing of protective headgear, would believe that he is maintaining visual contact and verbal communication with the operator.
(What the above means: 14 or younger CAN participate in a race, sanctioned event. They can practice for 21 days prior to that event, provided they actually participate in that event, and all of the above supervised by an adult 18 or older)
Section 25F. Whoever violates section 25 to 25E, inclusive, or section 26B shall be punished, for a first offense, by a fine of $250 and for a second or subsequent offense by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $2,500 and the snow vehicle or recreation vehicle that the operator was operating at the time of such second or subsequent offense shall be subject to forfeiture under section 26J.
Yeah.. you read that right. Allow your 12 year old to ride on your own land if its the second time, you get fined up to $2,500 and have their ATV taken by the state.
Better to have them inside getting fat while playing video games, or even better, get em hooked on some illicit drugs... woo hoo! At least that way they can have the state pay their way for the rest of their life.
No wonder people call MA the Communistwealth.
CT State Forest Rd Closures
Of course, other than the canned response letters we all received, we haven't had any other word from the Governor's office.
I am proud to say that we wrote a minimum of 50 letters that I can accurately account for. We are working on some other avenues as well.
This brings up something that I was going to bring up at our most recent Region meeting:
(I'll preface this by saying that I know there will be some that think I shouldn't say this.. but.. I'm going to say it anyway)
We, as a community ...organized 4WD enthusiasts... simply are not seen as a viable, noticeable community. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. We aren't loud enough, we aren't in their face enough, we aren't noticeable. That can work for us.. but has also worked heavily against us.
The reason the CT Forest roads were closed is becasue we wanted to do the right thing. We wanted to do a clean up. Help the state that won't do ANYTHING for us. When the powers that be heard of our actions, they immediately closed the roads. If we contacted the MA DCR about doing work on any road within their state forests, that road would soon be closed to us.
My opinion and paradigm has shifted. I was all for doing the right thing. I can't say that I wholly espouse that entire thought process any longer.
I am not condoning haphazard wheeling wherever we feel like. However, if the research we do show the road to be an open road (IE, the state GIS shows it, the town/state forest maps show it and town records show that it hasn't been discontinued completely (something that can be checked w/o causing a stir at city hall) then we continue to treat that road as open until shown full blown proof it isn't. Gates, signs, state paperwork, etc. Getting a ticket is not PROOF that a road is closed. Of course, we must be willing to fight any tickets we may get.
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE
The greenie wacko groups do it all the time. They blow up and burn buildings. They chain themselves to heavy logging equipment and/or trees. They throw paint on people wearing fur. They stand out on the town greens and shout at people driving SUVs, they vandalize SUVs.. all in the name of Mother Earth.
Hell, they even string up make shift guillotines that kill 13 year old boys.
( See the stories here: http://www.cttrailusers.com/forum/index.php?topic=1331.0 )
AGAIN.. I am NOT condoning ANY kind of violent actions.
However, if 50 rigs showed up on the stairs of the CT state capitol building, or at the Forest HQ or at the Governor of MA mansion... we would get attention drawn to our predicament.
If the roads at Breakneck are not posted, then we drive there... with the knowledge that we may very well get ticketed.. but if the roads aren't posted they are open. Those roads are shown plain as day on the State of CT's own forest maps.. the ones online available to JQ public.
Can you tell I'm really pissed?
If any of this offends or if people feel that by advocating any of this, I shouldn't be in this position as a Land Use Chair of a national 4WD association.. so be it.
Whats next?
Oh yeah.. they're still trying to close Tellico!
BLUERIBBON COALITION ACTION ALERT!
Dear BRC Action Alert Subscriber,
COMMENT ON PROPOSED CHANGES FOR UPPER TELLICO OHV TRAILS NEEDED!
The Nantahala National Forest today announced proposed changes in the 39.5 mile Upper Tellico OHV Trail System. The proposal calls for maintaining approximately 24 miles of trails, upgrading five miles of Davis Creek Road for street-legal vehicle use, and closing and restoring 11 miles of other trails. The Forest Service is asking for the public comments on the proposed changes.
BlueRibbon Coalition has gotten with our partners over at Southern Four Wheel Drive Association (SFWDA) to come up with some comment suggestions. In addition, we have developed a system to help you submit those comments in a quick and simple manner. To view the proposed changes, go to the forest's website at http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/nepa/tusquitee/tellico.htm.
This is also a reminder that the Upper Tellico Off-Highway Vehicle Trail System Open House on new Trail Management Proposal is scheduled for Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:00 PM until 4:00 PM. It will be held at the First Baptist Church, 517 Hiwassee Street, Murphy, NC. The church is located at the intersection of US 74-19 and Hiwassee Street in Murphy (across the street from McDonald's); entrance for the open house will be marked. Individuals may come anytime during the open house hours.
The public is invited to come ask questions and learn more about the proposal as well as submit written comments and suggestions.
Comments may be sent to the Tusquitee District Ranger, 123 Woodland Drive, Murphy, NC 28906. Comments may also be sent via email to comments-southern-north-carolina-nantahalatusquitee@fs.fed.us.
THE DEADLINE IS JULY 9, 2008, SO PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE AND SEND
THE FOREST SERVICE YOUR COMMENTS.
As always, if you have any questions or concerns, please contact BRC.
Thanks in advance for your support,
Brian Hawthorne
Public Lands Policy Director
BlueRibbon Coalition
208-237-1008 ext 102
SITUATION
The Nantahala NF is accepting comments on proposed changes to the Upper Tellico OHV Trail System. Comment deadline is July 9, 2008. For additional information, contact Candace Wyman at 828-837-5152 extension 113, or go to http://www.cs.unca.edu/nfsnc/nepa/tusquitee/tellico.htm.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO
Please send an email to the Nantahala National Forest. Use the comment suggestions below. Be sure to add a bit of personal information.
If you want, you can use BRC's letter generator (www.sharetrails.org/letters/letter.php?id=14). It has an easy interface for adding additional comments and sending your letter.
INSTRUCTIONS:
Be polite. Be Professional. Be on time. (The comment deadline is Wednesday, July 9, 2008)
EMAIL COMMENTS TO:
- comments-southern-north-carolina-nantahala-tusquitee@fs.fed.us- Acceptable formats for electronic comments are text (.txt), MSWord 6.0 or higher (.doc), Portable Document Format (.pdf), or Rich Text Format (.rtf).
- In the Subject Line of your email, please put: " Comments on Upper Tellico OHV System "
- Paste in the name and address:
Tusquitee District Ranger
123 Woodland Drive
Murphy, NC 28906 - It's always good to include a brief paragraph about how much you and your family enjoy motorized use on National Forest lands.
- Use the comment suggestions below in your email:
MAIL WRITTEN COMMENTS TO:
Upper Tellico OHV System
Steve Lohr, Tusquitee District Ranger
123 Woodland Drive
Murphy, NC 28906
COMMENT SUGGESTION:
I would like to strongly suggest that the FS consider scoping for reopening and maintaining trails at Tellico instead of closing trails. If the purpose and need for this action is to reduce sedimentation in streams, then that should be the desired outcome of this analysis, not closing trails. If the FS were to change the proposed action to reduction of sedimentation, this would allow the FS to conduct a more comprehensive analysis under NEPA and could provide recreation opportunities to OHV community and reduce sedimentation in the Tellico River watershed at the same time.
I take issue with the idea that the FS is scoping to close trails at the Tellico OHV area based on inaccurate science. I feel that the FS is crumpling under the threat of a lawsuit by a sportsman-turned environmental group. The FS provided information states that Jenks Branch is the creek with the most sedimentation. I feel that it is coming from the Tipton Community rather than the OHV area. The upper portion of the "Lower 2" trail does not drain in the watershed and, even if it did, can be maintained. The area in between that was logged recently needs to be reworked as there were no BMP put in place during that logging and the result is erosion. This erosion is not due to the OHV area and therefore we as users of the area should not be punished for actions for which we are not responsible.
It is inaccurate to say the FS has to close trails because of maintenance issues when they are the entity that did not perform the maintenance. SFWDA volunteers have been working for years in cooperation with the FS and now that relationship is being cast aside in an effort to pacify another less involved user group.
The motorized recreating public will not accept monetary constraints as an excuse for trail closures. Ironically, it is the motorized user community that has been successful in securing substantial funds for OHV management. There are several grant and volunteer programs available, and the OHV community is committed to help provide the tools to address legitimate concerns about route maintenance. Therefore, my comment is that you address any legitimate maintenance concerns by incorporating a training protocol into your plan that would train agency staff on how to apply for grants, use the available ICE-T Money, effectively manage volunteer programs, and learn about and apply for other funding sources. In addition, you might consider MOUs or other similar agreements with recreational groups, such as the Southern Four Wheel Drive Association.
I believe that the USFS has not properly evaluated the impacts of closing or restricting the Upper Tellico OHV Area. I believe that the economic impacts to the area have not been considered at all in determining the current proposed changes. I believe that the Forest Service has not considered the rapid, explosive growth of interest in motorized recreation, and has simply wilted in the face of a NOI from an extreme environment group. The FS needs to consider the interests of others besides itself and the few environmental lobbyists and lawyers who represent a small but well-financed group who wants to prevent the public's use of land that rightfully belongs to the public. The FS needs to consider where the OHV operators who currently utilize the Upper Tellico OHV Area will go, and what damage may occur from that shift to other areas. I believe that current plan for Upper Tellico OHV Area is unfair, unwise, and scientifically and economically unsound.
We're not alone:Controversial Washington Wilderness Bill Approved by Congress
Lawmakers Pursue Other Proposals to Limit Off-Roading
Congress has approved legislation designating 106,000 acres in Washington state’s Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest as wilderness. President Bush is expected to sign the bill into law. SEMA and the off-highway vehicle (OHV) community opposed the bill and supported an alternative version to preserve existing roads and trails on about 13,000 acres of the land. By law, wilderness areas generally prohibit roads and the use of motorized vehicles. The issue is consequential to SAN members as off-roaders will have less riding areas in the region.
The measure, which is commonly referred to as the “Wild Sky Wilderness” may sound familiar to SEMA members as it has been pushed in Congress for about five years. In years past, the bill was blocked by former House Resources Chairman Richard Pombo (R-CA) who, with SEMA’s support, proposed a compromise “backcountry wilderness” designation to set aside specific tracks of land that have existing roads and trails. Chairman Pombo was defeated in the 2006 election, and the bill’s sponsors were able to pursue the legislation without concession.
Leaders in the Democrat-controlled Congress are now moving forward on other wilderness proposals, which also may not adequately protect existing roads and trails. Currently, there are more than 20 other wilderness bills pending before Congress.
If you made it all the way through all that and have questions.. by all means, please do not hesitate to ask.
David BrillLand Use Chair: East Coast 4WD Assoc.
V.Chair/Land Use Chr. Region D/Northeast of EC4WDA
President, Eastern 4 Wheelers
Tread Lightly! Master Trainer
Blue Ribbon Coalition
NAMRC
NOHVCC
SEMA/SAN
Brilliant Signs & Grafix
Guilford, CT
No comments:
Post a Comment