> I can sympathize with what you say, Richard. Where I live there
> are already
> many areas where even mountain bikes are prohibited. Mountain bikes have
> there designated areas and it seems to work fine. I hate over-regulation,
> but IMO there are too many people in the US now to be letting everyone do
> (totally) as they please in all forests and public land.
>
Joe & Richard:
Though I sympathize with what you've said, but there are millions of acres
of national forest where no motorized vehicles are permitted. They are
called Wilderness Areas, and they were set aside by an act of Congress. The
problem here is that the President, using the power of Executive Order, has
decided to cut off vast amounts of certain lands for motorized recreational
use, even though these decisions are typically left up to the congress. Who
is advising the President on these areas is questionable, because not
everyone who would like input into this decision has it--only certain
groups. Some of these groups are what are called 'extreme
preservationists'. I believe that we are all preservationists of some
sort. These lands belong to all of us, and it is only through Congressional
action that lands should be set aside for particular kinds of activity (or
non-activity). If the Congress is taken out of the loop as has happened
here, then we don't get our fair say on what to do with the land which
belongs to everyone.
Regards,
Henry S. Winokur
'94 GTS 1000
AMA Lifer, MRF, MSF/MD MSP Certified Instructor
West Bethesda, MD
> Has much has I like motorcycle, National forest is not the place for noisy
> and often polluting off-road vehicle that are not subject to emission
> control. For me it's like hunting in a national park.
>
>
> Richard
>
