eh, I think this is great but..I really think the approach we are taking is wrong. Personally, we should be looking at ways to change the perception of what it means to preserve land from closure to fair and sustainable usage.
It's an uphill battle for us to argue to anybody who doesn't sled, or use ORV. It's a very easy argument to make that we should "protect" our forest by not allowing ORV. It's easy for somebody who is impartial to get behind it the "protect our wilderness agenda". As to be honest it seems like the "correct" thing to do, who doesn't want to see our national forest preserved on some level or another?
To me the issue isn't that we shouldn't be protecting our natural resources, our forests and our wilderness, but what the definition is to protect it, and what the definition of "wilderness" should be. Wilderness should be a designation for the protection of an area in regards to development, not recreation. I would very much like to see the areas I enjoy sledding in, to be preserved and maintained for future generations, and myself to be able to enjoy by the recreational means we choose. The arguments need to change from debating about closing, and not closing areas to, how to create a program that allows for sustainable usage of our national forest by recreational users of all types. When that happens all these companies, and impartial people will be able to get behind something that is both a benefit to the environment and ORV enthusiasts like ourselves.
Until then, when kids are thought in school how important it is to protect our environment, the only solution they are given is... ...and you do so by making it off limits. Which as far as I'm concerned is a falsehood, the more areas that are restricted, the more impact that is done to what areas are left unrestricted do to over usage. If we opened up more acres, it would spread out the usage creating a more sustainable solution in terms of impact to the environment. If it were up to me we'd be taking the approach of learning how to best recommend multiusage for sustainably.
So, with that said I don't think the answer is to boycott every company that tries to get a little publicity throwing some money to what seems to them like the the correct thing to do, but instead to give them a better option to support, a new "green movement" of sorts that both supports the preservation of our environment, and our rights to usage!
