Thread: Why?
View Single Post
Old 03-28-2013, 02:41 PM   #50
Senior Resident Curmudgeon
redhawk's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: In My Memories
Posts: 10,931
Originally Posted by haderondah_wild View Post
I can see you just want to argue. OK.

Let me know where your well is and I will dump oil in it for you. Then let me know how you feel about it.

For someone so old and wise you only seem to see the short term effects.

PS any trail erosion CAN be fixed with fill if one is so inclined to get it out there. Detoxifying water, and millions of gallons requires one big water filter, OR many, many years of natures own purification processes.

I mean no disrespect. I have owned ATVs and 4wd jeeps and I know what they are capable of doing to the land. I also think on improved trails they don't do any harm other than air, noise, (and thermal pollution) if operated responsibly. By improved trail I mean one in which gravel is continuously spread to prevent rutting and culverts and bridges are included for drainage and stream crossing. I still do not think it is a good idea to be allowed within park on state land, no matter what the land designation is. The only exception I could possibly think of is state camp grounds and those roads are usually paved. Rangers and search and rescue should be permitted as well.

I feel the same for motor boats and snowmobiles. Snowmobiles themselves probably do the least harm, but the principle is the same. Wild to me means no motors. JMO. Just because you can't readily see the damage, doesn't mean it isn't there or it isn't coming in the future.
Last I knew (In my infinite wisdom) it takes at least two to make an argument.

I don't have a well. Sorry

You can "fill" as much as you want. Erosion will still take place. And sometimes the fill might do more to upset the "balance" then not.

My point was comparing the ATV's to motorboats isn't a valid argument. Hell Backpackers do damage as well, and in the case of some areas, lik he High peaks, the volume of backpackers in a relatively small area is more damaging to the ecology then a lot of motorboats on a big lake. By your standard we might also ague the facts that cars should not be allowed within the Adirondack pary because the pollution from heir emissions kills trees near the road, and the salt used on the road in the winter also effects the flora and subsequently the fauna. Lot more damage there then what motorboats do do a lake. The worst damage a motorboat does for a lake is give humans access.

You can ask anyone who knows me, I don't like motorized boats either in fact their are people on this forum who witnessed me chasing a motorboat up the Raquette River with a kayak because of excessive speed.Just for the record, I caught it. I think there should be a number of lakes where motors should not be allowed.

BUT, an ATV does far more damage then a motorboat. Period. End of Story. Absolutely no room for argument. So if you want to make your point, do it with an argument that has some validity.

And you're right. I do like to argue, but I don't just argue. I debate fiercely for those causes that I am passionate about, and when I do I try to present information and comparisons that have validity to them. I'm just suggesting that you do the same.

The one problem with your point about the ATV's on the improved trails is the part about "responsibly". It's unfortunate that are people who choose to not be responsible, nor considerate. And it only takes one to really mess up a trail. And it's impossible to separate the responsible ones from the jerks. So, it's necessary to ban the vehicles because of the few bad eggs. It's not a question of "fair" it's a matter of necessity.
"If future generations are to remember us with gratitude rather than contempt, we must leave them more than the miracles of technology. We must leave them a glimpse of the world as it was in the beginning, not just after we got through with it." Lyndon B. Johnson
redhawk is offline   Reply With Quote