View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 07-25-2011, 05:55 PM
fyshstykr's Avatar
fyshstykr fyshstykr is offline
Super Moderator

 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Plain City, Utah.
Posts: 4,472
Blog Entries: 1
fyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond reputefyshstykr has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: AFFTA Joins TU in Opposing Bill that would Trash America's Backcountry

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diver Dan View Post
I just talked to one of the writters of the bill. Again it does not effect widerness areas. Correct, but it does open the "buffer zone" that Frank mentioned to new roads and trails which will put these roads at the doorstep to designated wilderness area's. And then the next step is full blown motorized access.
It does open to access for the public some areas The public already has access to these area's, they just cannot drive into them with a motorized vehicle. Access is not prohibited, you just gotta hoof it.(not designated or not fitting the criteria of being wilderness)

as a side effect of reducing the wildfire hazzards so many have tragically become aware of. Over protection has had the unintended consequences of at some point creating a wildfire that wrecks the area some you guys seem so bent on never touching and then overrunning that, and destroying homes and businesses. Boy oh boy that's a red Herring if there ever were one. I'll bet we have a bunch of people right here on the forum who have had first hand experience with a wildfire. The bill also said right in it that as a protective measure that the bill cannot be used by the secretary of the interior to release wilderness areas.
Or we can just never touch any of it and wait for nature to wipe it clean and take maybe your home with it. If you build a home far enough from protective service you are taking your chances. And if an unfortunate act of nature happens then you have to deal with it.

As for the uneducated panic, I stand by the statement. The chacterization of the bill by TU and those involved is completely innaccurate. I respectfully disagree with you once again. How is the opinion of TU and AFFTA on this subject completely inaccurate?
How about we let the members here read it, digest it, and think on it for themselves and then we can have an actual discussion about the proposed legislation? Rather than a mudslinging event.
How about it folks, can we have a discussion of the proposed legislation here? I would love to have an informative, thought provoking thread, rather than the "same old/same old" whenever something of this nature comes up.


Infact, I'll say that I could be wrong. (I am human after all). So instead of telling me what an Idiot I am if you disagree with me, show me why I'm wrong to offer my support in fighting this legislation.
__________________
John.

*Comments posted above are only my opinion. I may be right....ehhh.....I'm certain they're wrong. Take 'em for what they're worth.*




Last edited by fysh; 07-26-2011 at 12:08 AM.
Reply With Quote