Ourea no shit no where for the moose to hide in your photo exactly the kind of area i am talking about ripping apart
Ourea no shit no where for the moose to hide in your photo exactly the kind of area i am talking about ripping apart
There is an interesting parallel to the SCUBA diving world, where divers directly and indirectly contribute to the devastation of coral reefs. I hear similar arguments as above (e.g. we need more people to experience the underwater ecosystems so they understand and appreciate, etc, why should I pay a premium to dive or why do you want to restrict my ability to dive, oceans should belong to everyone, etc etc)
I know it's not exactly the same situation, but please allow me to point out that, in several cases studies, a restriction (note: NOT elimination) of human access to e.g. coral reefs have shown significant improvements to these ecosystems in surprisingly short periods of time ("years" rather than "decades". On a related note, quite similar effects have been shown by teaching and enforcing responsible (dive) practices within these ecosystems.
Again, I know it's not exactly the same, but still.... worth mentioning.
The forest companies can pay for the deactivation.
Actually there is alot of deactivaton going on recently and I saw immediate results in game sightings over a 2 year period, it helps alot.
I see Island idiots point too, I think that if the mains are left open and many of the spurs deactivated we could reach a very desirable balance.
The argument about leaving roads open so we can get at a fire easier doesn't wash considering human activity causes most of the fires today...and putting them out is a big part of the problem.
Access is great but do we need this many roads?? the roads are there for resource extraction, thats about it, you can think of your favorite lake to fish 30-40 years ago, you used to have to walk in there and the fishing was good, then a road was built and now the fishing is poor....too much pressure.
Its not about being selfish, its about cutting the bs.
I can tell you that some of the spurs off the back of Scotty Creek were deactivated by a dozer pulling an enormous chain bridle with large “anchors”. Tore the crap out of everything. Work done on behalf of Tolko.
CranePete
My point wasn't to Keep hunters out.
My point was, if we only apply the "Motor Vehicle Restriction" to hunters, others can go in.
And they do create damage as well, depending on activity.
On top of that, only the "law abiding hunter" is restricted, were as "other hunters" (if you want to call them that), will
just go in, regardless of the law, or because they say they have "the right to" (don't remember them creating traditional roads....do you???).
On top of that, some areas just have "way too many"!
Nothing can hide, or should I say, move without being seen.
And has anyone ever stopped to wonder why so much of the game has become "Nocturnal"!!???
I am sure part of it is all the daytime traffic.
Again, I am a hunter, and use roads to get into some beautiful areas, and do rely on them.
But, "how much is too much"???
And, ripping up the roads compared to vehicle restrictions ensures "everyone stays out"...not just some.
Iland Idiout, if you are an "ethical/law abiding hunter", there are areas right now that are not allowed to hunt!
You do realize some in the hunting community are advocating for more "hunting vehicle restrictions"???
(which, fyi, means you cant go there anyways)
Also, how do you like the no ATV restriction in some MU's of R3 (if you go there)??
You do realize some still can with atv, just not you, unless you are status??
And correct me, I think there are some areas now off limit to vehicles of all types in some of the R5 fires (I could be wrong), but, not everyone is banned!
Get my drift???
Not trying to be selfish....trying to be fair.
And trying to be fair to the game we pursue also.
I think you're taking a bit of an unfair beating on your comments. I see your perspective, but only carried out to a very limited extent. Let me ask a couple of honest question to help clarify where you're coming from on this, and how they could actually inform recreational land use policy:
Do you think your status as "disabled", should entitle you to a "right of motorized access" to all alpine areas in the province?
Once in the alpine, does your status as "disabled" ensure that you should have access to everywhere in the alpine? Or just the one designated road you used to access?
My right to access the bush is no different than anyone else's. I would use a road to get there, and no I would not leave that road. I would hunt as near as I can and enjoy the area just like anyone else. To remove access to the bush by disabling side roads would remove my ability to access the back woods. It would however, provide access to those that can hike in.
This is discriminatory. My access will be removed, but others will still have the ability to access where I cannot go.
If you really want to limit access, then do it to everyone. Deactivate the roads, and POST the area NO TRESSPASSING.
Then we can all hunt the area your closures left me in. You can walk up and down the main roads and I will drive my ORV.
I am sure the wildlife will recover quickly if we all make the same sacrifices in the name of wildlife.
" We must strive to touch the land gently and care for it as true stewards, that those who follow us and assess our record may see that our mark on the land was one of respect and love, not cruelty and disdain."
Robert B. Oetting
Proud BC Resident Hunter
stay on your island please