Quote:
Originally Posted by 243plus
What I see, and generally support, on the Bighorn plan, is that there will be a curtailment of areas that are impacted by mechanical conveyances and equipment. Curtailment, not elimination, and curtailment includes avoiding sensitive habitat, whether that is riparian areas or upland.
What I would like to see is a better definition of where that curtailment will occur. Now, part of the planning process is to roughly outline the areas that will have various activities involved, with the details being hashed out later. That is normal, from what I understand.
.
|
You do realize this can be accomplished without wildland and provincial parks don't you? I think part of the problem is many don't.
Do yourself a favor and go pick up a couple maps. Start with the Ghost Forest Land Use Zone. Next pick up a map of the Bighorn Backcountry. You will notice that a large amount of area is already shut down to motorized vehicles, and also many areas with designated trail systems. Might be an eye opener going thru those maps.
Designated trail systems are a fantastic idea. Areas such as the hummingbird the trails are actually maintained by user groups with money donated by industry.
If there are problems, ENFORCEMENT is a novel idea.
We do not require any more parks to accomplish this balance
Privileges will continue to be taken away. It's a government thing...