Important Reading Item

[Guest]

I didn't get authorization to post a link, so I won't. Nonetheless, Outdoor News and the Outdoor News HSOforum both contain an article (actually a different article in each on the same subject) by Shawn Perich portraying some of the uses and misuses of the Spider Lake OHV park. Read it if you care about the existence of these areas.

I don't think this is anti-ATV propaganda being that the author has a fairly solid reputation. If this park is really the way it is portrayed in these articles, they might soon be a thing of the past.

Anyways, read it and post some feedback.

[Dave]

I have a problem with Perich. Seems if he doesn't use one, he does have a problem with it. ATV Magazine wrote a story about the same area and reported the area is a lot better now than just five years ago. Tons less drugs and the area is cleaned up due to the ATV club's efforts. Trails are being managed better. Still needs improving but a lot better than years ago.

The MN DNR discussion forum has some good (well, sometimes it's good) conversation going in the ATV Forum.

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited 02-20-2002).]

[SpikeRoberts]

First, I want to say that I don't have anything against ATVs per se and I understand that the vast majority of riders are quite responsible, but....
Our family has owned property for over a hundred years just a few miles from the Spider Lake system and we fish and play at Spider Lake quite often. While it has improved somewhat over the last few years there are still significant problems in the area. Despite the expensive installation of many barriers to prevent access to lakeshore and other sensitive areas riders consistently circumvent the blockades causing erosion to the shoreline. Throughout the trail system riders have "taken the liberty" to create scores of off-road shortcuts between trails damaging vegetation and fouling wetland areas. Taken together there has been a great deal of damage done to the area that could take decades to recover.
Now as I said, I'm not against ATVs per se; actually I think the trail system, if used responsibly, is a pretty neat thing. But unfortunately, the trail sytem has not been used responsibly. I realize that the problems I've described above are likely the result of a few yahoos, but its pretty obvious that it only takes a few yahoos a few years to ruin a good forest. If the users can't/won't police themselves, I'm afraid someone else will have to; maybe even ban them from the area all together.

[This message has been edited by SpikeRoberts (edited 02-20-2002).]

[Dave]

Spike,
I trust your analysis of the area. Being an ATVer I do get upset when some can't follow the rules; just like any sport/recreation. It's a tough job to "educate" people when a lot of parents are using these machines as a babysitter. What's the answer? I don't know. I think more partol/citations/kicking butt would do the job.

We'll keep after the bad guys to see if we can change the attitude of some, if people like you will keep trusting us on our intentions.

[SpikeRoberts]

-

[This message has been edited by SpikeRoberts (edited 02-25-2002).]

[Guest]

I hope that everyone that is concerned with this issue reads the front page article in the Star Tribune, its so large they have split into 2 days (Sunday Feb. 24 & Monday Feb. 25). They have done an OK job of portraying both sides, although I feel that it is leaning more towards anti-atv side. Oh well, its still informative.

-Mr. Fisherman

[Dave]

I feel it really leans toward anti-atv. Sorry, but nobody is screaming about all the oil (pollution) from outboards in our lakes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining. But, once/IF people like MRR get ATVs banned or heavily regulated, it'll be snowmobiles boats next. All sportspeople have to stick together.

[Benny]

I agree with what Dave has just stated.Look what a few green people did to the firearms industry, which is far larger than the ATV industry.We must all stick up for our rights as well as those who would like to fish and camp on a peaseful lake.We all have the same rights to nature, we just chose different whys to enjoy it.I grew up on the Iron Range right next to one of the largest open pit mines up there.NO one is going to tell me that they enjoy walking through those roads the mine's left behind.First off the bean bag and baseball size rocks are very hard to walk on, secondly everything you touch will turn red and sain red after just a few outings, third, there is no natural vegitation left on those sites.The mines stripped the origanal stuff away 30 years ago.
So I just can't see how the green people can say that the ATV's in that particular area have eroded and destroyed anything any worse than those mine's did.My friends and I would spend hours riding racing and haveing fun out there where no one ever drove 4x4 truck let alone a car to, and we never saw any person walking exept during hunting season.And we always respected them and slowed down to pass and never raised dust to choke them out.
I thing there should be manditory classes not only in safety but in envirnmental issues as well.All this before you can be allowed to purchace the ATV.We have all kinds of laws just like the firearms issue, what we need to do is EDUCATE the public and I mean every one starting at the grade school level.
Well thanks for letting me climb on the soap box, Benny

[Dave]

The MN DNR Discussion Fourm is REALLY hopping with "talk".. Help out your fellow motorsport user. Go there and speak your piece.....unless it's against ATVS Seriously, if you don't like ATVs, just look at the reasoning about some groups like MRR before you join their cause. Your outboard is the next on their list. And, I know you guys have one.

Had to add another comment. Think of ATV riders like some post I just read on this board about fisherman that leave the lake a mess with garbage. There are some "bad riders" we just have to figure out how to get them to shape up.

[This message has been edited by Dave (edited 02-25-2002).]

[jighed]

i agree the star and tribune is a very liberal paper and is always against our rights and freedom they dont want us to have any rights anymore. we have to fight back
GOD BLESS AMERICA

[Ferny]

Hey Guy's, First off Shawn Perich has had an anti ATV thing for years. If you get Outdoor News you know what I mean. He doesn't like any of them on "his land"...like the whole Northern half of the state especially during hunting season! Most of his articles he is whining about something.
As far as the slanted article in the Star Trib Sunday and Monday goes out of a whopping 148,000+ registered ATV's in MN only 60 tickets were written out and that's including Motorcycles and 4X4's. Oh my God 0.0004 of them were busted...sounds like a huge CRISIS to me...NOT! I surely don't think we need any more laws concerning ATV's. We have enough! I'm not falling for the "we don't have enough game wardens" line either. I have been checked on Chisago, Gull, and Upper Red lake all within a month.
It seems to me like this is another "tree hugger" issue against sportsman. How much erosion is the thousands/millions of acres of farm land causing and that doesn't make front page 2 days in a row. The other thing is I have seen exactly 2 people walking on a trail this year in the 100 plus miles I put on. Where are all these people that squawk get front page news?

Later,
Ferny

[bigpike]

erosion caused by millions of acres of farm land? what are you smoking?? what does farm land have anything to do with tree huggers and complaints about atv's ripping up land?? sounds like you just turned into a "complainer".

also, how does riding an atv make somebody a "sportsman". it really sucks that the real sportsmen have to stick up for those who can't respect the outdoors in order to keep a great hobby. just what qualifies somebody as a sportsman?? buying a bunch of expensive equipment, 4x4's, etc.? i don't think so. dont get me wrong, i ride snowmobile, fish, hunt, used to love my 3 wheeler when i had it. i hate the tree huggers out there as much as anybody, but i think the "sportsmen" or so some people call themselves can get just as extreme and strange arguments as the tree huggers. for example, taking a few (i know it is a select few) hell raisers on atvs who actually are causing problems and comparing them to farmland???

just wanted to let you know -- TREE HUGGER DOES NOT EQUAL FARMER AND ATV DOES NOT EQUAL SPORTSMAN.

the true sportsman becomes the casualty because of a select few.

i'll step off the soap box now and truly hope that any proposed restrictions fail.

[Guest]

I would not adopt a crass attitude with regards to this subject. The "anti-everything fun" groups are very well connected and well funded. And because we can't police are own, these groups can generate an awful lot of sympathy from folks that would normally be neutral.

Dave is right, they'll come after every motorized recreational device we own.

ATVers need a figurehead in this state. A voice to represent them. Dave, do we have one? Can we create one? Why aren't Polaris and Artic Cat sounding off these issues? If they're only preaching to the choir in ATV mags, it does no good.

You know, we could do something to help our cause through this forum. What? I don't know. Any suggestions?

[Dave]

LOL...I was wondering what you meant by figurehead..LOL...... I don't believe we do directly in MN. Richard Petty is the figurehead for Polaris.

[Dave]

Yes, MN ATVers do have a figurehead, ATVAM (All Terrain Vehicle Association of Minnesota) Membership is made up of ATV Clubs around the state. They have a HSOforum for information. ATVAM members are ~9000 members. All OEMs support ATVAM also. ATVAM and the OHV groups (trucks, motorcycles) are the ones intervening in the MRR lawsuit against the DNR.

bigpike, the reference to farmland erosion is a comparision to the constant cry of "erosion" problems from the Anti group. The main question in everyone pro motorsports group is what IS land damage. You can go to the extremes and say every recreation in the woods will damage something. Certain vegetation, oil from your leather boots in the streams, etc., etc.

When the Trib quotes problems with a small amount of ATVs dripping gas and oil into streams, just think how they will portray outboard motors.

I would guess Arctic Cat and Polaris are investigating what reactions to have/pursue.

[Guest]

I guess what I meant by a figurehead is a particular individual who knows how to grab the media spotlight in a positive way. Someone who's got the connections or is willing to acquire them to get positive media coverage. Kind of like what John Woedle is for the Governor or what Charlton Heston is to the NRA.

Do we have a Charlton Heston?

Thanks, Dave, for the information about the ATVAM. I will check them out.

[Guest]

Loogie,

Since you only fish you are not a Sportsman, but just a Fisherman. The term "Sportsman" generally refers to someone who is both an experienced hunter and fisherman. Just because someone owns an ATV does not make him/her a "Sportsman": it just make him/her a biker.

These "Green" people have serious identity issues. They claim this and that and everything in between is destroying the enviroment but you don't see them giving up their automobiles or their sea farring ship for the good old feet and non moterized sailboat. This truely proves that the "Green" people (Green Peace) are more green about the enviroment then a greenhorn about the hunting in the woods.

The Star Tribune's article is one sided: anti-ATV. I didn't see any pro's, just con's, in the article.

Hope the DNR doesn't restrict ATVing too much. I would love to be able to use my new Grizzly for hunting expeditions.

[This message has been edited by basshunter (edited 02-27-2002).]

[Guest]

I refuse to get the Star and Sickle so I didn't read the article. But I have heard and read other print/radio media relating to this. I'm not sure when this Anti movement started, but it is building a fast pace, and they are very organized.

First it was the PETA people and the anti hunting movement. Then it became anti animal testing for medical research. Then anti fishing and pet owning, anti fur, etc.

I believe the anti movement climaxed as the popularity of the "evil" SUV came into the mainstream. Global warming is now the battlecry for these Chicken Littles. All gasoline powered vehicles are the cause of this supposed calamity, and they won't rest until our behavior is changed. The SUV's gobble up gasolie, the ATV's chew up "our mother", snowmobiles are poluting the air, boats are poluting the waters. These people truly believe this and are comitted to put a stop to it.

Wasn't it in the early 1980's that Time magazine ran a series of articles about the coming of the new ice age and soon to be under a glacier? I wonder what happened to bring about a 180 degree turn about. Must have been the SUV's or ATV's.

Last year while canoeing out of Basswood Lake in the BWCA, we met some guys going in by boat. Asked them where they were camping and they said they only had a day permit, could not camp overnight. All of the motor permits were used up. But we witnessed countless open campsites. Evidentally the Sierra Club buys up motor use permits and not use them to keep motorized boats out of the BWCA. They were successful in closing the truck portages, and creating more restrictions.

Snowmobiles were first to get resticted, such as Voyaguers Natianal Park. Also in Yellowstone. The jetskis are next on the hitlist. Even though I am highly annoyed by 75% of the jetski riders, I do not want to ban them and give the antifun crowd a victory. ATV's may follow, soon it will be outboard motors. Soon the only people able to enjoy OUR forrests and lakes will be the quietsports elitists. I thought these places belonged to ALL of us to enjoy, not just a select few. These loonys are even trying to ban horseback riding in Yellowstone, too much horse droppings on the trails, it isn't natural. So, unless you have a backpack, hiking stick, and a good pair of Birkenstocks, you are not wanted in the forrests.

It is time to contact our representatives and set the record straight to protect what is left of our rights. Before the Environmental Chicken Littles eliminates all of our fun!

[SpikeRoberts]

First of all, ATV riding is a privilege, not a right -- at least it's not listed as a right in my copies of the US and MN State Constitutions. Second, the people that have problems with ATVs are not just greens. If you could read without your ideologically tinted glasses you would see that many of the people that oppose unrestricted ATV use in the state and national forests are DNR biologists, average landowners, and grouse & deer hunters -- not exactly your typical green-types. Third, the people that have raised questions about ATV use have very legitimate concerns about erosion and wetland degradation-- if you don't think so I'll happily take you on a personal tour of the Spider Lake System so you can witness the damage yourself.

AS I metioned in an earlier post, I've been watching this issue closely because I have a personal stake in preventing the Spider Lake area from getting any worse. Dave asked that I trust that ATV riders good intentions; I believe Dave and many others have good intentions, but I also believe there is credence to the old adage that the pathway to he** is paved with good intentions.

Many on this forum have made very weak arguments to support continued access to the state forests-- fearmongering slippery slopes, irrelevant statistical arguments, and character attacks. Others have complained about the Star-Trib article being anti-ATV (some w/o even reading it - sheesh); that the Star-Trib only covered the cons of ATV traffic in state forests. No one here has presented a decent argument why I shouldn't believe the Star-Trib article.

Here's your chance: Convince me (a stakeholder that also happens to be an avid angler, casual grouse hunter, occasional deer hunter, camper, hiker, and mountain biker) that there are some pros to the ATV situation that the Star-Trib didn't cover. Tell me about the organized efforts to restore the degraded areas and prevent future ones from developing. Show me some tangible evidence that the ATV community cares about maintaining wildlife habitat and a wilderness aesthetic in our state forests. I've been sitting on the fence on this particular issue, but I am leaning toward restricting ATV use because all I see here is a bunch of people looking to find ways to protect their privileges rather than looking for ways to solve real problems. Unless some folks in this forum can step up to plate and convince me otherwise I'll be throwing my support to MRR.

[This message has been edited by SpikeRoberts (edited 02-28-2002).]

[MikeR]

Hmmmmmm....

[This message has been edited by MikeR (edited 02-28-2002).]

[Guest]

Racy comments and name calling will get your post deleted.

I know those comments are funny when you're out on the lake or at the hunting shack, but they look terrible in print. If you need to fire a shot back at someone, do it constructively, please.

[Guest]

Hey Spikey,

The aim of the anti movement is not just to restrict ATV usage but to ban their usage in state forests altogether. If all they were aiming for is just to restrict the use of ATVs to created paths, by the way is the intention of the DNR, then all I have to say is "more power to them". However, this is not their intention: they know it, ATV users know it, we sportsmen know it, but the people in the middle seems to miss out on it.

If you want to move an audience to your favor, you show it a picture. If you want to move an audience to an anti stance, you show it a negative part of the picture. (This is in regards to Star Tribune.)

A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS.

My stance on the issue:
ATV should be restricted to created paths such as those proposed by the DNR. The only time an ATV should be permitted to leave a path is when it is parked, but not more than 5 feet or so. Finally, all ATV users must follow the time allocations during big game season.

I do own one of those ATV. I am also a sportsman. Although, I use it mostly for snow removal around the house, I do use it for big game hunting, but it is driven only during the legal hours (it is extremely annoying when one is out hunting and an ATV is being driven in the early and late hours, half hour before sunrise to 11AM and 2pm to half hour after sunset).

It's too bad not all ATV owners are responsible. It is really too bad all ATV owners are judged on the action of the irresponsible few.

[SpikeRoberts]

Basshunter,
I agree with everything you said. I don't lump all ATV riders together -- I believe that you and others I've had the opportunity to speak with are responsible and are sincere about your frustrations with the irresposible riders.
Perhaps, I need to clarify my point. In theory the restrictions that would require riders to stay on designated trails is a workable plan. However, in practice there are too many riders that don't live up to that requirement, causing all sorts of damage and assorted other problems -- you mentioned yourself that you are troubled by ATVs riding during restricted hours. My concern is that there has been no workable plan to keep these occurrances from happening and, from what I've read, the ATV community is unable to articulate any such plan for the future. The way I see it, is that if no one can present a plan that can reasonably enforce responsible riding then we might have to "burn down the barn to get rid of the mice." What I intended to ask in my earlier post, is what can be done to prevent such a drastic measure? How can I be sure that such a plan will acheive its expressed goals? In the absence of any such plan, as I said, I have to lean toward severe restrictions or an outright ban. I'm not posting here to cause trouble 1) I am looking for reasoned dialogue to better understand the issue, and 2) I am inviting the riding community to present their efforts to resolve some of the legitimate concerns that I have.

[Guest]

I appologize for being rather irate. It gets frustrating to see things taken away time and time again due to a few irresponsible people. Case in point, my city just closed itself to snowmobile use. A few riders ignored the rules, now the rest of us pay the price for their abuse.

At our lake place, I have been working and helping our neighbor clean up his beach area that is a winter access to the lake. I spend time on the beach cleaning up trash from others, and helped with repairing the damage to the private access in the spring. AT present, I don't use the access. But in the future I hope to use it to bring out an ice house. Now I see others picking up trash at the beach.

Sometimes the best way to get your point across is to lead by example. Perhaps an ATV Club should be formed to maintain the trails, and to police the abusers. The key is to talk with the individuals who abuse the system and let them aware of the concerns and provide alternatives for a solution. As with anything that we do, there will be "growing pains" and it will take some time to make the corrections and improvments. Please be patient while we try to figure the best solutions and a way to make the corrections. If everyone works together, ATV'ers and non-ATV'ers, all parties will be satisfied.

Rob

[Benny]

Was it not an ATV club that was pictured in the Trib story rebuilding the trail by MilleLacs? Isn't the DNR trying to solve the problem by concentrating the public to just a few areas to ride that would have the least amount of errosion instead of roamming all over the state?
Didn't that story explain that all the funds to do these things come from ATV regestration?
Doesn't my father deserve to deer hunt for the next few years he will be able to so long as he can ride the ATV to the deer stand?
If there is a ban on ATV'S where is the money going to come from to repair, make new or enforce any laws? If they ban the ATV's do you think people will pay $30. to renew a license they will never get to use any more.
Estemated 185,000 regestered ATV'S X $30.00 = $5,550,000 every three years maybe each year ? That is a lot of TAX dollars you are going to anti up for your right to walk in a forest that can only be enjoyed by a few elitist people that maybe walk there two times in a year or at least those who are physicly able to do any walking in the forest..
I do simpathize with those who live next to these riding area's, and I would vote for a bill requiring some sort of restriction on area's to ride but only if there is a provision for the use of ATV's in non sensitive area's. I.E those abandoned mine area's ,old sand pits, and designated trail systems that are controled and patroled to foil the bad apple elements we have in our ranks.
How about search and rescue teams, if ATV's are banded what manufacturer will make one they can't sell to save a life do to the distance into the wilderness the accadent happened?
Agriculture use , will there be a ATV built to use on farms if that is the only market do to a ban?
Minnesota miskeeto(sp?) patrol will have to get a new ride to dispatch the miskeeto(sp?) population that none of them will walk to!
I will find more PRO ATV things to list just give me time, this was just off the top of my head.
Benny

[This message has been edited by Benny (edited 02-28-2002).]