You want to know why Paul? Here's why:
Publicly accessible trails CLOSED in the last few years:
- Beacon
- Nam
- Abbott Mtn
- Driveshaft Hill
- Coy Hill
- Gutter & Ma Bell next?
These are only ones I know about in my short time
tammylynn wrote:I think that would fall under our Strategic Planning section? We really should continue with that. That was one of the most productive meetings we ever had but then it kind of dribbled down. I know...
.
Scott Hatch wrote:NETRA spends about 70k a year for a lobbyist in MA
Treasurer wrote:I have met their lobbyist. He dresses nice and talks right. This lobbyist should be working for all OHRV user groups. The Eco-Nazis go after all motorized user groups. They do not discriminate when it come to closing down land. You can meet with EC but that will not get you anywhere with the Commuistwealth. I am not going to harp on suing the state for ADA access to public lands. There needs to be a OHRV land trust that is a 501(c)3. This would have all motorized user groups on the BOD. This would allow manufacturers to donate money to keep land open and get land to ride on in the Northeast. The political arm of this would be a RIOHVA in MA. This non-profit would represent all motorized user groups at Beacon Hill. This organization would have the lobbyist.
mike_belben wrote:obviously im with tammy on this..Scott Hatch wrote:NETRA spends about 70k a year for a lobbyist in MA
off topic, but i read all of the minutes from all of the MA DCR workgroup for OHV use last night, and i didnt get the impression the person there for NETRA was fighting for ATV rights at all, hardly a mention of complaint on their behalf. seemed like they went right along with the same old "increased enforcement, education, safety, etc" rhetoric.
i wonder if their money is being well spent?
Scott Hatch wrote:BTW I don't think NETRA is geared towards ATVs but only trail bikes...but I could be wrong
rblank wrote:Scott Hatch wrote:BTW I don't think NETRA is geared towards ATVs but only trail bikes...but I could be wrong
correct, New England Trail Riders Association (NETRA) is two-wheel only. No ATV's
Hmmmmm 2500 individual members at $25 a pop would cover the NEA's own personal atty/ lobbiest at $50/yr salary.
mike_belben wrote:if nothing else, id feel some solace in just knowing we gave a jerk like that a few weeks of heartburn dragging his name through the mud in the papers.
in my opinion, we've been too easy of an adversary for the conservation groups who obviously steamroll us on every front. divisions between our recreational preference or association affiliation are making it even easier for them.
todays paper announced 3 massachusetts towns (northampton-72 acres, amherst-28 acres, belchertown-57 acres) just got 1.2 million dollars more conservation land. and im tired of paying for it personally.
Paul wrote:oohh you two gotta meet, that's gonna be great.
i want to be a fly on the wall!
sidriptide wrote:i cant keep up with all this new discussion and still be productive at work.. guess i need to quite the job. need to catch up on the topics at hand tonight. i like where its going so far.
is it just me or is it painfully obvious that Mike B has spent alot of time reading Brill-isms recently.
Zaedock wrote:Quato.
markdupont wrote:
You can't get angry at this crap, it's a business deal between a private land owner and a (regardless of who it may be) buyer... it's beyond your and my control... another thing to consider is, we don't live in the economies of scale these cats live in.
markdupont wrote:Not even close Mike, the 4-WD community has never even been in the game... members of the 4-WD community have mounted small attempts to capture the ear of the political community, but no one has ever really put together an initiative on the scale of what other user-groups have done... .
mike_belben wrote:markdupont wrote:Not even close Mike, the 4-WD community has never even been in the game... members of the 4-WD community have mounted small attempts to capture the ear of the political community, but no one has ever really put together an initiative on the scale of what other user-groups have done... .
so getting back to business. where do we start? how did other groups create their successes? how did the sled folks get tied in so well?
ToxicTurtle wrote:mike_belben wrote:markdupont wrote:Not even close Mike, the 4-WD community has never even been in the game... members of the 4-WD community have mounted small attempts to capture the ear of the political community, but no one has ever really put together an initiative on the scale of what other user-groups have done... .
so getting back to business. where do we start? how did other groups create their successes? how did the sled folks get tied in so well?
You do what are doing in CT.
First off, you get in touch with some local ATVers.. Ones who only ride legally in the MA state forests. Then, you get in touch with NOHVCC (yes, I will put you in touch with the right folks for this). Then, you get in touch with NETRA. You arrange for them to come out and direct all the MA motorized people towards a MA multiple trail users org.. Such as CT/COALT or RIOHVA.
Once you get everyone working under one unified umbrella, you can start taking steps to present legislation that will help all users. Some legislation may only affect OHM riders, while others may only affect full sized 4x4s,but, working together is the key element. So far in CT, we have been able to take the knowledge from the NETRA guys, the sheer numbers of the ATVs and the strong organizational/rallying skills of the full sized groups and be in a position to have a lobbyist, be presenting bills for the legal process and a proposal for an Urban OHV park.
RIOHVA is in the same boat.
PM me and I'll get that info to you.
Talk soon, Dave
rblank wrote:I don't know what the NEA might have already, but we should get our hands on the NOHVCC and highly anticipated State of MN trail maintance guides.
Paul wrote:One further, and this is where Mr. Dupont and I respectfully disagree:
The Massachusetts model for a multi-use trail system does not work. We see MX'rs and quads being set up for failure. If you want to push the state for our own 4x4 trail network, you're going to have to spec out new trails specifically for 4x4 use.
I've been on sled trails, I've been on quad trails, on mx trails in the state forests, all of us using the same trail is NOT going to work. Although we are all motorized we seek (at least in my eyes) dramatically different terrain.
To boot you're not going to get it by saying "give it to me because I pay taxes, I'm entitled" You're going to have to just short of seize that gas tax money, that RTP money, and create yourself a pilot system on a network of trails that you and your buddies built.
.02
Scott Hatch wrote:rblank wrote:I don't know what the NEA might have already, but we should get our hands on the NOHVCC and highly anticipated State of MN trail maintance guides.
I've got a few things posted about this on the main NEA site
http://www.nea4wd.org/articles/index.cf ... CLE_ID=176
What I've used is my own personal experience working with the AMC and information from various web pages and manuals, some of which are listed above
Paul wrote:Cheerios with a splash of urine this morning Mr. Dupont??
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests