Binder
Well-Known Member
OK I've drank enough alcohol and my alarm goes off at 2.45 tomorrow.
I'm out.
I'm out.
I've yet to see you answer it with anything other than a expanation of why they don't have enough people to enforce. Now you're saying they do.???????????
With as much as we've talked about this I would have hoped that it would have been brought to her attention much sooner than this.
You know I have written this nearly word for word and the only response I have gotten is they can't do it because they don't have the people. Now this may or may not be true but Gibby is now saying there would be enough enforcement to look for passes. Why could they not be enforcing the laws that are in place now?
I'm not saying the meeting format needs to be one way or another. I don't go to them and couldn't care less. What I'm saying is the people in general are getting tired of hearing the bullshit excuses of why things are going to ****. Typically we as in the people that don't go to the meetings are the ones blamed because we don't go. Now people go (for what reason doesn't matter) but there's too many people now. You guys can go but just don't say anything when you're there. What's the purpose of being there?
And does nothoing to fix the problem of resorce damage. You don't think a guy with a pass could still drive off of the trail?Spot checking for passes is MUCH easier than waiting around to find someone going off the trail
This could be done over the net without being there.One purpose of being there, is education. To learn the process, get involved with the process and yes provide input when appropriate..
I call BS. The way things work is what needs to change. If you're just trying to fit in with the system then you're not helping much. The system needs to change.So many people that have never been involved with the DNR or focus groups like this are spouting off garbage because they simply don't have experience or knowledge of the way things work.
I already gave the answer but you won't listen.
I'll let you read HER words instead of me trying to explain it for her. I've been to the meetings, I've talked with her about it and I've told you what she told me.
The BRIDGES have absolutely NOTHING to do with the proposed LENGTH restrictions. Tony, READ when she wrote. Don't start making stuff up. It sounds like you've been on the phone with Steve and he's filling your head with inaccurate information. The ONLY thing that she holding her ground on without budging is the 82" width restriction because that's how wide the bridges are. Wider vehicles have no CHOICE but to damage the rub rails and push them off the bridges.
Did you see ANYWHERE in her email where she said anything about 107" or 109" or anything involving length?
So why can't the ranger run around and give tickets for resource damage? This is the real issue here why not meet it head on?
Spot checking for passes is MUCH easier than waiting around to find someone going off the trail, or not using a tree saver etc. One person can simply hang around at the campground and check EVERYone, just like they do at the parking lots at Evan's Creek.
Regarding your ideal of passes. I'm in favor. I'm curious how many different users there on that trail in a two year period? 100? 350? or a 1000? Can we really have enough work parties to satisfy 1000 different users? You might need to add a another solution. Maybe a PNW bi-annual backed meeting? Maybe any work party at any area that has PNW backing? Dunno.
there would need to be a way for washington citizens to buy/educatation classes, if they can't make working parties. unless you plan on holding one every weekend and a few times on the weekdays. you can't manage 500 people at a working party, not to mention the people that work the weekends and can't get those days off. it would be insane and ignorant of you to do that. i think there would be a linching mob out there. you have to be able to accomadate most people's needs or times. to look blindly at someone elses schedules and implementing it in that fasihon would be an extremely ignorant move on your part. i'm all for a pass, but some of us work, go to school or have mass amounts of college work on the weekends and unless you are going to reimburse me for my college or get me a new job to replace a weekend of skipping work or slacking off my homework and endangering my future job... you can take that idea and eat it.
I agree that its easier to work with less people. BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH TELLING PEOPLE NOT TO COME BACK OR BE A PART. It's easier for them to work with less people. I personally have a problem with telling people to get involved and then saying thanks for coming now i don't need you THATS BULL CRAP. I will say it again ANYONE who wants to be involved and come to the next coming meetings needs to. Nancy told me that she wasn't going to listen to a bunch of people that were only willing to come to one meeting. ( granted she probably didn't think 205 people would show up) I didn't really advertise it all that much, but all of you did. Don't stop being a part of what all of you care about. I will be at the next meeting and I hope i will see all of you there as well.How many times have we heard that we need to get more people involved in these issues? Now you want to propose changes that would keep people from being involved in these meetings?
Wow... What happened to the reading comprehesion coment, comet???:eeek:
Wow... What happened to the reading comprehesion coment, comet???:eeek:
LOL you saw that!!! I cooled down and deleted it. I'm in a pissy mood and thought I should just STFU before I do something I regret. Well I did it, but then I "undid it!" :redneck:
LOL you saw that!!! I cooled down and deleted it. I'm in a pissy mood and thought I should just STFU before I do something I regret. Well I did it, but then I "undid it!" :redneck: