Help the green party with their petition against off road recreation.

skidmark43

skidmark43

Administrator / BFF in the blue jacket
imported post

imported post

Now I get it. Classy way of infiltrating...





588.
Terrance Martin
The parks plan was tabled and sent back to planning by a majority vote of the CRD Regional Parks Committee. We now welcome the opportunity to be included in the planning process to assist in preservation of a renewable natural resource that is there for everyone to enjoy. We are only seeking restricted access on designated roadways to specific destinations of importance to our community, and we oppose the unmanaged free-for-all that is the current management plan. It is unfortunate that the exclusion of a major stakeholder group has resulted in this divisive and confrontational atmosphere, and it is my hope that a more considered and inclusive approach will be adopted by CRD Parks management and planners. Respectfully, Terrance Martin: South Island Motorized Recreation Advisory Council http://simrac.ca
 
M

mint400

New member
imported post

imported post

is this some kind of double negative trick?

can anyone explain straight up what this is doing here?
 
250ccforme

250ccforme

Member
imported post

imported post

Here's what the petition is about,

Qoute:

To: CRD Parks Board

Background;
CRD's park plan for the new Sea to Sea regional park has been rejected by Sooke’s mayor Janet Evans. She has been convinced by a recently very vocal motorised off road user group to derail this plan in the final stage of completion, so that they can now be heard and make a claim for access to this park.

The Petition;
We, the undersigned, are opposed to allowing off road motorised vehicle access to the upcoming Sea to Sea Regional Park (Harbourview Rd.).

Sincerely,

End Of Quote.

So why would any of us sign this petition? T. Martin been puffin' the funny stuff???
 
M

mint400

New member
imported post

imported post

I'm wondering if moderators should reconsider not taking this down. Seems its intentions are not in contradiction to mixed use opponents.
 
Buck

Buck

Moderator
imported post

imported post

Ok Terrance, you want to clear this up? Seems confusing. Isn't the Sooke Mountain park (Harbourview) part of the Sea to Sea Greenbelt??
As usual the green petition is misleading. We don't want motorized access to the entire sea to sea greenbelt, just our fair share.... the Harourview portion.

edit...

Ok, here is a clue as Skidmark already quoted:

We are only seeking restricted access on designated roadways to specific destinations of importance to our community, and we oppose the unmanaged free-for-all that is the current management plan.
 
sparklr

sparklr

New member
imported post

imported post

I think Mr. Martin failed to elaborate properly the issue and meaning of the petition. I would expect that he will validate the comment soon enough.
 
T

Terrance Martin

Guest
imported post

imported post

Maybe I should have savedthat postfor today. Apologies for the confusion, but you really need to read the comment I posted on the petition.

Somewhere along the line we have to find some common ground with those people, or we will never work it out, and that common ground is environmental protection.

They have my (qualified) vote. I don't want a free-for-all in the parks either, and I doubt anyone does.

That petition has a long way to go to catch up to the 1200 people on our Facebook group, the 1100 names from the paper petitions wanting managed access, and the unanimous support of Sooke council.

We don't want access to the "park" whatever that is. We want managed access on deignated trails to designated and specific destinations.

They don't seem to be hearing properly.

T
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top