fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
Anybody out there heard anything about the Arctic Cat transmissions burning up on thier 2005 500's at around 500 miles? fatrooster.
Arctic Cat Transmission.
- Thread starter fatrooster
- Start date
T
TFinalshot
Guest
that would be cool, hope they all have that problem . . .
Finalshot
Finalshot
fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
Thanks for the encouragement Finalshot, ha ha. It turned out to be ok. The linkage had come apart. My stupid mistake. fatrooster.
T
TFinalshot
Guest
Fatroosert,
I know my comment was cold. Nevertheless, I don't like ORV?s. I don't believe they should be allowed to continue to colonize our backcountry areas our remote places during hunting season. I work very hard to encourage the reduction of ORV use on our public lands. It' is getting WAY out of control; too many ORV users, out here in Montana, disobey the rules and travel when and where they are not allowed. It's no clich?, it's true, and if you, or anyone, want to deny it, I'd challenge you to do your own inspection and come back and tell me what you find. ORV abuse of our land is ridiculous.
I'd be against hunting too if most people were breaking the law or destroying a herd by over hunting it. The parallel, of course, is that I'm not against ORV's on their face, I'm against the destruction of our landscape and our hunting experiences because of loud, and illegal off-road-vehicle use. . . just as I'd work to close hunting in areas were people are destroying the basis for a healthy heard by over harvest or poaching.
Here's a challange:
If you have a real, solid, and compelling explanation for the use of ORV?s in our back-county and how and why that activity is beneficial to our environment and our use of the mountains, I'd like to hear it. . . I've yet to hear a compelling answerer -- and I've heard of lot of them. Let's hear your position and please, give me something the will help me see why ORV?s should still be allowed to travel in our mountains and our wild-places. Old or crippled people and ?it's a small number of users that are ruining if for the rest,? wont cut it, be thought provoking and original.
Finalshot
I know my comment was cold. Nevertheless, I don't like ORV?s. I don't believe they should be allowed to continue to colonize our backcountry areas our remote places during hunting season. I work very hard to encourage the reduction of ORV use on our public lands. It' is getting WAY out of control; too many ORV users, out here in Montana, disobey the rules and travel when and where they are not allowed. It's no clich?, it's true, and if you, or anyone, want to deny it, I'd challenge you to do your own inspection and come back and tell me what you find. ORV abuse of our land is ridiculous.
I'd be against hunting too if most people were breaking the law or destroying a herd by over hunting it. The parallel, of course, is that I'm not against ORV's on their face, I'm against the destruction of our landscape and our hunting experiences because of loud, and illegal off-road-vehicle use. . . just as I'd work to close hunting in areas were people are destroying the basis for a healthy heard by over harvest or poaching.
Here's a challange:
If you have a real, solid, and compelling explanation for the use of ORV?s in our back-county and how and why that activity is beneficial to our environment and our use of the mountains, I'd like to hear it. . . I've yet to hear a compelling answerer -- and I've heard of lot of them. Let's hear your position and please, give me something the will help me see why ORV?s should still be allowed to travel in our mountains and our wild-places. Old or crippled people and ?it's a small number of users that are ruining if for the rest,? wont cut it, be thought provoking and original.
Finalshot
T
TFinalshot
Guest
Should we make provisions for everyone? There are places where I not longer can go because I'm not a youthful. However, if we dont do somthing about all the traffic in there wont be a choice for the young, they will never know the places as we did. I for one will be happy with my life of hunting if I could be assured that the young will be ablle to experence wild places without the havic of four wheeled thumpers. It's my job as an adult to restrain myself from doing things that will take from my kids. . .
Take care, and please tell me why it's okay for one ORV user to destroy the hunting experence for may?
Finalshot
Take care, and please tell me why it's okay for one ORV user to destroy the hunting experence for may?
Finalshot
YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYONE HAS THEIR POINT FROM WHERE THEY STAND, AS YOU DO YOURS/WHICH IS OK. BUT THERE ARE ALOT OF GOOD FOLKS/HUNTERS WHO USE A QUAD FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. JUST THE FLIP SIDE OF THE COIN I GUESS, BUT THEY NEED TO STAY LEGAL. TAKE ER EASY, YD.
T
TFinalshot
Guest
No one has said make them illegal, heck, they have their usefulness; just take them out of our backcountry. I propose a trail, right next to an existing road that could be used by atv's. They should not be allowed to access areas where other motorized vehicle cannot travel.
Why dont you tell us why they are so importanat for backcounty use? Why should one ATV be able to diminish or destroy the opportunitys for so many? Please, I'd like to hear a good explanation for once. . .
Finalshot
Why dont you tell us why they are so importanat for backcounty use? Why should one ATV be able to diminish or destroy the opportunitys for so many? Please, I'd like to hear a good explanation for once. . .
Finalshot
BOHNTR
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,339
ATV's should NOT be allowed to travel where any other motorized vehicle is not permitted. They are a good tool if used in this manner. Driving them, or any other vehicle, in unauthorized areas should not be tolerated.
I don't think we (tax payers) should make an "extra" road for their use though. If one wants to drive them, simply drive them on the dirt road already provided. If the ATV user doesn't like the dust, etc., then drive your truck.
For those illegally operating ATV's into the backcountry where they are prohibited, zero tolerance from law enforcement needs to happen. ATV's aren't the only ones back in there either. I've seen older jeeps back in there too. Don't outlaw the machine, punish those who abuse their use. Just my .02.
BOHNTR )))---------->
I don't think we (tax payers) should make an "extra" road for their use though. If one wants to drive them, simply drive them on the dirt road already provided. If the ATV user doesn't like the dust, etc., then drive your truck.
For those illegally operating ATV's into the backcountry where they are prohibited, zero tolerance from law enforcement needs to happen. ATV's aren't the only ones back in there either. I've seen older jeeps back in there too. Don't outlaw the machine, punish those who abuse their use. Just my .02.
BOHNTR )))---------->
fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
TFinalshot, you asked for my opinion so here it is. I totally agree with you. I bought an ATV mostly to do work around the house but also use it to save abuse on my truck on dirt roads while hunting. But most of my hunting is done in the wilderness area with horses or I hike in on foot which is my preferred method of hunting. I don't like taking care of horses when I'm hunting. Years ago the Clinton administration wanted to close down many roads and make more area nonmotorized areas which I was against but sometimes I wonder that maybe that wouldn't be such a bad idea. Where would our game herds be if our access with vehicles into these areas was cut in half?
As far as overharvest goes, that problem rest on the shoulders of our Fish and Game agencies and mismanagement of our game. Fewer tags will stop overharvest and thats that!!! Take Nevada for example; for the last few years Nevada has cut back deer tags due to small populations. Well what do you think that does to Nevada Department of Wildlifes pocketbook? Thier yearly revenue was drastically cut back. Also Nevada went to the computer electronic method of allowing people to apply for thier tags. In the past everybody had to send in the money and NDOW held on to it for several months and collected interest on it. More revenue was lost. So all of a sudden in 2005 the quota for deer was increased and more tags were sold and according to NDOW our enviroment suddenly could not sustain the increasing number of our deer herds. BULLSHIT!!!!! Tell me that money was not the the incentive for the increase in allotted tags numbers.
So back to the original subject about ATV's. You asked for me to give you a legitimate debate and I cannot because I am on your side. I just wish people would follow the laws because our game herds are suffering. Fatrooster.
As far as overharvest goes, that problem rest on the shoulders of our Fish and Game agencies and mismanagement of our game. Fewer tags will stop overharvest and thats that!!! Take Nevada for example; for the last few years Nevada has cut back deer tags due to small populations. Well what do you think that does to Nevada Department of Wildlifes pocketbook? Thier yearly revenue was drastically cut back. Also Nevada went to the computer electronic method of allowing people to apply for thier tags. In the past everybody had to send in the money and NDOW held on to it for several months and collected interest on it. More revenue was lost. So all of a sudden in 2005 the quota for deer was increased and more tags were sold and according to NDOW our enviroment suddenly could not sustain the increasing number of our deer herds. BULLSHIT!!!!! Tell me that money was not the the incentive for the increase in allotted tags numbers.
So back to the original subject about ATV's. You asked for me to give you a legitimate debate and I cannot because I am on your side. I just wish people would follow the laws because our game herds are suffering. Fatrooster.
T
TFinalshot
Guest
LAST EDITED ON Oct-18-05 AT 06:23AM (MST)[p]fatrooster, your reply is sincere and honest, thanks for that. you have pointed out a real dilemma with FW management. I'd like to see the state maintain a base funding level based on need and demand. It would be complimented with other wildlife program efforts and special licenses.
I hate seeing the politics manage our wildlife, but it is the way it works. If you ask most bio's I'm sure you will find them frustrated with the political decisions about game management.
Take care, keep the ORV on the trail and dont drive where you would not want to see an orv if you were stalking a buck of a lifetime!
Finalshot
I hate seeing the politics manage our wildlife, but it is the way it works. If you ask most bio's I'm sure you will find them frustrated with the political decisions about game management.
Take care, keep the ORV on the trail and dont drive where you would not want to see an orv if you were stalking a buck of a lifetime!
Finalshot
fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
I would like to add one more thought. Many people here in the US would like to take away our guns because so many people are killed with guns. But in reality the gun killed nobody. People kill people. ATV's to not break laws, people break laws. Politics are not crooked, politicians are crooked, etc., etc., and etc. So to make a long story short the people who break laws need adequately punished. Restricting the use of ATV's in order to insure that people do not break the exsisting laws will not work. People will still break these laws. fatrooster.
T
TFinalshot
Guest
So, when do we use our own discretion about where to drive? Just because something is legal, does not make it right. We each have our own minds and should use our own discretion more often. I can't believe you guys, who sound intelligent, are saying that just because its legal you'll do it. Come on. Does this mean that if it were legal to shoot 100 elk out of a herd of 100 elk you would be right there with your tag? Maybe, maybe not. So, you just go with the political flow, no matter what the science tells us about our actions ? are we lemmings? Does it mean that you will drive you quad across the tundra where there are no tracks and where it will leave a scar for 100 years just because it is legal? When do you use your own restraint and take responsibility for making changes at the local level - in your head?
I think you people hit the nail right on the head. Most people tend to believe that if it's not illegal, it must be okay. Then many more do not care and do whatever they want anyway. Wow, the issues are very complicated and I starting to believe it's not a orv problem but a morality issue. . .
Finalshot
I think you people hit the nail right on the head. Most people tend to believe that if it's not illegal, it must be okay. Then many more do not care and do whatever they want anyway. Wow, the issues are very complicated and I starting to believe it's not a orv problem but a morality issue. . .
Finalshot
fatrooster
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 4,187
Staying on roads is legal. To drive accross the tundra or the landscape is not. It is preached over and over to stay on designated roads and yes it should be up to everyones disgretion. But if you break that law you should be punished and pay a large fine or whatever in order to get the point accross to people. But if we restrict, restrict, restrict then we may as well be living in Russia. Its no different than people using disgretion about how they use thier firearms. Some people kill people with them but the majority of people do not. But the world wants to take away guns from the innocent majority. I guess we could do the same with ATV's. I read a story about a news columnist doing an interview with a general about teaching youth to use guns. She made a comment about saying that he was teaching youth to kill people. He answered that he was teaching youth to use guns in a responsible way. He then commented to her, "God made you with all the body parts to be a prostitute, are you one?" God made us with the ability to use our heads to decipher right from wrong, does that mean that we are gonna do wrong all of the time?
I also hate the way people misuse ATV's and guns and everything else in this world but the innocent should not have to pay for the guilty. If we took away all of the guns and all of the ATV's all of the horses, all of the rights to be out there at all then we will only be able to sit at home and be couch potatoes. Finalshot, you have a legitimate gripe and most everybody on this site agrees with you including me. Where do we draw the line? I'm sure everyone has an opinion. fatrooster.
I also hate the way people misuse ATV's and guns and everything else in this world but the innocent should not have to pay for the guilty. If we took away all of the guns and all of the ATV's all of the horses, all of the rights to be out there at all then we will only be able to sit at home and be couch potatoes. Finalshot, you have a legitimate gripe and most everybody on this site agrees with you including me. Where do we draw the line? I'm sure everyone has an opinion. fatrooster.
Both Fatrooster and YD have made points that I agree with 100%
I don't believe the answer is restricting ORV use-mainly because I have one, use it regularly and would not be able to hunt the way "I" hunt without one. I cover a lot of country while hunting and I use my ATV & Toyota to cover this country.
That said let me make this clear--when the legal road/trail ends my ORV use ends and the footwork begins PERIOD.
In every canyon I travel there are signs that read "Motorized vehicle travel is RESTRICTED to official/marked roads and trails ONLY." I know these signs are not invisible but for reasons not known to me SOME PEOPLE can't read these signs, the ATV's they are riding aren't responsible for this.
I believe the answer starts with how proactive we get as outdoorsman. What do you do when you witness illegal ORV use? Do you right down a description/plate # and get it to the LEO's or do you let the violators go and voice your support for all-out ban on ATV's? How about confronting these people and respectfully letting them know they are in the wrong? I guarantee IF I were confronted about my careless ORV operation I might think twice next time.
IMO these are the actions we should rightfully take to start the fix. Take pictures when possible and hand those pics w/ description to the fish&game cops, they are the ones with legal authority to punish.
I don't believe the answer is restricting ORV use-mainly because I have one, use it regularly and would not be able to hunt the way "I" hunt without one. I cover a lot of country while hunting and I use my ATV & Toyota to cover this country.
That said let me make this clear--when the legal road/trail ends my ORV use ends and the footwork begins PERIOD.
In every canyon I travel there are signs that read "Motorized vehicle travel is RESTRICTED to official/marked roads and trails ONLY." I know these signs are not invisible but for reasons not known to me SOME PEOPLE can't read these signs, the ATV's they are riding aren't responsible for this.
I believe the answer starts with how proactive we get as outdoorsman. What do you do when you witness illegal ORV use? Do you right down a description/plate # and get it to the LEO's or do you let the violators go and voice your support for all-out ban on ATV's? How about confronting these people and respectfully letting them know they are in the wrong? I guarantee IF I were confronted about my careless ORV operation I might think twice next time.
IMO these are the actions we should rightfully take to start the fix. Take pictures when possible and hand those pics w/ description to the fish&game cops, they are the ones with legal authority to punish.
