More trib...Rainer huck letter

[Cody]

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_11445215

I don't align with Rainer Huck in the slightest, and I'm on the fence about whether having an extremeist to counter SUWA is good or bad. It just seems that because he is so vocal and well known that everyone who then drives an OHV is all of a sudden lumped into the pile as another "Rainer Huck". I guess if nothing else, he brings a version of our side of the issue into the spotlight.

but is all PR good PR in this case?

 

[Herzog]

It's always the exact same losers commenting on sltrib.

 

[phatfoto]

Maybe I won't read the article then. The same people commenting makes it rather dull.

 

[scoutabout]

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_11445215

I don't align with Rainer Huck in the slightest, and I'm on the fence about whether having an extremeist to counter SUWA is good or bad. It just seems that because he is so vocal and well known that everyone who then drives an OHV is all of a sudden lumped into the pile as another "Rainer Huck". I guess if nothing else, he brings a version of our side of the issue into the spotlight.

but is all PR good PR in this case?

No

I love Rainer. The number of Utahns who have put more of their own time and money into the ohv cause can be counted on one hand. But he knows where I differ with him and some of the ideology he has bred into the activists working today.

Harsh rhetoric hurts our cause. Terms like 'greenies', 'eco-Nazis' and 'enviro-nuts' do almost as much harm to our efforts as irresponsible users. Also the concept of anti-access sets back our efforts. It's an indicator of how amateur our 'professional' orgs really are that they have so heavily promoted the term 'anti-access'. As anti-motorized groups point out, they want to maintain access as long as it's via foot power.

There's a lot to change if we want success. Using the same methods for the last 20+ years hasn't made much progress.

 

[anderson750]

No

they want to maintain access as long as it's via foot power.

It may be just splitting hairs on terminology, but if you narrow it down to only one select group only wanting access by one method, therefore keeping everyone else out......it is anti access.

 

[dieslcruisrhead]

I love "the trough" comment

 

[scoutabout]

It may be just splitting hairs on terminology, but if you narrow it down to only one select group only wanting access by one method, therefore keeping everyone else out......it is anti access.

Effective language is all about split hairs. Fighting to eliminate motorized access doesn't keep "everyone else out" and that's where your logic is flawed. You can walk in, I can walk in. The disabled or grossly out of shape are in a separate category, but it's not blanket "anti-access".