Don’t forget the handicapped
Dear Editor,
I just read your paper, with great interest in the letter about ATVs on the KVR.
I would like to mention a user group that not too many people have considered; the handicapped.
I have been taking my mother-in-law down the KVR for years, and have always felt guilty.
This now clears the confusion about the legalities of quads. To say that this trail should be used only by walkers and bicycles is purely selfish, and I will now ride with a very happy mother-in-law with a clear conscience.
Nick Carras
Surrey, BC
Co-operation needed between user groups
Dear Editor:
I was recently heartened and encouraged by a letter by Nat Brown in Area H: “Compromise between ATV users and hikers is the key to managing trails”.
Thank you Nat for your vision and your support for meaningful dialogue on all sides of the issue of motorized traffic on our trail.
If we are to truly be a “community” then we must come together to make that happen.
This is not a life or death situation here; it does not threaten our livelihood or our wellbeing. It is just a trail for heaven’s sake. And a magnificent one at that. We have been blessed by this.
Where else on the good green earth can you find such a wonderful trail, rolling through the open range lands, and into the higher levels where you are literally on top of the world.
And I have not even mentioned yet the ride along our majestic Tulameen River.
We have been given a gift that we need to make available to everyone.
And that brings me back to Nat. Compromise, understanding and working together, these all have to come into play.
We are a unique area filled with a great many points of view.
Instead of having this draw a line in the sand, why can’t we strive to be the community that made it all work for everyone?
This could be our ace in the hole, that we embrace all users of our area.
Is it about time that we stopped being the environmentalists against the red necks and concentrated on being residents of an absolutely spectacular area that we can all enjoy and make it work?
It all comes down to communication and respect. Come on Princeton; show everyone how we can make this all work.
ATV regulation needed, ban goes too far
Dear Editor;
I live at Chain Lake and am an avid hiker as well as ATV and snowmobile rider.
I appreciate the sentiments of the hikers and cyclists using the KVR.
From my perspective, joy riding on the KVR should be banned, but riders should be able to travel along it to get to trails that are open to riders.
A friendly hello and wave is always appreciated by everyone. The challenge is how do you “tar and feather” the riders speeding or bothering hikers and cyclists.
British Columbia is one of the last provinces to not register ATVs with an identifiable licence plate. Until this happens, enforcement will always be a problem.
A permit system could be put in place, which would identify the ATV and could be revoked, but then who is going to enforce it?
There are many communities in the U.S., and apparently some in B.C., where they have managed to come to grips with this problem and made everyone feel welcome.
There are several ATV clubs in this area. Working together, can we not find some way to ride through Princeton from end to end without conflict, even if the ATV must come to a full stop and wait for hikers to pass?
This would at least allow ATVs access to trails outside Princeton.
Princeton is a frontier kind of community where we still walk the streets with a friendly greeting to all we meet. This is rare and kind of exhilarating, and we should try to keep it that way.
The following comments may give a fresh perspective of ATV riders.
There are many communities in the U.S. where ATVs are street legal.
They must be registered, licensed and insured, have tail lights, brake lights, license plate light, rear view mirror and a horn.
Some communities also require signal lights and whip antenna.
They even have police ATVs for enforcement.
Riding is allowed on any street with a speed limit under 35 miles per hour and you must have a valid drivers license.
I have personally participated in community parades and events, some with as many as 500 ATVs at a time.
In Quartzsite, Arizona it is a common sight to see an elderly woman parking her ATV, buying groceries and filling it up at a service station.
These ATV riders eat, shop and stay overnight in the community.
I am sure that some way can be found to accommodate some kind of community trail system for all users.
Vic Bartel
Princeton
Princeton made the right decision
Why is it so important to ATV users to have these few kilometers of KVR trail?
There are other users, such as walkers, runners, cyclists, young families with children, etc. who do not want them there.
Considering the size of the trail, “self-propelled activities” and “motorized activities” are incompatible.
The main consideration is SAFETY! There is insufficient space for the two activities to coexist.
All ready there have been instances when pedestrians have feared for their safety, especially in the tunnel with machines roaring by.
The town made the right decision!
Let there be a non-motorized section of the KVR within the five-kilometre town boundary.
Let the ATV users go elsewhere with their noisy machines to pursue their motorized activities.
Princeton needs to become of age and join other communities. Kimberley and Golden immediately come to mind, who have developed “riverside trails for self-propelled activities”.
These trails have become an asset for these towns and are well used by the public.
Even Calgary, the motorized capital of the world, has extensive non-motorized trails within its city limits.
Let’s allow Princeton to march forward into the 21st century, where activities do not have an adverse impact on the environment and where the public receives physical benefits from self- propelled activities that promote wellness and good health.
Mary Masiel
Princeton