"Just say no to people with disabilities."

A group here in Utah is protesting the BLM which has prohibited the use of vehicles on some public lands here. They protest by driving 4 wheelers and off road vehicles on the land as an act of civil disobedience.

There was a picture of some of them in the paper today and they had signs on their vehicles that said "Just say no to people with disabilities." The sign also had a picture of a wheelchair (like on handicapped parking stalls) with a red circle around it and a red line running through it (like no smoking signs). These signs did not appear to be "home made" but were printed and identical on the 2 vehicles with signs.

WTF?

Nothing in the article about why they have a beef with ppl with disabilities.

Does anyone know why they are protesting people with disabilities? Are people with disabilities denying access to federal lands?

(My guess is this is a freeper crowd. The same ones who want to snowmobile all over public lands regardless of how loud and obnoxious they are! But I still don't get what this has to with people with disabilities.)

You just watch. They'll flip faster than Arlen Specter.

Unless they use a motor vehicle, the back country is inaccessable to them.

I'm kind of on their side, as they have a valid point, but there should be public areas that no vehicle should be allowed into, period.

There are - they are called "wilderness" areas in the NFS.

They want all areas opened up to vehicular traffic.

Some off-roader groups want all BLM land open to all vehicular traffic, with no restrictions of any kind, for anyone.

Not just handicapped users, any user.

I believe they think they can use the lack of access to the back country by handicapped citizens as a wedge issue to open those restricted federal lands to all.

It's almost a no-win situation. If the BLM restricts ORV access to all, then those that are restricted to an ORV to get to those areas are denied access 100%. Where are their rights in this?

And there are real reasons to keep all vehicles out of certain areas as they have been deemed harmful to the environment, endangered flora, fauna, and riparian rights.

There must be some form of limited ORV access granted to those that need it. Right now, it seems that the rules are all or nothing.

moves at the same rate of speed as a hiker, for their use. Sort of like a Hover-round on steroids.

I think if they want to go into the wild, the use of an SUV kinda destroys the point. And I'm guessing "no vehicles" doesn't mean "no electric wheelchairs."

Someone needs to get to work and fill this niche.

I don't agree with their logic.

Is someone making an argument if it is not handicap accessible it should be closed to all?

and desire equal acess to the land...that would be my guess. Seems self evident to me.