ICT Sledder
Active member
Saw on one of the Facebook pages that I follow for Keweenaw area news and whatnot that a group by the name of the North Woods Conservancy is fundraising to buy a 546 acre parcel of land around and to include a substantial chunk of the Gratiot River:
http://www.keweenawreport.com/news/...kWOD1lCE8MRFIZWV5hbGesAraymfHfGFfS34mdpsMw8Bw
This isn't a piece of land that would jeopardize established sled trails, but since this purchase would connect with other parcels owned by conservation groups to effectively form a pretty substantial combined acreage, it could potentially lock out various land users and outdoor enthusiasts from a fairly substantial geographic swath of land, save for one or two "acceptable" uses traditionally allowed by groups like this. I'm not sure if this land as it sits today is accessible for summer ORV trails, or off trail stuff for winter use, but I'm sure some of you can look at the maps in the above link and know.
There's almost zero development demand and profitable use of land in the Keweenaw (which is reflected in the LOL-low $2500/ac sale price here, which even that figure is really high for the peninsula - due to the lake and river frontage) so I'm not sure what imagined threat they see in the either short or long-term; it's basically just about control and a long-view plan. A slow amass of as much land as possible, so that access and use can be dictated forever. Buy one square mile chunks of land (about what this buy is) over enough years, and with strategic geographic linking in mind, and eventually a group can shut down entire trail systems (among other outdoor uses).
I mean most sledders would consider themselves by definition to be land conservationists - meaning we don't want it all turned into subdivisions or solar fields or oil patches or even a bunch of blown out ORV trails overlapping each other every 50 feet - but land conservationists in the traditional sense aren't friendly in any manner towards the way folks like us enjoy our time outdoors. Their end game is a slow restriction of access, starting with the obvious, and then when even foot traffic exceeds their thresholds of acceptability even that will severely be cut back. It's "conservation" such that economic 1%ers in the largest metros in the US, who don't actually spend their recreational time in the outdoors, can sleep well at night so that plebeians like us, who do actually spend out recreational time outdoors, have less and less options.
Not trying to sound too alarmist, but stuff like this is a slow drip in a land access fight outdoor users like us will eventually lose. Death by a thousand cuts.
http://www.keweenawreport.com/news/...kWOD1lCE8MRFIZWV5hbGesAraymfHfGFfS34mdpsMw8Bw
This isn't a piece of land that would jeopardize established sled trails, but since this purchase would connect with other parcels owned by conservation groups to effectively form a pretty substantial combined acreage, it could potentially lock out various land users and outdoor enthusiasts from a fairly substantial geographic swath of land, save for one or two "acceptable" uses traditionally allowed by groups like this. I'm not sure if this land as it sits today is accessible for summer ORV trails, or off trail stuff for winter use, but I'm sure some of you can look at the maps in the above link and know.
There's almost zero development demand and profitable use of land in the Keweenaw (which is reflected in the LOL-low $2500/ac sale price here, which even that figure is really high for the peninsula - due to the lake and river frontage) so I'm not sure what imagined threat they see in the either short or long-term; it's basically just about control and a long-view plan. A slow amass of as much land as possible, so that access and use can be dictated forever. Buy one square mile chunks of land (about what this buy is) over enough years, and with strategic geographic linking in mind, and eventually a group can shut down entire trail systems (among other outdoor uses).
I mean most sledders would consider themselves by definition to be land conservationists - meaning we don't want it all turned into subdivisions or solar fields or oil patches or even a bunch of blown out ORV trails overlapping each other every 50 feet - but land conservationists in the traditional sense aren't friendly in any manner towards the way folks like us enjoy our time outdoors. Their end game is a slow restriction of access, starting with the obvious, and then when even foot traffic exceeds their thresholds of acceptability even that will severely be cut back. It's "conservation" such that economic 1%ers in the largest metros in the US, who don't actually spend their recreational time in the outdoors, can sleep well at night so that plebeians like us, who do actually spend out recreational time outdoors, have less and less options.
Not trying to sound too alarmist, but stuff like this is a slow drip in a land access fight outdoor users like us will eventually lose. Death by a thousand cuts.
Last edited:
