People for the ethical treatment of Geezers needed
Last updated 5/29/2019 at 9:26am
The stated reasons for regulating access to Geezer Beach seem contrived and
sophomoric. If you accept the premise that vehicle traffic on the beach poses a threat to public safety, you could argue that boat ramps and public parks have greater potential for incidental events. The (bureau) should produce valid evidence to support their position. If there is an underlying reason for restricting access, let’s hear it.
People who visit Geezer Beach for recreation are not hoodlums. They go there to enjoy nature, fish and socialize. Many choose the site because they are elderly and/or disabled.
For some, it is the only place that accommodates their needs. They tend to be friendly, courteous and helpful. Most are happy to share conversation, fishing tips and would oppose nefarious activity. In my opinion, they police themselves.
It is not readily apparent to people why they should be prevented from driving to the water’s edge. The rocky beach provides good support and traction for vehicle traffic. If any mishap should occur, others would willingly assist. To my knowledge, vehicles are not abandoned or rolled into the lake. To get to the site, you have to drive past government facilities. There are probably numerous surveillance cameras that would no doubt observe any inappropriate activity.
According to an article in the May 9 issue of the Wilbur Register, the (bureau) claims ownership of the land in question. There should be a distinction made between ownership and stewardship. In the democratic republic, as I understand it, public lands belong to the citizens of the United States. Government agencies are assigned authority to manage the assets in the best interest of the residents. That responsibility includes recreational pursuits. Furthermore, individuals with disabilities should receive adequate consideration. Elderly and/or disabled people fishing at Geezer Beach do not pose any threat to public safety.
Lowell J. Moore