Floatplane argument doesn’t fly

Regarding the disabled veterans’ lawsuit to allow floatplanes on lakes in the Forest Preserve [“Floatplane ban challenged,” November/December 2010]:
First, wilderness with motorized vehicles is not wilderness. This should be kept a separate issue from a person’s right of access to public lands within the Park and should also be kept separate from the American’s With Disabilities Act and their rights to access public lands.
Second, the plaintiffs do not mention anything about people who don’t have the cash to hire floatplane pilots, whether they are disabled or not. Apparently they favor access by individuals that can pay—which is far from everybody.

Finally, I felt Michael Washburn has a perfect point in his “It’s Debatable” commentary when he states, “All citizens have a right to enjoy wilderness, but they do not have the right to deprive others of that enjoyment.” Should Baker’s logic be extended to the High Peaks as well? Helicopter access to Santanoni Peak or Allen Mountain or even Lake Tear of the Clouds for disabled individuals? I don’t think so.
Dana C. Rohleder, Port Kent

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *