 |
 |
SCORRSUMMIT COUNTY OFF-ROAD RIDERS, COLORADO |
||
SCORR has been in the local news! (See "News" for specifics)
It has not been all positive, because after over 25 years of hard work, countless public meetings, thousands of volunteer hours, and complete transparency, it comes down to a few people saying, "We don't want motorcycles or ATV's in our backyard." (A note about our backyard: 75% of Summit County is USDA Forest Service, with 25% of THAT designated as wilderness and another percentage of THAT ready to be designated as "road-less".) Our History: SCORR started in the 1980's as SCORE, or the "Summit County Off-Road Enthusiasts" when the county did a land trade that included the existing riding area in Dillon. SCORE members worked with the County Commissioners in public meetings and were given permission to ride in these areas, but because of liability fears, the county did not make it an official OHV area. It was and it is still legal to ride there, but we cannot do improvements, like smoothing the motocross track. SCORR was reborn in the 1990's because of a "Closed Unless Marked Open" rule that was sprung on us (behind closed doors) We fought it and the result has been lawsuits and limbo for all concerned. We have since worked with local, county, state* and federal officials to make a travel management plan that we can all live with and enforce. *Colorado State Sen. Dan Gibbs and Rep. Christine Scanlan are trying to block years of our work by trying to block a State OHV trail improvement grant for the Tenderfoot or Dillon area, that comes directly from our $25.25 yearly OHV registrations. Since it's our money, please ensure that our pile of letters sits higher on their desk than those who do not pay these OHV fees, with an informative letter or e-mail:
|
||
SCORR is Colorado's OHV CLUB OF THE YEAR!SCORR is now a 501c3 non-profit and can get grant money for trail improvements. This includes trails and parking areas for hiking, biking, horseback riding and even...OHV's! SCORR Now has a Blog on myspace: Click Here CONGRATULATIONS!!!!Rebecca Jeche has stepped up to become a trail maintenance crew leader – Thanks Rebecca! She joins Greg Guras, Dave Love, and Chuck Ginsberg in increasing our capability to get trail maintenance done to preserve our riding privilege. We're proud that our very own Chuck Ginsberg received Summit County’s Volunteer of the Year Award for leading SCORR’s three trail maintenance efforts in summer 2007 (and 2008), and continues to work with the county agencies in several other capacities. Thanks to Chuck for his leadership and all the hard work he put into protecting the right for the rest of us to ride our OHVs in Summit County. |
||
You can help to Protect our right to ride By Joining SCORR and Becoming members of these organizations:The Colorado Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition (COHVCO)The Blue Ribbon Coalition |
||
Quick Links:Current White River National Forest service Conditions USFS Dillon Ranger District (DRD) OHV trails and maps Friends of DRD Volunteer Calender for Summit County, CO |
||
SCORR Endorses the AMA's support of helmets.The AMA's position in support of voluntary helmet use: "The American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) has always encouraged the use of helmets, gloves, sturdy footwear, and protective garments in general, as part of a comprehensive motorcycle safety program to help reduce injuries and fatalities in the event of a motorcycle accident. The Association will not oppose laws requiring helmets for minor motorcycle riders and passengers. It believes that many young motorcyclists and passengers may lack the maturity to make an informed decision regarding the use of motorcycle helmets. Although the Association strongly encourages helmet use by all motorcyclists, it maintains a long-standing fundamental belief that adults should continue to have the right to voluntarily decide when to wear a helmet....The Association further believes that helmet use alone is insufficient to ensure a motorcyclist's safety." Full Version of the AMA's position on helmet use
Colorado Helmet Law:Requires a person under 18 years of age who is an operator of a motorcycle or motorized bicycle or who is a passenger on such vehicles, to wear a protective helmet that is designed according to certain specifications; sets the penalty and surcharge for failing to wear the helmet; sets an additional surcharge for each violation to be deposited in the state Traumatic Brain Injury Trust Fund. Facts:80% of motorcycle crashes are fatal vs. 30% of automobile crashes. $10,122 average treatment with helmet vs. $30,365 without a helmet. A helmet reduces the chance of a fatal injury in an accident by 29%. A helmet reduces the chance of a debilitating brain injury in an accident by 67%. Sources: Journal Of Trauma; Accident Analysis and Prevention; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Urban Myths:"Claims have been made that helmets increase the risk of neck injury and reduce peripheral vision and hearing, but there is no credible evidence to support these arguments. A study by J.P. Goldstein often is cited by helmet opponents as evidence that helmets cause neck injuries, allegedly by adding to head mass in a crash. More than a dozen studies have refuted Goldstein's findings. A study reported in the Annals of Emergency Medicine in 1994 analyzed 1,153 motorcycle crashes in four midwestern states and determined that "helmets reduce head injuries without an increased occurrence of spinal injuries in motorcycle trauma." Orsay, E.M.; Muelleman, R.L.; Peterson, T.D.; Jurisic, D.H.; Kosasih, J.B.; and Levy, P. 1994. Motorcycle helmets and spinal injuries: dispelling the myth. Annals of Emergency Medicine 23:802-06."Regarding claims that helmets obstruct vision, studies show full-coverage helmets provide only minor restrictions in horizontal peripheral vision. A 1994 study found that wearing helmets restricts neither the ability to hear horn signals nor the likelihood of seeing a vehicle in an adjacent lane prior to initiating a lane change. To compensate for any restrictions in lateral vision, riders increased their head rotation prior to a lane change. There were no differences in hearing thresholds under three helmet conditions: no helmet, partial coverage, and full coverage. The noise generated by a motorcycle is so loud that any reduction in hearing capability that may result from wearing a helmet is inconsequential. Sound loud enough to be heard above the engine can be heard when wearing a helmet." |
