Sometimes you wonder if the MNR and NOTO really comprehend what they're doing because they are so blatant and what they are really referring to when they say they are protecting "remote-tourism values".

The document here written by NOTO says they do understand because they state that the public "generally speaking" has the right to access and enjoy their public lands and waters but the MNR can get around it by closing roads…value as referred to them is being able to charge up to three times their competitors…http://www.noto.net/images/new…..icyPpr.pdf

In making management decisions regarding trail development and use on Crown Land, it is important to

understand how recreational users value various kinds of outdoor experience. Studies of the tourism

industry have clearly shown that when a guest pays to go on a fishing trip in northern Ontario, he will

pay 2 ½ to 3 times more for a remote fly- in experience than he will pay for an otherwise identical

experience he can drive to. Clearly, “remoteness” is a measurable natural resource value that should be

managed systematically.

Although the Public Lands Act generally permits people to access public lands and waters, provisions in

the Act allow MNR impose restrictions on public use forest access roads. When these issues are

discussed, both MNR and many users describe the issue as one of “access”.