Helmet use and fair environmental protection rules are emerging as the top issues coming out of last week's standing committee report on safe operation of off-road vehicles.

The most surprising part of the report for some is not what it recommends, but rather something it fails to recommend: mandatory helmet use.

Responding to a voluntary survey sent out to every household in the Yukon last August, 80 per cent of Whitehorse respondents and 64 per cent of survey-takers living outside the capital said they supported helmet laws. Of those who said helmets should not be mandatory, 72 per cent said minors should be required to wear head protection.

So it left some people wondering why the committee fell short of fully supporting helmet use. Its final recommendation on the subject states: "That helmet use be mandatory when operating an off-road vehicle or snowmobile on-road. The Committee did not reach consensus on helmet requirements for off-road use.”

"The reason 76 per cent of people support helmet use is because people know. It's obvious,” Chris May, spokesperson for the Yukon Off-Road Riders Association, said today. He pointed to the fact the Yukon is the last province or territory without ATV helmet legislation.

"... The notion that your helmet will be a detriment only comes from people who don't wear helmets. I have worn a helmet every single time I have ever moved an ATV, and it has never been a detriment.”

But Lake Laberge MLA Brad Cathers heard differently. He was the one member of the committee who did not approve of a recommendation to make helmets mandatory.

"There are two main issues when it comes to helmet use,” Cathers said this morning. "One is the issue of personal freedom – at what point should the government intrude on people's lives and tell them how to behave for their own good?”

He contrasted helmet use with eating habits, and asked if the high cost of health care for individuals with heart disease or diabetes justified the government dictating what a person can or cannot eat.

"And there is the fact of certain cases where helmets may be impractical or even more unsafe than not wearing one,” he said.

He pointed to issues raised by people who wear glasses and said their lenses fog up under a helmet when riding in very cold temperatures.

Others who run snow machines said helmets reduce their ability to hear oncoming traffic when running beside the road.

Both are issues which have to be settled by the government of the day, said Cathers, and not by a nonscientific opinion survey.

"For the record, I always wear a helmet when snowmobiling and I think in most cases you should,” he added. "But it is not as simple as saying they should be mandatory at all times.”

One person who doesn't want to see the government imposing more rules on off-road vehicle users is Brian Edelman, owner of Listers Motor Sports.

"Every time we turn around, there seems to be another law, another restriction,” Edelman said Friday. "... I'm not sure what the big rush is to legislate us like we're Ontario. We're not – we have less than 40,000 people here.”

Edelman believes that more regulation will hurt businesses like his, all to appease the environmental protection camp, not in response to a real need.

"It's not as if we have this massive growth up here,” he said.

"The only thing that has changed is the fact that people want to turn this into one big park. Until we can pay our own way, we're essentially welfare bums.... I don't think we are in a position to over-legislate the Yukon and prevent (economic) growth.”

Committee member Steve Cardiff disagreed, arguing that helmet laws and mandatory training would help ATV and snowmobile dealers.

"If we're making helmets mandatory, they're going to see more helmets sold,” he said last week. "... And if you have to have roadworthy vehicles, then if anything, that's going to encourage business.

"As for restrictions on access. I don't think that's going to stop anybody from buying a machine. There's an education aspect to all this, and as business owners, they have a role to play. By being responsible in that way, by offering training as part of the package, it will actually attract more people to come to your place of business.”

As Cathers pointed out today, the majority of people who made submissions to the report were concerned with environmental issues, and responded passionately on both sides of the fence.

"Everybody's impact should be considered,” May said of what he wants to see in terms of environmental protection.

"We think that B.C. has the model in the Forest and Ranges Act, which says, ‘If you do damage, you are responsible for reparations.'”

The committee acknowledged as much in its final recommendation, which urges lawmakers to "consider separate environmental protection legislation that targets and penalizes environmental damage rather than restricting specific users.”

"This issue is very polarized, very emotional and we have tried a much as possible to come to a compromise,” Cathers said of the report. "I would really encourage people to read all the recommendations for themselves so they can participate when it comes to actually writing the legislation.”

The Yukon is the only province or territory without laws specifically governing the operation and use of off-road vehicles.