I didn't say I disagreed with closing the back country. I think some have a serious lack of understanding what constitutes back country.
.
I define it as roadless areas where you have to walk or ride in on a four-legger. And you can get at least a few miles back in away from motorized access.
If you don't disagree with closing that kind of country, what's the rationale for closing it? It's not like any govt. employees have to be there to let you in or take your money. So who's being endangered by leaving the backcountry open?
Even people in the government who support all the restrictions will acknowledge that people still need to get outside for exercise. Where's a safer place to do that than backcountry?
