Does Tread Lightly stop at the border?

[TheRoadie]

First all the auto manufacturers plaster pics of thier trucks doing donuts in the mud, hauling butt across the desert and general mayhem style driving.

Even moreso the Monster Truck mags, and even 4 Wheeler and the rest. I think only Overland Journal is the exception in this universe of sleaze.

Any mag that shows a JUMPING truck on the cover is suspect in my eyes, and those subscriptions are not going to be renewed anymore.

 

[Redline]

I have a similar view about your point of concentrated use and “Parks”.

I have often said, it you want to ruin a natural wonder or site "Make It A Something"

With any designation short of a Wilderness Area (of which I'm not a fan because of the the very limited uses) there is at least increased interest and use. The next step is better roads, signs, and sometimes pavement. Better access allows more people to visit more easily and concentrated use occurs. Yosemite and Yellowstone/Teton Nat'l Parks are good examples of excessive, concentrated use. The south rim of the Grand Canyon may be another. The easy access ‘somethings’ are used to death with much of the rest of the area ignored.

Proper dispersed use seems like a better experience for both those visiting and the land. The operative word is proper. I think most if not all here on The Portal are aware and careful enough as to not cause undue wear and tear on our lands.

.........

Now having said that, these are my thoughts on trials. Well actually parks in General. Although it is better to have confins on where people can drive or hike or ride horses or even paddle in our wild lands. Parks are really bad for the environment. You are basically taking a dedicated area and concentrating a large amount of usage to it. Soil compaction is a serious problem, erosion cased by bike tires, heavy lugged hiking shoes, and tires are all issues. Importing foriegn dirt to make picnic areas like shale for example creates high spots that rain will wash to areas not intended to recive the dirt. etc. SO IMO it is crazy how sensative Park managers are to trail wear and tear. In a way I see dedicated trails as write offs. I mean sure you want to maintain a trial so it ooks good and has minimal impact on the surrounding area however you establish a trail to have a dedicated wear and tear area. I think it is terrible how many closures there are for the OHV becuase by closing trails you increase wear and tear on the remaining ones. Chances are that reguardless of tread lightly tactics the sure number of hikers, bikers horses, or ohv users on the fewer and fewer trials will lead to overusage and significant trail damage will occure even if everyone was playing by the rules. This is compounded as every year more and more people are discovering the outdoors, It goes against all logic to decrease the amount of trails when participation is increasing. Example Ocala national forest has always allowed cross country travel. Now they not only took that waay which they should never have allowed in the first place, but they went from 1100 mile sof trails to 150 mile sof trails. They still provide no maps of the trials that are legal and are now talking about closing more of the remaining 150 miles to trail damage. Well it is a no brainger when the #1 OHV national forest in the state clese 90% of it's trails the little bit that is left is going to have over use issues. Plus if the rangers catch you in mud at all even if it is on the trial you will get a $500 fine! this is crazy.

Findng a balance is difficult. However practicing the aspects of tread lightly is something you should do reguardless of political borders.

 

[TheRoadie]

I have often said, it you want to ruin a natural wonder or site "Make It A Something"

Hmmmm. Makes me think of the way cavers have their "sacrificial caves" they allow the yahoos of the world to know about, and the "good" caves that are kept confidential.

 

[viter]

Any mag that shows a JUMPING truck on the cover is suspect in my eyes, and those subscriptions are not going to be renewed anymore.

I agree on the whole advertising thing of showing one things and saying another, but I hope you are not trying to say that JUMPING a truck in general is bad for the environment... if you are landing on a dune in the middle of the desert or back onto the dirt road - what's the problem?

 

[TheRoadie]

...I hope you are not trying to say that JUMPING a truck in general is bad for the environment...

Nah. I was mixing up two ideas and shouldn't have in this thread about other things. My personal expedition-style driving, restricted by what I drive and carry and how I want to build it, doesn't involve jumping. And I subscribe to about 25 magazines and need to cut out 5 or 6 of them. Rock crawling, baja bashing, mudding, the Hammers, and Top Truck Challenges aren't my bag, and mags with those sorts of things on the cover are going to be looked at with more scrutiny for cancelling. My stereotype is that sort of magazine is also more likely to include pictures of winching with no tree straps, scraping trees, damaging desert habitat, stirring up stream silt, noise polluting with excessive unmuffled engines, landing on trees after a jump with no visibility, etc. Perhaps I'm extending a false stereotype to the magazine subscribers, that owners who build trucks that jump are more likely to be non-Tread-Lightly people. Not ExPo readers, of course, but those redneck mullet-head mudder yahoos. [just kidding!] Boy, it sure is easy to let the prejudices take over - thanks for the reminder.

Maybe Scott should add a test to the OJ tent and fridge reviews how they withstand repeated jumping?

 

[viter]

got it!

Maybe Scott should add a test to the OJ tent and fridge reviews how they withstand repeated jumping?