View Full Version : Hiking is more damaging than ATVs? AT should be ATV trail!
hillsidedigger
11-11-2007, 08:57
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact, even less so than hikers. Hikers spend more time in the wilderness, impacting it much more heavily than a day's worth of responsible riding. They leave more waste, burn local wood and deface public property."
hillsidedigger
11-11-2007, 08:59
Link for previous post:
http://media.www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/storage/paper244/news/2007/11/09/Opinion/Let-The.Public.Use.The.Land-3091110.shtml
Yes, and the moon is made out of cheese.
nitewalker
11-11-2007, 09:06
there is also a new thought out there that alaska is now warmer than africa. hmmmmm, go figure....
This is not a good justification for your being too lazy to WALK!!!!!!!
This is not a good justification for your being too lazy to WALK!!!!!!!
That's the issue really. The debate is framed as "we should be able to go to these places too." Well, they can. They just have to walk there like everyone else.
SGT Rock
11-11-2007, 09:25
That's the issue really. The debate is framed as "we should be able to go to these places too." Well, they can. They just have to walk there like everyone else.
Yep.
Big problems on a section of the BMT where some off road group has broken up barriers to get around them or thru them and ride on the hiking trails. Tears up the trail and the barriers. Talking with some of the FS guys the mudholes they make around there sure do look like tearing stuff up, but they turn out to be the best places to catch them as he set up right beside it one day next to a no ATV sign and they all continued to haul ass right for the big mud puddle where he promply wrote them tickets. Talk about hunting a baited field.
So in other words - tearing up trail, destroying the barriers, and undoing countless man hours of labor is less destructive than walking through an area in 8 hours.
As a maintainer - I'll take the hikers any day. At least you can hear yourself think when you are around them.
Tipi Walter
11-11-2007, 09:27
This is all about a human's fascination and addiction to motorized traffic and wheeled movement. Having millions of miles of traffic roads I guess is not good enough to feed their addiction, they demand little road paths in areas normally closed to cars and other vehicles. Why? Do they like exploration? Just walk!
ATV's really tear up a trail, just look what they do on steep inclines, and they do make roads much wider and deeper than any foot traffic, and the worst thing of it is THE NOISE POLLUTION! Who wants to be out hiking and backpacking and hear the whine of a gasoline engine, once again, where no engine belongs? Don't we have enough of car noise, chainsaws, jet noise, motorcycle screams, as it is? Silence is a big reason I go to the woods on my long backpacking trips, and even then I'm bombarded with near constant jet airplane roar. Having a noisy ATV zoom by, well, I might as well dump the tent and hiking boots and stand on the Interstate hitchiking.
Quiet recreation. That's more my style.
Lone Wolf
11-11-2007, 09:37
flying across a frozen lake on a snowmobile at 100 mph is some fun stuff!
SGT Rock
11-11-2007, 09:38
flying across a frozen lake on a snowmobile at 100 mph is some fun stuff!
Wait until it thaws - I hear that is even mo' better.
She doesn't seem to have put much effort into backing up her opinions with examples or facts. Her wording also seems to fall flat.
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact"
Maybe I'm being picky but wouldn't the description "responsible off-roading" imply low impact? Shouldn't it be: Contrary to popular belief, off-roading can make a very small impact when done responsibly.
Also
Even with my limited knowledge of Utah I know that
"We have hundreds of miles of undeveloped land" hardly begins to describe the undeveloped areas in Utah (even if "miles" was an accurate way to measure area).
And with all the hiking trails, old mining roads and other under developed tracks on all the public land in Utah just how significant is closing 468 miles or even "thousands" (how many thousands?) of miles of trails? I guess it would depend on where the trails access, something she wasn't specific about.
I just wonder if she really understands the scope of these potential trail closures. I certainly didn't gain a clear understanding from reading her opinion piece.
SGT Rock
11-11-2007, 09:51
You are right on that - I thought the same thing when I read it. I imagine she hasn't spent a lot of time around hikers if she thinks that ORV travel is less impacting than hiking. Not a well founded position she takes at all - but there are people already lining up to support her.
I posted a comment on the thing. I reckon y'all can figure out which one is me fairly easy.
Flush2wice
11-11-2007, 10:17
I think it was bait- notice the "winky" emoticon.
The local ATVers here like to use the argument, "but we've been doing for year. It's our right." They have backed this up with some petroglifs discovered on rock cliffs along the Fundy shore which clearly show early man hunting mastadon with spears from the back of ATVs. Of course these are the same folks that deny aboriginal title and treaty rights. Then again, many of the natives aren't all that responsible with the ATVs either. Mostly I think its an age thing. Most folks seem to be responsible, once they hit 60 or 70.
Our town land trust has had a Maine Conservation Corps crew here for the past week repairing damage caused by ATVs to an old road we had used as a trail before the machines made it became impassable.
The machines had created 700 running feet of mud holes that the crew bridged with 4 by 6 inch rough sawn planks, restoring the area for pedestrian use for the first time in a decade.
The crew is part of a youth employment and training program. The work was paid for by the land trust with the help of a federal grant financed by gasoline taxes.
A few years ago we had worked out a plan with the local ATV club under which we would allow use of the road by machines if the club would repair past damage and maintain it to a level suitable for pedestrian and machine use. The club talked a great game but didn't do an ounce of work.
Allowing the machines on the AT would quickly destroy the trail.
Weary
buckowens
11-11-2007, 11:14
Here in WV we have a trail system known as the "Hatfield-McCoy Trail" (probably soon to be renamed the Senator Robert C. Byrd Trail system ;) ...just kidding), and it is a series of hundreds of miles of trails. I have ridden these trails and found it to be quite a bit of fun. The trails are routinely changed to limit the impact, but boy there sure is an impact nonetheless. It is nice to separate the two activities of riding and walking IMO.
probably soon to be renamed the Senator Robert C. Byrd Trail system ;) ...just kidding Another highway system in good 'ole WV?!?!?:banana
buckowens
11-11-2007, 11:26
Another highway system in good 'ole WV?!?!?:banana
It drives my wife crazy as everything in Huntington is named after him. Unless someone pulls a "Weekend at Bernie's", WV is cut off from the funding when he dies. I joke about everything being named after him, as he has been good to WV.
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact, even less so than hikers. Hikers spend more time in the wilderness, impacting it much more heavily than a day's worth of responsible riding. They leave more waste, burn local wood and deface public property."
OK, I'll bite at this obvious troll.
Where does one find this species referred to as the Responsible Off-Roader?
OK, I'll bite at this obvious troll.
Where does one find this species referred to as the Responsible Off-Roader?Notice the wink and the link:-?
Notice the wink and the link:-?
Up in the headline. Missed it. My bad.
Still want to know where to find the Responsible Off-Roader.
SGT Rock
11-11-2007, 11:36
Up in the headline. Missed it. My bad.
Still want to know where to find the Responsible Off-Roader.
I's a realative thing. Like saying you were robbed by a very nice man.
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact, even less so than hikers. Hikers spend more time in the wilderness, impacting it much more heavily than a day's worth of responsible riding. They leave more waste, burn local wood and deface public property."
Incredibly stupid observation.
cowboy nichols
11-11-2007, 12:11
Any ATV that can go tru Mahoosuc Notch could be alowed LOL And I don't mean in parts!!
OK, I'll bite at this obvious troll.
Where does one find this species referred to as the Responsible Off-Roader?
Actually, there is such a thing.
And I will add, that hikers, en masse, can do tremendous damage to natural areas. That's why it's so important to stay on the trail. I visited the Billy Goat Trail off the C&O Canal in Maryland a few weeks ago and saw the work that Dr. Jeff Marion is doing to try and keep folks from trampling the 50 species of rare & native plants found in the area. As we were there, a certain small percentage of folks were disregarding the signs to stay on the trail, and I saw at least a half dozen dogs on a trail that was clearly designated - NO DOGS ALLOWED.
My point? We can all do better to limit our impact on natural areas. The ATV is at the top of the food chain however. It's a different animal.
dessertrat
11-11-2007, 13:26
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact, even less so than hikers. Hikers spend more time in the wilderness, impacting it much more heavily than a day's worth of responsible riding. They leave more waste, burn local wood and deface public property."
Unfortunately, only about 2% of the ATV riders I know are "responsible".
Cookerhiker
11-11-2007, 13:33
Any ATV that can go tru Mahoosuc Notch could be alowed LOL And I don't mean in parts!!
You beat me to it.:D I was going to say if they can ride their ATV up the north side of Moosilauke and the Webster Cliff Trail, they can have the whole AT.
Dakota Dan
11-11-2007, 13:36
Mountain Bikes must not do any damage either if ATV's don't.
There is a section between Overmountain Shelter and Mountaineer Shelter that those "Responsible" ATVer's have broken through a repaired fence to make there trail on the AT. I'm glad I didn't have to share the trail with them when they were slinging rocks and dirt :eek:
Bootstrap
11-11-2007, 16:12
Some of the most awe-inspiring places are the most remote, requiring days of hiking.
Shouldn't that read, "permitting days of hiking"?
Jonathan
The quote in the previous post shouldn't be attributed to me. Its from the original article. I didn't even use it in my first post.
Bootstrap
11-11-2007, 17:06
I see Sgt. Rock responded to this article at the paper's web site:
http://tinyurl.com/36qnhe
So I added my own comment:
http://tinyurl.com/2locm8
Incidentally, it's a student newspaper.
Jonathan
We have perennial debates here about ATV and snowmobile use in the Green Mtn. National Forest. Snowmobiling is huge up here, and generally is done responsibly, and with limited impact, because the deep snow protects the ground from damage. But once the snow is gone, so are the snowmobiles, and you're left with an old road through the woods, usually one that had been there for generations.
ATV's on the other hand, rip up the ground and any vegetation, and leave lasting, deep, mud filled scars - IMO their use should be very limited to specific trails. ATVers should be allowed their fun, too, within reason.
My biggest gripe about either is the noise. A hiker, snowshoer, or cross-country skier can do their thing 20 feet from you, and you'd never know they were there. ATV's and snowmobiles can be heard for miles.
Jim Adams
11-11-2007, 22:44
You guys are soooo blind! Don't fight them, work with them!
Let them keep, develope and maintain the trails that they have now instead of making new trails in new areas.
Yes they can be noisy, yes they can cause erosion but so do horses! Try to fight that bunch about trail use.
Teach them how to correctly build trails to cause the least impact but don't try to shut them out...in the end you may not like the outcome!
Scenario: You see Senator, Congressman, Judge hundreds of thousands of ATV's are sold every year in America so obviously the general public is truely in love with off road travel. A collapse of this industry could in the long run be catastrophic to the economy not only due to the sales of the ATV's but also the ancillary items such as helmets, protective clothing, accessories, trucks and trailers to carry them, mechanics and sales jobs, gasoline and fees.
Now you see Senator, Congressman, Judge, there are only a few hands full
of hikers out there compared to our masses which causes a major problem with the amount of litigation that occurrs in our country. It can be truely detrimental to having fun if you are constantly worried about coming around a corner and hitting one of these hikers and being sued when they should have been wearing blaze orange head to toe and a loud "beeper" so that we knew there was a hiker in the area. So what we are asking is that hiking be outlawed in this area for the safty of all involved.
Don't think that it could happen?
Drive down all of your local roads on a weekend and count how many vehicles have ATV's in / on them and then count the number of backpacks that you see!
Hikers a little out numbered?
Look, I'm an offroad motorcyclist and although I do believe that Quads are the devils own invention and I also believe that motorcycles cause less damage than horses, that is not the issue.
I also do not want motorized vehicles OR horses allowed into any NEW areas of wilderness. What is already roadless should stay roadless but to talk about it and not realize the minority that hikers represent is foolish.
Work with them to keep them where they are or you just might awaken a sleeping giant!!!
geek
Jim Adams
11-11-2007, 22:56
You beat me to it.:D I was going to say if they can ride their ATV up the north side of Moosilauke and the Webster Cliff Trail, they can have the whole AT.
Again you guys are so blind!
I ride a motorcycle sport competition known as observed trials. I at 54 years old can ride OVER my van. The sections of competition at these events look just like the Notch...the object is not to make it thru, it is to make it thru without putting your feet down. Moosilauke and Webster Cliffs would be no problem. So you see Cookerhiker, if you were in charge of the trail, my next AT trip would be a THRU RIDE!
I don't mean to negatively get down on hikers...I am also one of you...but you need to understand just what you are up against. Laws that have been in effect for generations have been changed so that deer hunters can now use their quads to get into and out of the woods. They had enough "pull" in the area to vote out the opposing legislators and get things changed.
Try to work to keep them where they are NOW!:-?
geek
trippedoutnatureboy
11-11-2007, 23:09
I think ATV,s on the AT is not at all a good Idea and my personal opinion further more is that
ATV vs Hikers and the impact they have on the environment is not even a subject that need be debated. The number of hikers that use the AT during any given year and there waste ,impact on the enviroment and the acusation or assumption that hikers deface property being compared to The open possibility For ATV to be riden on the trail is Crazy the weight of an ATV is probably 3 times that of a human with a backpack the tread on there tires two to three times the depth and size of your average hiking tread then let us not forget that these recreational vehichles burn gasoline and emit fumes into the air and once over they could be leaking other forms of petrol such as oil ,lubricant and the above mentioned GAsoline I agree that the LNT way of backpacking is often not followed by some people who may be out for a weekend party on the trail but most seriuos backpackers and people who genuinely love Nature Do follow this to the best of there ability and there fore the impact of the masses of this type of backpacker outways the weekend party warrior the above mentioned facts about ATV are present even in the most respectful and careful ATV operator these polutants and impact Regaurdless again just my opinion but the AT is a footpath and its original purpose just that to be walked so ATV and there loud roaring engines might Ruin anothers journey on otherwise peaceful and serene wilderness walk
trippedoutnatureboy
11-11-2007, 23:16
I must also stae that I to Ride Dirt Bikes and ATV and own a few of each And love to ride them in the woods were Trails and roads have already been established For the Specific use of Motor powered vehichles so dont confuse me with an environmentalsit Wacko just a person with an opinion founded on the beleifs of the laws and rules already in place to protect the hiking Trails that are already in danger of being lost it is hard enough to get some private landowners to allow people on foot to cross there property let alone a fleet of ATV
IMHO, hikers go into the "wilderness" to appreciate it.
ORVrs go into the "wilderness" to
1) Enjoy their machines.
2) OVERCOME nature's "obstacles".
BTW: A spinning tire can dig a hole in soft earth MUCH faster than a lugged sole.
Tennessee Viking
11-11-2007, 23:55
Then explain Bishop Hollow. Why is there there is a set of tire ruts on the trail.
Jim Adams
11-12-2007, 00:01
Tinker,
When I ride my bikes in the woods it is to enjoy the woods. I can enjoy my bike in my yard and you will never overcome nature.
geek
Jim, you aren't the only exception out there, but you are probably one of the few. If you really do love the woods and ride responsibly, ride on (on designated trails, of course).
Jim Adams
11-12-2007, 00:20
Tinker,
Yes, my idea here is not to let bike / ATV riders go anywhere they please but to protect, seriously protect what we currently have for "hiking only".
The only easy way without the possibilities of alot of backfires is to work WITH the motorcycle / ATV population and "guide" them to a satisfactory outcome.
Being overpowered is the alternative!
geek
Frolicking Dinosaurs
11-12-2007, 04:32
You are right on that - I thought the same thing when I read it. I imagine she hasn't spent a lot of time around hikers if she thinks that ORV travel is less impacting than hiking. Not a well founded position she takes at all - but there are people already lining up to support her.
I think it was bait- notice the "winky" emoticon.Seems the writer in the article feels it is some sort of inalienable right to be able to get out in the woods without the work.:rolleyes: She cites no proof for her statement that hikers cause more damage than ATVs - likely because she couldn't find a source willing to say such a ridiculous thing. Anyone who has ever been out in the woods and seen the damage done by ATV & OTV knows how laughable the premise of the article really is.
As for the poster and trolling - very likely. Checked out previous posts and found Freedom.org (an on-line publication of Environmental Conservation Organization) is cited repeatedly as a serious source on environmental issues - something which doesn't do a lot for this poster's credibility IMO.
The Environmental Conservation Organization, Inc. was founded in 1988 when 17 national organizations met in Chicago to devise a strategy to protect private property rights from erosion by excessive environmental regulations. These 17 national organizations were groups that are fighting to keep regulations from being passed to keep cattle grazing from destroying water supplies, to keep big oil from having to comply with environmental regulations like staying out of the unspoiled property in Alaska, etc. Basically, the organization fights for the right of businesses and people to destroy the environment under the misguided idea that being allowed to do so is a constitutional right.
I enjoy serious and spirited discussion of finding a balance between conservation and personal rights, but bring solid info - not op ed pieces and an e-zine that is the mouthpiece for anti-conservation efforts - into the discussion.
Seems the writer in the article feels it is some sort of inalienable right to be able to get out in the woods without the work.:rolleyes:
Nearly everyone does, which is why there are road systems through so many places that serve no infrastructural purpose, such as national parks; pork belly projects are a different story. Power accessible trails suck if you don't have motor propelling you.
"Contrary to popular belief, responsible off-roading makes a very small impact, even less so than hikers. Hikers spend more time in the wilderness, impacting it much more heavily than a day's worth of responsible riding. They leave more waste, burn local wood and deface public property."
Horse crap!
The only outdoor motor sport I think that has the least impact on the land is snowmobiling. I think that is. Because most everything is covered by ice and snow. When i lived up in Wyoming and Montana I enjoyed this sport very much.
Hiking has a far less impact on the trail and you know it.........;)
taildragger
11-12-2007, 09:17
I used to do some big time 4-wheeling in my old jeep scrambler before I rolled and sold it. Man that was some fun, if it weren't so expensive I'd get back into it.
But as for responsible riding, I think its about staying on the rocks. I was a rockcrawler and would never do mud, making big ruts just never made sense to me, nor did the hours of cleaning that it required and the money of broken parts).
And there are groups of responsible ORV's out there. Pirate4x4.com has a few, most the the jeep groups have been responsible, and all practice tread lightly ethics.
ATVs though always furiated me, they were like ants. It would be really annoying to start descending down a steep large hill to have ATVs come flying all around you. That would freak me out, I always worried about hitting them. They were also the groups that usually dug holes in the mud and ran off the trails (mainly cause jeeps were too big to get into these areas). This may have also been because they weren't with an organized group or competition, they were more likely to be the drunk rednecks having fun and busting skulls. Sure, there were a few in the IHV Scout categories that would fit that description, but not too many.
2587
Yea, right, hardly any impact. Bullsh-t. Janice Kopaunik can't tell a portion of her lower backside from a hole in the ground.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2503604050263511129&q=atv+riding&total=2721&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9
No recreational use of atv's or ohv's should be allowed on any hiking trails. Period!
The Park Service has problems with illegal ATV use in the maritime forest section and other places along the Mountains to Sea Trail here. (Recreational ATV not allowed in park.) They put up signs, put out warnings to locals who have atv's and patrol impacted areas. Everything is cool for a few months, then junior or somebody hops on the noise maker and heads for and through the woods. Not straight through, but in large sweeping circles, small tight circles, S-turns, back and forth, up sandy hills, down the sandy hills, across the face of sandy hills, through marsh, brush and bush, wetland...you know, all the places atv riders dream of riding over and through. With little or no thought that they are destroying natural areas, driving away wildlife and killing native plant life.
Of course, a Park Ranger or somebody like me will find out what's going on...hours, days or weeks later, when it's too late.
One adult on a ATV can rip up more sandy trail and forest floor in an hour than can be repaired in a month, if ever. Don't even talk to me about what one kid can do in an hour. And don't tell me kids never ride without adult supervision. That's just more Bullsh-t. Adult supervision means there's at least, at the very least, twice as much damage when daddy goes along on his bigger digger.
No impact? Less impact? What a load of crap.
Jim Adams
11-12-2007, 09:21
Anyone who has ever been out in the woods and seen the damage done by ATV & OTV knows how laughable the premise of the article really is.
That is true but the problem is that 1. the people that haven't been out in the woods don't know any better and 2. far more people have been out in the woods on ATV's than not on ATV's.
So if you are a legislator, to adequately serve your constituents, you go with the numbers. Now that same wilderness is in trouble. I love backpacking and I love bike riding but the idea of what the future holds for our wilderness scares me at times. Backpackers are the minority in this equation. There is a reason that there is only 1 backpacker magazine out there but 10-15 offroad magazines. Look at the magazine racks and how many off road magazines are there, then also notice how many hunting and gun magazines that there are because most hunters also own ATV's.:-?
Work with the ATV crowd or you stand the chance of losing more than you think!
geek
BTW, was backpacker on that magazine rack?:eek:
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 09:24
motorcycles are allowed on certain sections of the Iron Mtn. Trail (old AT) going out of damascus. horses too
Yea, and there's a section of the BMT that's designated a motorcycle trail. Go check that out for impact.
The BMT needs relocating away from that thing.
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 09:33
motorcycles are allowed on certain sections of the Iron Mtn. Trail (old AT) going out of damascus. horses too
but i'm not against it. i'm all for multi-use on some trails
hillsidedigger
11-12-2007, 09:40
For the record:
Except on a families own property, I think ATV use should be conducted by no one without a valid driver's license and should be nearly completely banned from public wild lands.
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 09:46
Horse crap!
The only outdoor motor sport I think that has the least impact on the land is snowmobiling. I think that is. Because most everything is covered by ice and snow. When i lived up in Wyoming and Montana I enjoyed this sport very much.
Hiking has a far less impact on the trail and you know it.........;)
What about the noise? So, people in the solitude and quiet of a wonderful winter landscape have to hear the whine of snowmobiles? When does it end? We can stay in the city for traffic and noise, you'd think every effort would be made to keep the backcountry quiet from human racket. Not only is there sprawl from the outside creeping into the woods, but some people want to bring yet more gasoline engines and wheeled traffic into the woods, in effect to creat sprawl from the inside out. This is ridiculous.
This is about children riding bumper cars at the State Fair, glee written on their faces with each sqeeze of the throttle.
Jim Adams
11-12-2007, 09:50
Yea, right, hardly any impact. Bullsh-t. Janice Kopaunik can't tell a portion of her lower backside from a hole in the ground.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2503604050263511129&q=atv+riding&total=2721&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9
No recreational use of atv's or ohv's should be allowed on any hiking trails. Period!
The Park Service has problems with illegal ATV use in the maritime forest section and other places along the Mountains to Sea Trail here. (Recreational ATV not allowed in park.) They put up signs, put out warnings to locals who have atv's and patrol impacted areas. Everything is cool for a few months, then junior or somebody hops on the noise maker and heads for and through the woods. Not straight through, but in large sweeping circles, small tight circles, S-turns, back and forth, up sandy hills, down the sandy hills, across the face of sandy hills, through marsh, brush and bush, wetland...you know, all the places atv riders dream of riding over and through. With little or no thought that they are destroying natural areas, driving away wildlife and killing native plant life.
Of course, a Park Ranger or somebody like me will find out what's going on...hours, days or weeks later, when it's too late.
One adult on a ATV can rip up more sandy trail and forest floor in an hour than can be repaired in a month, if ever. Don't even talk to me about what one kid can do in an hour. And don't tell me kids never ride without adult supervision. That's just more Bullsh-t. Adult supervision means there's at least, at the very least, twice as much damage when daddy goes along on his bigger digger.
No impact? Less impact? What a load of crap.
I totally understand your feelings but you still don't get it.:eek:
Junior gets caught, gets in trouble, calls dad who also has an ATV, who calls his brother, uncle Bob who also has an ATV, who calls his neighbor Tom, who also has an ATV, who calls his son who also has an ATV, etc.,etc.
A month later you have a town/township/county meeting to discuss the "problem". 1 local backpacker shows up or 5 or 10. The judge looks at the 10 backpackers and the 150 ATV riders that show up and decides that it is awful selfish of these 10 backpackers to want the woods just to themselves.
Junior is slapped on the wrist and new legislation is on the ballot to open up the whole area and make it legal to ride ATV's in that area.
Lets see, voting day countywide 50 backpackers vote....1,500 ATV riders vote. Guess what just happened to you local woods!!!:mad:
geek
This thread reminds me of the time we stealthed near Governor Clemente shelter. There is nothing like the sound of ATVs and gunfire at 1am. ;)
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 09:52
I used to do some big time 4-wheeling in my old jeep scrambler before I rolled and sold it. Man that was some fun, if it weren't so expensive I'd get back into it.
But as for responsible riding, I think its about staying on the rocks. I was a rockcrawler and would never do mud, making big ruts just never made sense to me, nor did the hours of cleaning that it required and the money of broken parts).
And there are groups of responsible ORV's out there. Pirate4x4.com has a few, most the the jeep groups have been responsible, and all practice tread lightly ethics.
ATVs though always furiated me, they were like ants. It would be really annoying to start descending down a steep large hill to have ATVs come flying all around you. That would freak me out, I always worried about hitting them. They were also the groups that usually dug holes in the mud and ran off the trails (mainly cause jeeps were too big to get into these areas). This may have also been because they weren't with an organized group or competition, they were more likely to be the drunk rednecks having fun and busting skulls. Sure, there were a few in the IHV Scout categories that would fit that description, but not too many.
2587
I have a question for you: We have a big Off Road trail system on the headwaters of the Tellico River and I ask, do you guys ever blow out the oilpans and dump a gallon or two of oil on the ground? The reason I ask is because with all the rockcrawling and crossing creeks and streams there might be a problem. When oil is dumped, is it left or cleaned up?
Jim Adams
11-12-2007, 10:05
For the record:
Except on a families own property, I think ATV use should be conducted by no one without a valid driver's license and should be nearly completely banned from public wild lands.
You are in the minority in this country with those ideas.
Locally they passed laws to make it illegal to ride an ATV if you were under 16 years old. The parents got together, had enough numbers to take those lawmakers out of office and then turn over that law and have no age limit.
Come on, Junior needs something to do while the PlayStation is broken!!!!:rolleyes:
We need to work with the ATV community. What land is already in use may never make a comeback even if the ATV's are restricted or outlawed there.
I am afraid of what the retaliation may be to attempt to place restrictions on such a large majority.
IMO take your money and run! Let them keep riding where they already are...stop the spead into NEW areas! Also teach them how to build trails so that is causes as litttle wear as possible...same as a hiking trail then their areas will last longer.
geek
Locally they passed laws to make it illegal to ride an ATV if you were under 16 years old. The parents got together, had enough numbers to take those lawmakers out of office and then turn over that law and have no age limit.
Come on, Junior needs something to do while the PlayStation is broken!!!!:rolleyes:
geek
Darwin's theory at work.
Work with the ATV crowd or you stand the chance of losing more than you think!
geek
I agree with most of what you're saying. But!!!! There are many such issues concerning hiking, trails and great natural resources. Sometimes you have to decide. You have to take that chance. What's it worth to you? Where and when do you make your stand? Is it worth the effort? What do you stand to lose? What could you gain? This one is worth it to me.
That why there are organizations like the ATC, Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, American Hiking Society, ALDHA, Geen Peace and many others. We are not so small as you might think. Everybody should belong to and be as active as they can be to at least one such organization. The United States Army is the biggest and best in the world, and needs more privates than generals.
taildragger
11-12-2007, 10:19
I have a question for you: We have a big Off Road trail system on the headwaters of the Tellico River and I ask, do you guys ever blow out the oilpans and dump a gallon or two of oil on the ground? The reason I ask is because with all the rockcrawling and crossing creeks and streams there might be a problem. When oil is dumped, is it left or cleaned up?
It's supposed to be cleaned up. The people that I rode with might leave you a blackeye and a broken rib if you left oil like that. With ORV park's closing down groups are getting pretty strict on the tread lightly principle.
That being said, I've had to go clean some yahoos gear oil up before where he had rolled and just left dodge without even thinking about the oil.
BTW, Tellico is a sweet place, I always wanted to get out on those trails. Pretty much the premiere southern trail (except for maybe Glencoe, which is just brutal even to walk, let alone try with a rig).
This is an area that I really wouldn't mind more legislation, there are a bunch of trails that are used illegally, and its hard to catch someone offroad when there rig has lockers and 35" tires, they can go about anywhere and somewhat fast to get away. If there were some more registered OHV parks with good clear trails, that might help. But who knows, Bubba's like to have fun with toys and sometimes Bubba's just ain't right in the head.
ATV's have no place on the AT or any other public hiking trail. Thes things stink, they are noisy and they do huge damage to trails. ATV's do more damage than any hiker ever could on trails and they are totally incompatible with "wilderness" foot paths.
I think the solution should be..lets take some private land and give it to the ATV folks.. and BAN these god awful things from all private land.
It is sad some people have so little respect for our natural world and the rights of people to hike in peace through undisturbed natural woodlands. Weary's post sums up very well what these things do.
Don't tell me all terrainv vehicles aren't bad for trails. They are terrible and have no place along public hiking trails like the AT. Period. End of story.
David
The problem, among many, of Jim Adam's prescription is that ATVs are everywhere, sometimes legally, often illegally. Our town land trust has tried to work with the local ATV club -- though "gang" is probably a more accurate description.
We gave them permission to use one of our trails that they needed to get to adjacent properties if they would repair the damage they had done. They agreed, but did no repairs. The "leaders" explained that they couldn't get volunteers because their members resented that some of our trails were posted against machine use.
We tried again. We applied for a $10,000 grant to build a combined pedestrian-ATV trail along the shore of a wild pond. The project was unanimously endorsed by the ATV club members.
Then at the last minute the club withdrew its endorsement and the grant was cancelled. It seems someone had heard a totally unfounded rumor that we planned to kick them off the preserve once the trail was constructed.
Logic is not a strong point among ATV enthusiasts. I don't know what they thought we were going to do with an eight-foot wide pedestrian trail. We built the trail anyway, paying for it ourselves, though we narrowed the width to six feet, thus leaving space for the rogue ATV users that we knew would ignore our signs.
The machines are inherently destructive to dirt trails. There are few "responsible" ATV users in my experience. For it is the destruction that makes riding a pleasure for most. The deeper the mud hole they can create, the greater the pleasure of churning through it.
Weary
taildragger
11-12-2007, 10:41
The problem, among many, of Jim Adam's prescription is that ATVs are everywhere, sometimes legally, often illegally. Our town land trust has tried to work with the local ATV club -- though "gang" is probably a more accurate description.
We gave them permission to use one of our trails that they needed to get to adjacent properties if they would repair the damage they had done. They agreed, but did no repairs. The "leaders" explained that they couldn't get volunteers because their members resented that some of our trails were posted against machine use.
We tried again. We applied for a $10,000 grant to build a combined pedestrian-ATV trail along the shore of a wild pond. The project was unanimously endorsed by the ATV club members.
Then at the last minute the club withdrew its endorsement and the grant was cancelled. It seems someone had heard a totally unfounded rumor that we planned to kick them off the preserve once the trail was constructed.
Logic is not a strong point among ATV enthusiasts. I don't know what they thought we were going to do with an eight-foot wide pedestrian trail. We built the trail anyway, paying for it ourselves, though we narrowed the width to six feet, thus leaving space for the rogue ATV users that we knew would ignore our signs.
The machines are inherently destructive to dirt trails. There are few "responsible" ATV users in my experience. For it is the destruction that makes riding a pleasure for most. The deeper the mud hole they can create, the greater the pleasure of churning through it.
Weary
This is why I prefer that ORV stay on rocks in designated areas. Trust me, I've been in mud, and I've been on rock, nothing makes your sphincter pucker like the feeling of a rig balancing on two wheels as you move it forward. Its a thrill and an adrenaline dump thats hard to beat. Its really fun to watch the ATVers do it, but it takes patience to be on rocks. A lack of patience on rocks = one less ATV rider
I don't understand why ATV's aren't allowed on the trails, they should be. It's a free country, why should only the hikers be allowed to use the trail? I for one ride my dirt bike on it whenever I want, I love pissing off the tight ass hiker's. I also have no problem whatsoever when a dirt bike rider goes by me on any trails when i'm hiking, because my belief is that we can live in harmony and share the trail. I don't try to think that i am above anyone else when it comes to trails use, unlike the large portion of hikers out there.
Horse crap!
The only outdoor motor sport I think that has the least impact on the land is snowmobiling. I think that is. Because most everything is covered by ice and snow. When i lived up in Wyoming and Montana I enjoyed this sport very much.
Hiking has a far less impact on the trail and you know it.........;)
Hiking is almost always the low impact way to enjoy the woods.
Snowmobiles do not tear up the land when it is covered by deep snow, but they do cause a lot of air and noise pollution in what is usually otherwise pristine wilderness. It might be a good policy to let them take over the already existing ORV trails during the snow months but ban them elsewhere.
Of course there are people who live deep in the woods and they would be isolated all winter if they couldn't use snowmobiles to get out so there would need to be an accommodation for them.
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 11:16
I don't understand why ATV's aren't allowed on the trails, they should be. It's a free country, why should only the hikers be allowed to use the trail? I for one ride my dirt bike on it whenever I want, I love pissing off the tight ass hiker's. I also have no problem whatsoever when a dirt bike rider goes by me on any trails when i'm hiking, because my belief is that we can live in harmony and share the trail. I don't try to think that i am above anyone else when it comes to trails use, unlike the large portion of hikers out there.
Stop trolling.
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 11:17
I don't understand why ATV's aren't allowed on the trails, they should be. It's a free country, why should only the hikers be allowed to use the trail? I for one ride my dirt bike on it whenever I want, I love pissing off the tight ass hiker's. I also have no problem whatsoever when a dirt bike rider goes by me on any trails when i'm hiking, because my belief is that we can live in harmony and share the trail. I don't try to think that i am above anyone else when it comes to trails use, unlike the large portion of hikers out there.
Harmony and the trail? What about addressing the previous posts on exhaust fumes, noise pollution, and path destruction? What about weary's dealings with ATVs? To say "it's a free country" won't work, not with Whiteblazers hovering over their keyboards ready to pounce.
I for one ride my dirt bike on it whenever I want, I love pissing off the tight ass hiker's.
...my belief is that we can live in harmony and share the trail.
.......
Harmony and the trail? What about addressing the previous posts on exhaust fumes, noise pollution, and path destruction? What about weary's dealings with ATVs? To say "it's a free country" won't work, not with Whiteblazers hovering over their keyboards ready to pounce.
They can pounce all they want, I could care less, I'll just laugh and move on. Exahust fumes? Are you kidding me? You obviously haven't been around many ATV's to know what your talking about. To even notice an exhaust fumes you'd have to have your nose next a tailpipe. It's worse smelling hiker's that haven't bathed in a week.
In what way are you saying it destroy's the path? It CHANGES the path but does not destroy it, learn to get along.
.......
And? Your not seeing the bigger picture I guess...
NICKTHEGREEK
11-12-2007, 11:24
flying across a frozen lake on a snowmobile at 100 mph is some fun stuff!
Try it on an Ice boat where some skill replaces noise and stink and the fun multiplies.
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 11:24
Here we go again.
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 11:26
They can pounce all they want, I could care less, I'll just laugh and move on. Exahust fumes? Are you kidding me? You obviously haven't been around many ATV's to know what your talking about. To even notice an exhaust fumes you'd have to have your nose next a tailpipe. It's worse smelling hiker's that haven't bathed in a week.
Been around them. I'll take hikers over the things any day.
In what way are you saying it destroy's the path? It CHANGES the path but does not destroy it, learn to get along.
Take it from a maintainer - it destroys them. You can take hours to build a few hundred feet of side hill just to have one or two ORVs destroy it.
With all the open FS roads built for travel, the places designated for travel by ORVS, and the fact that places have been designated for not allowing that same stuff because people do want that alternative - it is more selfish to deny those last few places a person can go simply because you want to. That is the epitome of selfish.
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 11:26
Try it on an Ice boat where some skill replaces noise and stink and the fun multiplies.
have you ever snowmobiled?
have you ever snowmobiled?
Obviously he hasn't...
Skates and a garbage bag.
Have fun getting back.
Been around them. I'll take hikers over the things any day.
Take it from a maintainer - it destroys them. You can take hours to build a few hundred feet of side hill just to have one or two ORVs destroy it.
With all the open FS roads built for travel, the places designated for travel by ORVS, and the fact that places have been designated for not allowing that same stuff because people do want that alternative - it is more selfish to deny those last few places a person can go simply because you want to. That is the epitome of selfish.
I have done trail maintenace so don't try to preach to me. The trail changes and that's it, it doens't make it unhikeable. If you can't hike it after a ATV or dirt bike has been on it then maybe you should get a different hobby.
So by sayin only the hiker's are allowed on the trail isn't selfish? It's funny, because you'll never see any ATV or dirt bike rider get upset when they see a hiker on their trails, they will simply wave, smile and drive by. But if it's the rider on the hiker's trail you are hated....funny how that works...I would rethink the selfish remark.
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 11:33
I have done trail maintenace so don't try to preach to me. The trail changes and that's it, it doens't make it unhikeable. If you can't hike it after a ATV or dirt bike has been on it then maybe you should get a different hobby.
So by sayin only the hiker's are allowed on the trail isn't selfish? It's funny, because you'll never see any ATV or dirt bike rider get upset when they see a hiker on their trails, they will simply wave, smile and drive by. But if it's the rider on the hiker's trail you are hated....funny how that works...I would rethink the selfish remark.
this post will go over well. :eek:
Hiking (only) trails are not built to sustain motorized use. A failed trail caused by illegal motorized use damages resources such as flora & fauna and water quality. Perhaps more importantly, the sight lines on many hiking trails pose risks to hikers from illegal non-motorized use.
I have no problem with ATVs riding on trails designed and built for their use.
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 11:37
I have done trail maintenace so don't try to preach to me. The trail changes and that's it, it doens't make it unhikeable. If you can't hike it after a ATV or dirt bike has been on it then maybe you should get a different hobby.
Cool your tone there guy.
So by sayin only the hiker's are allowed on the trail isn't selfish? It's funny, because you'll never see any ATV or dirt bike rider get upset when they see a hiker on their trails, they will simply wave, smile and drive by. But if it's the rider on the hiker's trail you are hated....funny how that works...I would rethink the selfish remark.
Actually I stand by it. If a route is not built to handel an ORV and it is designated to be against the law to ride there. Then to pass up other areas where it is legal and allowed simply because one wants to - that is selfish. On the other hand, I have walked on ORV trails and I did piss off the ORV riders because that slow hiker was in the way. I decided hiking in that area wasn't good for me or them despite the fact I was authorized to be there.
Anyway, keep up that tone and I will put you to moderated status. Got it?
What hiker would want to hike an ATV trail? Dumb ass.
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 11:47
What hiker would want to hike an ATV trail? Dumb ass.
In Louisiana all but two trails I could find in the state were multi-use. So just about everywhere you went you were dodging ATVs. With all the trails open to them - one that was fairly nice was closed to ATVs in one section. But they went there anyway despite the fact that a portion was closed because it went through an area that had a sensitive ecology. Hiking on the trail was allowed but no camping.
The ORVs didn't care. With the rest of the state open to them, that one place still had a draw to them. Again - the epitome of selfish to put one's fun of tearing through mud over the rules and considerations that the were put into place to enforce.
Many of us can carefully describe the problem with Walter P's logic but he is just incapable of admitting there is any valid point of view but his. Over and over. Selfish.
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 12:26
Move along, nothing to see here.
I'm heading up to Bob Bald tonight. Hopefully it will be a quite one :D.
What about the noise? So, people in the solitude and quiet of a wonderful winter landscape have to hear the whine of snowmobiles? When does it end? We can stay in the city for traffic and noise, you'd think every effort would be made to keep the backcountry quiet from human racket. Not only is there sprawl from the outside creeping into the woods, but some people want to bring yet more gasoline engines and wheeled traffic into the woods, in effect to creat sprawl from the inside out. This is ridiculous.
This is about children riding bumper cars at the State Fair, glee written on their faces with each sqeeze of the throttle.
Snowmobiles, I'm all for it! Noise and all!
Snowmobiles, I'm all for it! Noise and all!
Yes, the ATV of winter travel. Try snow shoeing, it'll do you good.
ATV'ers do not appear to like pavement. Pave the trail, although personally I would prefer carpet. ;)
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 13:24
Yes, the ATV of winter travel. Try snow shoeing, it'll do you good.
the first thing i would do if i ever moved back to northern vermont would be to buy a new Polaris snowmachine
the first thing i would do if i ever moved back to northern vermont would be to buy a new Polaris snowmachine
On another post I thought I saw where you were fond of snow shoeing near Jay Peak. Getting old?
Lone Wolf
11-12-2007, 13:32
On another post I thought I saw where you were fond of snow shoeing near Jay Peak. Getting old?
nope. love doing both. not enuf snow here to do either
the first thing i would do if i ever moved back to northern vermont would be to buy a new Polaris snowmachine
Snowmobile trails cross the AT on top of Glastenbury. I always thought it would be cool to go back on a snowmobile. Different strokes for different folks works on different trails works for me. :cool:
Different strokes for different folks works on different trails works for me. :cool:
Preferably 4 stoke.
Bootstrap
11-12-2007, 13:54
I for one ride my dirt bike on it whenever I want, I love pissing off the tight ass hiker's. I also have no problem whatsoever when a dirt bike rider goes by me on any trails when i'm hiking, because my belief is that we can live in harmony and share the trail.
So you pissing off the people who disagree with you is harmony, and if they object, they aren't living harmoniously with you?
Jonathan
SGT Rock
11-12-2007, 13:56
Ignor him bootstrap. He won't reply.
Ignor him bootstrap. He won't reply.
Unless he wants to kick it up a notch. Perhaps we should let this thread die before it deteriorates any further and needs to get shutdown.
Unless he wants to kick it up a notch.
WalterP is Emeril? Who knew? :confused:
I went over to Emerils.com and he doesn't have a hiking forum to kick it up with. :-?
Most likely Walter is tired of pissing into the wind.
I could use a non-judgemental 6th grader around here about 20 minutes every third day. Might learn some stuff.
dixicritter
11-12-2007, 20:04
Ummm, folks, WalterP was placed on Moderated Post status by SGT Rock earlier today. It is highly unlikely that you will get a response any time soon as SGT Rock will be the one approving his posts and he is currently on Bob Bald for the evening. :)
....... he is currently on Bob Bald for the evening. :)Can't think of a better way to spend a Monday night considering the weather we have been having. Hope he doesn't have to take out an ATV or two.:rolleyes: Take care dixi.:)
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 21:10
Ummm, folks, WalterP was placed on Moderated Post status by SGT Rock earlier today. It is highly unlikely that you will get a response any time soon as SGT Rock will be the one approving his posts and he is currently on Bob Bald for the evening. :)
I was out the door with my pack loaded to do a late drive and a nighthike up to the Bob to surprise the Rock, had two flashlights in each pocket, when ZAP! the UPS truck drives up with my new Western Mountaineering sleeping bag and the delay killed my plans. I'm thinking about you up there on the Robert.
BTW, I'm not WalterP!:)
Ummm, folks, WalterP was placed on Moderated Post status by SGT Rock earlier today. It is highly unlikely that you will get a response any time soon as SGT Rock will be the one approving his posts and he is currently on Bob Bald for the evening. :)
Detention....now that's funny.
Skidsteer
11-12-2007, 23:03
Detention....now that's funny.
Worse than a detention.
Detentions last a half hour and you get cool points with your friends.
Moderated status is kinda like asking the Principal to tell your buddies to meet you in the john for a smoke after home room.
Dakota Dan
11-12-2007, 23:20
I was out the door with my pack loaded to do a late drive and a nighthike up to the Bob ..... :)
Tipi, I see you're from the Tellico area, and since the subject of Bob Bald came up. It's been years since I have hiked in the area and was just wondering the status of "Pine Ridge Rd" off NC road 165, (intersection near Strawberry Knob). Has it been closed to traffic, if not can you drive all the way to "Swan Meadows" ? I'd love to go back Boar hunting up there. It's also a great area to hike in, I know the old AT came thru there somewhere before being cut back to Fontana.
Tipi Walter
11-12-2007, 23:45
Tipi, I see you're from the Tellico area, and since the subject of Bob Bald came up. It's been years since I have hiked in the area and was just wondering the status of "Pine Ridge Rd" off NC road 165, (intersection near Strawberry Knob). Has it been closed to traffic, if not can you drive all the way to "Swan Meadows" ? I'd love to go back Boar hunting up there. It's also a great area to hike in, I know the old AT came thru there somewhere before being cut back to Fontana.
It's called Forest Service road 81 and goes from 165 at Stratton Meadows(on the Cherohala Skyway)along Santeetlah Creek and ends up right next to the entrance to the Joyce Kilmer Park. Along the way there are turnoffs, 81E, 81F, and 81G, one of which goes near Swan Cabin(and the meadows)and the other goes near Wolf Laurel Hunter Camp, a popular pulloff for those trying to get to the Bob quickly. Too quickly in my opinion. But parts of the road are rough and there's a sign that reads "NOT FOR PASSENGER CARS."
The old AT did not, I don't think, come thru this exact area, instead it swung southwest at Walker Gap above Fontana and followed the Yellow Creek Mountain Trail 9 miles to Tapoco and Hiway 129. Here it followed the road a bit and crossed the Calderwood Lake bridge and went back into the woods until reaching Hiway 129 again at Deals Gap. Alot of history.
They can pounce all they want, I could care less, I'll just laugh and move on. Exahust fumes? Are you kidding me? You obviously haven't been around many ATV's to know what your talking about. To even notice an exhaust fumes you'd have to have your nose next a tailpipe. It's worse smelling hiker's that haven't bathed in a week.
In what way are you saying it destroy's the path? It CHANGES the path but does not destroy it, learn to get along.
WalterP. If you are a law and order conservative, you perhaps should take note that vehicles on the trail are illegal by the laws enacted by the Congress of these United States, and signed by the president, thereof.
minnesotasmith
11-12-2007, 23:48
Just need to be pedal-powered. No more noise or exhaust fumes.
Oops, there'd still be the wheel- and ski- ruts. Guess wheels and skis need to be left behind, too, when someone wants to bring an ATV or snowmobile onto a trail designed for foot travel. ;)
Many of us can carefully describe the problem with Walter P's logic but he is just incapable of admitting there is any valid point of view but his. Over and over. Selfish.
And rather amazingly ignorant.
Weary
Dakota Dan
11-13-2007, 00:06
........Wolf Laurel Hunter Camp, a popular pulloff for those trying to get to the Bob quickly. Too quickly in my opinion. But parts of the road are rough and there's a sign that reads "NOT FOR PASSENGER CARS."...........
I pulled my maps up and I see the FS road designations now I guess the road I called Pine Ridge is FS 81, the Wolf Laural Rd looks like it dead ends near Swan Meadows, maybe my map is wrong. Anyway looks like about a 2 mile hike to Bob Bald from the end of Wolf Laural Rd and does look like a quick way up. If those roads were any worse than the last time I was in there you would need a Sherman Tank to get thru.
I wasn't sure of the exact route of the Old AT, just knew it came near Tellico. And, are Wild Boars still around up there. LOL Thanks for the reply.
in Big River public use area in Rhode Island yesterday. Haven't been there in 10 years.
10 years ago, the state was trying to kick out the orv and motorcycle enthusiasts.
Now, though multi-use, motor vehicles of all types are prohibited. There are signs posted at all major access points.
There was evidence of illegal use by motorcyclists, given the huge berms built up at trail intersections along with the telltale huge knobby tire tracks.
I'm convinced that some people see any attempt to discourage them from selfish acts to be a challenge to a duel. Disobedience to established law is considered crime and subject to legal action (fines of up to $100.00 as posted on the signs in the area mentioned above).
I have no problems with law abiding citizens of this country. Excuses don't make wrongs right.
I'm convinced that some people see any attempt to discourage them from selfish acts to be a challenge to a duel. Disobedience to established law is considered crime and subject to legal action (fines of up to $100.00 as posted on the signs in the area mentioned above).
In the Jefferson NF, there is an OHV club that has flatly stated that they see fines for riding illegally as a user fee to ride on the forest. For folks with that mentality, the only thing that will work is confiscation of their toys.
In the Jefferson NF, there is an OHV club that has flatly stated that they see fines for riding illegally as a user fee to ride on the forest. For folks with that mentality, the only thing that will work is confiscation of their toys.
Singapore-style caning might have the desired effect, too.
I once found a "three wheeler" stuck in a boggy stream on a trail clearly marked with "no ATV" signs. I was tempted to destroy the thing, but resisted and instead called our town's only police officer.
A couple of hours later I got a call from a mother: "Thank you, thank you Mr. Cummings for finding my son's ATV," she said. "Someone stole it last night and he's been crying all day."
Weary
Whoever wrote that is obviously smokin crack!
Reminds me of one time in a local state park, I met a guy ontop of a 2,000+ lb horse, his comment to me on the condition of the trails (they WERE a mess) "Look at all the damage to the trails the deer are doing!" we were standing right next to an aactual deer path (barely noticable) which I pointed out to him, plus the fact that the largest deer recorded for that area was 400 Lbs, over 20 years ago & the fact that the vast majority of hoof prints were HUGE horse prints. He acted like I had 3 heads & had spoken in Hungarian. Well, at least I didn't point out to him that he weighed about 80 Lbs more than the record deer :D
Denial is not just a river, it is also a powerful state of mind.
SGT Rock
11-13-2007, 15:05
I was out the door with my pack loaded to do a late drive and a nighthike up to the Bob to surprise the Rock, had two flashlights in each pocket, when ZAP! the UPS truck drives up with my new Western Mountaineering sleeping bag and the delay killed my plans. I'm thinking about you up there on the Robert.
BTW, I'm not WalterP!:)
I thought if I saw anyone out there it would be you.
I decided before getting out there to do some hiking around the old AT in the Smokies - went out and found that old road that leads to Dalton Gap where the AT once crossed it. I walked around Dalton Gap and picked up some indications of where the AT crossed back in 1948. By the time I got back to 20 Mile Ranger Station it wass already dark - that is when I realized I forgot my trail map for getting to Bob Bald. :eek:
So on the way over there I stopped and checked out some FS boards until I found one with a trail map and took a picture with my digital camera for reference. By the time I got to Beech Gap it was 730PM. I got to Bob Bald with a headlamp at about 930PM where I ate dinner and went straight to bed pretty darn tired. This morning I just got packed up and off the bald as it started raining. The spring was dry up there, but hopefully that rain keeps soaking the area. There were lots of hunters up there - but they were all hunting their dogs.:-?
In the Jefferson NF, there is an OHV club that has flatly stated that they see fines for riding illegally as a user fee to ride on the forest. For folks with that mentality, the only thing that will work is confiscation of their toys.
I've heard that at least one Wildlife Conservation Officer was known to have made the miscreant push their machine without power assist out of PA State Game Lands. I've never been quite able to nail down a good cite for that though.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
11-13-2007, 16:03
In the Jefferson NF, there is an OHV club that has flatly stated that they see fines for riding illegally as a user fee to ride on the forest. For folks with that mentality, the only thing that will work is confiscation of their toys.
I've heard that at least one Wildlife Conservation Officer was known to have made the miscreant push their machine without power assist out of PA State Game Lands. I've never been quite able to nail down a good cite for that though.I like the push the machine out approach - natural consequences type discipline is effective. Another idea would be a fine plus mandatory community service time - say a couple of days - helping repair the damage ATV and OTVs do. Finding out just how much work goes into repairing the damage they do would be a real eyeopener for these miscreants.
I doubt that confiscation of toys will ever happen, but I'm thinking if even 24 hours of mandatory jail time was attached, it would be serious deterrent. It is one thing to get out the ol' check book and pony up some $$$ (a user fee as the club so aptly put it), but quite another to spend a night in the county lock-up - or to spend two days doing trail maintenance.
I like the push the machine out approach - natural consequences type discipline is effective. Another idea would be a fine plus mandatory community service time - say a couple of days - helping repair the damage ATV and OTVs do. Finding out just how much work goes into repairing the damage they do would be a real eyeopener for these miscreants.
Yes, a simple fine on the rare occasion they get caught isn't much of a deterrent.
I doubt that confiscation of toys will ever happen, but I'm thinking if even 24 hours of mandatory jail time was attached, it would be serious deterrent. It is one thing to get out the ol' check book and pony up some $$$ (a user fee as the club so aptly put it), but quite another to spend a night in the county lock-up - or to spend two days doing trail maintenance.
I don't know, they confiscate vehicles and guns much of the time when caught jacking deer.
watchingtrainsgoby
11-13-2007, 22:13
they already have an "appalachian trail" for motorized vehicles, its called I-95
I grew up in the Indiana Dunes area ... I remember some of the great dunes that were present before the local gov bent to pressure to open some of these places to ATV's.
Funny thing .... within a year ... no more dunes!
Where ever they opened up the trails the dunes disappeared ... not shrunk, not moved ... read ... GONE.
Don't tell me that ATV use doesn't have an impact on trails. I call Toro Caca on that one.
Jim Adams
11-14-2007, 19:27
I grew up in the Indiana Dunes area ... I remember some of the great dunes that were present before the local gov bent to pressure to open some of these places to ATV's.
Funny thing .... within a year ... no more dunes!
Where ever they opened up the trails the dunes disappeared ... not shrunk, not moved ... read ... GONE.
Don't tell me that ATV use doesn't have an impact on trails. I call Toro Caca on that one.
This is what I've been saying all along!!!!:-?
geek
Yeah anyone that thinks ATV's don't cause damage are out to lunch. They just need to stay on their own trails period.
Here's an article about ATVs on the Benton MacKaye Trail in Georgia;
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-08-20-atv-damage_n.htm
I'll add that when the BMT was being extended to the Smokies, volunteers with the trail club spent years working to get approval to build new trail in the Cherokee National Forest. Botanical surveys & archaeological work was required. In one weekend, somebody with an ATV went in and brushed out and blazed an illegal ATV trail uphill from the BMT. The volunteers were exceedingly discouraged to say the least.
Thankfully most of the BMT doesn't have an ATV problem, but like the AT, it is a problem in some areas.
Jim Adams
11-14-2007, 19:59
I've heard that at least one Wildlife Conservation Officer was known to have made the miscreant push their machine without power assist out of PA State Game Lands. I've never been quite able to nail down a good cite for that though.
Most hunters have ATV's and use them to haul/drag deer out of the woods. Most of the state game lands in our area of the state allow ATV use.
geek
Here's an article about ATVs on the Benton MacKaye Trail in Georgia;
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-08-20-atv-damage_n.htm
Friggin' morons. Jeff couldn't rangers or fish and game/ dept of environment issue similar penalities as hunting illegally? Confiscating the ATV's is the only way to slow it down.
Sly, IMO as long as the number of law enforcement officers remains at the current level, little will change. The FS came up with new rules, but no budget allocation for more LEOs. American Hiking Society is pushing, but there are "competing priorities" right now.
Everyone concerned about this should call their Congressman and urge an increase in the recreation budget for the US Forest Service.
Skidsteer
11-14-2007, 20:38
Friggin' morons. Jeff couldn't rangers or fish and game/ dept of environment issue similar penalities as hunting illegally? Confiscating the ATV's is the only way to slow it down.
Good idea.
They could tow it out of the woods.
With their ATV.
Good idea.
They could tow it out of the woods.
With their ATV.
Wise azz! ;)
Skidsteer
11-14-2007, 21:32
Wise azz! ;)
:D
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Dakota Dan
11-14-2007, 23:46
The way to catch them is to find where they are parking and put some motion cameras and get the tag plates of the vehicles unloading the ATV's. This has been used many times and works very well.
I know of a mother who carried her son and friend to a non-atv site. She dumps them out with the ATV's, goes home. Kids call from there cell when they want to be picked back up. This is how she finally got busted.
Jim Adams
11-14-2007, 23:55
they already have an "appalachian trail" for motorized vehicles, its called I-95
This statement makes you no better than WalterP. Hikers wonder why offroaders get mad at them and then you make statements like that.
How upset would you feel if he had told you- hikers already have a "long distance trail net work", it's called "rails to trails".
Most OHV organizations do not trust ANY hiking / conservation organizations due to the lies and false info filed by the Sierra Club and Wilderness Society in law suits 30 years ago. Back then it was just the dirtbikers against these groups and although the courts almost always ruled in favor of the bike riders, it simply ran them out of money and the large organizations would still get their way. Hundreds of thousands of acres were taken away from OHV's under the premise that studies were being done to see if there was anything there to protect...alot of this was on old military bombing areas! This was before the advent of the quad ATV. Now everybody and his brother has an ATV.
The Hiking / conservation / eco people are now vastly outnumbered.
The last thing that we need is to piss off the OHV crowd.
I am not sure what it will take to have the OHV community work with hikers but it MUST be done or you will lose in the long run just because of the numbers.
Let them keep all of the area now open to them...KEEP NEW ONES FROM OPENING UP!
I am very serious about this! Almost always, the majority rules and even with all of the hiking and conservation organizations the ATV riders are still the majority!
geek
BTW, I read back thru the thread and found that OHV people (of which I am also one) were refered to as miscreants, idiots, stupid, noneducated and incest. OTOH, although he was being an a$$ and trolling, WalterP was just telling his side (even if misguided) and he was restricted....getting a little like TrailPlace are we WingRock?:D
Dakota Dan
11-15-2007, 00:04
Mountain Bikers are a stronger group than ATVer's, at least it appears so. Every time I turn around former hiking trails have been turned into a "Multi-Use" trail excluding motorized OHV's and Pack Stock. These guys will be riding the "Hiking Only Trails" before the ATVer's. More Doctors, Politicians, and Lawyers on the mountain bikes. Money and Pull.
SGT Rock
11-15-2007, 00:12
BTW, I read back thru the thread and found that OHV people (of which I am also one) were refered to as miscreants, idiots, stupid, noneducated and incest. OTOH, although he was being an a$$ and trolling, WalterP was just telling his side (even if misguided) and he was restricted....getting a little like TrailPlace are we WingRock?:D
Actually I was trying to turn the fire off Jim. If I were WingRock he would have been banned, you would have been banned, and the whole thing would have been one sided.
I have nothing against debate and I have had a lot of other things going on or I would have gotten to those too. But when you put out a fire you start with the big parts and work your way down. But when you get a guy that violates the terms of use then acts like that when you tell him to stop - well you either put your money where you mouth is or become an emasculated bystander.
But back to my points on this - I have nothing against there being ORV trails and have hiked a few - I just realize that there needs to be places where ORVs shouldn't go for a variety of reasons. The fact that there are more ORV riders than hikers is not something that hikers should cower from standing up for what they think is right. Being the minority does not make your position wrong. Think about it. If it were, our country would be a lot more screwed up than it is.
Getting to that point - we have places in Army training areas where we cannot even go as soldiers to train because the area is considered to have too much ecological sensitivity, historical value, or has been over used and needs to be restored. Think about that fact. Really, get this: there are places in this country where it has been deemed OK for the Army to tear to hell with tanks, bombs, and whatever else we have at our disposal so we can win wars - but then, even with all that, there are sections within there that we cannot go or can no longer go for the good of the land. If a unit violates this, even by accident, the commander can be relived (and that does happen) and the unit (which is a part of the government) gets fined by the EPA - the money that it is fined comes out of the units operational budget.
Now, if these sorts of areas exist in places that were already deemed places to be sacrificed for the security of the country - then a place that is in a wilderness area where that is supposed to be in as natural and wild a state as possible to be preserved for generations should get even more protection from these same lawmakers and judges. Simply because the majority want it to be open to ORVs because it is fun and convenient should not override all other concerns.
I am not sure what it will take to have the OHV community work with hikers but it MUST be done or you will lose in the long run just because of the numbers.
Let them keep all of the area now open to them...KEEP NEW ONES FROM OPENING UP!
The beef is ATV/OHV are using hiking trails!
BTW, I read back thru the thread and found that OHV people (of which I am also one) were refered to as miscreants, idiots, stupid, noneducated and incest. OTOH, although he was being an a$$ and trolling, WalterP was just telling his side (even if misguided) and he was restricted....getting a little like TrailPlace are we WingRock?:D
Being an a$$ and trolling and insulting one of the owners and you have a problem with him being restricted? OK... :rolleyes:
Once again, SGT Rock has got it right. Put the issue in perspective, use the moderation required to keep the discussion moving foreward. Tough job, way to handle it. Kudos, and hopefully soon to be Kludos(as Sly puts it).:sun
Jim Adams
11-15-2007, 00:53
Actually I was trying to turn the fire off Jim. If I were WingRock he would have been banned, you would have been banned, and the whole thing would have been one sided.
I have nothing against debate and I have had a lot of other things going on or I would have gotten to those too. But when you put out a fire you start with the big parts and work your way down. But when you get a guy that violates the terms of use then acts like that when you tell him to stop - well you either put your money where you mouth is or become an emasculated bystander.
But back to my points on this - I have nothing against there being ORV trails and have hiked a few - I just realize that there needs to be places where ORVs shouldn't go for a variety of reasons. The fact that there are more ORV riders than hikers is not something that hikers should cower from standing up for what they think is right. Being the minority does not make your position wrong. Think about it. If it were, our country would be a lot more screwed up than it is.
Getting to that point - we have places in Army training areas where we cannot even go as soldiers to train because the area is considered to have too much ecological sensitivity, historical value, or has been over used and needs to be restored. Think about that fact. Really, get this: there are places in this country where it has been deemed OK for the Army to tear to hell with tanks, bombs, and whatever else we have at our disposal so we can win wars - but then, even with all that, there are sections within there that we cannot go or can no longer go for the good of the land. If a unit violates this, even by accident, the commander can be relived (and that does happen) and the unit (which is a part of the government) gets fined by the EPA - the money that it is fined comes out of the units operational budget.
Now, if these sorts of areas exist in places that were already deemed places to be sacrificed for the security of the country - then a place that is in a wilderness area where that is supposed to be in as natural and wild a state as possible to be preserved for generations should get even more protection from these same lawmakers and judges. Simply because the majority want it to be open to ORVs because it is fun and convenient should not override all other concerns.
SGTRock,
I agree totally! Just because we are the minority is no reason to give up trying to save all that we can. My point was that we must do it in a way that the true outcome is saving and not backfiring on us.
The Wingrock dig was certainly in jest!
BTW, anyone watching David Letterman right now? A kid jumping an ATV over taxi cabs tonight in the street...not a backpack in sight!
geek
Sly, IMO as long as the number of law enforcement officers remains at the current level, little will change. The FS came up with new rules, but no budget allocation for more LEOs. American Hiking Society is pushing, but there are "competing priorities" right now.
Everyone concerned about this should call their Congressman and urge an increase in the recreation budget for the US Forest Service.
If they can bust 8 hikers mooning the Cog, I don't understand why they can't bust a few illegal ATV drivers in problem areas.
http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/14602221/detail.html
Lone Wolf
11-15-2007, 10:14
ATVs aren't offensive
ATVs aren't offensive
Tearing up the trails isn't offensive, yeah right
Just because we are the minority is no reason to give up trying to save all that we can.
I'd like to see some data to back up the claim that hikers are a minority compared to OHV users.
Backpackers? Yes. Hikers? I don't think so. But I am open to seeing some evidence that proves otherwise.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
11-15-2007, 10:34
....I read back thru the thread and found that OHV people (of which I am also one) were refered to as miscreants, idiots, stupid, noneducated and incest. Can't speak for others, but my mention of 'miscreants' referred to those who had been caught by LEOs riding where is was not allowed. The term fits.
I'm afraid the facts speak for themselves in re: the damage that ORV and ATVs do to trails not meant to handle the weight and traction of such vehicles.
Geek, if you ever come down south I will take you out and show you about a dozen places where trails used to exist and be open to the public - they are now closed because they have been destroyed by the ATV / ORV crowd. There was no way the maintainers could keep the trails up once they discovered the area. It is now so bad that even the ATV / ORV can't use them - they have destroyed the trails completely. We will probably need some light-duty climbing equipment to be able to cross the damage to access the real damage.
This is why I have little respect for ATV & ORV riders as a whole. While I'm sure some responsible riders do exist, I feel such riders a tiny minority of the total group.
Most hunters have ATV's and use them to haul/drag deer out of the woods. Most of the state game lands in our area of the state allow ATV use.
Here's the regulation for PA State Game Lands governing ATV use:
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/058/chapter135/s135.2.html
see subsections (3) and (9), then exception posted here:
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/058/chapter135/s135.48.html
with condition on use of exception posted here:
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/058/chapter135/s135.53.html
At least around Harrisburg, a WCO visits your home and interviews you in detail about obtaining such a "disabled persons permit," and I know of one emphysema patient with a walker, despite having a vehicle handicapped tag on his regular car, was deemed unqualified for such a "disabled persons permit."
There may be things the local land managers don't tell Harrisburg about, but given my experience in dealings with those types of folks in three different PGC regions (albeit not yours), I would be very surprised if such ATV use is truly officially authorized.
Most hunters have ATV's and use them to haul/drag deer out of the woods. Most of the state game lands in our area of the state allow ATV use.
geek
Here's the regulation for PA State Game Lands governing ATV use:
Well he did say he was an OHV'er. Like a mountain biker, I don't think they ever bother to read the rules. :rolleyes:
Well he did say he was an OHV'er. Like a mountain biker, I don't think they ever bother to read the rules. :rolleyes:
Maybe they are going too fast to read the signs. :-? Place a few of these (http://www.ilfireandpoliceequip.com/stinger_spike_system.htm) in front of the signs might encourage more reading.
Maybe they are going too fast to read the signs. :-? Place a few of these (http://www.ilfireandpoliceequip.com/stinger_spike_system.htm) in front of the signs might encourage more reading.
Sweet. Too bad they're so expensive. I'd buy one. :D
It's really pathetic on how ingnorant they are or pretend to be. I mentioned to several MB'ers on the PCT that it was off limits and they'd be like "dah, I didn't see anything". Every trailhead had a sign.
taildragger
11-15-2007, 11:11
Just stick a hiking pole in the spokes, that'll stop em (note, use cheap steel polls, possibly rebar)
Another reason to go ultralight, save carrying capacity for rebars to stop bikes with???
SGT Rock
11-15-2007, 11:23
Just stick a hiking pole in the spokes, that'll stop em (note, use cheap steel polls, possibly rebar)
I think that qualifies as assault. I think the penalty for that is a little more stiff than for riding a bike.
Just stick a hiking pole in the spokes, that'll stop em (note, use cheap steel polls, possibly rebar)
Believe me, I felt like it. Some sections of PCT were tore up. If the trail is shared like parts of the CDT, I deal with it and have met some OK folks, but most are into vroom, vroom. Bunch of goofs showing off their hardware, if you ask me.
I must appologize for my previous posts as it was a bad day and I went a little far. If I offended anyone I sincerely appologize. Thank you SGT ROCK for allowing me to post again, that was agony! :)
Anyway, I guess the my biggest thing is I wish there was just a way everyone could get along and enjoy all these lands together in their own form of recreation but I see how it is a tough thing to accomplish. Who knows if there will ever be a solution?
Jim Adams
11-15-2007, 17:16
I'd like to see some data to back up the claim that hikers are a minority compared to OHV users.
Backpackers? Yes. Hikers? I don't think so. But I am open to seeing some evidence that proves otherwise.
MOWGLI16,
I was also curious as to exact figures, this is what I found.
According to the research firm Polk, in the year 2,000 there were 5.5 million motorcycles and ATV's in the U.S.
30% of all of these are located in just 4 states: California, New York, Tx. and Ill. 12% of which is in California.
Louisiana and Texas have had growth rates of 60% since 1997.
Honda had sales of 550,000 offroad units in the year 2000 and is recording 2007 as a record sales year.
Although I to am an offroad motorcycle rider, I only ride in approved areas or in closed course competition and personally hate ATV's.
There are alot of irresponsible offroad riders out there that ruin it for the rest.
BUT,
There are horse riders out there on a totally torn up 5' wide trail complaining of mountainbikers.
There are fishermen out there complaining about canoes and kayaks chasing the fish away but the banks are littered with coffee cups, bait containers and hook and lure packages.
There are birders out there that complain about windmills and fishermen leaving fishing line causing harm to birds.
There are land developers complaining that hikers don't need thousands of acres saved to walk in narrow corridors of woods to see the pretty spots and there are offroad riders complaining of all of the avilable land being developed by developers. Everyone has some type of complaint about another factions ideas and uses of land.
Try to stop horse riding, or hunting or fishing. They have not been eliminated and probably never will DUE TO THEIR NUMBERS.
Hikers are definitely in the minority especially when you consider that most hunters and fishermen use ATV's.
FD,
I also have local areas that have been destroyed by ATV's. That is why I am trying to get the point across that if the numbers are to big to stop, then at least try to contain the use and damage to current areas.
geek
I think there's more than 5.5 million hikers.
I think there's more than 5.5 million hikers.
Ehh, with today's levels of obesity and laziness, you might possibly be wrong...
SGT Rock
11-15-2007, 18:02
And they are not registered hikers either LOL.
And they are not registered hikers either LOL.
Very true...
Ehh, with today's levels of obesity and laziness, you might possibly be wrong...
LOL.. Well, they're not going to lose any weight driving around on an ATV, that's for sure.
Ehh, with today's levels of obesity and laziness, you might possibly be wrong...
Some obese people hike...
Many lazy people type...
LOL.. Well, they're not going to lose any weight driving around on an ATV, that's for sure.
Well in all fairness it would depend on the ATV, there are some sport ATV riders that get a heck of a workout by riding, I know from personal experience. But if your just out riding a big 4x4 ATV and drinking beer than no, you will not lose weight LOL.
Just a couple of years ago, over 70 million Americans hiked at least occasionally. This is based on Outdoor Industry survey data.
Just a couple of years ago, over 70 million Americans hiked at least occasionally. This is based on Outdoor Industry survey data.
Yes, but I wonder how many typed about hiking? :-?
Some obese people hike...
Many lazy people type...
Indeed they do, I was just being sarcastic...
Indeed they do, I was just being sarcastic...
Then use one of these --> :rolleyes:
Then use one of these --> :rolleyes:
Will do :)
WB needs a tongue in cheek smilely
SGT Rock
11-15-2007, 19:32
I can vouch for the work out - motocross type ridding will throw a whooping on you.
Jim Adams
11-15-2007, 23:18
I can vouch for the work out - motocross type ridding will throw a whooping on you.
SGTRock,
I made a living for 7 years racing motorcycles, most of the time professional motocross. During the summer nationals the average rider would lose 5 lbs. per 40 minute moto in the summer heat. Hydration recovery between motos was the primary concern. Most people don't realize the physical effort it takes to ride a dirt bike...I imagine that with the increased weight of ATV's that the workout in even more intense.:-?
geek
Lets not kid ourselves, any whopping provided by motocross or ATV, although physically demanding, also translates into serious torn up trail.
Lets not kid ourselves, any whopping provided by motocross or ATV, although physically demanding, also translates into serious torn up trail.
Motocross is on a closed track.
SGT Rock
11-16-2007, 09:16
Lets not kid ourselves, any whopping provided by motocross or ATV, although physically demanding, also translates into serious torn up trail.
I can vouch for that too. That is why I believe that there should be places where they are allowed and places where they are not.
What I remember from back in the day with some of the folks was a sense of adventure to go places where others couldn't. Ever see those hill climbing competitions? Tears the hell out of the side of a mountain just to see who can ride up it the furthest - but that sort of was what I saw at times. If there was a barrier on an old dirt road - then the game was to see if you could get around it to see what was on the other side for the adventure of 1 - getting around the barrier, and 2 - seeing what was down that trail that someone didn't want you t go to in the first place.
As I said - in Louisiana just about everywhere there is a trail it is multi use. In those places the ORVs stayed on the trail for the most part, but put up a fence to keep them out of the impact area (some were on the edge of Ft Polk) and the duffasis went through wire over tank traps, or around gates just to go see what was in there. The truth was there was nothing any different than the rest of the state - except when we were shooting. But even then there is nothing to really see - just feel, and I can guarantee you don't want to feel that.
geoffrey morris
04-10-2008, 14:04
Does anyone recall, I guess over ten years ago, the US government passed laws regarding handicap access. Shouldn't the trail be required to be handicap accessible? Everything else is required to be handicap accessible. Shouldn't the trail be open for everyone regardless? What if you can't walk? Shouldn't you be allowed to use an ATV on the trail? Maybe some sections of the trail, where it's possible should have an ATV trail running along side the foot path. Perhaps in the future someone will create an ATV AT service for the handicapped. What about horses and horse trails running with the AT?
As an ATV owner and a person who lives next to the trail, I see and hear AVTs on the trail from time to time, usually on Sundays. Part of the section near me follows an old road grade and some local rides enjoy riding this old winding road section. Ok, so whats ya gonna do? This road grade was in use by ATV and motorbike users long before the USFS decided to kick the local land owners off and re-route the trail on to it. So, shouldn't some compromise be made in certain sections? After all, the USFS used the "right of eminent domain " to take this property(forcing the sale of it) However this is not the original location of the trail and the road grade existed there before the trail came along. So where is the fairness in this?
I ofter wonder if AT hikers really know how the USFS operates? How the USFS goes about acquiring lands along the AT route? I have myself dealt with the USFS on this very issue. When we purchased this land, it wasn't a month before the USFS was pounding on the door. They came and acted like we were poor ol' dumb ass hill billy scum, asking us if we wanted to sell our farm. Of course we said "HELL NO!" we just bought it a month ago. Man, you should of seen the look on their faces when they realized that this property had been on the open market and had sold. The USFS knew they wanted the land but were to stupid to realize it was on the open market. So.... the USFS agents came knocking twice a month for a year, pestering the crap out of us. They like to play the "good cop/bad cop" routine with ya. One acts like he's your life long friend, telling you not to worry and the other acts like an ass, and continues to tell you how the government all ways gets what it wants. So , after some wrangling about the amount of land that they needed, they reduced it from the whole farm down to 13 acres, then down to 3.5 acres(after we hiked around the area in question). We then told the USFS agents to make us an offer on the 3.5 acres. lol We didn't hear back from them for over 6 years. Yes that's correct, over 6 damn years, then one day out of the blue they show up again. This time it's 2 new USFS agents and they know nothing about the agreement we had reached 6+ years earlier. So we are back to square one and they now insist on the 13 acres. In the end we sold them what's called a scenic easement and they finally went away. Just thought I'd share with you all one of the experiences of living next to the AT.
G.Morris
Old Hillwalker
04-10-2008, 17:55
Does anyone recall, I guess over ten years ago, the US government passed laws regarding handicap access. Shouldn't the trail be required to be handicap accessible? Everything else is required to be handicap accessible. Shouldn't the trail be open for everyone regardless? What if you can't walk? Shouldn't you be allowed to use an ATV on the trail? Maybe some sections of the trail, where it's possible should have an ATV trail running along side the foot path. Perhaps in the future someone will create an ATV AT service for the handicapped. What about horses and horse trails running with the AT?
As an ATV owner and a person who lives next to the trail, I see and hear AVTs on the trail from time to time, usually on Sundays. Part of the section near me follows an old road grade and some local rides enjoy riding this old winding road section. Ok, so whats ya gonna do? This road grade was in use by ATV and motorbike users long before the USFS decided to kick the local land owners off and re-route the trail on to it. So, shouldn't some compromise be made in certain sections? After all, the USFS used the "right of eminent domain " to take this property(forcing the sale of it) However this is not the original location of the trail and the road grade existed there before the trail came along. So where is the fairness in this?
I ofter wonder if AT hikers really know how the USFS operates? How the USFS goes about acquiring lands along the AT route? I have myself dealt with the USFS on this very issue. When we purchased this land, it wasn't a month before the USFS was pounding on the door. They came and acted like we were poor ol' dumb ass hill billy scum, asking us if we wanted to sell our farm. Of course we said "HELL NO!" we just bought it a month ago. Man, you should of seen the look on their faces when they realized that this property had been on the open market and had sold. The USFS knew they wanted the land but were to stupid to realize it was on the open market. So.... the USFS agents came knocking twice a month for a year, pestering the crap out of us. They like to play the "good cop/bad cop" routine with ya. One acts like he's your life long friend, telling you not to worry and the other acts like an ass, and continues to tell you how the government all ways gets what it wants. So , after some wrangling about the amount of land that they needed, they reduced it from the whole farm down to 13 acres, then down to 3.5 acres(after we hiked around the area in question). We then told the USFS agents to make us an offer on the 3.5 acres. lol We didn't hear back from them for over 6 years. Yes that's correct, over 6 damn years, then one day out of the blue they show up again. This time it's 2 new USFS agents and they know nothing about the agreement we had reached 6+ years earlier. So we are back to square one and they now insist on the 13 acres. In the end we sold them what's called a scenic easement and they finally went away. Just thought I'd share with you all one of the experiences of living next to the AT.
G.Morris
You really know your stuff. It's not the USFS. It's the NPS that did the deed. (National Park Service)
It is hard to see properly when the uniforms start talking eminent domain.
The NP here made some noise about that in the '70s.
The locals were less than civil.
geoffrey morris
04-10-2008, 23:14
Nope,your wrong, maybe it's you that doesn't know your stuff!!.Dude trust me when I tell you it's the USFS. Where I live is not a National Park.Maybe you should read the National Scenic Trails Act. This empowered the Sec of interior through USFS to use the right of eminent domain to acquire lands for the AT corridor. I guess the chain of command is Sec of Interior, USFS, then NPS(if we're dealing within a national park). No matter who you want to call in charge or top dog, the results are the same. Why would you question what I know or do not know? This was a personal account of what and who we had to deal with living next to the trail. Do you think I just made it up for kicks? It's what really went down.
This was in the late 1990's. Apparently, congress allocated funding for acquiring lands along the AT until the year 2000. Then the funding ran out. So in the late 1990's there was this big push by the USFS to finalize these land transactions.
As for my sight, it's 20-15, and when the uniforms start talking eminent domain the cross hairs only focus more intently.
FS in the south, NPS in the north
geoffrey morris
04-10-2008, 23:48
well there ya go, kinda like biscuits and gravy vs. gravy and biscuits
Everyone is wrong.
The National Park Service is part of the Department of Interior. The USFS is part of the Department of Agriculture. Both agencies work both north and south. Both acquire land for the trail, though that is mostly finished for now, anyway. Both administer federal handicap access laws.
Weary
geoffrey morris
04-11-2008, 00:10
I hope the USFS/NPS is done taking(forcing the sale of) land. Difficult to believe what they tell ya, since they're such liars. How long 'till the USFS decides it wants more? By law they can take up to 125 acres per mile of trail. At one time ,it was only 25 acres per mile but was amended in the 1970's to 125.
Tipi Walter
04-11-2008, 08:23
I hope the USFS/NPS is done taking(forcing the sale of) land. Difficult to believe what they tell ya, since they're such liars. How long 'till the USFS decides it wants more? By law they can take up to 125 acres per mile of trail. At one time ,it was only 25 acres per mile but was amended in the 1970's to 125.
I have a pretty good friend, a Native American, who lives in Roan Mountain up on a mountain(Buck Mt??), and she told me there's a strange history of discord between the locals and the Appalachian Trail. She even mentioned something about a couple of untimely deaths related to the issue but I'm clueless on the subject.
I do know that nearby on hiway 19E there's been several cases of car vandalism and car burnings, just wondering if it's related to the general bad feelings in the area?