ATV Restrictions
#1
11-13-2005, 09:41 PM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: LaGrande Oregon
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATV Restrictions
The press and various news releases from the USFS indicate that soon there will be a nationwide movement to severely restrict the travel of ATV's. I am certain that here in the State of Oregon the restrictions will be based on "good for the salmon", "good for the tree's", "good for the environment", and other sound bites that print good and have the warm fuzzy's attached to them. Reality is that it is only for control. Be good little kiddies, take your toys and go where we have determined you need to go. The same USFS that allows thousands of acres of our resources to feed the bugs, feed the fires, go unsalvaged and unmanaged has decided that ATV's need to be restricted and controlled.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img] I would suspect that if there is no productive way for those individuals to earn a living that imposing their will over ATV's does give them some justification.........Caring for the Land and Serving the People is supposed to be what the USFS stands for.....These control activities unfortunately accomplish neither. Tass
#2
11-13-2005, 10:25 PM
Pro Rider
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Northern Virginia, near DC
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#3
11-14-2005, 12:50 PM
ATV Restrictions
I live in Southern Oregon and won't let other riders on my land. When I watch riders do donuts tearing up BLM land cover, deliberately forging new trails through mossy habitat and intentionally riding in stream beds tearing up spawning areas, and in cases encouraging their children to do the same I hope they ban all motorized vehicles from public land. This is a case of more than a few riders unable to control their destructive intent, which reflects poorly on the sport as a whole. If common sense and respect for others who also 'own' public land isn't in their character, they should be banned.
#4
11-14-2005, 01:17 PM
Pro Rider
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Northern Virginia, near DC
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATV Restrictions
GeorgeD, I think it safe to say that there are a couple types of people on lists such as this. Those that feel the way you do regarding those that do not act responsibly, and then you have those that do not want any limitations placed on them. It is hard to say what is fact or fiction until we are able to see it in print.. which in many cases, is mis interpreted, or non existant...
I can't argue that the industry in general is under attack from many directions... but I am reserving judgement until I have everything before me in black and white.
I agree with you however, that irrespnsible riding is ruining not only our sport, and the damage they are doing to the environment is going to have far reaching effects.. not only physically/environmentally, but from a riding access point of view down the road that is based on the perception that all ATV riders are irresponsible.
I think the USFS has come under fire lately for decisions taken in the past. I know a whole lot of folks in New Mexico and AZ would love to debate their policy on controlled burn over the past couple of years. But I also understand the position they are placed in budget wise, and the limitations they have placed upon them as far as spending their time and resources where it will do the most good.
I would hope that all persons who claim to be enthusiasts would see that eventually, we are all going to need to sit down at the same table and hammer out some real compromise. I hate to say it, but I think we all need each other.... even if it is in ways we can't see right now.
I agree, we can do without the bad element though...
I can't argue that the industry in general is under attack from many directions... but I am reserving judgement until I have everything before me in black and white.
I agree with you however, that irrespnsible riding is ruining not only our sport, and the damage they are doing to the environment is going to have far reaching effects.. not only physically/environmentally, but from a riding access point of view down the road that is based on the perception that all ATV riders are irresponsible.
I think the USFS has come under fire lately for decisions taken in the past. I know a whole lot of folks in New Mexico and AZ would love to debate their policy on controlled burn over the past couple of years. But I also understand the position they are placed in budget wise, and the limitations they have placed upon them as far as spending their time and resources where it will do the most good.
I would hope that all persons who claim to be enthusiasts would see that eventually, we are all going to need to sit down at the same table and hammer out some real compromise. I hate to say it, but I think we all need each other.... even if it is in ways we can't see right now.
I agree, we can do without the bad element though...
#5
11-14-2005, 05:53 PM
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: LaGrande Oregon
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATV Restrictions
If you have public lands in your area such as BLM or USFS or perhaps State forestry go to their office and request information on ATV restrictions and ask to be placed on their mailing list for mailings on proposed rules or changes to existing rules. Watch your local newspapers for articles relating to ATV use and restrictions. There is an organization "Blue Ribbon Coalition" that provides information. A few weeks ago the Chief of the USFS had an article in the Oregonian relaying the fact that uses are being reviewed and restrictions are on the way. I agree with georged that abuse should not be tolerated but elimination of access for everyone is not an acceptable solution. Wise and cautious use of resources is good business whether for occupation or recreation but there are those that choose to abuse and they cannot be tolerated. Several years ago the Wallowa Whitman National Forest in Northeastern Oregon came out with a "Travel Access Management Plan", sounds wonderful. After they had the plan all put together a public meeting was called to explain the plan. A wonderful map was shown of the roads left open in an area known as "FOX PRARIE", beautiful green lines letting all know the roads they would be allowed to use. For the next meeting I took my copy of that map and marked in red the roads that would be closed. The public would have been denied access to 90% of the roads in that area. Granted that some needed to be reclaimed, but the plan was put together with no public input and after much "discussion" the public became involved. The practice now is to put a plan together and then let you see it. Any management activity should start with the question "what would you like" presented to the public, then a plan should be evolved. Land management has become an issue of "I am from the government, I will give you what I want". That is not tolerable. By all means seek out definitive information, but make sure you question everything and remember who put the information together......Tass
#6
11-14-2005, 07:18 PM
ATV Restrictions
Originally posted by: georged
I live in Southern Oregon and won't let other riders on my land. When I watch riders do donuts tearing up BLM land cover, deliberately forging new trails through mossy habitat and intentionally riding in stream beds tearing up spawning areas, and in cases encouraging their children to do the same I hope they ban all motorized vehicles from public land. This is a case of more than a few riders unable to control their destructive intent, which reflects poorly on the sport as a whole. If common sense and respect for others who also 'own' public land isn't in their character, they should be banned.
I live in Southern Oregon and won't let other riders on my land. When I watch riders do donuts tearing up BLM land cover, deliberately forging new trails through mossy habitat and intentionally riding in stream beds tearing up spawning areas, and in cases encouraging their children to do the same I hope they ban all motorized vehicles from public land. This is a case of more than a few riders unable to control their destructive intent, which reflects poorly on the sport as a whole. If common sense and respect for others who also 'own' public land isn't in their character, they should be banned.
#7
11-14-2005, 09:25 PM
ATV Restrictions
Consider the case of another outdoor motorsports group that started out with a bad image, yet turned that around to get trail access. These are the sledders.
Sleds were well on their way to achieving a very bad public image back in the 1970's. But, the sledders got smart. They organized, and cleaned up their act. Put a lid on the loud mufflers and the wild behavior, did public service in the form of winter rescue, maintained the trails they had, and did not create new ones. And in the last 20 years, a lot of sled trails have been opened. Perhaps the greatest change that helped the sledders was attitude - they stopped talking about access as if it were a right, and started thinking of it for what it really is - a privilige, and one that will be restricted or lost if it is abused. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists. Sled trails exist all over the Northeast now, because landowners know that it won't be abused, their land won't be damaged, their livestock won't be harrassed, and that all traces of it will be gone when the snow melts. Sledders don't have the right to have these trails, they have the privilige because they have worked hard to get it, and work hard to keep it.
The cold hard facts are - buying an ATV does not carry a guarantee of a place to operate it. You can ride it on your own land, that's about the only right you have. Beyond the bounds of your property, you compete with many groups of recreational users, several of which are well organized and politically experienced. Practically all of these groups will object to the noise, muddy streams, and erosion of the typical unmaintained ATV trail. Public land is not available for anyone to do whatever they want. It is open to the activities that the majority of people express a desire for, either through elected officials, or organized political action. Generally speaking, any recreational activities that damage the land or create excessive noise, are restricted or prohibited, because they disrupt the other recreational users. Consequently, one doesn't see ATV or dirt bike trails in national forests that much, because those groups tend to cause noise and create a mess, which irritates everyone else. That's not a 'right', that's political reality in a democracy - tick off a lot of people and they'll vote for legislators who will stop you. And that's pretty much what is happening.
So get smart. The environmentalists are well organized, well supported, and well financed. They are not going away. If you want better trail access in national forests, you must stop giving them good reasons to think of ATV riders as irresponsible. Every person you irritate with a loud muffler or erosion on hillsides or a mudhole is another vote for restrictions. Stop creating your own opposition. Show the general public that an ATV trail can be operated in a responsible, quiet manner, without degrading the land or irritating everyone else in the forest, and they may stop calling their legislators and complaining. It all starts when ATV riders recognize that access to trails is a privilige, not a right.
Sleds were well on their way to achieving a very bad public image back in the 1970's. But, the sledders got smart. They organized, and cleaned up their act. Put a lid on the loud mufflers and the wild behavior, did public service in the form of winter rescue, maintained the trails they had, and did not create new ones. And in the last 20 years, a lot of sled trails have been opened. Perhaps the greatest change that helped the sledders was attitude - they stopped talking about access as if it were a right, and started thinking of it for what it really is - a privilige, and one that will be restricted or lost if it is abused. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists. Sled trails exist all over the Northeast now, because landowners know that it won't be abused, their land won't be damaged, their livestock won't be harrassed, and that all traces of it will be gone when the snow melts. Sledders don't have the right to have these trails, they have the privilige because they have worked hard to get it, and work hard to keep it.
The cold hard facts are - buying an ATV does not carry a guarantee of a place to operate it. You can ride it on your own land, that's about the only right you have. Beyond the bounds of your property, you compete with many groups of recreational users, several of which are well organized and politically experienced. Practically all of these groups will object to the noise, muddy streams, and erosion of the typical unmaintained ATV trail. Public land is not available for anyone to do whatever they want. It is open to the activities that the majority of people express a desire for, either through elected officials, or organized political action. Generally speaking, any recreational activities that damage the land or create excessive noise, are restricted or prohibited, because they disrupt the other recreational users. Consequently, one doesn't see ATV or dirt bike trails in national forests that much, because those groups tend to cause noise and create a mess, which irritates everyone else. That's not a 'right', that's political reality in a democracy - tick off a lot of people and they'll vote for legislators who will stop you. And that's pretty much what is happening.
So get smart. The environmentalists are well organized, well supported, and well financed. They are not going away. If you want better trail access in national forests, you must stop giving them good reasons to think of ATV riders as irresponsible. Every person you irritate with a loud muffler or erosion on hillsides or a mudhole is another vote for restrictions. Stop creating your own opposition. Show the general public that an ATV trail can be operated in a responsible, quiet manner, without degrading the land or irritating everyone else in the forest, and they may stop calling their legislators and complaining. It all starts when ATV riders recognize that access to trails is a privilige, not a right.
Trending Topics
#8
11-14-2005, 09:57 PM
ATV Restrictions
Originally posted by: JohnO
Consider the case of another outdoor motorsports group that started out with a bad image, yet turned that around to get trail access. These are the sledders.
Sleds were well on their way to achieving a very bad public image back in the 1970's. But, the sledders got smart. They organized, and cleaned up their act. Put a lid on the loud mufflers and the wild behavior, did public service in the form of winter rescue, maintained the trails they had, and did not create new ones. And in the last 20 years, a lot of sled trails have been opened. Perhaps the greatest change that helped the sledders was attitude - they stopped talking about access as if it were a right, and started thinking of it for what it really is - a privilige, and one that will be restricted or lost if it is abused. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists. Sled trails exist all over the Northeast now, because landowners know that it won't be abused, their land won't be damaged, their livestock won't be harrassed, and that all traces of it will be gone when the snow melts. Sledders don't have the right to have these trails, they have the privilige because they have worked hard to get it, and work hard to keep it.
The cold hard facts are - buying an ATV does not carry a guarantee of a place to operate it. You can ride it on your own land, that's about the only right you have. Beyond the bounds of your property, you compete with many groups of recreational users, several of which are well organized and politically experienced. Practically all of these groups will object to the noise, muddy streams, and erosion of the typical unmaintained ATV trail. Public land is not available for anyone to do whatever they want. It is open to the activities that the majority of people express a desire for, either through elected officials, or organized political action. Generally speaking, any recreational activities that damage the land or create excessive noise, are restricted or prohibited, because they disrupt the other recreational users. Consequently, one doesn't see ATV or dirt bike trails in national forests that much, because those groups tend to cause noise and create a mess, which irritates everyone else. That's not a 'right', that's political reality in a democracy - tick off a lot of people and they'll vote for legislators who will stop you. And that's pretty much what is happening.
So get smart. The environmentalists are well organized, well supported, and well financed. They are not going away. If you want better trail access in national forests, you must stop giving them good reasons to think of ATV riders as irresponsible. Every person you irritate with a loud muffler or erosion on hillsides or a mudhole is another vote for restrictions. Stop creating your own opposition. Show the general public that an ATV trail can be operated in a responsible, quiet manner, without degrading the land or irritating everyone else in the forest, and they may stop calling their legislators and complaining. It all starts when ATV riders recognize that access to trails is a privilige, not a right.
Consider the case of another outdoor motorsports group that started out with a bad image, yet turned that around to get trail access. These are the sledders.
Sleds were well on their way to achieving a very bad public image back in the 1970's. But, the sledders got smart. They organized, and cleaned up their act. Put a lid on the loud mufflers and the wild behavior, did public service in the form of winter rescue, maintained the trails they had, and did not create new ones. And in the last 20 years, a lot of sled trails have been opened. Perhaps the greatest change that helped the sledders was attitude - they stopped talking about access as if it were a right, and started thinking of it for what it really is - a privilige, and one that will be restricted or lost if it is abused. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists. Sled trails exist all over the Northeast now, because landowners know that it won't be abused, their land won't be damaged, their livestock won't be harrassed, and that all traces of it will be gone when the snow melts. Sledders don't have the right to have these trails, they have the privilige because they have worked hard to get it, and work hard to keep it.
The cold hard facts are - buying an ATV does not carry a guarantee of a place to operate it. You can ride it on your own land, that's about the only right you have. Beyond the bounds of your property, you compete with many groups of recreational users, several of which are well organized and politically experienced. Practically all of these groups will object to the noise, muddy streams, and erosion of the typical unmaintained ATV trail. Public land is not available for anyone to do whatever they want. It is open to the activities that the majority of people express a desire for, either through elected officials, or organized political action. Generally speaking, any recreational activities that damage the land or create excessive noise, are restricted or prohibited, because they disrupt the other recreational users. Consequently, one doesn't see ATV or dirt bike trails in national forests that much, because those groups tend to cause noise and create a mess, which irritates everyone else. That's not a 'right', that's political reality in a democracy - tick off a lot of people and they'll vote for legislators who will stop you. And that's pretty much what is happening.
So get smart. The environmentalists are well organized, well supported, and well financed. They are not going away. If you want better trail access in national forests, you must stop giving them good reasons to think of ATV riders as irresponsible. Every person you irritate with a loud muffler or erosion on hillsides or a mudhole is another vote for restrictions. Stop creating your own opposition. Show the general public that an ATV trail can be operated in a responsible, quiet manner, without degrading the land or irritating everyone else in the forest, and they may stop calling their legislators and complaining. It all starts when ATV riders recognize that access to trails is a privilige, not a right.
#9
11-15-2005, 08:41 AM
Pro Rider
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Is old enough to know better, but too young to stop.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Northern Virginia, near DC
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATV Restrictions
I hate to wave that age/perception flag here, but I think it is obvious under teh current circumstances that in general, I believe the thinking process of let's say, older more mature individuals is a lot more conservative than many of the "younger" set. Maybe it is because we lived through the period when the industry saw the elimination of 3 wheeled vehicles, and the sport of 4 wheel ATV riding almost went teh way of the dinosaur.
We were the know it all punks that loved to tear it up anytime and any place we wanted to... and believe me, things were a lot less restrictive then than now...
I think this experience has taught us a little on how to deal with the radicals, because we were there once. I agree, that there are no guarantees. Riding an ATV is NOT a right... It is a priviledge granted and based on trust and mutual respect. In many cases, that respect is not between people.. it is between the environment.. it is between the promises we make to parents and authority figures.. it is a respect for laws, and other person's right to a cooexistance that does not include loud noise or ruts across their back yard.
Much has been said concerning education being the key to turning this around... and a lot of positive results have occurred... but the real test.. and the real solution has always been, and will continue to be... the ability of enthusiasts to join their voices en masse and force the authorities to address the issues, and apply policies and rulings in a fair and equitable manner. This also carries the weight of knowing that we as a group must also self police ourselves, and actively educate and admonish those that choose to act in an irresponsible manner.
When considering the arguments that environmental groups are using like preserving the habitat for some obscure species of plant or animal... I have to wonder where in the constitution does it grant them rights over human beings rights to access? It doesn't... but the squeaky wheel in this case has managed to sway public opinion to the point where the government is setting policy based upon those complaints. THAT is where joining voices is the KEY to solving the issues. The other stuff is just establishing our credability...
TASS, I know about the Blue ribbon coalition... and I know about the bills before commitee in DC, as I work here. My only suggestion is that when starting a thread.. that you provide links to the articles in question so that all can be on the same page and provide more focused comentary. We may not be able to address local issues from a distance, but many issues are national in scope.. and as such, we can add our voice to the cause.
We were the know it all punks that loved to tear it up anytime and any place we wanted to... and believe me, things were a lot less restrictive then than now...
I think this experience has taught us a little on how to deal with the radicals, because we were there once. I agree, that there are no guarantees. Riding an ATV is NOT a right... It is a priviledge granted and based on trust and mutual respect. In many cases, that respect is not between people.. it is between the environment.. it is between the promises we make to parents and authority figures.. it is a respect for laws, and other person's right to a cooexistance that does not include loud noise or ruts across their back yard.
Much has been said concerning education being the key to turning this around... and a lot of positive results have occurred... but the real test.. and the real solution has always been, and will continue to be... the ability of enthusiasts to join their voices en masse and force the authorities to address the issues, and apply policies and rulings in a fair and equitable manner. This also carries the weight of knowing that we as a group must also self police ourselves, and actively educate and admonish those that choose to act in an irresponsible manner.
When considering the arguments that environmental groups are using like preserving the habitat for some obscure species of plant or animal... I have to wonder where in the constitution does it grant them rights over human beings rights to access? It doesn't... but the squeaky wheel in this case has managed to sway public opinion to the point where the government is setting policy based upon those complaints. THAT is where joining voices is the KEY to solving the issues. The other stuff is just establishing our credability...
TASS, I know about the Blue ribbon coalition... and I know about the bills before commitee in DC, as I work here. My only suggestion is that when starting a thread.. that you provide links to the articles in question so that all can be on the same page and provide more focused comentary. We may not be able to address local issues from a distance, but many issues are national in scope.. and as such, we can add our voice to the cause.
#10
11-15-2005, 09:34 AM
ATV Restrictions
Originally posted by: JohnO
"...Consider the case of another outdoor motorsports group that started out with a bad image, yet turned that around to get trail access. These are the sledders. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists...."
"...Consider the case of another outdoor motorsports group that started out with a bad image, yet turned that around to get trail access. These are the sledders. They also learned the value of cooperating with their greatest opposition - the environmentalists...."
I have trouble with folks accepting my similiar view of what's going on here; because I tend to break it down into even simpler terms.
This generation can't evidently even carry the sledder generation's 'jockstrap' in terms of saying/doing what needs to be done..if it means hurting somebody's "feelings"....
They follow non-profit national organizations who have no other motivation other than keeping their 'job' and pissing as few people off as possible to keep that membership money rolling in ("racing" being their #1 time-waster and obviously the holy grail they feel will lead us all into the promised land) .....
Many orv club members (those supposedly intelligent enough to put their money where their mouth is) are more interested in who is going to bring those werenies to that next big ride or what the next "t-shirt" is going to look like....than the hard fought battles involved with orv politics.
As you mentioned, most riders would rather bitch about the fringe group of environmentalists...than partner with those few who respect the same things you and I do...which is getting <u>serious</u> about cracking down on those who disrespect the land we both share...
and the #1 fact that none of this is getting done?
Light four wheeled enthusiasts in 2005 are the most shameful group of enthusiasts to ever throw a leg over <u>anything</u> motorized per the sheer <u>volume</u> of machines they own and the damage they <U>continue</U> to cause (both environmentally and perceptually).
I'd like to let the sport down more easily....yet "frankly"?...the vast majority of the people I've ran into <u>in it</u>?(and this spans almost 7 years now)....simply don't deserve that courtesy. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]