What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Crossing streams in trucks

Whether electric or fossil fuel or nuclear, use of and production of energy results in pollution. In America, we are free to choose our favorite way to pollute. I choose a big old, liberal scaring, Ralph Nader smashing, spotted owl eating 72 Blazer. And I love it. If somebody doesn't like us, and is really serious about pollution and the environment, they should look into a timeshare in the Amazon. Becuase one of the best things about America is the availability of outdoor recreation. I agree with urban sprawl controls, but not with recreation limits.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's different out West but here in the East 'off-roaders' do an incredible amount of damage to the environment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it is different out here. We use the same logging roads to get to our wheeling, hunting, fishing whatever spots as the tree-huggers do to get to their trailheads. Only there are less of us in most places. (which is why we now have trail/hiking permits limiting use in a lot of areas)

An 8 ft cut through a bank, with all the trees missing around it, generates a lot of erosion. A few wheelers would have to do a hell of a lot of work to equal anything near a logging roads environmental impact.

I say either or. Leave your vehicles at the boundary to the Federal Lands, and everyone walks, or shut up and let people use them how they want to, since it *is* everyones land. I'm not talking about cutting down all the trees you want, littering, and wheeling across alpine meadows, but I'm not going to draw a distinction between a Forest Service road (former logging road) that 100 granola eaters use to get to their trailhead, and a 4 wheeling trail that maybe 30 vehicles on a good day use. (and yes, I like hiking as well)

What pisses me off is that in most areas, ORV groups and the tree-huggers should be working together to save more land for public use, not arguing about how to use the miniscule amounts we already have. We can worry about how its going to be used AFTER plenty has been purchased for the public. Heck, the wheeling places I've seen (very few though) are insignificant for any other use anyways. There are far more credible threats to wild areas, and wild life, than 'wheelers.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it's different out West but here in the East 'off-roaders' do an incredible amount of damage to the environment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it is different out here. We use the same logging roads to get to our wheeling, hunting, fishing whatever spots as the tree-huggers do to get to their trailheads. Only there are less of us in most places. (which is why we now have trail/hiking permits limiting use in a lot of areas)

An 8 ft cut through a bank, with all the trees missing around it, generates a lot of erosion. A few wheelers would have to do a hell of a lot of work to equal anything near a logging roads environmental impact.

I say either or. Leave your vehicles at the boundary to the Federal Lands, and everyone walks, or shut up and let people use them how they want to, since it *is* everyones land. I'm not talking about cutting down all the trees you want, littering, and wheeling across alpine meadows, but I'm not going to draw a distinction between a Forest Service road (former logging road) that 100 granola eaters use to get to their trailhead, and a 4 wheeling trail that maybe 30 vehicles on a good day use. (and yes, I like hiking as well)

What pisses me off is that in most areas, ORV groups and the tree-huggers should be working together to save more land for public use, not arguing about how to use the miniscule amounts we already have. We can worry about how its going to be used AFTER plenty has been purchased for the public. Heck, the wheeling places I've seen (very few though) are insignificant for any other use anyways. There are far more credible threats to wild areas, and wild life, than 'wheelers.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may not " ... draw a distinction ... " btwn logging roads & 'trails' but there is a difference. The one was planned to minimize, as much as possible, the impact on the environment & associated added maintenance but the other ... well, it's mostly "... he11 lets see where we can go today ...". I subscribe to a # of "off-road" magazines & the evidence is there -- in living color.

As for "A few wheelers would have to do a hell of a lot of work to equal anything near a logging roads environmental impact." Really? More levitation? What's the most favored route by "hardcore" off-roaders? Mostly straight up & over isn't it? Care to guess what results? Try a vertical sluiceway! More environmental damage? Naw (aw shucks) ... /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
I subscribe to a # of "off-road" magazines & the evidence is there -- in living color.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is an area that the mags really need to clean up. Just about every single issue of all the 4x4 mags has pics in it(some are articles but most are ads) that are perfect ammunition for the Sierra Club sonsabitches. Also I agree that mudding is much more detrimental to the enviroment than rockcrawling will ever be...this is why I choose the latter...
 
Whose side are you on? The Sierra Clup and EarthFirst both have their own chat rooms. Maybe you could become a member there.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Whose side are you on? The Sierra Clup and EarthFirst both have their own chat rooms. Maybe you could become a member there.

[/ QUOTE ]

He probaly is a member there, can you say TROLL?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Whose side are you on? The Sierra Clup and EarthFirst both have their own chat rooms. Maybe you could become a member there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not on any "side", just don't like playing make-believe. If you want to continue to delude yourself that's fine -- more power to you (I'm sure the padded-cell chat forums would enjoy your company /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif)! But every off-roader, whether intentional or not, has an impact on the environment. I just happen to be acutely aware of my impact (apparently unlike some) & try to minimize it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Whose side are you on? The Sierra Clup and EarthFirst both have their own chat rooms. Maybe you could become a member there.

[/ QUOTE ]

He probaly is a member there, can you say TROLL?

[/ QUOTE ]

Aw, c'mon ... you can do better than that, can't you? Feeling just a little bit inadequate /forums/images/graemlins/1zhelp.gif are you?
 
All of us are retarded for throwing blame around. If you are so worried about the environment and the ecological disaster that may or may not happen in a million years then what are you doing on a board that is 100% about wheelin? Ecological this and pollution that, man go look to the big coporate giants and the big cities. Or how about sub-divided neighborhoods. Hell the list could go on and on but who cares? Get over it. Enjoy what we have and take care of it the best we can.

Everyone is right but just make sure you are aware of your surroundings when you voice your opinion.

(And if you are worried about pollution and you think this country is bad, go spend sometime in Afghanistan, Pakistan or any one of those Middle Eastern countries. Just be sure not to go hiking around the nuclear waste buried in the desert.)

ML
/forums/images/graemlins/truck.gif /forums/images/graemlins/usaflag.gif
 
ok, i know i couldn't stay quiet on the subject for too long. after reading the posts and deciding not to post, i read again and now i must post. I have spent almost 8 yrs of undergrad and grad work on environmental engineering and biology. Unfortunately for such a hot topic, there appear to be no jobs available around here for fixing the environment. Everybody just wants to talk about it, instead of doing something about it. Yes it is true that automobiles cause far less air pollution than do factories. Yet it is true that automobiles cause far less water pollution than factories. All across the country steps are being taken to lessen the impact of factories costing billions of dollars in new construction and retrofitting. Only recently have automobiles been targeted for their impact. The fact is most industries have adhered to what is called bmp(best management practice) in regards to pollution. In a nutshell it is not the best way to prevent the most pollution but it is the best way to prevent the most pollution they can without going under. Lawmakers realize that cleaning up the environment is a good thing, but they also realize that people having jobs is a better thing. Sometimes they have to be reminded of whats the most important, especially if the seirra club is talking in their ear non-stop.
ok, back to the topic at hand. Do offroaders cause pollution? yes. Is it irrevocable? no. offroaders cause errosion especially if they just rip up whatever they want to. I agree it is fun to romp through a huge mud hole, and no doing it every once and a while will not cause major harm. doing it everyday with multiple vehicle will cause serious damage to that mud hole. That hole keeps getting bigger and bigger. The dirt loses it health, the water becomes polluted, etc. etc. Is it fixable? Yes. Mother Nature can fix almost anything with time. The major concern here is down time for trails. IT basically comes down to this without getting too in depth, responsible wheeling and regular trail maintanence will keep trails open, irresponsible wheelers who trash trails and do not pitch in to help repair trails get trails closed. Please help out with trail repairs in your area, show that you are responsible wheelers. In Virginia it is time to voice our public opinions regarding the usage of public lands as the Environmental Impact Statement has been submitted for public review period. One option calls for a state trail system and grants for those wanting to open private lands for trail construction. They understand the need for legalized trails. Another option bans all public land to vehicles period. Let lawmakers know what you want or they will decide for us and for the sierra club.
 
what are you saving the wheelin mud holes for?
they will be subdivisions shortly anyway, as most are in spitting distants from population.
 
what I could never uderstand is the greenies are like OHH dont mess up the woods keep them the way they are BLAH BLAH BLAH sure we make a trail WOW that hurt alot But atleast were enjoying "The grear out doors" like someone else said we get blamed for messing the woods up but then a big shot brings in a loader and tears it all down anyways to build houses
 
No need to worry about anything people. If humans cause enough damage to the environment that keeps them alive, we will all die and then earth can heal again. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif ......or perhaps some sort of mutated species that thrives on polution will arise and conquer us all /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
38" boggers and a 454 do more damage than Joe Commuter and his honda ever will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's not forget about the exsessive CO2 out-put. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
The reality is (my opinion of reality anyways lol) that all those people driving their cars to work 5 days a week do MUCH more environmental damage than a wheeler does in a weekend.


[/ QUOTE ]

I would definately agree with this. I drive my truck a few thousand miles a year, so I fugure I may use more gas and pullute more than a honda does per mile, but Mr. Honda probably drives his car 30,000 miles a year. I also think that the bigger pollution issue would not be vehicles at all, and more like factories, power plants, etc. Our cars and trucks could be as clean as possible but the world would still get polluted.
 
I agree, we could never even make a dent in the earth, barring nuclear weapons and such.

What about farming, destroying millions of acres of natural land just to feed people! SICK!

Humans are not all that important in the grand scheme of things, we are weak and brittle and most of us deserve to die more than we deserve to live.

I live in a place where there is still open country, but more and more houses are being built. I say shut the hell up about dirt misplacement and start teaching people to quit having 9 kids at a throw, it's sick, when I see quadmillatuplets on tv I wish ferverently for their flaming death in a minivan. I've been to the suburbs once, and I never want to be even vaugely near one.

Feel free to engage me in any form of argument, I enjoy it, and I enjoy trying to defeat non logic

Me, I'm just waiting to die /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Hey Suburbanite, what kind of rig do you have, where do you wheel, and what mods have you done? Your profile is pretty blank.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You may not " ... draw a distinction ... " btwn logging roads & 'trails' but there is a difference. The one was planned to minimize, as much as possible, the impact on the environment & associated added maintenance but the other

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you familiar with what you speak of? Massive clear cuts, stream sedimintation caused by same, reduced fish runs, dirt roads so choked with dust that people wear dust masks in the National Forests, and so on? I think you fail to realize that there are hundreds of thousands of miles of logging roads. Once again, quantity of "lesser" causes vastly outweighs the "gross" damagers such as 4 wheeling, which occurs much less often, and in less places. But its actually pretty obvious you have no experience with mountainous areas, or you would know how bad logging roads are. a 10 mile 4 wheel trail will never equal 100 miles of logging roads in environmental damage.

[ QUOTE ]
I just happen to be acutely aware of my impact (apparently unlike some) & try to minimize it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then don't go wheeling. Your argument is about as useful as drawing a distinction between different types of hunting when the end result is the same.

No matter the reason a trail or road is in place, it's environmentally damaging. Either you manage the area for best use, or you don't use it. It's called conservation or preservation, decide what you want. It's not YOUR land, it's everyones.

You come off sounding awfully high and mighty.

"Oh I go wheeling, but I'm not like everyone else, I'm better! My truck gets 50 miles per gallon, weighs 250 pounds, runs on 20 inch wide tires (slicks of course!) and never treads in the same place twice."

True, there are gross examples of idiots in the woods. All you have to do is look at the trash.
 
I was going to sit on the sidelines on this one, but I happen to be conversant in forest practices and regardless of the negative press they sometimes see, they are performed with thoughts to environmental impact. You brought up the best one, clearcutting.

Clearcutting is an environmentally friendly way to log in some forests, it comes closest to simulating natural regeneration by fire and instead of selective logging where the heavy equipment traverses the same roads over and over to take out small patches, you go in once and don't have to return for the rotation age (up to 100 years in some cases). You get a homogeneous regeneration, habitat for large wildlife and less traffic than "patchwork logging". As long as the watershed is taken into consideration the impact on creeks and streams is minimized also.

Beyond balloon or helicopter logging (which still takes a significant number of people on the ground) clearcutting is one of the more enviromentally friendly forest practices. People just don't like to see a field of stumps. In that case, move to a brick house.

I have no investment in the forestry sector, just spent some time at graduate school learning advanced forest management and ecology .. part of which includes managing public use .. you think they don't think about these things? Come on ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom