I recently visited Utah's Coral Pink Sand Dunes State Park. This is a place I avoided seeing for quite some time due to the fact that ATV's are allowed on the dunes. I heard many mixed opinions on the dunes and we finally decided to check it out ourselves. While the dunes themselves exceeded expectations, the ATV's there pretty much ruined the experience and the photography. (I am going to continue this thread on my blog today)
While doing some research today on Zion National Park I came across this article from the Salt Lake City Tribune. I haven't read it yet but I thought I would share it with y'all. Its interesting, because the picture they have for the article looks to be in the same area as the cover shot for the latest Outdoor Photographer.
While I understand the allure and rights of ATV users, because they are so intrusive and destructive, it is a shame people insist on riding them over some of the most pristine wilderness areas in the country. Then again, you can't blame then when they are allowed to do it and the tourism and market for ATV use in Southern Utah is tremenedous.
One of these quads totally disrupted a tern colony where I live. The problem is not the atvs but how is put behind the wheel. Unfortunately common sense and a respect for nature is not a requirement to own one of these things.
The Town I work for confiscates ATV's when they are found to be used illegally (on Town Lands) and then sells them on the open market.... Well, except for the ones they donate to the Police to tear up the beaches with, hmm....
I could go on a long time about the evils that are ATVs. Whether it's destroying up fragile alpine tundra habitat, killing salmon redds in creek bottoms by driving over them, plowing down designated foot trails, or creating quarter mile -wide mud holes around wet spots, they are worst thing to happen to the wilderness since DDT.
I won't ride them. I try to avoid places they go. And I find the attitudes of people who do ride them completely appalling.
I read your blog post on the subject Michael and I certainly agree with virtually everything you said. 25 years ago that state park was a wonderful place to visit and I did often. My last two visits in recent years were a disaster, for the very reason you describe. I won't be going back. Ever.
Jim's comment could have come out of my own mouth (or keyboard) - that's exactly how I feel about ATV's in general and the majority of those who ride them on public lands.
If we keep surrendering our favourite haunts because of these dreadful contraptions we are obviously going to be the losers. This is a worldwide problem and it is not getting any better. Sadly common sense is no longer common.
I abhor the things personally. Snowmobiles ...cough...and ATVs.
Posted by Fred Stearns on July 15, 2010 at 10:05 PM
Like many such devices, they were developed for a purpose and do a great job at it. Then the manufacturers think that they have a wonderful moneymaker and go wild. They get big and noisy. The advertisements show them being used in all sorts of inappropriate ways. Then they become hazards! ATVs fall into the same category as snow mobiles and jet skis, which I can personal death traps. Use them for what they were originally designed for and prohibit the other uses. I could make a lot of people made at me and include a select group of motorcycles, especially the extra loud ones and the crotch rockets.
Bret, You cycle does not fit into that category.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on July 19, 2010 at 12:41 AM
While doing some research today on Zion National Park I came across this article from the Salt Lake City Tribune. I haven't read it yet but I thought I would share it with y'all. Its interesting, because the picture they have for the article looks to be in the same area as the cover shot for the latest Outdoor Photographer.
Way to post up a huge issue without gaining any knowledge on the matter or taking time to learn about the issue. All because tire tracks through a State Park which allows ATV use interfered with your chosen method of recreation. Factory Butte (the image you referenced) is a huge issue and rightfully so. But it is NOT a wilderness area. You should understand SUWA's proposals and their impact before you jump on-board. Many of the things they've proposed would greatly reduce your ability to access public land in Utah.
I'm a jeeper. I sometimes use my jeep purely for the challenge of tackling a difficult trail. More often than not, I use it to access a remote trailhead where I get out and hike or backpack. I have never driven it off trail. I have never destroyed sensitive habitat in it. I have never taken it blasting across the sand dunes or blazed across virgin tundra. Many, I would even say MOST jeepers, ATV and snowmobile enthusiasts use motorized vehicles in the backcountry in a respectful manner as recreation in nature. There are bad apples, but it is not the majority.
I've got my own personal issues with many ATV and dirt bike riders I've seen out on the trails. I've seen their owners/riders tear up areas. They've been rude to me in my slower traveling jeep. I've seen enough who have no respect for staying on the trail. But they also offer access to the backcountry for many respectful users and they serve many useful purposes in addition to recreation. At the same time, can you honestly tell me you've never seen a hiker cut a switchback or hike off trail. The result is the same on a smaller scale.
There is no doubt a balance which needs to be established as ever more capable off-road vehicles are factory built. I can tell you that organizations are out there working to educate riders to stay the trail. But those same organizations are simultaneously being forced to expend their efforts and financial resources working to keep open existing LEGAL backcountry roads which have been under attack for many years, especially over the last decade. The major environmental organizations far exceed the revenue and lobbying leverage of groups like IMBA and Blue Ribbon Coalition.
Its difficult to regain a freedom which society has readily given away. These vehicles may not be YOUR choice of travel in the backcountry, but some people use them in conjunction with their enjoyment of the backcountry. Where do you draw the line between your reasonable fun and someone else's. Who is to say that there will not come a time when all federal lands are off-limit to photographers because of the dangers poised to our country or due the damage cause by photographers at overused locations like Dream Lake or Maroon Lake here in Colorado. The government could choose to put a licensing program and enforcement into place effective for all photographers rather than just the commercial and motion picture permitting required today.
I have said it before, but in our country today there are only a few options to protect our public lands from destruction at the hands of developers, mineral and energy extractors. The ones I can think of off the top of my head are the National Park/Monument System, National Wildlife Refuge designation, Wilderness Area designation and Roadless Area designation. We already have laws on the books that effectively eliminate the ability of persons to create new roads or trails on Federal land. But there is room for Federal protection from developers, mineral and energy extractors while still giving the public multi-use recreation access on lands which currently offer multi-use. Not every acre of land that deserves protection from development fits the Wilderness Act definition.
Thanks very much for your well written post. I feel like we aren't discussing the same issue here. I didn't mention Jeep's at all in my post. Also a couple of points I want reemphasize. #1 Is the large distinction between "pristine" wilderness areas and others areas specifically designated for off road use. #2 The noise pollution these vehicles make are a distraction for others trying to enjoy the area.
I am not speaking at all of someone driving their Jeep Wrangler down an unmaintained, old forest service road to go backpacking or driving it recreationally on a trail designated for that use like Hog Canyon outside of Kanab. I hope this helps clarify my position. I appreciate yours as well. Thanks for sharing.
The noise pollution is just as big of an issue as the physical damage. The same goes for helicopters, which I think are just as bad as ATVs, because they can go ANYWHERE and blast it with noise. Last year I did an amazing hike on the big island (Hawaii): 5 hours to an active lava flow, and we were the only people there to witness it. For about 5 minutes, that is, when the first helicopter buzzed over our heads and circled for 30 minutes. At times there were as many as 4 helicopters circling our spot. What a buzzkill! Will were ever (as a society) relearn the value of solitude and unspoiled nature?
Hey Mel, come on out to Tennessee and I'll show you the reverse of your, "I would even say MOST jeepers, ATV and snowmobile enthusiasts use motorized vehicles in the backcountry in a respectful manner as recreation in nature. There are bad apples, but it is not the majority" statement. In fact, Tennessee is trying to pass legislation to make it legal to tag and drive your ATV on public roads, allowing them to be driven on all Forest Service access roads not designed for unlicensed ATV's or the heavy usage that they will bring. Drop by my "Environmental Gallery" and check out the first few pix Environmental
Posted by Scott Fricke on July 26, 2010 at 11:11 PM
Reply posted by Jim Bullard on 07/10/10 at 07:53 am MDT
We all have a built in ATV, our legs and feet. Today too many are too lazy to use them.
Some people ride ATV's because they are not able to walk or hike and want to enjoy the outdoors. Included in this group are disabled veterans that sacrificed themselves for this country and simply want to enjoy the same areas you do. How about the elderly and those disabled by disease? Consider yourself blessed you have the choice of how you experience the outdoors, I do.
I visited the Coral Pink Sand Dunes a couple of years ago. We camped overnight in the campground and then got up just before dawn and hiked out into the dunes. Spent 2 hours in absolute solitude, seems the ATV crowd aren't early risers.
Ive heard that argument presented many many times, Scott--i simply do not buy it. Implicit in your point is the assumption that we are all equally endowed with some inalienable right to visit every scenic place on earth. That simply isnt the case. I wish i could visit the summit of K2, but...dang...i just dont have the natural fortitude to do it. That doesnt mean we should build a road up to the summit. Some folks think that every summit should be like Pikes Peak, with a concession stand at top. I'm not one of those people. I'm all for helping the disabled and elderly enjoy the outdoors, but it has to be balanced against the need to protect these areas--so they're not ruined for everyone.
Mel, I completely respect and understand your opinion--and since im going on year #2 without a high clearance 4WD vehicle, i am somewhat sympathetic (you should have seen me cursing as i trudged up to Music Pass a couple weeks back... ). However--I'd be a coward if I didnt submit to you that there is an underlying assumption held by you, and now Scott, that more and greater access is fundamentally a good thing. It isn't. ATVs and Jeeps etc werent in existence until very very recently from an ecological perspective. They've only been around for about the same amount of time its taken for our species to cut down 97% of the ancient forest, dam virtually every river, and wipe out countless species. They're part of an overall misconception of "progress" that encompasses a broad range of our society, not the least of which is that heavily processed or chemically produced foods are good for us.
Call me crazy (and im sure many will, and maybe theyre right ) but i think we are blinding ourselves through our own desire for a 'pleasant' life experience. I think we are completely forgetting the values that Daniel C mentions above (I'd add light pollution---how many times have you seen photogs exclaim how enlightening it was to see the night sky from some remote corner of the earth). Maybe we can't put the genie back in the bottle, but that's not going to stop me from complaining about it--not when i see the devestating results everytime i head out into the so-called "wilderness"--replete with buzzing helicopters, garbage-strewn primitive campsites, old abandoned relics of prior habitation, 'official' and unofficial roads, etc. It gets worse every year, IMO. Education doesnt seem to be working. We cant legislate against people's stupid behavior, there's not enough enforcement to go around. I saw a dozen or so 'illegal' campsites at Lost/Goose Creek a few weeks back--as i picked several disgarded bottles out of the 'pristine' wilderness creek. You argue for balance--the problem is, at least from my perspective--the balance is heavily tipping the scale in the wrong direction, and for the wrong reasons.
Posted by Daniel Ewert on July 28, 2010 at 10:17 PM
Scott, I understand your point about disabled people, but that doesn't justify the destruction of an unspoiled area so that a small group of people can enjoy it more. When the day comes (God forbid) that I am no longer able to do a multi-day backcountry trip through the mountains, you won't see me buying an ATV so that I can roar through the pristine meadows where I used to hike. Your reference to a sympathetic group such as disabled veterans doesn't do much for me either. What about the firemen, nurses, and elementary school teachers who want to have peaceful solitude in the mountains away from the ATV's?
Also, there are beautiful areas that already provide access for disabled individuals. For example, some of the trails in the Paradise area of Mt. Rainier are paved and are wheelchair accessible.
Posted by Scott Fricke on July 30, 2010 at 2:13 AM
Stan and Daniel,
I didn't once mention the destruction of any "pristine", or "unspoiled area", simply that not all ATV users are simply "lazy". My story also made a point that the area can be used by participants in both activities. I utilized the area just as I wanted to, and then as the golden light faded I left and the ATV's used it as they wanted to. I just find it kind of humorous that someone would go to the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, knowing fully well that ATV's are allowed, and then complain about it. Kind of like going to Times Square on New Years Eve and then complain about the crowds.
Stan, Lost/Goose Creek is only open to hikers, ATV's are not allowed, so should we close off that wilderness area to keep "lazy" hikers from furthering the destruction of the "'pristine' wilderness creek"? Maybe prohibit human visitation all together until society learns a thing or two? I find it interesting that you rail against all these "'official' and unofficial roads", yet use them (the official ones in this case) to get to areas like the Goose Creek Trailhead at Lost Creek Wilderness or Porphyry Basin. Lost Creek must be around a 200 mile round-trip from where you live, Porphyry even farther, wouldn't it be better to do your part to tilt the scales in the other direction and only go to areas you can reach by foot or other means that don't create the problems you complain about?
Your reference to a sympathetic group such as disabled veterans doesn't do much for me either. What about the firemen, nurses, and elementary school teachers who want to have peaceful solitude in the mountains away from the ATV's?
Sad that it doesn't do anything for you, we are talking about people that are permanently maimed. If you get to a point you can't hike a trail, then don't, just don't deny other people the opportunity to do so because it doesn't please you... The reality is, there are wilderness areas which exclude all motorized vehicles where anyone can go to enjoy a true "pristine" wilderness. There are also areas that have roads suitable for ATV and other off-road vehicles. There is plenty of room in this country for both activities. The reality is that most ATV riders don't "roar through the pristine meadows where I used to hike." Sure there are some, just like there are some hikers that create illegal campsites, cut switchbacks, create new trails, destroy natural features, and leave trash in the same former pristine meadow. I don't enjoy ATV noise either, that is why I choose a designated wilderness area or a trail that does not allow vehicles when I want quiet and solitude. But I also drive an off-road vehicle to get me to remote wilderness trailheads and I practice the same Leave No Trace principles as I do while hiking. So, David, to get to some of your pristine wilderness areas do you (and the hundreds/thousands of other users) have to drive through otherwise quiet rural areas disturbing the peace and solitude of the local inhabitants?
Good question, Scott--I'll try to honestly respond. Like you, I practice 'leave no trace'. I always leave an area better than it was when i come in, by carting out garbage or whatever. My '200' mile RT was over mainly highway, so its not like I was disturbing anyone in the manor I was referring to. When I travel those unpaved roads, Im not doing any more damage than has already been done. (well, I do pollute the air, but i do even more of that driving to work each day, and until I find a way around that there's not a heck of a lot I can do). I will say, if there was a petition circulated that required everyone to give up their cars and resort to foot travel until the problems of fossil-fules based transportation was solved, assuming there was a gaurantee that the law would have full enforcement--I would be the first to sign it. But as with all these issues, without enforcement, there is no point in taking a stand or making a point in an attempt to "tip the scales" in the other direction, because it simply doesnt work. A few "bad apples" can easily undo the good intentions of many do-gooders.
And, fundamentally, therein lies the problem for me.
I think the only point on which you and I may disagree is that I'm more pessimistic when it comes to your belief that there "is plenty of room in this country..." I just don't see it that way. When I fly over our country, I see a land that is criss-crossed with roads and dotted with superfund sites, and every year the 'wilderness' areas seem to become more and more isolated and surrounded. Evidentally many others see it this way too, since the "isolated" areas see increasing traffic each year. Places that saw maybe 4 or 5 people 10 years ago now see dozens if not hundreds of visitors. As the population of our country continues to double every generation or so, the 'fringe' areas, such as your 'quiet rural areas' continue to expand indiscriminantly. The Front Range is a good example; for an even better one go visit the coastal areas. As the number of visitors continues to expand, the unfortunate truth is that the number of 'bad apples' is going to increase--there's really no way around that or way to legislate against, short of "prohibiting human visitation all together" as you jokingly suggest (I don't think it's a joke, I think we're at a crucial point in our history where wilderness may be lost forever--in fact most of it already has been lost). That may sound pessimistic, but I base that opinion on personal observations of the downhill decline of our natural areas that I have seen over the last few decades. I regrettably believe that by the time our society realizes the value of our wilderness, it will be too late. The only thing I can do in the meantime is sound the alarm best I can, for those who are willing to listen.
Thanks for the civil and interesting discussion
Posted by Daniel Ewert on July 30, 2010 at 2:15 PM
Scott, I think we can agree to disagree on the merits of ATV use but I do want to clarify a point about your arguments that incorporate sympathetic groups such as disabled veterans. I learned in debate class a long time ago that one way to increase the appeal of your argument is to incorporate an aspect of emotional appeal into it. I think we can both agree that most of the folks driving ATV's through the woods are not disabled veterans. You referenced that group only because they naturally inspire sympathy (and rightly so). I challenged this aspect of your argument by dragging in firemen, nurses and teachers (to make a point about your use of a group) and your response seemed to be that I don't care about disabled people. Should I now respond by saying that you don't like firemen and teachers who enjoy peaceful solitude? That would be a lame response that ignores the actual merits of what we are really talking about. So, in sum, let's stick to the actual issues.
Posted by John Tobias on August 17, 2010 at 3:54 PM
This has been an interesting discussion, however there seems to be one part of the debate missing: Oil and Gas. The fact is atv, snowmobiles, jetskis all use gas and oil, something we are suposed to be weaning ourselves off of. Granted, public transportation by no means meets our needs to get from point A to point B. But, once off of the main roads should we rely on vehicles which add to the use of oil products? Just for fun? I also have to admit I see no reason for car racing, speedboat racing or air races. Just a couple of thoughts.
Posted by Keith Nelson on October 3, 2010 at 3:32 PM
As one who has owned an ATV, and enjoyed our time with it very much, I'd like to offer my own view on this issue, one nutured and shared with my wife.
As someone who has owned, and very much enjoyed my time with an ATV, let me simply point out “our” perspective. My wife and I, owned for a time a single ATV which we mostly rode double. At the time we lived in Colorado’s high alpine country. We’ve taken this machine through the high reaches of British Columbia, in addition to some very high alpine environments in Colorado. I’d be the first to admit there are some real uncaring folks who ride these vehicles, but no more than I encounter on the highways of the Rocky Mountain State. It isn’t the ATV owners and riders who have lost all sense of manners and respect. It has been my experience it is we Americans in our vehicles. This is based upon countless experiences on Vail Pass, Kenosha Pass, Tennessee Pass, Fremont Pass, Trout Creek Pass, Wilkerson Pas as well as the Eisenhower tunnel throughout the seasons with my street vehicle, as well as fellow ATV’rs. We have lost respect for each other, and for nature.
Ok, so you want to drive up in your vehicle, with camera in tow, to capture some beautiful majestic scene, and through your viewfinder, or along the path you’ve encountered some off-road vehicles… did you ever think, perhaps you should have pulled into a parking lot at some wilderness area, an area where any and all such modes of transportation are banned, walked for an hour or so, to an equally beautiful scene, and taken that civilization free shot? I’ve found many, many such areas, and have come to learn where and when to visit these areas, when no one else is around, no one!
There are 54 (depending upon who is counting) peaks over fourteen thousand feet in Colorado. There are two with paved highways to the summit, one with not only a highway, but a train, and a concession stand (beyond trashy) at the summit. So do I focus on the error of my fellow citizens in allowing this to happen on beautiful Pikes Peak and Mt. Evans, or instead do I chose one of the other 52 summits to focus on, to drag my camera to the summit of, and take an unobstructed view of “nature” as I perceive it? Contrary to some of the views expressed in this thread, I avoid “National Parks” for the very reason some here profess to go there, to see “nature”. Those parks are overrun with people, that is, in my view, what they were created for, for city-folk to drive out into “nature”. Head to the back country of a National Wilderness Area, at least in the Buffalo Peaks Wilderness Area, and more times than not you will be the ONLY human being in that huge, protected, place of nature.
Discussion
22 repliesWhile doing some research today on Zion National Park I came across this article from the Salt Lake City Tribune. I haven't read it yet but I thought I would share it with y'all. Its interesting, because the picture they have for the article looks to be in the same area as the cover shot for the latest Outdoor Photographer.
While I understand the allure and rights of ATV users, because they are so intrusive and destructive, it is a shame people insist on riding them over some of the most pristine wilderness areas in the country. Then again, you can't blame then when they are allowed to do it and the tourism and market for ATV use in Southern Utah is tremenedous.
ATVs threatening 10 Utah ‘treasures’
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/49898838-76/wilderness-utah-lost-alliance.html.csp
I won't ride them. I try to avoid places they go. And I find the attitudes of people who do ride them completely appalling.
Jim's comment could have come out of my own mouth (or keyboard) - that's exactly how I feel about ATV's in general and the majority of those who ride them on public lands.
Bret, You cycle does not fit into that category.
Way to post up a huge issue without gaining any knowledge on the matter or taking time to learn about the issue. All because tire tracks through a State Park which allows ATV use interfered with your chosen method of recreation. Factory Butte (the image you referenced) is a huge issue and rightfully so. But it is NOT a wilderness area. You should understand SUWA's proposals and their impact before you jump on-board. Many of the things they've proposed would greatly reduce your ability to access public land in Utah.
I'm a jeeper. I sometimes use my jeep purely for the challenge of tackling a difficult trail. More often than not, I use it to access a remote trailhead where I get out and hike or backpack. I have never driven it off trail. I have never destroyed sensitive habitat in it. I have never taken it blasting across the sand dunes or blazed across virgin tundra. Many, I would even say MOST jeepers, ATV and snowmobile enthusiasts use motorized vehicles in the backcountry in a respectful manner as recreation in nature. There are bad apples, but it is not the majority.
I've got my own personal issues with many ATV and dirt bike riders I've seen out on the trails. I've seen their owners/riders tear up areas. They've been rude to me in my slower traveling jeep. I've seen enough who have no respect for staying on the trail. But they also offer access to the backcountry for many respectful users and they serve many useful purposes in addition to recreation. At the same time, can you honestly tell me you've never seen a hiker cut a switchback or hike off trail. The result is the same on a smaller scale.
There is no doubt a balance which needs to be established as ever more capable off-road vehicles are factory built. I can tell you that organizations are out there working to educate riders to stay the trail. But those same organizations are simultaneously being forced to expend their efforts and financial resources working to keep open existing LEGAL backcountry roads which have been under attack for many years, especially over the last decade. The major environmental organizations far exceed the revenue and lobbying leverage of groups like IMBA and Blue Ribbon Coalition.
Its difficult to regain a freedom which society has readily given away. These vehicles may not be YOUR choice of travel in the backcountry, but some people use them in conjunction with their enjoyment of the backcountry. Where do you draw the line between your reasonable fun and someone else's. Who is to say that there will not come a time when all federal lands are off-limit to photographers because of the dangers poised to our country or due the damage cause by photographers at overused locations like Dream Lake or Maroon Lake here in Colorado. The government could choose to put a licensing program and enforcement into place effective for all photographers rather than just the commercial and motion picture permitting required today.
I have said it before, but in our country today there are only a few options to protect our public lands from destruction at the hands of developers, mineral and energy extractors. The ones I can think of off the top of my head are the National Park/Monument System, National Wildlife Refuge designation, Wilderness Area designation and Roadless Area designation. We already have laws on the books that effectively eliminate the ability of persons to create new roads or trails on Federal land. But there is room for Federal protection from developers, mineral and energy extractors while still giving the public multi-use recreation access on lands which currently offer multi-use. Not every acre of land that deserves protection from development fits the Wilderness Act definition.
Thanks very much for your well written post. I feel like we aren't discussing the same issue here. I didn't mention Jeep's at all in my post. Also a couple of points I want reemphasize. #1 Is the large distinction between "pristine" wilderness areas and others areas specifically designated for off road use. #2 The noise pollution these vehicles make are a distraction for others trying to enjoy the area.
I am not speaking at all of someone driving their Jeep Wrangler down an unmaintained, old forest service road to go backpacking or driving it recreationally on a trail designated for that use like Hog Canyon outside of Kanab. I hope this helps clarify my position. I appreciate yours as well. Thanks for sharing.
Some people ride ATV's because they are not able to walk or hike and want to enjoy the outdoors. Included in this group are disabled veterans that sacrificed themselves for this country and simply want to enjoy the same areas you do. How about the elderly and those disabled by disease? Consider yourself blessed you have the choice of how you experience the outdoors, I do.
I visited the Coral Pink Sand Dunes a couple of years ago. We camped overnight in the campground and then got up just before dawn and hiked out into the dunes. Spent 2 hours in absolute solitude, seems the ATV crowd aren't early risers.
Maybe theyre lazy?
Call me crazy (and im sure many will, and maybe theyre right
Also, there are beautiful areas that already provide access for disabled individuals. For example, some of the trails in the Paradise area of Mt. Rainier are paved and are wheelchair accessible.
I didn't once mention the destruction of any "pristine", or "unspoiled area", simply that not all ATV users are simply "lazy". My story also made a point that the area can be used by participants in both activities. I utilized the area just as I wanted to, and then as the golden light faded I left and the ATV's used it as they wanted to. I just find it kind of humorous that someone would go to the Coral Pink Sand Dunes, knowing fully well that ATV's are allowed, and then complain about it. Kind of like going to Times Square on New Years Eve and then complain about the crowds.
Stan, Lost/Goose Creek is only open to hikers, ATV's are not allowed, so should we close off that wilderness area to keep "lazy" hikers from furthering the destruction of the "'pristine' wilderness creek"? Maybe prohibit human visitation all together until society learns a thing or two? I find it interesting that you rail against all these "'official' and unofficial roads", yet use them (the official ones in this case) to get to areas like the Goose Creek Trailhead at Lost Creek Wilderness or Porphyry Basin. Lost Creek must be around a 200 mile round-trip from where you live, Porphyry even farther, wouldn't it be better to do your part to tilt the scales in the other direction and only go to areas you can reach by foot or other means that don't create the problems you complain about?
Sad that it doesn't do anything for you, we are talking about people that are permanently maimed. If you get to a point you can't hike a trail, then don't, just don't deny other people the opportunity to do so because it doesn't please you... The reality is, there are wilderness areas which exclude all motorized vehicles where anyone can go to enjoy a true "pristine" wilderness. There are also areas that have roads suitable for ATV and other off-road vehicles. There is plenty of room in this country for both activities. The reality is that most ATV riders don't "roar through the pristine meadows where I used to hike." Sure there are some, just like there are some hikers that create illegal campsites, cut switchbacks, create new trails, destroy natural features, and leave trash in the same former pristine meadow. I don't enjoy ATV noise either, that is why I choose a designated wilderness area or a trail that does not allow vehicles when I want quiet and solitude. But I also drive an off-road vehicle to get me to remote wilderness trailheads and I practice the same Leave No Trace principles as I do while hiking. So, David, to get to some of your pristine wilderness areas do you (and the hundreds/thousands of other users) have to drive through otherwise quiet rural areas disturbing the peace and solitude of the local inhabitants?
And, fundamentally, therein lies the problem for me.
I think the only point on which you and I may disagree is that I'm more pessimistic when it comes to your belief that there "is plenty of room in this country..." I just don't see it that way. When I fly over our country, I see a land that is criss-crossed with roads and dotted with superfund sites, and every year the 'wilderness' areas seem to become more and more isolated and surrounded. Evidentally many others see it this way too, since the "isolated" areas see increasing traffic each year. Places that saw maybe 4 or 5 people 10 years ago now see dozens if not hundreds of visitors. As the population of our country continues to double every generation or so, the 'fringe' areas, such as your 'quiet rural areas' continue to expand indiscriminantly. The Front Range is a good example; for an even better one go visit the coastal areas. As the number of visitors continues to expand, the unfortunate truth is that the number of 'bad apples' is going to increase--there's really no way around that or way to legislate against, short of "prohibiting human visitation all together" as you jokingly suggest (I don't think it's a joke, I think we're at a crucial point in our history where wilderness may be lost forever--in fact most of it already has been lost). That may sound pessimistic, but I base that opinion on personal observations of the downhill decline of our natural areas that I have seen over the last few decades. I regrettably believe that by the time our society realizes the value of our wilderness, it will be too late. The only thing I can do in the meantime is sound the alarm best I can, for those who are willing to listen.
Thanks for the civil and interesting discussion
As someone who has owned, and very much enjoyed my time with an ATV, let me simply point out “our” perspective. My wife and I, owned for a time a single ATV which we mostly rode double. At the time we lived in Colorado’s high alpine country. We’ve taken this machine through the high reaches of British Columbia, in addition to some very high alpine environments in Colorado. I’d be the first to admit there are some real uncaring folks who ride these vehicles, but no more than I encounter on the highways of the Rocky Mountain State. It isn’t the ATV owners and riders who have lost all sense of manners and respect. It has been my experience it is we Americans in our vehicles. This is based upon countless experiences on Vail Pass, Kenosha Pass, Tennessee Pass, Fremont Pass, Trout Creek Pass, Wilkerson Pas as well as the Eisenhower tunnel throughout the seasons with my street vehicle, as well as fellow ATV’rs. We have lost respect for each other, and for nature.
Ok, so you want to drive up in your vehicle, with camera in tow, to capture some beautiful majestic scene, and through your viewfinder, or along the path you’ve encountered some off-road vehicles… did you ever think, perhaps you should have pulled into a parking lot at some wilderness area, an area where any and all such modes of transportation are banned, walked for an hour or so, to an equally beautiful scene, and taken that civilization free shot? I’ve found many, many such areas, and have come to learn where and when to visit these areas, when no one else is around, no one!
There are 54 (depending upon who is counting) peaks over fourteen thousand feet in Colorado. There are two with paved highways to the summit, one with not only a highway, but a train, and a concession stand (beyond trashy) at the summit. So do I focus on the error of my fellow citizens in allowing this to happen on beautiful Pikes Peak and Mt. Evans, or instead do I chose one of the other 52 summits to focus on, to drag my camera to the summit of, and take an unobstructed view of “nature” as I perceive it? Contrary to some of the views expressed in this thread, I avoid “National Parks” for the very reason some here profess to go there, to see “nature”. Those parks are overrun with people, that is, in my view, what they were created for, for city-folk to drive out into “nature”. Head to the back country of a National Wilderness Area, at least in the Buffalo Peaks Wilderness Area, and more times than not you will be the ONLY human being in that huge, protected, place of nature.