Fwd: Re: The Curtailment of "Mudboging"...

[sean <o2design@wsu.edu>]

Daniel,
Thanks for the thoughts.  It is hard to imagine that flinging mud, in 
and of itself, is any less illogical say than kayaking it whitewater 
or skiiing deep powder.  To each participant the activity is fun. 
You or I don't have to understand it to make it legitimate.  On the 
other hand, damaging ecosystems is a separate issue.  I do not 
condone this, nor would most of the OHV enthusiasts I know (yet some 
would).  I think it is worth some honesty regarding the damage done 
in the name of various rec pursuits and the aesthetic (vs. 
ecological) sensibilities.

First, recreation development in America has permanently rendered 
useless vast areas of wilderness as well as less pristine landscapes. 
We do this as a sacrifice to enable a pursuit that different groups 
value.  We make a tradeoff.  Similarly, we accept certain 
degradations of ecosystems (e.g., ski runs on alpine slopes).  More 
tradeoff.  We do NOT require respect for the marmot who was 
displaced.  We simply sacrifice.  Respect for the environment is not 
a part of the definition for a sport.  This holds true for pursuits 
like hiking and mtbiking; each damages the landscape, sacrificing 
some nature for some human gain.

Suggesting that OHV enthusiasts stick to roads is tantamount to 
advising mt bikers to do the same.  The scales of impact vary but the 
principle is the same: a legitimate pastime needs to be met with 
appropriately planned, designed, constructed and maintained 
recreation areas suitable for their unique needs.  Your email avoids 
the idea of how this user group has been neglected and thereby has 
been marginalized into an outlaw status.  Why not be truly visionary 
and talk about helping meet their needs?

s

>
>Visionaries:
>
>I must agree with most of the responses to this issue.  There is no
>problem with riding OHV vehicles, but I can't see any purpose in flipping
>up mud and destroying a meadow to satisfy some socially programmed
>male-dominated (you don't see as many females) need to destroy.  I would
>be curious in exploring the differences between males and females (real
>and social) and certain percieved "masculine" and "feminine" behaviors.
>How much of this "War of the Sexes" actually has a basis and how much is
>just social programming?  For example, why do little boys, when aimming to
>insult one another, call each other the most vile insult of all: a girl?
>
>Anyways, sports which can take place and still have a respect for
>something other than just the sport, ie leave the field of action as you
>found it, be curtious of other life, then it deserves to be regarded as a
>sport.  If "mudboggers,"  skate boarders, sport hunters, baseball players,
>football players, whatever, can't have respect for their surroundings then
>they should be allowed to do their sport there.  Tolerance if for everyone
>and everything.  Destroying a meadow does not count.  Riding along a
>designated road does.
>
>Love
>
>Daniel
>>  with no alternative terrain.
>>
>>  What happened to tolerance?  where is the "vision" of developing
>>  designated recreation areas?  The charge against skaters is that they
>>  damage property and threaten the safety of others.  Sounds like a
>>  similar charge to the one leveled at ATV's, 4x4s, etc.  So why be any
>>  less open-minded and creative with this group?
>>
>>  This is not simply an issue from some far-off API story.  There is a
>>  vigorous body of recreators in the Palouse who seek to use their
>>  motorized vehicles.  They, like others in this billion dollar market,
>>  deserve well thought out and equitable recreation areas (remember
>>  equity?).  There are no such locations in within a reasonable drive.
>>  The same can hardly be said for other outdoor recreation.  Want to
>>  rock climb?  Mt bike?  hike?  Those and many more sports ARE provided
>>  for.  Many were once marginalized, considered to be "fringe", and
>>  experienced being ignored.  Any snowboarder from way back will
>>  remember those days (and not very fondly).
>>
>>  The elitism that is routinely applied to OHV enthusiasts is
>  > embarrassing and smacks of hypocrisy.  Are there any sports lacking
>>  "jerks"?  Do any of us not find some group whose members do not
>>  generally rub us the wrong way?  And are those not the groups we are
>>  most apt to avoid (and therefore remain ignorant ofäand even fearful
>>  of) and therefore to misunderstand?  How does user conflict equate to
>>  a right to outlaw and exclude a sport?
>>
>>  Educating oneself about a group and then helping them by providing
>>  for their needs is a far better approach than ostracizing them.
>>  Marginalizing and making enemies of off-roaders has been the approach
>>  used in recent decades by those wishing to protect wildlands.  Where
>>  has it gotten anyone?
>>
>>  Here's to showing true vision in the future.
>>  s
>>
>>  ps- before chanting "Hayduke, Hayduke, Hayduke!", recall that he
>>  drove a 4x4 (equipped--gasp!--with a winch)äand tossed beer cans
>>  asunder.
>>
>>
>>  >
>>  >Visionaries:
>>  >
>>  >All I can say is, "Heyduke Lives"!
>>  >
>>  >I'm with you, Bill.
>>  >
>>  >Don Kaag (Who loves the wilderness and despises motorized scofflaws
>>  >and their illegal depredations...)
>>  >
>>  >From: bill london <london@moscow.com>
>>  >Date: Sat Jun 15, 2002  11:36:22 AM US/Pacific
>>  >To: Vision2020 <vision2020@moscow.com>
>>  >Subject: mud boggers
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >     The Thursday Lewiston Tribune (6/13, page 1C) included an article
>>  >about tire-piercing spikes found in mug bogs in the Pomeroy Forest
>>  >Service Ranger District.  The spikes were placed illegally.  The spikes
>>  >were discovered because they punctured tires on 4-wheelers that were
>>  >being driven through forest meadows creating mud bogs.
>>  >     The "mud-bogging" (driving through the meadows) is illegal because
>>  >of the damage to water quality and to the meadows themselves.  However,
>>  >the authorities involved said they were more concerned with the spikes,
>>  >and considered the placing of the spikes an act of eco-terrorism.
>>  >     While I do not support the vigilante justice action of placing those
>>  >spikes, I certainly can relate to the emotion and anger behind it.  I
>>  >have seen beautiful mountain meadows ravaged through the thoughtless and
>>  >wanton destruction by 4-wheelers and motorcylcists.  In just a few
>>  >minutes, the wet soils and fragile flowers of a meadow can disappear,
>>  >churned to mud--which then fouls streams and invites further desecration
>>  >later.
>>  >     Given the impossibility of stationing guards at every meadow or
>>  >catching any of the perpetrators in the act, perhaps stopping
>>  >mud-bogging with spikes is not such a bad idea.  Maybe the US Forest
>>  >Service should place tire-piercing spikes in areas where "mud-boggers"
>>  >go for their kinky thrills.  The USFS could post plenty of warning
>>  >signs.  Perhaps the potential threat to their machines would keep these
>>  >scofflaws on the roads and out of the meadows.
>>  >     The situation is the same as the commion practice of police placing
>>  >strips of tire-piercing spikes on roads when they are trying to stop a
>>  >vehicle in a chase situation.  Of course, the police do not place spike
>>  >strips randomly across roads.  They use the spikes when they are trying
>>  >to stop someone in a dangerous and illegal act.
>>  >     Same with the spikes in the meadows.  By definition, anyone driving
>>  >in the meadow is committing an illegal act.  A flat tire is better than
>>  >a ravaged meadow.
>>  >BL
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Thanks,
>>  s
>>
>>
>>           * * * * * * * *
>>           Sean Michael
>>           .dwg


-- 
Thanks,
s


         * * * * * * * *
         Sean Michael
         .dwg