# Moab fun isn't just for bikes



## bustamove (Aug 12, 2004)

Those of you who are familiar with Genshammer knows he likes fun on four wheels just as much as being on two wheels. Earlier this month Kurt hooked up with a group of dedicated off-roadies and attended the annual Cruise Moab event. Blend in a little dirt, a little sand, and lots of happy 4-wheelin' people from all over the country congregating in one of the most scenic places in the U.S. and the recipe turns out some great stories.

Click on the link to read about Kurt's experience at Cruise Moab this year. Enjoy!

Cruise Moab 2008 - The Premier Land Cruiser Event


----------



## wheelerfreak (Jul 3, 2007)

I've actually been 4-wheeling in Moab longer than I've been MTBing there. I first went in 1992 for the Easter Jeep Safari. My first MTB exclusive trip there was in about 1995. I love that place for the variety of activities you can do there. I've never been there for a cruise Moab event though. Of course I don't own a TLC either. My 4x4's are an 85 Toy p/u and a 78 Jeep CJ-5.


----------



## xcguy (Apr 18, 2004)

*I was at Elephant Hill one time on my bike*



wheelerfreak said:


> I've actually been 4-wheeling in Moab longer than I've been MTBing there. I first went in 1992 for the Easter Jeep Safari. My first MTB exclusive trip there was in about 1995. I love that place for the variety of activities you can do there. I've never been there for a cruise Moab event though. Of course I don't own a TLC either. My 4x4's are an 85 Toy p/u and a 78 Jeep CJ-5.


and watched a ranger in a Dodge diesel truck inch his way up the highest of step-ups. They seem to asphalt in the runup on a lot of these year-to-year but I just can't imagine how he cleared these with his chassis as he rolled forward to grab his rear tires. Grab onto what? It's almost like he was doing it on faith alone. He did have a sh!t eating grin on as he went by. Would I try that on my stock '97 Tacoma? Pay me a million bucks and I'll give it a shot!


----------



## w00t! (Apr 28, 2008)

I wonder how long it'll be before somebody mentions the black scuffs left all over the rocks.


----------



## wheelerfreak (Jul 3, 2007)

w00t! said:


> I wonder how long it'll be before somebody mentions the black scuffs left all over the rocks.


 Those damn 4x4's leave black scuff marks everywhere and spew exhaust and leave a huge carbon foot print...:nono: rft:


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

I have never been able to understand the guys who do this. It completely eludes me. If they wanted a challenge, why not do it on a bicycle, why stink up the place with those heaps of motorised junk? A pox on them, I say.



R.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

Rainman said:


> I have never been able to understand the guys who do this. It completely eludes me. If they wanted a challenge, why not do it on a bicycle, why stink up the place with those heaps of motorised junk? A pox on them, I say.
> 
> R.


It is motorized junk (not junk actually).

And they most likely have the same confusion about you on your bike. There is room for everyone. The Red Rock 4 Wheelers and a few other land access groups work very hard to keep the public lands open to everyone. If they lose access, more than likely you and I will too.

Oh, I 4 wheel too.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

mtroy said:


> It is motorized junk (not junk actually).
> 
> And they most likely have the same confusion about you on your bike. There is room for everyone. The Red Rock 4 Wheelers and a few other land access groups work very hard to keep the public lands open to everyone. If they lose access, more than likely you and I will too.
> 
> Oh, I 4 wheel too.


I bet you do...what a total waste of resources...and that's a lame excuse you gave.

They work very hard to keep the lands open so they can drive their stinky polluting 4 wheels there, not out of some altruistic motive for the land itself.

We have these people here in Oz, too unfortunately. I've come upon them miles from nowhere out in the bush stuck in creeks and holes with their stinking vehicles.

No excuses.

Unless you have to go into these places because it's your job to do so, then you shouldn't be in there at all in those things..not when you can ride a bicycle there and back.

R.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

Rainman said:


> I bet you do...what a total waste of resources...and that's a lame excuse you gave.
> 
> They work very hard to keep the lands open so they can drive their stinky polluting 4 wheels there, not out of some altruistic motive for the land itself.
> 
> ...


Nonsense.

I was not making excuses. No need to. They do not need an excuse to drive there.

The mtn bike groups do land access to keep the trails open so they can ride there, no altruism for mother earth, I suspect.

You sound like the folks who only think you should hike there, no bikes allowed. Then there are the ones who think no one should go there at all...ever. I seldom hear this from a mtn biker, though.


----------



## wheelerfreak (Jul 3, 2007)

Rainman, Good to see that you're tolerant of other forms of recreation. Not everyone has the same hobbies or passions that you do, and there is room for all of us. Just because someone drives a 4x4 doesn't mean they also don't ride a bike.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

I am tolerant of other forms of recreation, but i'm against this 4 wheel driving into places like Moab when you just don't need to be there.

I've heard this all before, people defending their right to do this kind of thing just because they want to. It's totally self-centered and greedy. This is the sort of thinking that is killing this planet.

It doesn't matter whether you also ride a bicycle, that's also a lame excuse. 

I'm not about stopping HPV's into these places, or hikers or horse riders either.

What i'm about here is stopping the use of these powered vehicles in wilderness areas when they don't need to be there at all.

I'm not against 4 wheeled drives, i've used them when I was on the land myself as part of the running of a property. What I am against is the use of these things for "recreational" purposes in the wilderness, when there are other better less polluting and wasteful means of transport.

If you guys who do this sort of thing were completely honest with yourselves, you would see that I am right, instead of coming up with petty arguments for your behavior, unless of course, you are all completely without a conscience. 



R.


----------



## strangeland2 (Apr 8, 2006)

Rainman said:


> I am tolerant of other forms of recreation, but i'm against this 4 wheel driving into places like Moab when you just don't need to be there.
> 
> I've heard this all before, people defending their right to do this kind of thing just because they want to. It's totally self-centered and greedy. This is the sort of thinking that is killing this planet.
> 
> ...


I think if you really believed that youd kill yourself and really do something for the planet. Humans destroy everything no matter what we re doing. You re no better on your bike than they are in their vehicles. Are you pedaling to the ride or are you driving there to ride? Your entire rationale is so incredibly hypocritical its ridiculous.

Edit** If off road vehicles arent your thing thats fine but dont try and decide what other people should be doing.


----------



## playpunk (Apr 1, 2005)

Rainman said:


> I am tolerant of other forms of recreation, but i'm against this 4 wheel driving into places like Moab when you just don't need to be there.
> 
> I've heard this all before, people defending their right to do this kind of thing just because they want to. It's totally self-centered and greedy. This is the sort of thinking that is killing this planet.
> 
> ...


I think that now on for recreation we should be restricted to nude hiking - to minimize our impacts. I guess you could run instead, but by running you'll leave deeper footprints, and also consume more oxygen.

To be clear, I don't 4WD, I don't really think that it's a sustainable activity, but I guess I'm enough of a libertarian to believe that eventually the market will sort it out - if gas is 10 dollars a gallon less people will be out there in their trucks.

And anyways, there are MUCH bigger environmental problems than people driving trucks on rocks. Stick to the big issues, do what you can, and let the market sort out the smaller issues.


----------



## far twiggle (Nov 29, 2006)

playpunk said:


> I think that now on for recreation we should be restricted to nude hiking - to minimize our impacts. I guess you could run instead, but by running you'll leave deeper footprints, and also consume more oxygen.
> 
> To be clear, I don't 4WD, I don't really think that it's a sustainable activity, but I guess I'm enough of a libertarian to believe that eventually the market will sort it out - if gas is 10 dollars a gallon less people will be out there in their trucks.
> 
> And anyways, there are MUCH bigger environmental problems than people driving trucks on rocks. Stick to the big issues, do what you can, and let the market sort out the smaller issues.


Big issues? Like drilling in the ANWR or the conflict in Iraq?

I don't really mind the big trucks, just care much for the people that drive them.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

strangeland2 said:


> I think if you really believed that youd kill yourself and really do something for the planet. Humans destroy everything no matter what we re doing. You re no better on your bike than they are in their vehicles. Are you pedaling to the ride or are you driving there to ride? Your entire rationale is so incredibly hypocritical its ridiculous.
> 
> Edit** If off road vehicles arent your thing thats fine but dont try and decide what other people should be doing.


I pedal to the trails. I own a vehicle that is only ever used when there in no other means to carry people or goods. Otherwise, it sits in my garage.

Your statements are so ridiculous that they hardly warrant me answering. "You re no better on your bike than they are in their vehicles".

OMG! That is the most inane statement I have read for a long time on here.

I am not trying to decide what other people should be doing. If these guys had any sense they would see themselves what *they* are doing, and stop.

But this whole thing is so like "recreational" 4 wheel drivers everywhere.

"I want to drive all over the wilderness in my big 4 wheel drive and no one is gonna stop me" attitude.

I would just love to see what these people are going to do when there is no gasoline left to fuel their fantasies.

There's No excuses, and you guys know it. Deep down, you do.

R.


----------



## strangeland2 (Apr 8, 2006)

Rainman said:


> I pedal to the trails. I own a vehicle that is only ever used when there in no other means to carry people or goods. Otherwise, it sits in my garage.
> 
> R.


Thats exactly the point... When its convienent for you you drive... You dont need a car if you re driving one then you re no better.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

strangeland2 said:


> Thats exactly the point... When its convienent for you you drive... You dont need a car if you re driving one then you re no better.


Ahhh, but I do need a car, i'm a family man, you see. There are times when I need to carry loads of people and other goods. BUT! That is worlds apart from recreational 4 wheel driving in wilderness just because you want to do it.

Can't you all see that? Why is it that people are so unreasonable when it comes to things like this?

It's just greed and a lack of caring.

No excuses can cover up the real truth of it.

R.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

rainman aka enviro nazi wannabe said:


> blah, blah, blah


Here's my rig. I especially like running over endangered species. I'm upgrading to an 8.0 liter chevy next winter so I can tear sh*i*t up more easily. I'm fairly wealthy too, so bring on the $10/gallon gas so I can have the trail to myself.



















No, really, I'm an environmentalist and I'm sure you burn more gas in your car per year than I burn wheeling. I've driven this restored classic about 3000 miles in two years; much less than I've ridden my stable of bikes. When you give up your car, I'll park this too, or convert it to solar-generated hydrogen power.


----------



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

The 'free market' arguement is a con as the American right to drive already means that gas is already effectively subsidised by society. Taxes on gas and registration are not sufficient to pay for the impact that driving has on society- either in terms of massive infrastructure cost, damage to the environment or burden to the health system.

The above is pretty much true for most Western countries (maybe not Scandinavia where gas and ownership prices are much higher, but I haven't seen studies for Scandinavia). But especially so for the US, which has much cheaper gas costs than other Western nations.

Are bigger problems than people driving trucks on rocks? Sure. But it's exactly this simplistic of mindset of excess and privilege that is at the root of our energy and environmental problems.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

Fast Eddy said:


> Here's my rig. I especially like running over endangered species. I'm upgrading to an 8.0 liter chevy next winter so I can tear sh*i*t up more easily. I'm fairly wealthy too, so bring on the $10/gallon gas so I can have the trail to myself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Three thousand miles in two years? That's about double what I do in my car.

But I can see that i'm wasting my time here with the attitude that you people have about driving that stinking junk in the bush.

You have no conscience, or you have refused to listen to what it is saying to you.

These pics of you in your stinking 4 wd in the wilderness are self-accusing enough for me not to have to say any more on this.

I wish you all live long enough to realize what you have done.

R.


----------



## nOOby (Jul 20, 2007)

Hard to hold a NATURAL LIGHT on a bicycle.



Rainman said:


> I have never been able to understand the guys who do this. It completely eludes me. If they wanted a challenge, why not do it on a bicycle, why stink up the place with those heaps of motorised junk? A pox on them, I say.
> 
> R.


----------



## scorpionwoman (Jul 7, 2006)

Putting aside opinions/feelings about motorized, 4-wheel vehicles in Moab, my question is this:

Why is this thread on this forum?? Am I missing something?


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

Rainman said:


> I am tolerant of other forms of recreation, but i'm against this 4 wheel driving into places like Moab when you just don't need to be there.
> 
> I've heard this all before, people defending their right to do this kind of thing just because they want to. It's totally self-centered and greedy. This is the sort of thinking that is killing this planet.
> 
> ...


You are not tolerant of other forms of recreation unless it is by your narrow terms. Stop using wilderness in your arguments. Vehicles are not allowed on wilderness land. Wild places? Maybe so, but the broken rock of Moab, almost always an old mining road, is hardly wilderness or there would be no roads for you to bike on.

As I read more of your thoughts, I think I understand where you are coming from.

If you are being honest with yourself, and you seem to be, than it is very obvious that this idea of vehicles+off road = bad is a very closely held belief that you hold more than a valid argument based on rational thinking. Nothing wrong with that as long as you recognize the difference and I am sure I or anyone else will ever change your mind as long as it goes against that deeply held belief. And, I have no interest in trying.

My conscience is fine, by the way. So is yours. Funny old world, ain't it?


----------



## Upandatem (Apr 11, 2004)

What a pointless argument. As if Rainman is going to convince four wheelers to sell their rigs or four wheelers are going to persuade Rainman to take his Toyota Estima down poison spider.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

Upandatem said:


> What a pointless argument. As if Rainman is going to convince four wheelers to sell their rigs or four wheelers are going to persuade Rainman to take his Toyota Estima down poison spider.


Not sure if it is pointless. Fruitless, perhaps. Ah well. I am sure Rainman is a great guy even if he does truly believe I am a conscience-less earth spoiler.

Time to go.


----------



## Deme Moore (Jun 15, 2007)

While I'm all for 4-wheeling it is obvious by the width of trails and skidmarks/oil/fluids left on the paths when they scrape against that the environmental impact is far higher. It would take a heck of a lot more hikers, bikers and yes even equestrians on a particular trail to create the erosion and disturbance to wildlife as a string of 4x4's tearing through.

Obviously as long as said activity is properly managed it's not an issue. In areas where it isn't, that's a crying shame.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

Rainman said:


> Three thousand miles in two years? That's about double what I do in my car.
> 
> But I can see that i'm wasting my time here with the attitude that you people have about driving that stinking junk in the bush.
> 
> ...


Who are you? The Mike Vandeman of 4x4? You're an idiot. I stand by what I said. You give up your car and I'll give up my 4x4. Bring it on enviro-weenie. Someone has got to take the first step. I'm saying it's not going to be me, and you're saying it's not going to be you.

If you add up all the recreational 4x4 activity in the world there's less damage to the environment than a day of air travel, or a single space shuttle launch. If you're worried about some damage to the earth, you should be protesting freeway and housing projects, or open pit mining. Watch the 60 minutes piece on electronics recycling in China or ship recycling in SE Asia.

Do you know how much oil is burned in the US to heat houses? Bunker oil burned in ships to ship McDonald's toys over from China?

There are way worse things going on on this planet. Once you've got all those figured out, I'll park my 4x4 forever. I promise.

The real problem here is that there's about twice as many people as are sustainable. The truly devoted environmentalist will take as many with him as possible on the day of his own suicide.

"I say we dust off and nuke the whole site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
-- Ellen Ripley


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

scorpionwoman said:


> Why is this thread on this forum?? Am I missing something?


You're missing the name of the forum: Passion.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

Rainman said:


> Ahhh, but I do need a car, i'm a family man, you see. There are times when I need to carry loads of people and other goods.


So you admit that you have made a choice to burn fossil fuels and pollute the planet. You did not have to make this choice, but you did, so you are as responsible for the state of affairs as anyone else, to a degree.

Hypocrite.

I see you're a 29er zealot. That explains a lot. _And_ a budding evil genius? WTF is this?










You should tour the factory that makes your tires and tubes. I'll bet that makes 4x4 look like beach cleanup on earth day.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Agent Smith: "Never send a human to do a machine's job." 

All is well, Rainman. Karma always sorts things out. And nothing speaks louder than arterial plaque and colon polyps.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

I actually agree with Rainman. I don't know, but for me nature is pure untouched nature, not something filled with cars. And when I was on holidays in SW of USA, I was really surprised seeing all those tracks left by cars, atv's etc. I mean every single part of land there was all marked with lines left by tires. You can see this difference even more, when you get out of National park, where nature is still untouched (more or less, and if we don't count bunch of asphalt roads, parking places etc.), and you go by normal land. I don't know if you notice such things, but I certainly did.
Of course it's your place, and you do whatever you want to do there, but for me personally, nature should be kept intact. Why do we say for mountain biking leave no trace? With cars, atv's, mx bikes etc. this is not really possible.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

cannesdo said:


> Karma always sorts things out. And nothing speaks louder than arterial plaque and colon polyps.


This is exactly what the Sierra Club thinks of you, you dirty mountain biking trail killers. It's all about perspective. The Brazilian natives are burning the rainforest so they have land to grow crops for their kids. The Afghanis are growing opium right in front of the US Soldiers. Humans are selfish.

If y'all don't like the world you live in, GTFO.


----------



## Clutchman83 (Apr 16, 2006)

Yes, thats right we should ban them! Keep those dirty stinking fat tired beer swilling rock crawling hooligans off my stuff!

It's funny, thats the kind of talk MTBers have been fighting to dissuade hikers from using for years now. You carbon footprint types need to get a grip. Automobiles are hardly the problem in this country. Besides, how much do you spend driving to the trails. Most of us are unfortunate enough to live too far away to ride to the trailhead so we have to commute. Does that mean we should give up mountain bikes? Or should we encourage land raping devoloper f*cks to continue to push into remote areas so we can live right nextdoor to our favorite trail system? The US is built around automized commuting, what needs to happen is alternate fuels or power sources, not less driving. 4-byes kick ass, and no, I don't do it personally but I think it's cool.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Fast Eddy said:


> When you give up your car, I'll park this too, or convert it to solar-generated hydrogen power.


Alright. I gave up my car. So?

Not that I see why it should be up to someone else to do the right thing first, for you to do so, but whatever.

What kind of environmentalist sees value in mangling and polluting the environment with a gas engine driving a tonne of steel, when there's no need to, and when your own two legs (or hell, four) will carry you there better, just because the law says it won't stop you.

In that regard, Rainman's right.

We hug the trails to keep our tires in an 8 inch wide ribbon so as not to leave a trace, and are mindful of the extremely fragile ecosystems in rivers. And then you guys plow through in friggin tanks? Nice.


----------



## scorpionwoman (Jul 7, 2006)

Fast Eddy said:


> You're missing the name of the forum: Passion.


Gosh gee willakers! You're right!!

I finally found a place to post that video of me knitting lace doilies while sitting on a rock at Moab!

["Passion" is a subforum of the *mtbr* forum. The "mtb" stands for "mountain bike."]


----------



## ScreenName (Jan 14, 2006)

Rainman said:


> ...driving that stinking junk in the bush...


Sorry, but that right there deserves to be quoted.


----------



## Sinker (Feb 3, 2007)

Impeccable logic!



Fast Eddy said:


> The real problem here is that there's about twice as many people as are sustainable. The truly devoted environmentalist will take as many with him as possible on the day of his own suicide.


----------



## dascro (Apr 1, 2007)

I haven't been to moab yet,(this weekend!!!) but I'll give my opinions on this based on the 4x4 driving I see in other parts of the country. 

there are 2 very seperate groups of 4 wheelers: those that have the mentality of mountain bikers and care for the environment and those that are distructive ********. I have no problems with the first group if they are using carefully constructed trails. I hate the second group.

What bothers me about the arguements against them here is those arguements can very easily be turned against mountain bikers by hikers and horseback riders. It seems like a very easy progression. Pretty soon we will only allow barefoot hikers. Because lets be honest, mountain bikes are not part of the natrual environment. Actually horses aren't either, neither are hiking boots. 

I am not a 4 wheeler but I think we all need to learn to accept other sports we share the outdoors with.


----------



## slowride (Jan 13, 2004)

scorpionwoman said:


> Putting aside opinions/feelings about motorized, 4-wheel vehicles in Moab, my question is this:
> 
> Why is this thread on this forum?? Am I missing something?


It's a thinly veiled ploy to get more traffic to a mtbr.com sister site, carreview.com. Seeing as the sites are all related, it's acceptable, although this kinda pushes it IMHO. Francois posting links to reviews of cars in the Car & Biker forum seems more organic to me. But, it's not my site...

All that aside, I find 4wheeling a bit pointless, but I'll defend their right to do it in the US. And I'm sure they stimulate the economy wherever they go.


----------



## crashdude (Mar 29, 2007)

I too also 4wheel. I usually carry my bikes with me too that way I can knock out 2 birds with 1 stone.


----------



## crager34 (Feb 23, 2005)

Live in a house? Your raping the forest for wood.
Drive a 4x4? Your causing harm to the environment.
Drive a car? Adding to the global warming problem.
Read by the light of a lamp? Your using to much electricity.
Like to eat fish? You contribute to oil spills whenever a fishing boat sinks.


Whydo horses get to go out on trails that dogs don't, when they leave so much more poop and bigger, deeper footprints?

Where does it end?

It doesn't end. We just have to moderate our existance and live within our means vs. live in excess.... treehuggers and meat eaters alike.


----------



## 2ridealot (Jun 15, 2004)

We just have to moderate our existance and live within our means vs. live in excess.... treehuggers and meat eaters alike.[/QUOTE]
+ 1:thumbsup:


----------



## esf_mtb (Apr 12, 2006)

crager34 said:


> We just have to moderate our existance and live within our means vs. live in excess.... treehuggers and meat eaters alike.


That's the key. Only one problem: everyone's opinion of "within our means vs. live in excess" is different.

Personally, I think that if you're allowed to go 4-wheeling on public land, go have a ball. Just please stay on the trail and be responsible and respectful of other users (which we should all do). I don't care for 4-wheeling, but I think the bigger issue is protection of the public lands from more devious harm such as development.


----------



## forkboy (Apr 20, 2004)

scorpionwoman said:


> I finally found a place to post that video of me knitting lace doilies while sitting on a rock at Moab!


This post is useless without pics.


----------



## PaintPeelinPbody (Feb 3, 2004)

Guys, think of it this way,

At least a 4x4 trail can grow back, regenerate and replenish. It is, in a sense, a sustainable sport with proper management. Now granted, a 5mpg 400hp turbo diesel without catalytic converters isn't exactly green, but it sure not any worse that construction equipment used to build/pave sports arenas, highways, and parking lots. 

Now you might say "4x4s create large amounts of erosion", well, so does the runoff from parking lots and highways. At least mud/dirt soaks up some of the rainwater. 

The beautiful thing about offroad trails, is that when you shut them down, give them 5 years and you'll barely knew they were there. 

Can't say the same of a highway, there are still highways that have been closed for 20-30 years that you can drive on.

The way I see it, if the world was still dirt roads, fine by me.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

A few years ago after not having been in Moab in quite a few years I was shocked and dismayed by the impacts I saw from rock crawling. Pritchit canyon is just trashed. There where tire tracks of monster trucks, dirt bikes and ATVs off of the road everywhere. vegetation in the riparian areas was beat down and destroyed. There was a skim of oil in the water. Areas that should have supported a wide variety desert vegetation where bare of any living thing. Really really sad to see. Rock crawling is just the latest technological advancement that allows motorized activity to occur in places that it has not been able to take place before, thus bringing those impacts to even more places.

To equate this kind of rampant destruction of what is a very fragile and rare desert environment for entertainment with using an automobile as a transportation necessity is ludacris. Everywhere motorized off road recreation occurs, destruction way out of proportion to every other kind of recreational activity follows. All you have to do is open your eyes and look around to see that.

I know most OHV enthusiasts think they are just having fun, challenging themselves and their machine and all that, but they are by and large, in serious denial about their impacts on the land.


----------



## PaintPeelinPbody (Feb 3, 2004)

Part of the problem lies in the access granted to off-road enthusiast clubs. 

They fight and fight, and either get complete access to an area, free roam, able to do whatever they wish, or they get the door slammed in their faces. 

What needs to be done is better management of these areas by environmental based groups to determine when these groups are being overly destructive. Permits would be a start, as well as specified times of year when they can use the areas. 

Personally, I don't have any interest in rock-crawling or mudding. I'm more of adventure type. I want to be able to go to areas that I can't reach via a normal car, but would take days to reach by foot. Simple dirt roads are all I need to get my off-road fix. 

It is also my opinion that rock-crawlers and mudders should be confined to privately owned areas, such as off-road parks. In this case, if you can't pay to play, you shouldn't be ripping up the trails. If you dish out a couple million for 200 acres, you should be able to do with that land what you wish. Just don't expect everyone to agree with it.


----------



## CHUM (Aug 30, 2004)

blah, blah, blah........4 wheeling...rock crawling.....biking...hiking....horseback riding.....it all gets people outta their chairs....away from the TV....and outside....

when peeps enjoy the outdoors....and pass that passion along to their family and friends....they will do what is necessary to sustain/repair it when their areas start to degrade from "overuse"....

we, as bikers, volunteer for trail days....fisherman throw back fish......equestrians....well, equestrians have $$$ and pay for everything.....rock crawlers will do the same...if they aren't already....

personally...i'd rather have my kids 4 wheeling outside, camping and exploring.....than sittin' on their butts eating fritos and playing nintendo.....

just my .02


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

Damn, Rainman...I've enjoyed quite a few of your posts on the 29'er forum on technical and riding issues, but geez...you have a freakin' case of tunnel vision. Fast Eddy and some others have hit the nail on the head about the small minded perspective of many outdoor users/advocates and their pompous, single-minded sense of righteousness about "their" view of how "all of us" should be using the great outdoors. I don't necessarily approve with everything I see going on out in the great outdoors, but one has to realize that within reason others should have some lattitude in pursuing their passions too. 

Your kind of "Rainman Knows Best" attitude is probably more dangerous than allowing some 4X4's to have some fun in the backcountry. Despots and megalomaniacs usually start with an attitude like you displayed here, and this is one reason that many environmentalists are looked at with some deserved suspicion, even when their cause has some basis.


----------



## grrrah (Mar 26, 2004)

TNC said:


> Damn, Rainman...I've enjoyed quite a few of your posts on the 29'er forum on technical and riding issues, but geez...you have a freakin' case of tunnel vision. Fast Eddy and some others have hit the nail on the head about the small minded perspective of many outdoor users/advocates and their pompous, single-minded sense of righteousness about "their" view of how "all of us" should be using the great outdoors. I don't necessarily approve with everything I see going on out in the great outdoors, but one has to realize that within reason others should have some lattitude in pursuing their passions too.
> 
> Your kind of "Rainman Knows Best" attitude is probably more dangerous than allowing some 4X4's to have some fun in the backcountry. Despots and megalomaniacs usually start with an attitude like you displayed here, and this is one reason that many environmentalists are looked at with some deserved suspicion, even when their cause has some basis.


well said :thumbsup:

Now back to eating my fritos and endurance training on my wii.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

HotBlack said:


> We hug the trails to keep our tires in an 8 inch wide ribbon so as not to leave a trace, and are mindful of the extremely fragile ecosystems in rivers. And then you guys plow through in friggin tanks? Nice.


But you paved 10000 miles of "fragile ecosystem" to support your education and lifestyle so that you could get to the "8 inch wide ribbon" and so you could burn coal to generate power to run your computer so you can ***** at me driving? Your bike came on a truck, even if you don't have a car.

The Sierra Club wants to have a talk with you about your tires and their 8 inch wide ribbon.


----------



## bustamove (Aug 12, 2004)

slowride said:


> It's a thinly veiled ploy to get more traffic to a mtbr.com sister site, carreview.com. Seeing as the sites are all related, it's acceptable, although this kinda pushes it IMHO. Francois posting links to reviews of cars in the Car & Biker forum seems more organic to me. But, it's not my site...


Dang! I can't get anything by you. I admit this post was a shameless post to generate more traffic to my site, but it was also meant to share Kurt's stories since he has a great writing style.

I hope more people enjoyed reading Kurt's article than the "passionate" dialog that grew out of this thread.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

Tnc it's not about tunnel vision or being single minded. It doesn't need to be some super genius to understand, that huge trucks which spend 20+l of gas/100km, doesn't really make nature nicer and less polluted.
Of course everyone has their own joy, but considering such people preserve
nature is at least a bit lunatic. Based on this how I experienced USA, only thing to prevent such things, is even more expensive gas. And I do hope gas prices will go up... a lot! It will cause more grief for some people, but on the end, World will be nicer less polluted place.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

zrm said:


> A few years ago after not having been in Moab in quite a few years I was shocked and dismayed by the impacts I saw from rock crawling. Pritchit canyon is just trashed. There where tire tracks of monster trucks, dirt bikes and ATVs off of the road everywhere. vegetation in the riparian areas was beat down and destroyed. ...





PaintPeelinPbody said:


> Part of the problem lies in the access granted to off-road enthusiast clubs...


LOL. You sound like two old ladies on a Sierra Club forum.

I'll bet downtown Moab, where the gas station and bike shop are and where you drink your lattes, was once a beautiful, natural area. Now it's paved for your convenience. Pissed about that too? Are you telling me there's no untouched natural beauty in Moab? Ever seen a skid mark or chainring mark left by a bike out there? It's just a matter of scale.


----------



## crashdude (Mar 29, 2007)

CHUM said:


> blah, blah, blah........4 wheeling...rock crawling.....biking...hiking....horseback riding.....it all gets people outta their chairs....away from the TV....and outside....
> 
> when peeps enjoy the outdoors....and pass that passion along to their family and friends....they will do what is necessary to sustain/repair it when their areas start to degrade from "overuse"....
> 
> ...


X2 nice saying.


----------



## Fast Eddy (Dec 30, 2003)

primoz said:


> Based on this how I experienced USA, only thing to prevent such things, is even more expensive gas. And I do hope gas prices will go up... a lot! It will cause more grief for some people, but on the end, World will be nicer less polluted place.


A couple hundred dollars worth of gas will not prevent someone from wheeling a $20000-$80000 vehicle. A 1/4 mile pass down the dragstrip can cost $1000, but plenty of people are doing that too with no exhaust controls of any kind. How much fuel do you think Nascar burns up in a season with no emissions controls of any kind?

You people are idiots. See you on the trails.


----------



## forkboy (Apr 20, 2004)

Fast Eddy said:


> I'll bet downtown Moab, where the gas station and bike shop are and where you drink your lattes, was once a beautiful, natural area. Now it's paved for your convenience. Pissed about that too?


I used to go to Moab a LOT. Now... not so much.

Sprawl has hit Moab, and it's going to get worse before it gets better. The area of occupation gets pushed farther south every year. Condo's, flipping golf courses in the desert... that's where your real "damage to the environment" is.

I don't see any more jeepers now than 10 years ago. I have never had any run ins with any Motorcyclists, or 4wd'ers that have been anything less than pleasant. 9 times out of ten they yell out encouragement, offer water, etc. They always yield right of way if you're sharing a trail... I've run into way more ******* MTB'ers in Moab than other varieties of outdoor enthusiast. Generally the biggest jerks are the ones that perceive that they have the smallest carbon footprint.

As for Destroying the fragile desert environment - it's sand and rock. 
Oh No! That dirty gas guzzling jeep moved a rock to the other side of the trail!! Oh Me Oh My.

And RainMan - How much fuel do you use getting from Austrailia to the Slickrock trailhead? I'm guessing you don't come over in a canoe.


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

Fast Eddy said:


> LOL. You sound like two old ladies on a Sierra Club forum.
> 
> I'll bet downtown Moab, where the gas station and bike shop are and where you drink your lattes, was once a beautiful, natural area. Now it's paved for your convenience. Pissed about that too? Are you telling me there's no untouched natural beauty in Moab? Ever seen a skid mark or chainring mark left by a bike out there? *It's just a matter of scale.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

Well forkboy...I didn't want to get into personalities and attitudes of the differing user groups in Moab, but I think your observation is more correct than not. Most of the "tudes" I"ve run into on Moab trails are more commonly sported by cyclists than by other user groups. I find it more fascinating than annoying, as it's an interesting element of human nature. Strictly from a "Dr. Phil" shot-in-the-dark analysis, I wonder if many cyclists feel self-conscious and unsure of themselve when they come to Moab, and are for the first time being confronted with other and varying user groups in close and frequent proximity. On the other hand, some of these same cyclists seem to offer no more courtesy or friendliness to their fellow bikes on the trail, so that may have no bearing. It's interesting anyway.


----------



## slowride (Jan 13, 2004)

forkboy said:


> I used to go to Moab a LOT. Now... not so much.
> 
> Sprawl has hit Moab, and it's going to get worse before it gets better. The area of occupation gets pushed farther south every year. Condo's, flipping golf courses in the desert... that's where your real "damage to the environment" is.


Trust me on this... once it gets worse it never gets better. It just continues getting worse.


----------



## forkboy (Apr 20, 2004)

slowride said:


> Trust me on this... once it gets worse it never gets better. It just continues getting worse.


I've got my fingers crossed for a nice Armageddon.


----------



## SinglePivot (Dec 30, 2003)

Dood, they fertilize the trail too as evidenced by all the poop stuck to my marzocchi fender 

-Sp



CHUM said:


> "......equestrians....well, equestrians have $$$ and pay for everything"


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

In the case of Moab, didn't 4-wheelers and motorcyclists more-or-less create most of the routes that bikers now use? Without them we'd all be rafting or rock climbing or doing some other dumb shet in Moab. I have no fight against them, since mountain biking is also needless, environmentally destructive recreation too.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by cannesdo
> Karma always sorts things out. And nothing speaks louder than arterial plaque and colon polyps.





Fast Eddy said:


> This is exactly what the Sierra Club thinks of you, you dirty mountain biking trail killers. It's all about perspective. The Brazilian natives are burning the rainforest so they have land to grow crops for their kids. The Afghanis are growing opium right in front of the US Soldiers. Humans are selfish.
> 
> If y'all don't like the world you live in, GTFO.


The Sierra Club thinks I'm going to die of a heart attack or cancer?

Who said I don't like the world I live in?

Who said I don't have perspective?

I don't like the "Machine People" for personal reasons, because of what I've experienced off the trail, the last six weeks in Moab. They've been the loudest, most inconsiderate people in the campground -- they speed through, dusting everyone, far more often than the mtn. bikers. They rev their engines and crank their radios first thing in the morning and yell to each other like they're in their own backyard. You never even know the mtn. bikers are here. I've said a friendly hello to new arrivals and receiving nothing (truly) but blanks looks in return. Just bizarre. Like the most fundamental social skills are just not there. Throw in a toyhauler that decided to use his 25,000 lb rig to play tag with me on the highway and no...not a huge fan, thus far, of the four-wheeling crowd.

True, I don't personally understand why someone would rather inch along a trail in what looks (again, to me) like a wheelchair on steroids, but there are a lot of things I haven't been able to appreciate until I tried them. Seems like the difference between flying and crawling, but, I have to say, I do like blowing by them and up a small steep ledge, or over a boulder that would stop them in their tracks, under my own power.

As for the earth, George Carlin did a great bit years ago about how when we say "Save the planet!" we're forgetting that the planet is going to be just fine. It will eliminate us and regenerate. We're the ones who are going to die. Ultimately we are all responsible for ourselves, for our own choices. I can choose to stay off the jeep trails. I can choose to not come back to Moab. I do what I can, but I'm not going to get all bent out of shape about someone else's choices. So, you see, I'm not complaining. I'm doing the exact opposite. I'm accepting things as they, confident that karma, and physics and natural selection will sort it all out. Action and reaction -- who needs to complain when that law applies to every thought, word and deed?

The planet is going to survive. As for the 2 and 4 wheelers, I've seen both groups eat. And you can be sure that one of them is going to last a lot longer than the other.

(I should note that I'm the first to agree that some MTB'ers are insufferable, but the above-mentioned laws will take care of them as well, --- on the whole I think they're a brighter, healthier bunch.)


----------



## TwistedCrank (Aug 6, 2004)

I don't really mind the 4x4's. It's the crackers that drive them that irritate me.


----------



## Glynis27 (Sep 28, 2007)

I like to wheel once in a while. I agree that you should stick to the trail, not drive in sensitive areas and make sure to make as little impact as possible. At least they are making their vehicles so they can drive over the rocks and rutted roads instead of paving it all over so that any little car can get back there. They are changing their tools to fit the environment instead of changing the environment to fit their vehicles.


----------



## mustardfj40 (Aug 23, 2006)

For the guys who think 4x4 should be off-limit on moab trails, then I beleive your mtb has no bussiness on the trails neither :eekster: :eekster: :eekster: The Sierra Club work hard to get rid of the 4x4 then your mtb off the trails make no mistake about it 

Enjoy both 4x4 and mtb and of course it's all about responsible 4wheeling and mtb'ing:


----------



## pappaf2 (Aug 14, 2007)

Great pictures! :thumbsup: Moab is an amazing place to enjoy in a 4wd. 
To all the 4x4 haters out there. The Sierra Club and it's eco elitist friends hate mountain bikers just like they hate ohv's. The day you help them to eliminate ohv's from the trail is the day you seal the fate of the mountain bike to go extinct with the ohv.  
If we all recreate responsibly there is plenty of room for all of us to enjoy the outdoors via our own choice of transport. :thumbsup:


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

This thread would be great fodder for Mike Vanderman.


----------



## dft (Apr 9, 2004)

Rainman said:


> I bet you do...what a total waste of resources...and that's a lame excuse you gave.
> 
> They work very hard to keep the lands open so they can drive their stinky polluting 4 wheels there, not out of some altruistic motive for the land itself.
> 
> ...


are you that self-centered, jeeze louze. there are ALOT of other fun sports in the world besides mountian biking. so your against all motor stuff (MX, formula one, jeeps, jet skis, snow moblile, etc) buy a clue, the world is a big place.


----------



## dft (Apr 9, 2004)

Rainman said:


> Ahhh, but I do need a car, i'm a family man, you see. There are times when I need to carry loads of people and other goods. BUT! That is worlds apart from recreational 4 wheel driving in wilderness just because you want to do it.
> 
> Can't you all see that? Why is it that people are so unreasonable when it comes to things like this?
> 
> ...


your SO clueless pal. your kids will be WAY worse for the enviroment than a few gallons of gas burnt out on the trails. yea i'm sure you buy all the global warming hype also, al gore must be your hero!! let them be for christ-sake, they are having fun and not hurting a soul.


----------



## dft (Apr 9, 2004)

playpunk said:


> I think that now on for recreation we should be restricted to nude hiking - to minimize our impacts. I guess you could run instead, but by running you'll leave deeper footprints, and also consume more oxygen.
> 
> To be clear, I don't 4WD, I don't really think that it's a sustainable activity, but I guess I'm enough of a libertarian to believe that eventually the market will sort it out - if gas is 10 dollars a gallon less people will be out there in their trucks.
> 
> And anyways, there are MUCH bigger environmental problems than people driving trucks on rocks. Stick to the big issues, do what you can, and let the market sort out the smaller issues.


yea what he said. i laugh at congress hualing in the oil company execs complaining about high gas prices. do these people understand econ 101, i think not. yea what is really happening is the CEO of exxon could really sell gas for 12 cents a gallen, he is using the rest to buy big fat cubans cigars, NOT!


----------



## mustardfj40 (Aug 23, 2006)

lidarman said:


> This thread would be great fodder for Mike Vanderman.


Wow! I still remembered this dude from rec.mtb newsgroup 10+ years ago, a Sierra Clubber and real mountain bike hater who showed up at local park hearings and demanded park trails to be closed to mtb'ers. :madmax:

What happened was his mom was killed in an automobile accidents which started his anti-mountain bike cruisade. Weird :eekster: :eekster: :eekster:

For Rainman the dude, do you bike to your trail heads or drive to the trail head using your polluting  car/truck paying +4 bucks for gas???? For the record, I have been riding my mtb to my trail head :thumbsup: which is nice because I gain another 2500ft of climb another hour of riding, I'm a part time roadie too.


----------



## mustardfj40 (Aug 23, 2006)

zrm said:


> Yep, it is all a matter of scale. Motor vehicles have impacts on a scale way larger than impacts of non-motorized users
> 
> .


This is I'm hollier than you attitude...If you have been to one of those local park meetings, you would hear the same agruments from hikers: mountain bikes have more significant impact on trail compared to a hikers, the mtb disburb our enjoyment of the environments...blah, blah, blah...

Obviously, you're not a member of any 4x4 wheeling club. Our 4 wheeling club promotes responsible usage of the trails and donate money to different organization to promotes our cause.


----------



## unfriendlyGiant (Apr 15, 2008)

I've been visiting Moab since 1988 when all I saw were a handful of Jeepers and hikers. Flash forward 20 years and the place is overrun with MTBers sporting the latest in gayboy spandex fashion crowding the trendy local brewpubs and coffeeshop, pushing and shoving everyone out of the way so that he can show off for his cityslicking GF who would kill to be anywhere Moab except she is too afraid to bruise his ego by telling him so.


----------



## forkboy (Apr 20, 2004)

unfriendlyGiant said:


> I've been visiting Moab since 1988 when all I saw were a handful of Jeepers and hikers. Flash forward 20 years and the place is overrun with MTBers sporting the latest in gayboy spandex fashion crowding the trendy local brewpubs and coffeeshop, pushing and shoving everyone out of the way so that he can show off for his cityslicking GF who would kill to be anywhere Moab except she is too afraid to bruise his ego by telling him so.


Preach it Brotha!

<img src=https://www.bikerfox.com/foxphotos3/images/DSCF3350.jpg>

This thread needs to die. Maybe some Biker Fox will help!


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

I've now seen the light.

1. I am above consequnce. Also, those non-existant consequences of my actions don't matter. As long as I'm enjoying myself, the world answers to me.

2. Everything is doomed to be consumed by us anyway, so why not trash it all, tomorrow. Also, everything is invincible and incapable of being affected by us, so why not trash it all, tomorrow. Who cares? I certainly don't, and that's what counts.

3. Rain runoff in a city is the same thing as burning rainforests, erosion, strip-mining, and the worlds rising level of poisonous pollution.

4. Non-mechanized traffic is the same as mechanized traffic. If someone walks wearing shoes, it's the same thing as a rock crawler sliding down a trail, tearing a 6' wide swath through the forest, and destroying a section of river & screwing up downstream.

5. Horses, which roamed freely for millions of years, do not belong in nature.

6. Al Gore invented Global Warming. Also, he created the internet. Also, I heard on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh that the best scientists, the ones whose allegiance lies not to the pursuit of universal truth or pure research, but to a conservative religion that's always opposed science, don't agree with global warming, or the theory of evolution, or the heliocentric theory, or the theory of gravitation, or... (they're just theories, afterall) and blah blah blah...

7. The after 30 years of working first against and then with the Sierra Club, they still hate mountain bikes, for the express reason that none of them want us to have any fun.



It all makes so much more sense! We are both truly divine, and oppressed.


----------



## nathan abernathy (Feb 8, 2008)

must be nice to have a self imposed style of anarchy on four wheels.


----------



## jkkfam89 (Jan 2, 2007)

Rainman said:


> I am tolerant of other forms of recreation, but i'm against this 4 wheel driving into places like Moab when you just don't need to be there.
> 
> I've heard this all before, people defending their right to do this kind of thing just because they want to. It's totally self-centered and greedy. This is the sort of thinking that is killing this planet.
> 
> ...


Oh and you need to be there Beacause???? Recreation. Your tires do wonders to Moab, stay out. Come on, quit being like that


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

unfriendlyGiant said:


> I've been visiting Moab since 1988 when all I saw were a handful of Jeepers and hikers. Flash forward 20 years and the place is overrun with MTBers sporting the latest in gayboy spandex fashion crowding the trendy local brewpubs and coffeeshop, pushing and shoving everyone out of the way so that he can show off for his cityslicking GF who would kill to be anywhere Moab except she is too afraid to bruise his ego by telling him so.


Yes...places change. Such is life. My hometown isn't the town in which I grew up. It is what it is. It's a big world. Find a new favorite place. Railing against change is like railing against gravity. A bigggg fat waste of energy.

But Moab? Gay? Moab???


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 3, 2005)

TwistedCrank said:


> I don't really mind the 4x4's. It's the crackers that drive them that irritate me.


Racist scum.


----------



## Razorfish (May 9, 2008)

Rainman said:


> I have never been able to understand the guys who do this. It completely eludes me. If they wanted a challenge, why not do they *hike*, why stink up the place with those heaps of *bicycle* junk? A pox on them, I say.





TwistedCrank said:


> I don't really mind the *bikes*. It's the crackers that drive them that irritate me.


I fixed it for you. Some perspective.


----------



## Deme Moore (Jun 15, 2007)

Anonymous said:


> Racist scum.
> __________________
> The Qur'an. Now in two ply.


Kinda ironic, coming from the man with an anti-semitic sig.


----------



## Clutchman83 (Apr 16, 2006)

Deme Moore said:


> Kinda ironic, coming from the man with an anti-semitic sig.


Close, it's an anti islamic sig but equally ignorant nonetheless. You were probably thinking Torah.


----------



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

zrm said:


> The town of Moab is built on _private_ land so we'll assume that most people will use their property for either financial gain, or their own personal enjoyment. while government does have some say in what kind of use develops on those lands through zoning and that sort of thing, people are largely free to do what they want.


Hey, good post. Nice to see someone using their brain instead of coming up with reflex and personal-interest based quick retorts.


----------



## snobrder5 (Apr 16, 2006)

ok i'll play the game....i used to 4 wheel in my jeep...never made it to moab, really wanted to...but we did go up to tellico, TN/NC one year and did some wheelin up there...it was fun...pretty expensive hobby...so i ride now...do i think 4wd vehicles hurt the enviornment sure they do...in the hands of people who dont know how to tread lightly....it's the same with mountain biking....and possibly worse from a littering standpoint...atleast when you break something on your jeep, you have some place to put it in your jeep to take it back with you....i've seen more litter (BLOWN TUBES, power bar wrappers, co2 cartridges, gel wrappers, etc) on bikes trails than i ever did when out 4 wheeling....as far as POLLUTION from the 4x4's goes...whatever, it's such a little thing in the grand scheme of things that's wrong with this world....hell i even know some 4x4 rigs that run on propane...where's your pollution now!!!???


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

snobrder5 said:


> as far as POLLUTION from the 4x4's goes...whatever, it's such a little thing in the grand scheme of things that's wrong with this world....hell i even know some 4x4 rigs that run on propane...where's your pollution now!!!???


Hahaha... can't see it, doesn't exist, hey?

I see you haven't gotten to enjoy "Smog Days" yet. Just keep on doing what you're doing, with no regard to consequence, and you'll have them too. They're real fun. It's where the air outside is so toxic you have to stay inside so you don't get violently ill or die. We have them once in a while where I live now. It comes from peoples insistence on using combustion engines for every little whim.

Where's the pollution... tuck yourself in, I'll tell you a story. Since you don't seem to grasp the effects of adding to the greenhouse effect, or poisoned water, or the toxic cloud hanging over every city, I'll tell you another place the pollution is that you'll care about (if not today, then someday). The pollution is in your mouth, on its way to filling your lungs, and being absorbed into your bloodstream with each passing breath. From there, it enters your brain, and in your organs, and in your spine, and in your fat cells, and in your skin cells, as your skin tries unsuccessfully to purge it back out of your body. Over time, it just quietly builds up, killing off cells here & there, until it's recognized as any of a dozen different cancers which will either kill you in a long, drawn-out painful way, or put you through a hell worse than death, before ending death itself anyway.

There's your bedtime story. Nighty night.


----------



## lidarman (Jan 12, 2004)

snobrder5 said:


> ..hell i even know some 4x4 rigs that run on propane...where's your pollution now!!!???


The ignorance of the world please stand up.

Propane, methane hexane octane ...

when you oxidize this stuff, you get power and carbon dioxide....if you are lucky.


----------



## snobrder5 (Apr 16, 2006)

HotBlack said:


> Hahaha... can't see it, doesn't exist, hey?
> 
> I see you haven't gotten to enjoy "Smog Days" yet. Just keep on doing what you're doing, with no regard to consequence, and you'll have them too. They're real fun. It's where the air outside is so toxic you have to stay inside so you don't get violently ill or die. We have them once in a while where I live now. It comes from peoples insistence on using combustion engines for every little whim.
> 
> ...


dude if polution is THAT bad where you live, THEN WHY DONT YOU F#CKING MOVE!!!! i live an hour north of miami, and i've never ONCE experienced a "smog day"....between miami and ft lauderdale, there's a lot of cars here too, all pumping out tons of crap into the air..yeah it's no LA or NYC i realize that....but do you REALLY think that by taking someone's 4x4 off the trails, that it's going to have ONE BIT of impact on the air we breathe?? HELL NO!! dude by your post, it seems like you're so against cars as a whole, that the topic of 4 wheeling here isn't even your issue..your issue is with cars AS A WHOLE...not 4 wheeling.....and notice in my post i said "the POLLUTION from the 4x4's".....JUST from the 4x4's...do you think that if you took away JUST all 4x4's off the planet (and i dont mean a 4wd vehicle that's not being used for offroading, like the soccer mom's toyota sequoia), that you would see a reduction in the smog where you live? HELL NO!! dude this planet is F*CKED no matter what we do, and nothing in MY lifetime is going to change it.....SURE i want things to get better for my kids and their kids, but it's not something that's going to be fixed by "getting rid of 4x4's..."....there's much bigger fish to fry out there my friend.....like our dependence on fossil fuels as a whole....get rid of that, and you get ride of 99% of the smog issue...maybe even all of it....


----------



## ICanDigIt (Jun 23, 2004)

While I do think going into the wilderness to drive around a [email protected] truck is pretty retarded...

I think when you look at the big picture, their impact is fairly minimal. And trying to ban 4bying completely is perhaps not where environmentalists - myself being one - should spend their energy...

See picture for example of what is really fvcking sh!t up....


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

snobrder5 said:


> dude if polution is THAT bad where you live, THEN WHY DONT YOU F#CKING MOVE!!!! i live an hour north of miami, and i've never ONCE experienced a "smog day"....between miami and ft lauderdale, there's a lot of cars here too, all pumping out tons of crap into the air..yeah it's no LA or NYC i realize that....but do you REALLY think that by taking someone's 4x4 off the trails, that it's going to have ONE BIT of impact on the air we breathe?? HELL NO!! dude by your post, it seems like you're so against cars as a whole, that the topic of 4 wheeling here isn't even your issue..your issue is with cars AS A WHOLE...not 4 wheeling.....and notice in my post i said "the POLLUTION from the 4x4's".....JUST from the 4x4's...do you think that if you took away JUST all 4x4's off the planet (and i dont mean a 4wd vehicle that's not being used for offroading, like the soccer mom's toyota sequoia), that you would see a reduction in the smog where you live? HELL NO!! dude this planet is F*CKED no matter what we do, and nothing in MY lifetime is going to change it.....SURE i want things to get better for my kids and their kids, but it's not something that's going to be fixed by "getting rid of 4x4's..."....there's much bigger fish to fry out there my friend.....like our dependence on fossil fuels as a whole....get rid of that, and you get ride of 99% of the smog issue...maybe even all of it....


Really?


----------



## Razorfish (May 9, 2008)

ICanDigIt said:


> While I do think going into the wilderness to drive around a [email protected] truck is pretty retarded...
> 
> I think when you look at the big picture, their impact is fairly minimal. And trying to ban 4bying completely is perhaps not where environmentalists - myself being one - should spend their energy...
> 
> See picture for example of what is really fvcking sh!t up....


People?

I agree, there should be less of them. Culling is a great idea.

Anybody that thinks over population is a problem should immediately kill them self.


----------



## matteus (Mar 27, 2005)

Clutchman83 said:


> Close, it's an anti islamic sig but equally ignorant nonetheless. You were probably thinking Torah.


uhh... no. The term semitic refers to peoples originating from the semitic region of the world -- arabian peninsula (thus Saudi Arabia, thus Islam) included.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Razorfish said:


> Anybody that thinks over population is a problem should immediately kill them self.


Yes, but that's only one down, seven billion to go. And for people to have to spend enough years to realize they should kill themselves, tsk tsk, you'll never make any progress. It'd be so much more effective to, having made the realization, keep yourself alive and take out as many people as you can instead. Preferably the ones who don't get it.

...hence about a million stupid books and movies.


----------



## slowride (Jan 13, 2004)

HotBlack said:


> Hahaha... can't see it, doesn't exist, hey?
> 
> I see you haven't gotten to enjoy "Smog Days" yet.


They call them Ozone Action days here.


----------



## CHUM (Aug 30, 2004)

matteus said:


> uhh... no. The term semitic refers to peoples originating from the semitic region of the world -- arabian peninsula (thus Saudi Arabia, thus Islam) included.


aw crap....i actually learned something......

BTW - when did Passion turn into f88???.....buncha closed minded-self-indulgent-propaganda-i'm-the-center-of-the-universe-spewing chuckleheads.....well, in this thread anyhooo.......


----------



## Ska (Jan 12, 2004)

HotBlack said:


> It'd be so much more effective to, having made the realization, keep yourself alive and take out as many people as you can instead. Preferably the ones who don't get it.


I don't get it bro.

I've been reading the debates that have been spotting the board in what seems a growing number lately and have found some of your arguments to be valuable additions since you seem to key your words from the heart and key them too with some knowledge of the topic behind you. Some of your views reflect mine (some don't) but for me I choose (for the most part) to sit back and watch instead of take part.

Despite enjoying some of the statements made by you and some others in said discussions, there is one thing that is puzzling me. In another thread that raised a number of voices you stated _"If I wanted to kill you, no gun would save you"_ and the creepy _"If I come after you, you won't know it, and you will not have time to respond". _Now, reading a post somewhere else I think you stated you were ex-military so depending on the level of training you received and the training your victim has received these two statements could very well be true. However, I'm deeply puzzled by these statements. You said, if I remember correctly, that you would never raise a gun in anger at another living thing for as long as you live yet here you are encouraging (in jest I know) to kill. Gun or not, killing is killing. I'm disappointed that your arguments all seem to eventually twist and mutate into something involving killing or death. It's a bummer bro. What gives?

Why does a self proclaimed peaceful man speak so much of death and killing? Why do you encourage others (again I know it's in jest) to kill? Dude, your arguments are way better than that.


----------



## Howeler (Sep 23, 2005)

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here.

It came to me when I tried to classify your species.

I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not.

*You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. *

There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus.

*Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague*, and we are the cure.

--The Matrix

I think I'll go ride now.


----------



## Satanpez (Sep 16, 2007)

We have simply just not hit our equilibrium point yet.

The pollution and environmental damage by 4x4s is 1/100000000 damage to the earth. It's inconsequential.

-Steve in NJ



Howeler said:


> I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here.
> 
> It came to me when I tried to classify your species.
> 
> ...


----------



## pappaf2 (Aug 14, 2007)

HotBlack said:


> Hahaha... can't see it, doesn't exist, hey?
> 
> I see you haven't gotten to enjoy "Smog Days" yet. Just keep on doing what you're doing, with no regard to consequence, and you'll have them too. They're real fun. It's where the air outside is so toxic you have to stay inside so you don't get violently ill or die. We have them once in a while where I live now. It comes from peoples insistence on using combustion engines for every little whim.
> 
> ...


Ohhh scary bedtime story.  
You try to make it look like through your vivid story telling that ohv's are the only thing causing pollution. Give me a break, the number of all the ohv's on the planet combind puts out an unmeasurable amount of pollution when compared to the rest of the internal combustion vehicals on this planet. 
You eco supremacists are ridiculous.


----------



## pappaf2 (Aug 14, 2007)

Satanpez said:


> We have simply just not hit our equilibrium point yet.
> 
> The pollution and environmental damage by 4x4s is 1/100000000 damage to the earth. It's inconsequential.
> 
> -Steve in NJ


Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
The greenies tell me that ohv's are the destructors of the world!!! What you say is blasphemy!!!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

pappaf2 said:


> You eco supremacists are ridiculous.


Oooh, that would make for a clever nickname. You've heard of white supremacists? Now we have green supremacists!


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

CHUM said:


> BTW - when did Passion turn into f88???


When forum 88 was closed.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Interesting....*

It's interesting to me that this thread evolved from a post about Moab passion in to a debate about 4x4's: Access, environmental impact, etc.

It would be interesting to know from those who have such strong anti-moto in Moab opinions the following:

1. Have you ever been to Moab and ridden with motorized vehicles? I have. My experience has never been "ruined" by being on the same trails as motorized vehicles and in some cases, enhanced (see below).

2. Are you aware that access for moto's came first in Moab?

3. Moab is one of the few areas that I've been too that can handle the increased motorized impact. It's so big. It's so rugged. It's so environmentally raped. It's a big uranium mine that played out and became an outdoor playground.

Moto Story: I was in Moab during an off time. No festivals anywhere near there (Fruita, etc.). It was a weekday. Me and a couple riding buddies wound up there. And we went and rode. We agreed to start at Slickrock because one of the guys had never ridden there.

As we're heading in to town from I-70, we passed a Travis Pastrana (sp?) semi with a huge picture of what I assume is Travis P on its side. We didn't think much about it other than to comment that someone from the team must be in Moab riding.

As we're out in the middle of Slickrock, having just ridden up to the top of one of the bowls, a couple MX guys ride up to us. There were 5 of us sitting up top, talking about the weather, how great it was to be in Moab during the week and the fact that we may have been the only 5 people on one of the worlds most famous trails.

We introduced ourselves and I shook Travis P's hand. As we were getting ready to headd our respective ways, he asked us if we wanted to "see something kick ass". We of course said, yes.

He then proceeded to nose wheelie down one of the bowls, hold it at the bottom and then take off. I turned to his riding buddy and said, "He was right, that was really kick ass".

We caught up to them later as they were doing some half pipe sessioning on the slick rock. BMX on MX. Very cool. We waved, and kept on riding.

Moto in Moab are like any other trail users: A cross section of society. They're people, just like us.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Ken in KC said:


> It's interesting to me that this thread evolved from a post about Moab passion in to a debate about 4x4's: Access, environmental impact, etc.
> 
> It would be interesting to know from those who have such strong anti-moto in Moab opinions the following:
> 
> ...


Good job Ken. I was wondering how many of the contributors to this thread are familiar with Moab and its history, and if they realized that motos and Jeeps more-or-less turned Moab from a deserted uranium mining town into a recreational OHV playground that morphed into a bike mecca. The classic Moab bike routes are almost entirely Jeep road that Jeeps and trucks developed.

From what I've seen, the Jeeping community tries as hard as the biking community to stay on existing trails and be as nice as possible to the ground. They're not all free-roaming hillbillies, but some of them are just as some bikers also are. I can handle seeing black tire marks on rocks more than I can handle seeing a churned up meadow.

As for air pollution from motors, I wonder who produces more exhaust, the numerous 4-wheelers that drive around Moab or the (probably more) numerous mountain bikers who drive to Moab? You shouldn't get to drive 2000 miles to go biking in Moab and then suddenly start complaining about Jeep exhaust the moment you set your parking brake in the trailhead parking lot!

Cool brush with fame too!


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Ska! said:


> I don't get it bro.... Why does a self proclaimed peaceful man speak so much of death and killing? Why do you encourage others (again I know it's in jest) to kill? Dude, your arguments are way better than that.


Hi Ska, sorry man. I didn't really think anyone was paying that much attention.

All that about killing in that absurd gun thread was intended to make a point that I never really wound up making. It increasingly became a waste of time trying to make any point in there, so I gave up to let the thread wither away.

But yea, these days, in real life, I'm peaceful in my actions, and nearly always in my words. It wasn't always that way. From one extreme to the other. There's no escaping your past though. When with close firends, or say, anonymously debating for debatings sake, my words occasionally become more extreme, and it's even more pronounced when debating matters of life & death, like civilian firearm proliferation or trashing the environment. Both matters that have life & death consequences, & sometimes it takes reminding people of that for them to take something seriously.

Thanks for reading all that stuff though!


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

*back on topic*



pappaf2 said:


> Ohhh scary bedtime story.
> You try to make it look like through your vivid story telling that ohv's are the only thing causing pollution.


Nope. It may have sounded like that to you, but that might be because you're on the defensive in this thread. Obviously the small percentage of people who four wheel aren't going to singlehandedly give us all cancer. That's not what I'm saying. Sure, they are part of the worlds growing pollution, and it all adds up, but it's a pretty tiny fraction.

There's a small point to be made that if four wheeling in a remote enough area, that pollution will mostly be absorbed by vegetation which can act as a filter of sorts, but then the counter is, that junk doesn't disappear, it has to go somewhere, and by going into the vegetation, it's built into our homes, or poisoning the animals that eat the vegetation, and the animals that eat those animals (us), or the water, or... and on and on it goes.... Toxic pollution from internal combustion engines just sucks no matter how you look at it.

There's an underlying attitude, in making a mess out of a trail for your own personal entertainment, and whether in a rock crawler or on an MTB, that Nature is here at our disposal, and disposing of it is just peachy as long as we're enjoying ourselves doing it.

Aside from the show of arrogance and total lack of respect for the rest of the world outside your immediate human perspective that many of us find offensive, this sort of attitude makes any sport unsustainable, as we depend on the charity of others to practice our activity.


----------



## Timo (Jan 13, 2004)

Rainman said:


> ..... driving that stinking junk in the bush.
> .........


I'm sorry but I could not finish reading this thread because I'm still laughing over this statement.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Back on topic?*



HotBlack said:


> Nope. It may have sounded like that to you, but that might be because you're on the defensive in this thread. Obviously the small percentage of people who four wheel aren't going to singlehandedly give us all cancer. That's not what I'm saying. Sure, they are part of the worlds growing pollution, and it all adds up, but it's a pretty tiny fraction.
> 
> There's a small point to be made that if four wheeling in a remote enough area, that pollution will mostly be absorbed by vegetation which can act as a filter of sorts, but then the counter is, that junk doesn't disappear, it has to go somewhere, and by going into the vegetation, it's built into our homes, or poisoning the animals that eat the vegetation, and the animals that eat those animals (us), or the water, or... and on and on it goes.... Toxic pollution from internal combustion engines just sucks no matter how you look at it.
> 
> ...


It seems we're way off topic.....

We're talking about Moab, right? I don't have any facts to back this up, but my guess is that 98% of the people who come to Moab have a far greater impact on the environment just getting there than they do impact while they're there. After all, the two closest metro areas are Salt Lake City (5 hours?) and Denver (6 hours). The next closest metro area East would be Kansas City (16 hours). That's a lot of driving (or flying) just to get there.

If you look behind some of the buttes or take a step or two outside of Arches, you're more likely to step in depleted uranium than slickrock. Eat a fish out of the CO river downstream of Moab and you're likely to glow in the dark.

I understand your opinion and your position. I agree that humans are adept at ravaging whatever environment we can. I agree that we need to stop doing this and live in balance with the earth.

But picking Moab and 4x4's in Moab as your battle is not making your point. Moab currently exists as a destination for a diverse group of outdoor enthusiasts. They all (including us) impact the environment.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Ken in KC said:


> It seems we're way off topic....


And I agree that there are bigger fish to fry.

I think Moab's bare, exposed environment and status as a multi-use mecca make it a place where worlds collide with a high degree of visibility, for better or worse.


----------



## CHUM (Aug 30, 2004)

HotBlack said:


> ....I think Moab's bare, exposed environment and status as a multi-use mecca make it a place where worlds collide with a high degree of visibility, for better or worse.


weird...i was just there a few weeks ago....ran into MX'ers, rock crawlers, 4X4's and MTB'ers.....everyone (including all the town peeps) were just as friendly and considerate as could be......no 'tude, snide quips.....no arrogance....just folk enjoying the outdoors......

i will say Utah beer is pretty pathetic though......that's my only real gripe...that, and the Amassa trail ate my lil' XC tires up in less than 2 miles....


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

HotBlack said:


> And I agree that there are bigger fish to fry.
> 
> I think Moab's bare, exposed environment and status as a multi-use mecca make it a place where worlds collide with a high degree of visibility, for better or worse.


Worlds collide in what way? Please expound.


----------



## Razorfish (May 9, 2008)

^^^ That's a pretty well know expression.


----------



## ICanDigIt (Jun 23, 2004)

Razorfish said:


> People?
> 
> I agree, there should be less of them. Culling is a great idea.
> 
> Anybody that thinks over population is a problem should immediately kill them self.


I was talking about urban sprawl....not overpopulation.


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Nat said:


> Worlds collide in what way? Please expound.


I mean, the mountain biker and the four wheeler come out of their forests, and suddenly find each other standing there on the same slab of rock, looking at each other with nothing in between. Both sports best and worst attributes are starkly right out in the open for each other to see.

Pretty much everyone I've met there has been nice too. Just happy to be on vacation.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Razorfish said:


> ^^^ That's a pretty well know expression.


Friendly tip: If you use the big blue "Quote" button for your reply, people will know which previous post you're referring to.


----------



## Deme Moore (Jun 15, 2007)

CHUM said:


> aw crap....i actually learned something......
> 
> BTW - when did Passion turn into f88???.....buncha closed minded-self-indulgent-propaganda-i'm-the-center-of-the-universe-spewing chuckleheads.....well, in this thread anyhooo.......


LEARNING!? On MY forums! Call the whaaaambulance!

You know it's funny I have lots of different recreational interests. In every one there is almost a sense of brother/sisterhood amongst the participants and they're some of the nicest people you'll ever meet. You almost want to get that warm and fuzzy feeling... right up until you find a few jerks. And usually said jerks are poking around online which makes me wonder... would they have the nerve to be such as**oles in real life to their fellow MTBers? Or are they just a bunch of whiny cowards pretending to be internet tough guys to make up for the fact that they're undereducated trash who can't afford to go mtn biking IRL? I like to think the latter cause in all honesty I've never met a whiny bigot out on the trails. Maybe I haven't gone deep enough in the woods I guess! (cue banjos)

As for the jeeping, not jeeping... been there done that. I find it boring to crawl over rocks at a snail's pace when a bike (or MXer) can go over said terrain far easier. Why get angry at the off roaders when karma is punishing them one broken axle at a time!? Someday they'll see the light and realize that there are more efficient tools crawling out on the moonscape. :rockon:


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Metaphorically speaking?*



HotBlack said:


> I mean, the mountain biker and the four wheeler come out of their forests, and suddenly find each other standing there on the same slab of rock, looking at each other with nothing in between. Both sports best and worst attributes are starkly right out in the open for each other to see.
> 
> Pretty much everyone I've met there has been nice too. Just happy to be on vacation.


I assume you're speaking in metaphors. Here's my experience in Moab: Those who haven't been there project some sort of angst between user groups. Those of us who have actually been there realize what a bunch of crap the assumed conflict is. It's not a big deal. We're all there for the same reason with different modes of transport to reach the same goal. You're less likely to run in to Phreds of any type of trail user there than on your local trails.

<excluding The Slickrock Trail>

It's an epic, grand destination. And you have to have a decent amount of confidence to consider riding there. You have to be prepared. You have to be committed. You have to come armed with some knowledge of what you're going to face. </>


----------



## PhotoGus (May 14, 2008)

To Rainman:

"None of us are going to live long enough to see what we have done."

"Its not our "fault" anyway." 

"It is because of the actions of the people before us."

No matter how hard you try, these are the things people will say until the world ends. 

So why don't you get off you high horse and enjoy life? 

Also, you should spend some of that energy you have on researching more effective ways to reach people. 

Your "I know I am better than you and this is why" attitude only makes you look like a prick. 

I guaranty you did not change one persons mind with your angry, douchey ramblings. 

For the record, I have never four wheeled and I too think it CAN SOMETIMES be wasteful and bad for the environment, but to each his own. Sure looks like a lot of fun. Maybe when I cannot pedal anymore. 

I've actually written/thought a lot about this topic for various different reasons and have done much research. 

The fact of the matter is that if you take every person in the continental united states that 4x4's for recreational purposes, it does not even come close to the environmental damage the Earth sustains through bike manufacturing, import, and export. Not even ballpark. Not even the same sport. Pun intended. 

Like I said, why don't you try enjoying life. You will grow old and fade away way before the Earth does. Cheers!


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

Ken in KC said:


> I assume you're speaking in metaphors. </>


Nope. Literally. The day a 4xer and an MTBer share the same slab of rock, Jupiter smashes into Mars and they both come crashing down in Moab. How do you think it came to look that way? Erosion? Oh wait...

Really, what I mean is, I think it's more a visibility thing. An MTBer who rides singletrack dedicated MTB, or even most mixed-use trails, every day may never see 4 wheeling. You come to Moab, and, well, there it is. I've been there with people who thought it was cool and looked like fun, people who thought they were just trashing the place and should be banned, and all shades of grey between.


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*Lol....*



HotBlack said:


> Nope. Literally. The day a 4xer and an MTBer share the same slab of rock, Jupiter smashes into Mars and they both come crashing down in Moab. How do you think it came to look that way? Erosion? Oh wait...
> 
> Really, what I mean is, I think it's more a visibility thing. An MTBer who rides singletrack dedicated MTB, or even most mixed-use trails, every day may never see 4 wheeling. You come to Moab, and, well, there it is. I've been there with people who thought it was cool and looked like fun, people who thought they were just trashing the place and should be banned, and all shades of grey between.


Yeah, I realized that it was a stupid question after I posted it.

I agree to a point.... but a responsible trail user knows what they're getting in to before they head out on the trail. In the case of Moab, that may even be as little as stopping in at Poison Spider to releive some degree of ignorance.

There are very few areas of the country (world?) that are environmentally sustainable for 4x4 use. Moab is one of them. If a trail user doesn't know this coming in, it's not the 4x4er's fault. It's their own ignorance.

Those who feel 4x4er's are "trashing" Moab are ignorant on many levels.


----------



## Razorfish (May 9, 2008)

Nat said:


> Friendly tip: If you use the big blue "Quote" button for your reply, people will know which previous post you're referring to.


Noted.

Friendly tip #2: If you use ^^^ it means the post right before. Yeah, I know the default display is not linear and sucks.


----------



## dft (Apr 9, 2004)

ICanDigIt said:


> I was talking about urban sprawl....not overpopulation.


you a physicist? i saw your link, i used to work on atlas at LHC!


----------



## Ken in KC (Jan 12, 2004)

*er...*



Razorfish said:


> Noted.
> 
> Friendly tip #2: If you use ^^^ it means the post right before. Yeah, I know the default display is not linear and sucks.


You were replying to the original post. The post right above it was mine. So Travis Pastrana hitting a nose wheelie on slickrock or sessioning slickrock is common knowledge? Or my questions regarding trail use are common knowledge?

You can choose to display posts any way you choose.


----------



## Roverbiker (Mar 28, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of wheeling for the sake of wheeling. I like to take my Land Rover on the off roads, primarily as a means of accessing more remote locations. Keep in mind, roads are there to be used. Rainman keeps using the term "wilderness" which in reality designates a ROADLESS and WHEEL-LESS environment.

At any rate, I bet Rainman commutes in his car far more than I do living 1.6 miles from work.


----------



## jkkfam89 (Jan 2, 2007)

HotBlack said:


> I've now seen the light.
> 
> 1. I am above consequnce. Also, those non-existant consequences of my actions don't matter. As long as I'm enjoying myself, the world answers to me.
> 
> ...


You are the smartest dumbass.


----------



## Razorfish (May 9, 2008)

Ken in KC said:


> You were replying to the original post. The post right above it was mine. So Travis Pastrana hitting a nose wheelie on slickrock or sessioning slickrock is common knowledge? Or my questions regarding trail use are common knowledge?
> 
> You can choose to display posts any way you choose.


:cryin:
It's not my fault this forum enables layouts that make no sense. The default is especially awful.


----------



## Roverbiker (Mar 28, 2008)

Just some food for thought - 

While the ACTIVITY of bicycling might be super clean, the bicycling INDUSTRY as a whole is far, far, far from green. This is a bone of contention for me every time I run across someone on a bike throwing stones from their glass house. I try to be green. I'm also a life long cyclist. If you spend much time in the bike industry, you quickly learn that the industry as a whole is not a green industry at all. For starters, most cycling goods are made in factories in Asia. How do you think those shiny bikes get under our green butts? It ain't wind power that brings them here.


----------



## Henrythewound (Jul 1, 2007)

Nobody here is innocent of polluting. Hell we're all using computers to read/lurk/post here, they all suck power and ultimately contribute to pollution. Sure there are varying degrees of contribution to pollution depending on your lifestyle and choices, but there needs to be respect. You should be able to respect 4WD peeps at Moab and vice versa. If you don't want to encounter anyone else on your rides better ride in more obscure places (however then you'd be destroying a portion of the pristine local ecosystem and wildlife). 

Humans F things up just by being humans (at least in developed nations). None of us are innocent although I tend to think those who adopt the holier than thou perspective need to think things through. I'm not saying none of us should change to better our environment but that boils down to a personal choice. Mountain bikes leave black marks on rocks too.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Some of the really extreme "green supremists" (good one Deme) remind me of that Star Trek episode where they find a Utopian society and Wesley gets the death penalty for walking on the grass (to be fair, it was posted, "_Keep off the grass_" ha...). God knows we humans need to play. I think it's more productive to focus on industry and cleaner manufacturing -- getting mercury out of our children's teeth....educating people on nutritional deficiencies so they aren't dumping, via their toilets, all those prescription meds into the water supply.

Nothing pisses me off more than people treating their body like a trash can. It makes them angry and lazy and stupid (yes bad nutrition makes you stupid) and affects their judgement -- that's the root of all of this. When people feel good, they want to exercise. You've got to go to the root of the problem. You don't want a toxic world? Address toxic bodies. Address our need for all of our food to be *pretty*. Get the processed sugar-saturated crap out of the school lunchrooms. Parents, set a freakin' example for your kids. It all starts there. Honestly, some of the poison that passes for food in this country -- If you laid it out as ingredients for people to consume separately, no one would. It's criminal.


----------



## ICanDigIt (Jun 23, 2004)

dft said:


> you a physicist? i saw your link, i used to work on atlas at LHC!


Haha...No. High School physics was hard enough for me! I'm just a big fan of science and those who peruse a greater understanding of the universe. When I ask people if they are excited about the LHC firing up this summer and get blank stares...my faith in human kind dwindles a little further.

I can't imagine how exciting it would be to be a part of such a project...What did you do?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Razorfish said:


> :cryin:
> It's not my fault this forum enables layouts that make no sense. The default is especially awful.


If you like linear mode you can switch to that, but check out hybrid mode if you haven't already. It maps out who replied to whom. Sometimes people click quick-reply to the next post up when they are actually responding to someone else in the thread and it becomes confusing if their post doesn't have any context. That's where using the "Quote" button makes everything crystal clear.

p.s., I still don't know to which expression you were referring.


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

Nat said:


> Good job Ken. I was wondering how many of the contributors to this thread are familiar with Moab and its history, and if they realized that motos and Jeeps more-or-less turned Moab from a deserted uranium mining town into a recreational OHV playground that morphed into a bike mecca. The classic Moab bike routes are almost entirely Jeep road that Jeeps and trucks developed.
> 
> From what I've seen, the Jeeping community tries as hard as the biking community to stay on existing trails and be as nice as possible to the ground. They're not all free-roaming hillbillies, but some of them are just as some bikers also are. I can handle seeing black tire marks on rocks more than I can handle seeing a churned up meadow.
> 
> ...


Good post. Reasonable thinking.

I went camping, come back, 6 pages of angst about the planet. Mercy.

I really have only a few closing thoughts and as one who has done both Jeeping (not rockracing, etc) and biking in Moab, your points are well taken.

For the folks who point out mass destruction, that can happen if the driver is careless or stupid, but a locked up, aired down jeep at 5 or 6 mph on an old mining road is pretty tame as far as damage to the trail. I have seen reckless damage by stupid drivers who have a poorly equipped rig or think that they need to find the ultimate challenge, even if it is 10 feet off the main trail, much like I have seen obvious switchback cutting and trail damage by cyclists trying to make the trail 'harder'. Too many knee pads and tattoos over pimply faces, usually, and the same can be said for the comp buggy approach to public trails. Typically the bozo is uneducated, young, and running on too much beer and hormones. Obviously 39" swampers and 200 horsepower can rip it up faster, but the issue is not the sport itself, it is the poor application of it.

My initial argument was to the thought that they don't belong there at all. Sez who? Not you.:nono:

Off to better things now.


----------



## Hardline (Jan 16, 2004)

Funny this post shows up. A bunch of my buddies went up to Moab for the last weekend of the Easter Jeep Safari. I did not get to go with them but here is a picture of them up there.








One of them said that there was a couple cyclist coming up the trail as they sat on the side enjoying a break from the action. The first went buy and the second guy stopped at my buddies rig to catch his breath. Buddy asked him if he wanted a ride to the top and he said that he was out there with his brother in law and that he would like nothing more than to get a ride to the top but he did not think that his brother in law would like it too much! LOL I got a kick out of that story. Here is a picture of my rig. My family enjoys it as a family event!JJ
















You can see from my fat gut in the last picture I have not done much pedaling in the last 2 years!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Hardline said:


>


I want to see pics with mud splattered all over the baby's face!


----------



## nuclear_powered (Apr 18, 2007)

cannesdo said:


> Some of the really extreme "green supremists" (good one Deme) remind me of that Star Trek episode where they find a Utopian society and Wesley gets the death penalty for walking on the grass (to be fair, it was posted, "_Keep off the grass_" ha...).


Man, that was hilarious. How about the utopian natives? All short shorts, short skirts, jogging everywhere, disgustingly happy ... "Let's go play throw the ball!!" ... cracked me up that one. Would have been funnier if Picard had just let Wesley die.

But yeah ... I don't watch Star Trek though.

Really.

As for the topic ... some of those trucks looks pretty full-on. Are they legal to drive on the road over there? Or do they get towed into the parks?


----------



## Hardline (Jan 16, 2004)

Nat said:


> I want to see pics with mud splattered all over the baby's face!


LOL What is funny is she loves it when it get rough and bouncing all over the place. The 7 year old does not like it too much. I flipped over the first time out with her and she is a little gun shy of it when it get rough. That is why she is not in that picture. She gets out and walks sometimes. Oh and I hate mud. I try to stay away from it as best as possible. JJ


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

cannesdo said:


> Some of the really extreme "green supremists" (good one Deme) remind me of that Star Trek episode where they find a Utopian society and Wesley


Holy crap. I've seen like three episodes of that show, and I remember that episode. Something about going to a foreign world and finding subtly masked nudity in late 80's style accouterments, followed by a long, mostly dull legal battle, followed by my complete disinterest in ever watching that show again. It's all coming back to me now.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make, relative to yours, is...

yes.

...maybe.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

> Would have been funnier if Picard had just let Wesley die.


AH hahahahahahaaaaa: "Yes, we have violated your laws and we accept the consequences. Sorry Wes."

I only watched the 'Next Generation". There was something about that cast I really liked. Totally lost interest after that.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Hardline said:


> LOL What is funny is she loves it when it get rough and bouncing all over the place. The 7 year old does not like it too much. I flipped over the first time out with her and she is a little gun shy of it when it get rough. That is why she is not in that picture. She gets out and walks sometimes. Oh and I hate mud. I try to stay away from it as best as possible. JJ


Ok....um...I'm speechless.


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

*Oh, c'mon now!*



cannesdo said:


> AH hahahahahahaaaaa: "Yes, we have violated your laws and we accept the consequences. Sorry Wes."
> 
> I only watched the 'Next Generation". There was something about that cast I really liked. Totally lost interest after that.


The "Voyager" series was pretty darned good too. That Borg-hybrid chick was really hot...better than anyone on the NG series. If you keep bashing the Star Trek venue, I'll put on my Klingon outfit from my last Trekkie convention, hunt you down, and give you a good alien thrashing. ...just as soon as I get back from my Star Wars convention.


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

TNC said:


> The "Voyager" series was pretty darned good too. That Borg-hybrid chick was really hot...better than anyone on the NG series. If you keep bashing the Star Trek venue, I'll put on my Klingon outfit from my last Trekkie convention, hunt you down, and give you a good alien thrashing. ...just as soon as I get back from my Star Wars convention.


Please...you know Dr. *Crusher* has a black leather bustier on under that uniform. (And any good Trekkie knows the correct term is "Trekker")


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Back on topic...

This also reminded me of the dinner conversation in "I Heart Huckabees". God, that movie kills me:

Tommy Corn: You should be ashamed of yourself. 
Mr. Hooten: I should be what? 
Tommy Corn: You should be ashamed of yourself. 
Mr. Hooten: And why's that? Why whould I be ashamed of myself? 
Tommy Corn: You're a hypocrite. 
Mr. Hooten: I'm a what? 
Tommy Corn: You're misleading these children. 'Cause you're the destroyer, man. 
Mr. Hooten: How am I the destroyer? 
Tommy Corn: I saw that S.U.V. out there. 
Mr. Hooten: My car's the destroyer? You wanna know how many miles per gallon I get? 
Mr. Hooten: God gave us oil! He gave it to us! How can God's gift be bad? 
Tommy Corn: I don't know. He gave you a brain too and you messed that up pretty damn good. 
Cricket: Jesus is never mad at us if we live with Him in our hearts! 
Tommy Corn: I hate to break it to you, but He is - He most definitely is.
Mr. Hooten: I want you sons of b***** out of my house now! 
Tommy Corn: If Hitler were alive, he'd tell you not to think about oil. 
Mrs. Hooten: *You're* the Hitler! We took a Sudanese refugee into our home! 
Tommy Corn: You did. But how did Sudan happen, ma'am? Could it possibly be related to dictatorships that we support for some stupid reason? 
Mr. Hooten: You shut up! You get out! 
Tommy Corn: You shut up. 
[to Albert] 
Tommy Corn: Come on. Let's get out of here.

Earlier in the conversation:

Mr. Hooten: Do you have a job, Tom? 
Tommy Corn: I'm a firefighter. 
Mrs. Hooten: Oh, God bless *you*! A hero! 
Tommy Corn: I'm not a hero. We'd all be heroes if we quit using petroleum, though.

Tommy (Mark Wahlberg) is obsessed with petroleum and rides his bikes to fires and makes it to the house before the fire truck and does this little dance in the yard -- "*I'm* here, where are you? ha ha haaaaa..."


----------



## mykel (Jul 31, 2006)

*did anybody hear a giant flush?*



ICanDigIt said:


> When I ask people if they are excited about the LHC firing up this summer and get blank stares...my faith in human kind dwindles a little further.


None of this will matter when we all disapear down the black hole.


----------



## AscentCanada (Aug 20, 2004)

Hiker's don't understand why we bike, but we expect them to be open minded enough to keep trails open to us. How do you feel when the sierra club come knocking to close down moab to mountain biking. 

Do you wear hiking boots when riding, because it sound like your close minded enough to be a hiker.


----------



## Eric Hoefer (Jan 19, 2004)

Heres my buddy whos also a MTB enthusiast doing Elephant Hill in Canyonlands in his daily driver tacoma. Nothing too crazy but it looks fun none the less


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

Sorry to drag this back up but just came across this old thread... I am a fan of the old Land Cruisers (and my username comes from it) and I was at CM. I've been to Cruise Moab about 6 times and almost always had a blast... I think MTB now is way more fun in Moab than 4WD but I have had fun doing both. I am also a complete raging environmentalist, I work a lot on climate change / global warming issues, professionally researched for a few years, and I run biodiesel in my vehicles... I'm also heavily involved in land use issues (that affect MTB and off-road). I think of it, as far as off-roaders, as a hot button issue... That also affects the environment way less than many other pressing issues... My story is back in the late 90s I got an old Land Cruiser, fell in love with it... Got into building it up and "greening it" and I think MTB and building cars actually have a lot of weird little similarities. I was also able to pick up wrenching on MTB fairly quickly from my background on vehicles... I like exploring a lot more now rather than "off-roading" which is frankly mostly boring to me these days... 

Here are a few pics from Cruise Moab. That is also my Gary Fisher 29er in the back of my pickup that I dragged down this year. First, my old FJ55 Land Cruiser, diesel powered... My red pickup. My good friend's FJ40 Land Cruiser... All badass vehicles, we also all love to take them "off road" with as much respect for the environment as possible...


----------



## FT$ (Nov 12, 2007)

sweet pics! thanks for sharing. I use to be super in to wheeli'n before I got my 575! Fun times! 

-FT$ (a.k.a 4X4RUNR)


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

I have to say, doegies seem to love four-wheelin' too. This one was riding shotgun today.

(But it's even better if you reverse it to make it look like he's doing the driving.)


----------



## snobrder5 (Apr 16, 2006)

dude is that YOUR unimog? you lucky bastard  about 4 years ago my buddy had a chance to buy one that was sitting in a parking lot here with a for sale sign on it....the guy said it ran great etc etc, buy my buddy was apprehensive about buying it b/c he didn't know much about the Mercedes Benz engine/drivetrain.....so he passed it up and the guy that bought it to the tune of 3700 bucks was a complete tool....it was a BEAUTIFUL fire engine red radio truck with the complete box still on the back...so nice....whatever you live you learn....the guy who bought it took me wheelin in it one time when i saw him at the gas station (i was in my jeep) and man that thing would climb hills that gave my jeep a hard time....anyway, very nice man....very very nice!


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> ...I am a fan of the old Land Cruisers...been to Cruise Moab about 6 times and almost always had a blast...


well, no worries...it's all in good fun....



> ...I am also a complete raging environmentalist, I work a lot on climate change / global warming issues, professionally researched for a few years, and I run biodiesel in my vehicles... I'm also heavily involved in land use issues (that affect MTB and off-road). I think of it, as far as off-roaders, as a hot button issue... That also affects the environment way less than many other pressing issues...


OK, you're joking, right? Anyone who's fighting for the Earth's future can't be a car owner, much less an SUV owner who abuses the Earth while spewing greenhouse gases and drives an old diesel off road for pleasure.



> ...got an old Land Cruiser, fell in love with it... Got into building it up and "greening it"...Here are a few pics from Cruise Moab...my old FJ55 Land Cruiser, diesel powered... My red pickup. My good friend's FJ40 Land Cruiser... All badass vehicles, we also all love to take them "off road" with as much respect for the environment as possible...


I guess all you need to do is claim you care and scam money from the taxpayers. No need to practice what you preach.


----------



## RXL (Feb 8, 2008)

pursuiter said:


> Anyone who's fighting for the Earth's future can't be a car owner


Please turn off your computer. You're wasting energy.

How do you heat your home, pursuiter? You must have a geo-thermal heat pump powered by solar or wind power.

Where was your bike made, and how was it delivered?

What are you using for chain lube?

Is that home made of wood? TREE MURDERER!!!:nono:


pursuiter said:


> No need to practice what you preach.





Fast Eddy said:


>


nice


cannesdo said:


>


nice


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

pursuiter said:


> Anyone who's fighting for the Earth's future can't be a car owner...


Not realistic.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

pursuiter,

For what its worth, even with all of the miles I put on that Land Cruiser... Because the vegetable oil manufactured was originally developed for restaurant consumption.... But even if it produced for biodiesel specific production (which still allows for use of the meal for food products) it is still a ~78% greenhouse gas reduction. That land cruiser (the purple/gray and white one) has been retrofitted to get 27 mpg (using 1990 diesel technology). Approximate particulate matter is also 60% reduced. The issue with diesel engine combustion technology is not the engine, interestingly enought, it is the fuel from the petroleum process that is full of harmful contaminents. Diesel is actually the cleanest and most efficient internal combustion technology currently available.

My overall greenhouse gas footprint is 14% of what the vehicle would be if it were gas, and is probably about 40% of a prius at 15,000 miles a year. That means I would have to drive approximately 40,000 miles a year to produce as much greenhouse gas as a prius, arguably top 3 vehicles produced emissions-wise. This means that Land Cruiser produces approximately 60% better emissions than a prius (and I built it myself!)

2nd, I manage a few web sites where we literally have thousands of enthusiasts doing the same thing with that vehicle (and its off-road exploits, aka not preaching to the choir, largely being the motivator) and our campaigns since approximately 2002 has rendered literally thousands of diesel conversions. I literally wrote the article, helped develop several businesses where diesel conversions are upto 50% of their business, yielding literally several hundred a year. You could say I have a lot of "carbon credits," LOL...

Diesel conversions, while they do produce more regional emissions are noticably reduced greenhouse gas emitters, and is step one for any vegetable oil of biodiesel based alternative fuel (which is night and day difference over ethanol which is the primary offender of "biofuels"). Diesel is literally the best, easiest, and cleanest option commercially available currently. They are cleaner and more efficient to produce than hybrids. This is why in 2010 nearly every major manufacturer is producing a new "clean diesel" model, for example a new Honda Accord that gets 62 mpg.

The issue here is whether driving that particular vehicle on dirt roads and rocks that are already driven on, 99% of the time simply adding a tire mark, are that environmentally destructive. Much like the footprint of say three-five mountain bikers width wise. But the issue is erosion, and noise (which is mostly mental). Again, it is a hot button issue that simply represents and ideology. I worked for Greenpeace. I literally researched global warming for the person who is now the head of greenpeace. Interestingly enough he actually gave me my first tool kit in 1997. I understand these issues greatly. I am friends and was actually nominated to the BLM's Resource Advisory Commitee ("the voice of the public to the BLM") for the state of Utah by SUWA, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, and have actually helped people on both sides navigate this issue. These issues affect all of us, off roaders and bikers because wilderness designation does not allow for Mountain Bikes either... :nono: And again, I am 100% for protecting and preserving the land, but I do not believe in leaving large swaths of approximately 11 million acres, such as the Red Rock Wilderness Act that is before congress annually (an appoximate 93.2% increase in wilderness in Utah) is a wise idea for most people and represents an extreme short-sightedness

3rd, I do lead an environmentally friendly life. My house is as environmentally friendly as possible within the budget I have. Every single bulb in my house is high efficiency and they actually all paid for themselves in less than two months and yielded an approximate 35% increase in electricity efficiency. 90% of our electricity comes from coal as you know, which causes major health effects (cancer, mercury, etc) in addition to greenhouse gas. Pursuiter, did you not use your toaster or coffee maker personally this morning? Do you have a hand powered coffee grinder or hair dryer?

So I hope it helps. Basically this is a tremendously complex issue. There are no silver bullets and clear decisions about what to do. Unfortunately you have been sold a bag of goods that represents an incredibly short sighted view. It is also "fundamentally unAmerican" according to an excellent article called "Death of Environmentalism" and shows that the "sacrifice" method of environmentalism basically goes against the American ideology system, which I agree with. I want to be clear that I am born out of the same environmental movement that we probably both embody. We need to develop technologies and methods of manufacturing (see the book _Cradle to Cradle_ by McDonough and Braugart) that are compatible with the life system that allowed humans to exist and will allow humans to exist, sort of like the natural laws of the world. Humans and the planet are not always combatting, it is perfectly possible that humans could exist in a method that is compatible with the planet. That said we are currently swimming against the river. We will get a 1/4-1/2 mile of strokes in but eventually it will overcome us.

The best we can do is navigate our best possible routes. I for one am not going to sit in my house, dictate what others should do, and particularly be completely uneducated in my conclusions about it... Andre


----------



## sneakyalien (May 26, 2006)

dft said:


> your kids will be WAY worse for the enviroment than a few gallons of gas burnt out on the trails.


 
I just want to point out what a tremendously ignorant and hateful thing to say.

I am not going to try and assert a position either way on this topic, but the fact is that we ALL have impacts, MTB'ers and 4x4'ers...ALL OF US should be trying to keep this in mind whenever we head out onto the woods (or in this case, the desert). We should do it, _at least_ to look out for other people's enjoyment of wilderness areas.

So you don't mind a bunch of tire marks all over the desert, well, other people do. Just recognizing and acknowledging that fact can do a lot! Lots of people don't like to see tire tracks on trails, or have peeps haul ass by em on bikes, that doesn't bother me...

I'm glad that I live in a state (NC) and area (Pisgah) that sees the need for mixed-use public lands and manages accordingly. It makes a big difference!


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

RXL said:


> Please turn off your computer. You're wasting energy.
> 
> How do you heat your home, pursuiter? You must have a geo-thermal heat pump powered by solar or wind power.
> 
> ...


LOL, I'm not a global warmist, I didn't claim:


> I am also a complete raging environmentalist, I work a lot on climate change / global warming issues, professionally researched for a few years, and I run biodiesel in my vehicles... I'm also heavily involved in land use issues (that affect MTB and off-road). I think of it, as far as off-roaders, as a hot button issue...


Then show off all my carbon wasting activities. It reminds me of algore living in 30k ft^2 houses (3) flying all over the Earth in a private jet, then telling me I need to change.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> pursuiter,
> 
> For what...blaah blaah blaah....Diesel is actually the cleanest and most efficient internal combustion technology currently available.
> 
> ....I worked for Greenpeace. I literally researched global warming for the person who is now the head of greenpeace. ..., did you not use your toaster or coffee maker personally this morning? Do you have a hand powered coffee grinder or hair dryer?...Basically this is a tremendously complex issue...It is also "fundamentally unAmerican" according to an excellent article called "Death of Environmentalism" and shows that the "sacrifice" method of environmentalism basically goes against the American ideology system, which I agree with...should do, and particularly be completely uneducated in my conclusions about it... Andre


What a joke, you're a gobal warmist working for the head of Greepeace driving an SUV. Do as I say, not as I do :nono:


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

That is exactly my point. I just pointed out that I developed and am driving an SUV that produces 40% of the greenhouse gas of a Prius. But because it is an "SUV," you can't get past that. Best of luck, Pursuiter...


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> That is exactly my point. I just pointed out that I developed and am driving an SUV that produces 40% of the greenhouse gas of a Prius. But because it is an "SUV," you can't get past that. Best of luck, Pursuiter...


LOL, read Kyoto, we're supposed to be below 20% of our 1990 carbon usage right now. And you claim "I am also a complete raging environmentalist". This is a perfect example of what global warming is all about, total scam, no intention of actual living what's preached.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

how so? And what exactly is "preached?" I also don't want to get into it but are you aware of the mathematical probability of global warming being "natural?" 1/17,000 -- about the odds of winning a small state lottery...

I also forgot to mention the "SUV" is 98% recycled by using a used automotive carcass, engine, transmission, etc, all to get up to 27%. Therefore, CO2 reduced is also that of purchasing a new car, it takes about 50,000 lbs of material (and CO2 comsumption to produce that material) for each 3,000 lbs of car on average...

I have been fairly polite here but it is clear, my friend, that you are a jackass... End of discussion for me, no sense attempting to explain logic to someone who lacks the ability to comprehend it. Kyoto -- the _goal_ was to be below 1990 levels, not where we are at...

I'm curious if anyone else thinks I am a "hypocrit" as well?


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> ...I have been fairly polite here but it is clear, my friend, that you are a jackass... End of discussion for me...


LOL, it's clear you don't really believe the lies you are paid to spread. Ripping up the Earth, spewing greenhouse gasses, bragging about it on the internet, posting pictures. And you work for Greenpeace....perfect :thumbsup:


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Diesel, when faced with crisis, those who do less often criticize those who do more, out of their frustration and fear -- fear that we all aren't doing enough (and because if they keep their focus on what you aren't doing, they don't have to look at what they're not doing). But there's something to be said for balancing concern for the environment with honoring the human spirit. You seemed to have found a nice balance. You've done far more than I have to make this world a healthier place for all of us. I appreciate the efforts you make to inform the stragglers, of which I am certainly one. 

I have often played the role of messenger, in my own family and in the world, in other ways (I *am* the proverbial canary in the cave with regard to heavy metal toxicity/environmental illness) and I've always found it interesting how the more you do, the more fire you draw -- the more you attract people who tell you you're not doing enough. 

You are. Go play. There's no point in having a healthy planet if we don't have healthy, happy people around to enjoy it.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

cannesdo said:


> ...There's no point in having a healthy planet if we don't have healthy, happy people around to enjoy it.


I guess you didn't watch algore's movie...the seas are rising, Pacific Islanders are drowning, Polar Bears are going extinct and you are only worried about your personal happiness. What about all Mother Earth's creatures that don't get to vote in US elections. Who's looking out for them? Not Greenpeace employees, that's for sure :madman:


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

Pursuiter, you're coming at this from a dynamic of dysfunctional thinking. "It must be fixed. Now."

Yes, it sucks. And we created it and we have to deal with the consequences.

And yes, you will remain in your head-banging state until you grow beyond that perspective. And I say this as someone who has been there. I nearly died because I could not accept things as they are. It literally made me physically sick. This applies to every sort of crisis a human can face, be it an unhealthy personal relationship, or impending doom on the world stage. Eventually you learn to do what you can do, focus on your own choices and accept that you can't change others or fix everything you'd like to fix. (If you don't, you self-destruct, see the Hemingway quote below.) No one would ever learn anything if you or I or anyone else were able to do that.

Attacking those who care, who are going above and beyond what most do, calling them hypocrites because you don't feel they're doing enough is a coping mechanism. I get it. I get the frustration. I feel everything you feel. I also know that learning to let go and accept things where they are in any given moment -- living in the moment (and this does not mean not recognizing what needs to be addressed, does not mean not addressing it) -- is a far healthier, and more productive, way of being in the world.

It's also dysfunctional to believe that anyone who does anything that brings them joy, if it in any way affects someone or something else, is selfish.

You need this as much as I needed it 20 years ago. I found it scrawled in bold print in magic marker on the back of a bathroom stall door of the Blue Moon Tavern in Seattle:



> "The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure that it will kill you too, but there will be no special hurry."


I get it. I do. But it is what it is. And we have to take this one day at a time, and beating up every messenger who has the audacity to enjoy himself a little (in a very conscious, reasonable way) while he's patiently (and considerately!) dragging our sorry asses out of our consumption coma isn't helpful.

When you get stuck in that "gotta fix it now" place you get desperate and when you're desperate you can't see anything but what's broken....You become inconsiderate and judgemental and you can't even cut yourself a little slack. Next thing you know you're slammin' your head into walls and telling everyone else where they've come up short. And that, my friend, is a waste of energy. Energy lost. You see? It comes full circle.

You and I, and every person on this earth have control over the just one person. Ourselves. the world is made up of two groups. People who get that and people who don't. And once you get that, you start to see...._Maybe_ we aren't the teacher. Personally, whenever I start feeling that way, it's pretty safe to assume I'm running from a lesson.


----------



## pursuiter (May 28, 2008)

cannesdo said:


> Pursuiter, you're coming at this from a dynamic of dysfunctional thinking. "It must be fixed. Now." ....


No, I'm coming at this from the perspective that all this man-made global warming scare talk is a scam to steal hard working taxpayer's money under the guise "for the Earth". If there was every any question that this is a scam, reading about a Greenpeace employee who reports to the CEO owning not one, but two SUVs seals the case. It's not like he doesn't know better, he just doesn't care or he knows its all a scam. Either way, US taxpayers are the chumps.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

pursuiter said:


> LOL, it's clear you don't really believe the lies you are paid to spread. Ripping up the Earth, spewing greenhouse gasses, bragging about it on the internet, posting pictures. And you work for Greenpeace....perfect :thumbsup:


I must have hit a nerve with this guy. Anyway, I don't work for Greenpeace, I sort of barely did, in college... (it's called a signature, click it). I worked for the guy that runs greenpeace, 10 years ago. I then researched global warming professionally for several years, and I also came into it pretty much uninformed and no agenda... I actually hear you about the tax payer issue (because that is who will pay for it). I don't particularly like Al Gore either, I'm not a "sky is falling" person either, but I have several years of research saying that removing billions of years of carbon dioxide from the ground and placing it into the atmosphere in less than 100 years is not that good an idea. And might actually have some consequences since CO2 regulates what keeps the surface warm (and cool).

You keep believing what you do and again, more power to you....

Cheers, 
Andre


----------



## zeeduv (Jul 30, 2007)

"I guess you didn't watch algore's movie"

eww


----------



## cannesdo (Feb 3, 2007)

pursuiter said:


> No, I'm coming at this from the perspective that all this man-made global warming scare talk is a scam to steal hard working taxpayer's money under the guise "for the Earth". If there was every any question that this is a scam, reading about a Greenpeace employee who reports to the CEO owning not one, but two SUVs seals the case. It's not like he doesn't know better, he just doesn't care or he knows its all a scam. Either way, US taxpayers are the chumps.


Ah, well, you can see how closely I pay attention when I know what I'm dealing with. The funny thing though is that that bit of information is irrelevant, as, in essence, you and the environmental hysterics are one in the same. You both have a reality which excludes any other viewpoint, any shade of gray. You both see yourselves as victims. Both live your lives angry and in fear, and you both find comfort in blaming someone else.

Extremes meet. Not a lot of room for critical thinking when you're that deeply invested in victimhood and fear.


----------



## GoGoGordo (Jul 16, 2006)

*Couldn't have said it better.*

You people are idiots. See you on the trails.[/QUOTE]


----------



## BlurredVision (Jul 1, 2007)

Just read the first and last pages of this thread and it's sad that some uneducated people don't take the time and consideration to find facts and learn more. Ive quit off roading myself due to high gas prices but having been a part of a few off road enthusiest organizations I know they do more to protect the environment and the areas they use then most bikers or aanyone else for that matter. Not only that but advances in any industry comes from extreme use. You need these off roaders more than you realize. Im guessing the whiners here have the same complains of Nascar and such. 
Off road enthusiests drives an industry that caters to not only them but all of us indirectly. While they're having fun and breaking parts on thier trucks, companies research better parts that dont break as easily bringing you better, safer search and rescue trucks. That trickles down into everyday vehicles as well bringing advancements in roll over protection, suspension and steering. Much of todays improved fuel economy over the past can be attributed to motor sports. After all, they cant win races refueling cars. Efficient engines produce more power and consume less fuel. 
Many of the advancements made in off road technologies have trickled down to your bikes as well. Suspension and structural designs have been adapted for use in motor cycles and your MTB's.
To say that they shouldn't have the right to use the land because they happen to consume a bit of gas is unamerican. Its sad to see that people have resorted to this and are close minded to the real issues.


----------



## eat_dirt (May 26, 2008)

haven't been out there in years.

my 62 series wants to go back, tho.


----------



## snobrder5 (Apr 16, 2006)

BlurredVision said:


> Many of the advancements made in off road technologies have trickled down to your bikes as well. Suspension and structural designs have been adapted for use in motor cycles and your MTB's.


amen to that! just look at Fox Racing Shox....they started off in the offroad racing (baja, etc) arena, and now they're the leaders in suspension products for mountain bikes......


----------



## zrm (Oct 11, 2006)

snobrder5 said:


> amen to that! just look at Fox Racing Shox....they started off in the offroad racing (baja, etc) arena, and now they're the leaders in suspension products for mountain bikes......


So what does that have to do with the discussion regarding the impacts of motorized vs non motorized recreation? So some moto technology leeches over to bicycles, so what? How does that justify the destruction that often follows OHV activity?


----------



## snobrder5 (Apr 16, 2006)

zrm said:


> So what does that have to do with the discussion regarding the impacts of motorized vs non motorized recreation? So some moto technology leeches over to bicycles, so what? How does that justify the destruction that often follows OHV activity?


what the heck does "the destruction that often follows OHV activity" have to do with the original subject of 4 wheel drive vehicles in moab? The park service out there which is backed by the government WELCOMES OHV's to these areas! Why do you care that OHV's are using SOME OF the same land that you ride bikes on? Are you jealous that you have to pedal up the hill and they get to sit back and do nothing as their rock crawler idles up the hill? are't they out there doing the same thing that you're doing? ENJOYING NATURE!!!! Dude i see more litter and trash left of my local trails than i did when i went up to tellico with my jeep a few years ago....people who go rock crawling and bust a tire, DONT LEAVE THE TIRE ON THE SIDE OF THE TRAIL!!!! unfortunately, many mountain bikers leave their tubes and tires right on the trail, or hang them in a tree as if they're "decoration" or "badges of honor"....screw that it's just plain littering...dont even get me started as to why riders cant stuff a power bar wrapper back into their jersey or camelbak after they're done eating it....they just throw them down on the trail.....as far as carbon emissions that you people think is so bad, it's been said before, that the amount of OHV's that are out there dont hold a candle to the rest of the population of cars/trucks that are used for highway use only, when it comes to air pollution....that's the simple fact....before you start griping about OHV's and air pollution, why dont you stop driving your car to work everyday, and that will cut down on MORE emissions than taking 10 OHV's off the trail....IMHO, mountain biking over the years has prob had more of an "environmental impact" on forests etc, than OHV's have...there are prob thousands more bike trails than their are OHV trails out there, and honestly, most of the OHV trails used to be logging roads that were already there.....anyway, i tried to stay out of this, i guess that didn't happen....

one more thing? do you boycott the sale of Fox Racing Shox products? well you should, b/c prob more of their business comes from motorized OHV's, than from mountain bikes....so why would you support them by buying their products...that just leads to the destruction of our environment by OHV's....oh yeah, i'm pretty sure that the rear shock on your specialized epic has something to do with fox.......

oh yeah, and just to add some fuel to the fire, here's my old jeep, that i used to wheel the SH*T out of....the pic with me is the day i sold it...the pic with my wife is right after i stretched the wheelbase...you know, so it doesn't wanna roll backwards off those huge rocks as easily, when i'm out destroying the environment!


----------



## Slyp Dawg (Oct 13, 2007)

cannesdo said:


> I have to say, doegies seem to love four-wheelin' too. This one was riding shotgun today.
> 
> (But it's even better if you reverse it to make it look like he's doing the driving.)


a trailbus! a freaking German made trailbus! that thing is awesome, dude


----------



## bstiff (Jul 21, 2004)

playpunk said:


> To be clear, I don't 4WD, I don't really think that it's a sustainable activity, but I guess I'm enough of a libertarian to believe that eventually the market will sort it out - if gas is 10 dollars a gallon less people will be out there in their trucks.


Espousing a libertarian point of view and believing the market will eliminate four-wheeling are orthogonal lines of reasoning.

I ride, I like to four-wheel, and my ideology runs strongly toward libertarianism.

The idea that people will stop four-wheeling when gas gets too expensive isn't libertarianism, it's simple economics. Likewise, everyone on the planet would ride a Ti bike if the stuff cost a dollar a ton, and no one (well, very few) would have them if it cost more than gold.

Four-wheeling is cursed by people with the same mentality that cast a dark light on MTB. While plenty of people in 4WDs (and on dirt bikes/quads) behave responsibly, keeping their vehicles on the road and not making a mess, there are plenty of dumbasses that are driving all over the vegetation and doing donuts in pristine patches of cryptobiotic soil. Similarly, there are plenty of people on bikes that spook horses, run hikers off the trail, and ride willy-nilly across hell's half acre anytime they decide something looks like it would be cool to ride on/through/over. Do you ride at Fruita? Do you remember when the trails there were just narrow cowpaths?

It's about responsibility. If everyone acts conscientiously and respects everyone else, I don't think there's going to be a problem. There's room for everyone.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

It is similar, indeed...

You all need to remember that just because we are human powered doesn't mean we can't cause damage. The issue is _erosion_ primarily, and a small tire with 75-100lbs on it, versus a wide tire with 700lbs on it cause cause just as much damage. Often it is about breaking the seal on the trail and in key points where water from moisture is then introduced to the trail, it can be all over. No matter how the trail was started. this is why there are water bars, on both MTB and off road OHV trails... To think that we are somehow causing less damage is incredibly short sighted. Remember, *wilderness designation applies to both OHVs as well as MTB specifically for this reason. * I also wanted to point out that I maintained trails as a job for 4 years as well from when I was 16-20, I am specifically aware of the issues that erosion and different types of activities have on trails. Comments such as this from a MTB are genuinely hypocritical and incredibly uninformed:



zrm said:


> How does that justify the destruction that often follows OHV activity?


With OHV, the issues are two fold.. As far as 4WD vehicles, it is about 95% responsible, sort of slow going people, "jeepers." Only about 5% of them are large tire'd buggies, and out of them only a small percentage of them go off trail.

The largest, single handed issue with OHV is not "jeeps" but is actually ATVs/quads, and dirt bikes. Sales in the last 5 years in particular have gone through the roof. These people have no training and understanding, there are health, safety, and environmental issues from them as well. Again it is a minority, but the sheer numbers of them is so staggering that the issues are just massive. Because of the "OHV" designation, all of these motorized vehicles are placed together when it is about on par with putting recumbents and MTBs in the same designation because they are both bicycles...


----------



## iajtywu (Jun 2, 2008)

snobrder5 said:


> what the heck does "the destruction that often follows OHV activity" have to do with the original subject of 4 wheel drive vehicles in moab? The park service out there which is backed by the government WELCOMES OHV's to these areas! Why do you care that OHV's are using SOME OF the same land that you ride bikes on? Are you jealous that you have to pedal up the hill and they get to sit back and do nothing as their rock crawler idles up the hill? are't they out there doing the same thing that you're doing? ENJOYING NATURE!!!! Dude i see more litter and trash left of my local trails than i did when i went up to tellico with my jeep a few years ago....people who go rock crawling and bust a tire, DONT LEAVE THE TIRE ON THE SIDE OF THE TRAIL!!!! unfortunately, many mountain bikers leave their tubes and tires right on the trail, or hang them in a tree as if they're "decoration" or "badges of honor"....screw that it's just plain littering...dont even get me started as to why riders cant stuff a power bar wrapper back into their jersey or camelbak after they're done eating it....they just throw them down on the trail.....as far as carbon emissions that you people think is so bad, it's been said before, that the amount of OHV's that are out there dont hold a candle to the rest of the population of cars/trucks that are used for highway use only, when it comes to air pollution....that's the simple fact....before you start griping about OHV's and air pollution, why dont you stop driving your car to work everyday, and that will cut down on MORE emissions than taking 10 OHV's off the trail....IMHO, mountain biking over the years has prob had more of an "environmental impact" on forests etc, than OHV's have...there are prob thousands more bike trails than their are OHV trails out there, and honestly, most of the OHV trails used to be logging roads that were already there.....anyway, i tried to stay out of this, i guess that didn't happen....
> 
> one more thing? do you boycott the sale of Fox Racing Shox products? well you should, b/c prob more of their business comes from motorized OHV's, than from mountain bikes....so why would you support them by buying their products...that just leads to the destruction of our environment by OHV's....oh yeah, i'm pretty sure that the rear shock on your specialized epic has something to do with fox.......
> 
> oh yeah, and just to add some fuel to the fire, here's my old jeep, that i used to wheel the SH*T out of....the pic with me is the day i sold it...the pic with my wife is right after i stretched the wheelbase...you know, so it doesn't wanna roll backwards off those huge rocks as easily, when i'm out destroying the environment!


Very well said!


----------



## BlurredVision (Jul 1, 2007)

Enlighten us to the destruction you speak of? Is it the destruction of thier trucks? I'm sure they appreciate your concern but they'll live? Unnecesarily burning gas? What about all the resources that went into building your bike? Perhaps you should become a hiker. I believe off roaders do more to conserve our parks than bikers do as a group. I've been a member of Tread Lightly for many years as have the various off road organizations I've been a member of. Tread Lightly is an organization focused on motorized AND mechanized outdoor recreation although I see no involvement from the bike industry. Bike companies may be sponsoring other organizations, I don't know. If they are, they are not waving the flag. If you want to do your part, get involved. Get the bike companies involved. Off roaders know they travel on borrowed land and they respect that. 
www.treadlightly.org


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

(sigh)


----------



## IntheBush (May 31, 2008)

How many aluminum framed 4 wheelers are out there?

Just sayin'... 



-----


----------



## jkkfam89 (Jan 2, 2007)

pursuiter said:


> I guess you didn't watch algore's movie...the seas are rising, Pacific Islanders are drowning, Polar Bears are going extinct and you are only worried about your personal happiness. What about all Mother Earth's creatures that don't get to vote in US elections. Who's looking out for them? Not Greenpeace employees, that's for sure :madman:


Al Gore took someones crappy idea from the 70's and made Millions upon millions on it, how much has he put back into Mother earth? He is a piece. Did the dinosauers vote? Oh wait maybe we should ask the cavemen about this global warming, especially when the ice age came. They must of really thought global warming was scary. Global warming is funny because all these stroms in the midwest, caused by what? A COLD front. HMMMM think about that a little

Watch Al Gores Movie???? Give him more money ?????


----------



## HotBlack (Feb 9, 2008)

jkkfam89 said:


> Al Gore took someones crappy idea from the 70's and made Millions upon millions on it, how much has he put back into Mother earth? He is a piece. Did the dinosauers vote? Oh wait maybe we should ask the cavemen about this global warming, especially when the ice age came. They must of really thought global warming was scary. Global warming is funny because all these stroms in the midwest, caused by what? A COLD front. HMMMM think about that a little
> 
> Watch Al Gores Movie???? Give him more money ?????


Yeap, science isn't for everybody. Aparrently.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> It is similar, indeed...
> 
> You all need to remember that just because we are human powered doesn't mean we can't cause damage. The issue is _erosion_ primarily, and a small tire with 75-100lbs on it, versus a wide tire with 700lbs on it cause cause just as much damage....


Nope, there have been a few studies on the subject, and that is not the conclusion that they found. They found that the magnitude of damage caused by cyclists was similer to that caused by hikers, especially with high foot-traffic. The studies found that the erosion caused by equestrians was on the same scale as motorized travel like ATVs and motorcycles. 4x4s is yet another magnitude above that.

The point of course is that you made that "fact" up, and real data exists that is contrary to your made up fact.


----------



## dieselcruiserhead (Aug 3, 2007)

I am a Tread Lightly tread trainer too, I have never seen any study that says mountain biking is on par with foot traffic.


----------



## El Jeffe (Oct 3, 2007)

> Al Gore took someones crappy idea from the 70's and made Millions upon millions on it, how much has he put back into Mother earth?


Um, yes, Al Gore is a hypocrite, but he was doing the whole green speech thing back in the 70s. And many will argue that the current greening trend is in part because he did MUCH to raise awareness with his film. I'd say if one man needs to fly around the world to get millions to act more responsibly...well worth it. I know some folks can't think that hard and realize that one person doing something to change the behavior of thousands? Millions? could possibly be a good thing but trust me, it is.

And for all you righties that like to type algore because you think it's offensive, try again. Or go back to grade school where calling names was how you sorted out who had the biggest tool.

For you folks who like to compare bikes to motorized traffic, it might be time to get your heads checked for bumps. We can work for 100 hours building a trail that we can then ride for years with no maintenance requirements. Yet when some jackass on an ATV rides the trail illegally, he can destroy it in 10 minutes with a few blips of the throttle.


----------



## smilycook (Jan 13, 2004)

El Jeffe said:


> Um, yes, Al Gore is a hypocrite, but he was doing the whole green speech thing back in the 70s. And many will argue that the current greening trend is in part because he did MUCH to raise awareness with his film. I'd say if one man needs to fly around the world to get millions to act more responsibly...well worth it. I know some folks can't think that hard and realize that one person doing something to change the behavior of thousands? Millions? could possibly be a good thing but trust me, it is.
> 
> And for all you righties that like to type algore because you think it's offensive, try again. Or go back to grade school where calling names was how you sorted out who had the biggest tool.
> 
> For you folks who like to compare bikes to motorized traffic, it might be time to get your heads checked for bumps. We can work for 100 hours building a trail that we can then ride for years with no maintenance requirements. Yet when some jackass on an ATV rides the trail illegally, he can destroy it in 10 minutes with a few blips of the throttle.


So your favorite trail is the "Soverign Trail"? Guess who built that trail, it wasn't mountain bikers, but instead a group dirt bikers. There are a lot of us who ride trails which are cleared by dirt bikers every year, in fact a lot of dirt bikers are seeking a similar experiance to mountain bikers.

Sure there are some bad apples out there and it is the job of the FS and BLM to create a trail system for all users. Just like some mountain bikers build illegal trails because they want a certain experiance so do other groups seek there own experiance. The FS designated trail system will go a long way to reducing illegal activities as will ensuring an enjoyable trail system for all users. A system that meets the needs of the public is easier to enforce than one that does not. Locally we had an ATV get onto our local trail and cause some serious damage, we fixed the damage and the FS proscueted the offending parties.

So write your congressmen or senator and ask for more funding for trails and enforcement. To many places have one enforcement officer for millions of miles.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> I am a Tread Lightly tread trainer too, I have never seen any study that says mountain biking is on par with foot traffic.


Ignorance is no excuse, and a slap in the face to us that have actually done research.



> The city of Oakland hired an outside company to assess the trails of Joaquin Miller Park: a park frequented by hikers, equestrians, and mountain bikers. Richard D. Koehler and Janet M. Sowers of William and Lettis & Associates, Inc. and Frank Mileham and Clare Tipple Golec of the Natural Resources Management Corperation submitted a report to the city of Oakland on December 31, 2000. The report outlines several erosion phoneme


Source=Me


----------



## smilycook (Jan 13, 2004)

dieselcruiserhead said:


> I am a Tread Lightly tread trainer too, I have never seen any study that says mountain biking is on par with foot traffic.


Lots of research on the IMBA website. From what I have read

(hikers=mountain bikers) < (horses=motorcycles)


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

This thread "ROCKS"!


----------

