Important new Busywild restriction update.

[wkndtoy]

Sorry had too

I hate to point out the obvious, but that looks like typical PNW wheelin.

I'm sure Nancy would like these guy fix our problems......

http://www.lakesideind.com/
:stirpot: :stirpot:

 

[Gibby1]

I hate to point out the obvious, but that looks like typical PNW wheelin.

You're right to a point. I just picked a few that I found that show the damage to the root structures around the trees and how it happens.

Nancy, wants to build up the area around these with large rocks to protect them. That's why we had the helicopter drop of rocks on the busywild this fall.

Some of this was to show that what we would call a ton of fun, is causing the damage that she's concerned about. It probably wouldn't be so bad if we had a better maintainence schedule to keep isolated spots from progressing to a problem stage. The busy received limited attention for a long time.

 

[CHOP SHOP]

Processes and politics will kill the sport of four wheeling, the attitude towards each other on here are what will kill the opportunity for the PNW4WDA to grow to the point it needs to be more effective. The PNW4WDA need new member with new ideas, you cannot get that with the mentality being shown, it's the same sh!t that was happening ten years ago.. Wake up folks or change hobbies!!!

I remember everyone saying get involved, get you opinion heard

 

[Not Jobless]

then agian you might not want thier support at reiter.

That's what I'm looking for, but no info is being provided.

 

[TreeClimber]

having a handful of new blood sign up for the PNW is not going to sway all the crusty OLD jeepers and all of a sudden give them an open mind. I just dont see that happening (IMO).

I dont think they represent the future of this hobby, only the past. which they will continue to hold onto.

Chop,
You of course are correct. But having dozens, masses, hundreds of new blood will change the PNW.
Tony Fox

and I've signed my name to a couple of my recent posts, because I WANT to be known what my opinion is. I AM an old time wheeler. I AM a PNW member. I AM the guy that will fit into whatever restrictions are implemented as I DO drive a short, narrow rig.

I know a few of you in person. But the DNR isn't going to respect the opinion of TreeClimber, but maybe they'll listen to Tony Fox.

And I'm not in favor of restrictions at all. NONE.
And I AM in favor of maintaining the integrity of the Busy as a short, narrow, tight, treehugging trail.

I feel that once we go down the path of restrictions, it'll never get better, but will surely get worse.

Guys like the F150 dude are idiots. And I distinctly remember he was repeatedly warned on the boards NOT to take his rig there. No amount of legislation will prevent idiocy.

Ramble off.

 

[Gibby1]

having a handful of new blood sign up for the PNW is not going to sway all the crusty OLD jeepers and all of a sudden give them an open mind. I just dont see that happening (IMO).

I dont think they represent the future of this hobby, only the past. which they will continue to hold onto.

People just signing up will have absolutely no effect.

Please getting active in the running of the org will have an effect.

The crusty old jeepers comment is completely uncalled for and frankly is attitudes and comments like that that keep them from getting involved in forums like this.

The PNW4WDA is the most influential group of it's kind in the northwest, like it or not. The majority of the folks running the org are "older" because new people are not stepping up to take leadership roles and aren't willing to learn the ropes. If someone want's to make a difference, the most effective way IMO, is to get involved at a leadership level with the PNW4WDA. BUT, be prepared for a lot of work and a lot of time committment. The key word is INVOLVED, not just becoming a member.

In our region (and probably across a broader spectrum than I'm aware of) I've become a stick in the mud because I fought for change. I've made some friends and I've made some enemies along the way. There's room here for more new people to step up and make a difference. Ed Campbell, the pres of Dogpound offroad has stepped up to say that he'll take on the Director position for Region 2 this next year. Way to go Ed! Now, let's see some other people back him up.

I stepped down because I recognized that I couldn't put the time in required, in the hopes that someone else will be able to better fill this position.

 

[Gibby1]

Chop,

Guys like the F150 dude are idiots. And I distinctly remember he was repeatedly warned on the boards NOT to take his rig there. No amount of legislation will prevent idiocy.

Yes, and just as sadly is that he went out with a bunch of other people that did nothing to stop him.

Here we get down to the crux of this and where the whole thing started, it was THIS idiot and the people that went went him that didn't tell him to go home.

Technically, Nancy could do nothing about him with her current rule set (according to her). He stayed on the trail and to quote Jobless, it was "typical northwest wheeling." But as a result it created a huge commotion. You can't ticket him for resource damage - how would you prove he did it. Some of the guys with him (pics I didn't post) were off the trail and the recovery itself was more damaging than anything. She wants teeth to give idiots like this guy a healthy fine that will stick. I don't recall who it was that went with him, but this is where self-policing comes in. Every single one of these guys should have told him to go home or run another trail so they are every bit as much to blame as the driver himself

BTW, he's apparently coming back to try it again... I hope we don't let him. I'd rather see his rig used as an RTI ramp!

 

[CHOP SHOP]

Chop,
You of course are correct. But having dozens, masses, hundreds of new blood will change the PNW.
Tony Fox

and I've signed my name to a couple of my recent posts, because I WANT to be known what my opinion is. I AM an old time wheeler. I AM a PNW member. I AM the guy that will fit into whatever restrictions are implemented as I DO drive a short, narrow rig.

And I'm not in favor of restrictions at all. NONE.
And I AM in favor of maintaining the integrity of the Busy as a short, narrow, tight, treehugging trail.

thank you for being open minded.

restrictions are not the answer, just the begining.:booo:

 

[CHOP SHOP]

The crusty old jeepers comment is completely uncalled for and frankly is attitudes and comments like that that keep them from getting involved in forums like this.

just callem like I see them. IMO

 

[Gibby1]

restrictions are not the answer, just the begining.:booo:

Everyone's happy to say what the answer is NOT.

So Brad, if you were king for a day and you were in Nancy's position, WHAT would your answer be?

You have to consider the following criteria.
1- limiting resource and trail damage.
2- maintaining 4x4 opportunities for everyone in the park.
3- meeting the needs of the 4x4 community at large.
4- keeping within the limitations provided by the DNR.
5- providing the DNR with an improved capacity to handle idiots.

 

[Brian H]

Let me see if I can explain this.
1) Everything inside the "trail corridor" is considered dead as far as the harvesting process goes so the "logging people in the DNR don't care so much about those trees. The logging end of things to care if we decide to put in a new trail as those trees are harvestable. We're more likely to get a new trail when there's a harvest going on and logging company can remove the trees that they want from a potential trail. In fact, we're waiting for the next logging operation up there to harvest more trees so that the campground can be expanded.
2) I'm going to quote from an email from Nancy.


3) Luckily at Elbe, we don't have a lot of resource issues related to run off, protecting habitats etc, that other areas have. What's she's referring to with the resources is the loss of dirt around the roots of the trees and the damage to the root structure of the trees. This results in the trees dying prematurely or become unstable. This affects the integrity of the trail, which includes the tight nature and the natural esthetics (you can't just cut all the trees 8' up and leave the stumps- it would be plain ugly).

I grabbed a few pics from various reports to show you the types of things that Nancy does not consider acceptable. I know a few of you will recognize rigs and I'm not picking on anyone, just looking for examples.

Driving up on obstacles on the side of the trail. It should be obvious in this pic how the damage is done when it's done over and over, regardless of how much fun it might be.

This is our buddy that caused all the comotion...

This is not acceptable in any size rig.

These aren't particular to full size rigs, more that I wanted to show the TYPE of resource damage that Nancy is concerned about.

How isnt any of the pictures of me acceptable? Its still part of the trail. Yeah me riding on the side of the sami probably wasnt the best idea at the time but it kept him from rolling over in that spot.

 

[TreeClimber]

Everyone's happy to say what the answer is NOT.

So Tony, if you were king for a day and you were in Nancy's position, WHAT would your answer be?

You have to consider the following criteria.
1- limiting resource and trail damage.
2- maintaining 4x4 opportunities for everyone in the park.
3- meeting the needs of the 4x4 community at large.
4- keeping within the limitations provided by the DNR.
5- providing the DNR with an improved capacity to handle idiots.

Post up bare minimum requirements. Something to this effect. "This trail designated as a tight, narrow, very difficult. Deep mud, tight turns, roots, and other obsticles will prevent all but those who are prepared. Lockers & Winchs required. Resource damaging will be punishable by a fine of $___. " Then let her fine for RESOURCE DAMAGE, instead of Vehicle Limitiations.

my most recent ramble off.

Tony Fox

 

[CHOP SHOP]

Everyone's happy to say what the answer is NOT.

So Brad, if you were king for a day and you were in Nancy's position, WHAT would your answer be?

You have to consider the following criteria.
1- limiting resource and trail damage.
2- maintaining 4x4 opportunities for everyone in the park.
3- meeting the needs of the 4x4 community at large.
4- keeping within the limitations provided by the DNR.
5- providing the DNR with an improved capacity to handle idiots.

dale I would have to say I agree with fully's aproach to trail maintanance.

its called a 4x4 trail because its difficult. if eroision is not a problem (I fish alot and like my streams and rivers) then leave it alone. theres nothing wrong with this trail. it needs some sort of gate keeper to keep out underprepared rigs. thats all.

 

[CHOP SHOP]

:awesomework:

Post up bare minimum requirements. Something to this effect. "This trail designated as a tight, narrow, very difficult. Deep mud, tight turns, roots, and other obsticles will prevent all but those who are prepared. Lockers & Winchs required. Resource damaging will be punishable by a fine of $___. " Then let her fine for RESOURCE DAMAGE, instead of Vehicle Limitiations.

my most recent ramble off.

Tony Fox

x2:awesomework:

 

[TreeClimber]

How isnt any of the pictures of me acceptable? Its still part of the trail. Yeah me riding on the side of the sami probably wasnt the best idea at the time but it kept him from rolling over in that spot.

Brian, it's a marginal infraction. The Sami was riding the bank of the trail because it couldn't run the main line thru the mud. Riding the bank is a minor resource damage. Minor. But the Sami shoulda' been locked front and rear, with some real tires. Then it coulda ran the main trail.

 

[Brian H]

Brian, it's a marginal infraction. The Sami was riding the bank of the trail because it couldn't run the main line thru the mud. Riding the bank is a minor resource damage. Minor. But the Sami shoulda' been locked front and rear, with some real tires. Then it coulda ran the main trail.

It was locked up but i think in this pic it had a popped rear axle shaft so we were trying to get it through that hole. The shft was broken from trying to pull out a vehicle that should not have been in there.

 

[Gibby1]

How isnt any of the pictures of me acceptable? Its still part of the trail. Yeah me riding on the side of the sami probably wasnt the best idea at the time but it kept him from rolling over in that spot.

I'm not talking about keeping him from rolling, that was the smart part.

I was trying to show HOW the roots and the dirt around the roots are damaged. This is the part that you all DON'T understand and I've been trying to tell you for WEEKS now.

Driving up on the roots or the dirt covering the roots, or rubbing up against the trees is NOT considered acceptable by the DNR. I bet it was fun but that's HOW the damage occurs. Over time with dozens and dozens of people running over the same spot (without maintenance) causes excessive erosion and irreparable damage.

What you and I consider fitting is no where NEAR what the DNR considers fitting.

That sami was supposed to have stayed in the tracks of the trail, not drive on the side of the trail. When that tree finally gives way, what do you think will happen to the trail? It'll get wide and MORE people will starting taking that route and then where's that lead us.

You've GOT to understand that from the DNR's point of view, you CAN NOT DO THAT.

This is not picking on you or you driving Brian, I've done it too, lots of times. I just didn't have a pic handy. I'm a guilty as everyone else. This is where I got into trouble mentioning that I could do a front wheel dig to get my rig through a tight spot and Nancy slammed on me stating that THAT wasn't acceptable. If you have to TOUCH up against a tree, you're too BIG by their standards. If you have to pivot off the roots, you're too BIG. If you have to run a tire up the roots or up the trunk, you're too BIG. How many ways can I explain this?

Too small has a different set of conditions but the same thing happens. That Sami was too SMALL to stay in the trail so what did he do? He started going around - bypasses here we go!

 

[Gibby1]

Brian, it's a marginal infraction. The Sami was riding the bank of the trail because it couldn't run the main line thru the mud. Riding the bank is a minor resource damage. Minor. But the Sami shoulda' been locked front and rear, with some real tires. Then it coulda ran the main trail.

Minor damage over and over without maintenance becomes significant damage.

 

[Gibby1]

dale I would have to say I agree with fully's aproach to trail maintanance.

its called a 4x4 trail because its difficult. if eroision is not a problem (I fish alot and like my streams and rivers) then leave it alone. theres nothing wrong with this trail. it needs some sort of gate keeper to keep out underprepared rigs. thats all.

And you think the DNR is going to go for that?
You've only addressed the issue that responds to YOUR needs. You haven't address the other points that need to be considered. You didn't even touch on the aspect of keeping within what the DNR has for standards or guidelines. You haven't even touched on how to best manage the parks assets for the good of the ENTIRE 4x4 community. If you don't look at the big picture you can't put out an option that WILL work.

Just leaving it alone is simply not an option.

I agree with the gatekeeper as a means to limit access to underprepared vehicle.

 

[TreeClimber]

It was locked up but i think in this pic it had a popped rear axle shaft so we were trying to get it through that hole. The shft was broken from trying to pull out a vehicle that should not have been in there.

Apparantly that goes back to the crux of the issue, that the F150 had no business being in there.

Minor damage over and over without maintenance becomes significant damage.

And I agree. All erosion related damage is this way. And I didn't read it to be you were picking on said Sami, but rather simply putting an example.