The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.

People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.

It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.

In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.

R. Lander

and we don't need any more like you, so go away back to which ever tree you was hugging before you learned how to mouth off.

Nice agenda, but complete bull****. Sorry, but Id like to see any proof
of this other than just your unsubstantiated ramblings.
Maybe you should define what you think an enviromentalist is, because
if you are talking about your average hippie hiker, out on his bike or
walking through the trails they leave more impact than the average 4wd
trail rider. Powerbar wrappers, feces and "biodegradable" toilet paper
to name a few, oh and the ability to turn an area upside down to
accomodate their extended camping stays.

But since you are on a roll, lets explore your extremely flawed logic.
The "Conquer Nature" mentality is the reason you even have these spots
to enjoy. Mining companys, prospectors and railroad companys were out
here not to conquer nature but to make a living from it and make it a
livable space at the same time. This land is our land, not yours not
ours, but OUR land collectively, that means that what may be fun to
some is not fun to other but you tolerate or are at least respectful to
each other.

Since you have so much to say about this, I assume that you have
positioned yourself to do something about it though, right. You are out
every weekend cleaning up the trails and organizing groups to monitor
the land, right? Id be willing to be not. You know the history and
geography of the lands you visit and leave them in a better state than
when you arrived. Right?

Sorry, but you just really have no clue as to what you are talking
about here. There is plenty of wild frontier, unexplored canyons,
mountains and valleys. But you have to be motivated to get out there
and usually it is the offroader who has that drive and sense of
adventure. The average enviromentalist waits for an area to be opened
up, then wanders in and says it should be closed to the very same
people who found it. Great logic, if it wasnt for the explorers you
guys wouldnt have any areas to whine about.

So keep this kind of unsubstatiated BS on the SUWA and other
short-sighted groups sites, cause it holds no water here.

Sincerely,

Corey T. Shuman
cshuman@goldrushexepeditions.com
www.goldrushexpeditions.com

R. Lander wrote:
> The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
> all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
> Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
> view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
> it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.
>
> People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
> sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
> Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
> to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
> It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.
>
> It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
> environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
> protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
> Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
> impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
> the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
> to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.
>
> In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
> more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
> places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
> trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander

Corey Shuman wrote:

> Nice agenda, but complete bull****. Sorry, but Id like to see any proof
> of this other than just your unsubstantiated ramblings.

The world's population grows by 75 million people each year and 3
million of them end up in the United States. That's why land for
recreational use is shrinking. I doubt you even had knowledge of those
basic figures. You look at a stand of trees in the distance and don't
see the houses creeping up behind it.

> Maybe you should define what you think an enviromentalist is, because
> if you are talking about your average hippie hiker, out on his bike or
> walking through the trails they leave more impact than the average 4wd
> trail rider. Powerbar wrappers, feces and "biodegradable" toilet paper
> to name a few, oh and the ability to turn an area upside down to
> accomodate their extended camping stays.

If such hikers exist (where exactly?), at least they aren't adding
noise and fumes to the mix. A narrow hiking trail with barely audible
footsteps is nothing compared to a huge slash with Jeeps and white
trash rumbling over it. I don't know any hikers who don't pack it out,
and the whole hiker mindset is much less likely to litter. I think
you're confusing land squatters with recreational hikers.

> But since you are on a roll, lets explore your extremely flawed logic.
> The "Conquer Nature" mentality is the reason you even have these spots
> to enjoy. Mining companys, prospectors and railroad companys were out
> here not to conquer nature but to make a living from it and make it a
> livable space at the same time. This land is our land, not yours not
> ours, but OUR land collectively, that means that what may be fun to
> some is not fun to other but you tolerate or are at least respectful to
> each other.

If the population ever stops growing there could be some balance
between the needs of people and the needs of other species and
wilderness. But the population keeps growing and taking over more land
for recreation, housing, mining, you name it. You treat nature as
limitless but you're flat out wrong. That's why all these conflicts
exist, for crying out loud. Look at satellite photos and topo maps.
Most land is chopped up into parcels and development is constantly
encroaching on the boundaries of nature. Most people are clueless about
the "ecological footprint" of modern Man, including his vehicles.

> Since you have so much to say about this, I assume that you have
> positioned yourself to do something about it though, right. You are out
> every weekend cleaning up the trails and organizing groups to monitor
> the land, right? Id be willing to be not. You know the history and
> geography of the lands you visit and leave them in a better state than
> when you arrived. Right?

Ah, here we go. You've finally admitted that there are problems, but
instead of seeing the bigger picture (too many people) you'd rather put
it all on me for not solving things singlehandedly. Believe me, I'm
doing plenty, and I'm not demanding more roads in roadless areas. I
understand that there are limits to growth but you refuse to see any.

> Sorry, but you just really have no clue as to what you are talking
> about here. There is plenty of wild frontier, unexplored canyons,
> mountains and valleys.

Define "plenty." How many acres per square mile should stay roadless?
The land is losing that battle EVERY DAY. The amount of wilderness in
the world shrinks every time a housing project goes up or a road is
built, and that happens 365 days a year (thousands of acres daily,
vanquishing the last frontiers). Environmentalism wouldn't be needed if
the land was as unscathed as your fantasy has it. You talk in vague
terms about frontiers you can't really define. Fifty acres at the end
of a dirt road could be called a "frontier" if one chose to. Admit that
you respect people and their "right" to relentless intrusion more than
you respect intact nature. Don't try to fake your motives.

> But you have to be motivated to get out there
> and usually it is the offroader who has that drive and sense of
> adventure. The average enviromentalist waits for an area to be opened
> up, then wanders in and says it should be closed to the very same
> people who found it. Great logic, if it wasnt for the explorers you
> guys wouldnt have any areas to whine about.

Are you claiming that only people in motorized vehicles can "get out
there" because they can go faster with greater ease? What an idiot. You
keep assuming there's real frontier left, and that it's somehow a bad
thing to just leave it alone. You need to learn more about what
population growth is doing to the landscape around the clock. It's
basically a slow war of attrition against wilderness. Growth conflicts
are making headlines every day all over the nation because the
population NEVER stops growing. That bothers me but you're just fine
with it, aren't you?

> So keep this kind of unsubstatiated BS on the SUWA and other
> short-sighted groups sites, cause it holds no water here.

It's substantiated by scientific and visual evidence that you are
willfully ignorant of. You probably voted for Bush, our great "Creation
Science" President. The truth is that overpopulation is carving up
wilderness and off-roading just adds to the problem. You can't treat a
grossly unbalanced situation as a mere case of Jeepers getting
harassed.

R. Lander

I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four wheeling." I run a
small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my fields are
just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around in my field
cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride around in
unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to leave only to
catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small (very small)
percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the category as
a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private property, I
can only imagine how they treat "our" land.

Ed

C. E. White wrote:

> I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four wheeling." I run a
> small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my fields are
> just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around in my field
> cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride around in
> unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to leave only to
> catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small (very small)
> percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the category as
> a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private property, I
> can only imagine how they treat "our" land.

Thanks for telling it like is really is. "Tread lightly" is a big joke
for many of them.

R. Lander

It seems like you're saying that all of the land will eventually be
bulldozed, but until that happens, you want it 'preserved' for your personal
enjoyment.

"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149181237.201783.299140@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...


> The truth is that overpopulation is carving up
> wilderness and off-roading just adds to the problem.

I replied to your Limbaugh-script comments using my original subject
header, not your altered one.

You forget that the Nazis were far-right punks with no respect for
"lower life forms." They shared traits with modern right-wingers who
think nature should yield at will beneath their Jeep tires. Don't
pretend you're operating on some higher moral plain with all your lies
about endless frontiers.

R. Lander

Corey Shuman wrote:
> Nice agenda, but complete bull****. Sorry, but Id like to see any proof
> of this other than just your unsubstantiated ramblings.
> Maybe you should define what you think an enviromentalist is, because
> if you are talking about your average hippie hiker, out on his bike or
> walking through the trails they leave more impact than the average 4wd
> trail rider. Powerbar wrappers, feces and "biodegradable" toilet paper
> to name a few, oh and the ability to turn an area upside down to
> accomodate their extended camping stays.
>
> But since you are on a roll, lets explore your extremely flawed logic.
> The "Conquer Nature" mentality is the reason you even have these spots
> to enjoy. Mining companys, prospectors and railroad companys were out
> here not to conquer nature but to make a living from it and make it a
> livable space at the same time. This land is our land, not yours not
> ours, but OUR land collectively, that means that what may be fun to
> some is not fun to other but you tolerate or are at least respectful to
> each other.
>
> Since you have so much to say about this, I assume that you have
> positioned yourself to do something about it though, right. You are out
> every weekend cleaning up the trails and organizing groups to monitor
> the land, right? Id be willing to be not. You know the history and
> geography of the lands you visit and leave them in a better state than
> when you arrived. Right?
>
> Sorry, but you just really have no clue as to what you are talking
> about here. There is plenty of wild frontier, unexplored canyons,
> mountains and valleys. But you have to be motivated to get out there
> and usually it is the offroader who has that drive and sense of
> adventure. The average enviromentalist waits for an area to be opened
> up, then wanders in and says it should be closed to the very same
> people who found it. Great logic, if it wasnt for the explorers you
> guys wouldnt have any areas to whine about.
>
> So keep this kind of unsubstatiated BS on the SUWA and other
> short-sighted groups sites, cause it holds no water here.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Corey T. Shuman
> cshuman@goldrushexepeditions.com
> www.goldrushexpeditions.com
>
> R. Lander wrote:
> > The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
> > all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
> > Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
> > view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
> > it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.
> >
> > People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
> > sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
> > Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
> > to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
> > It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.
> >
> > It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
> > environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
> > protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
> > Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
> > impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
> > the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
> > to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.
> >
> > In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
> > more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
> > places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
> > trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.
> >
> > R. Lander

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote in message
news:447f1d17@kcnews01...
> I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four wheeling."

According to your statement, you "have a lot of dislike" for me, yet you've
never met me. You base this opinion on your experience with trespassers.

i live next to a farmer who lets his cattle wander into my garden destroying everything my daughter and I have planted. so in the logic of farmer giles with the dislike of four wheelers then every farmer is guilty of this and having no respect for other peoples private property.

Personally I find this story a bit far fetched.

Not about an occasional yabbo driving through 'your fields' but that the
same people do it week after week after week and you do nothing about it
other than politely ask them to leave.

I grew up in a village surrounded by family farms and I never heard on any
that would tolerate this. At the very least the damage would be compensated
and most likely the sheriff would not look kindly upon this.

Methinks you are a troll or eco-weenie or have some other mental
infirmary...... that or you are just a lying sack of dog doo...


"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149181356.441456.148000@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> C. E. White wrote:
>
>> I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four wheeling." I run a
>> small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my fields are
>> just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around in my
>> field
>> cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride around in
>> unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to leave only
>> to
>> catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small (very small)
>> percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the category
>> as
>> a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private property, I
>> can only imagine how they treat "our" land.
>
> Thanks for telling it like is really is. "Tread lightly" is a big joke
> for many of them.
>
> R. Lander
>

It was on Thu, 01 Jun 2006 08:28:17 -0700, another Dirty Dusty Delta day, when R. Lander coughed up:

> The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
> all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
> Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
> view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
> it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.
>
> People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
> sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
> Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
> to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
> It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.
>
> It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
> environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
> protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
> Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
> impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
> the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
> to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.
>
> In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
> more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
> places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
> trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander

Thanks for your excellent post; sadly, few here are going to accept it,
regardless, and will argue facts with attitude and opinion.

Please keep it up until the flames overcome you.

If just /one/ person learns from your factual statements, you've succeeded.


SW
resident persona non grata
```````````````````````````````````




--
There is nothing so agonizing to the fine skin of vanity as the application
of a rough truth.

-Edward Bulwer-Lytton, writer (1803-1873)

That's only in his little part of the world. I wonder how many people he
has caught in his fields? Maybe 10-12 people. That's not even 1 thousands
of 1 per cent of all offroaders. I do feel for his pain. I wouldn't want
anyone destroying my property, but to state that he "dislikes fourwheelers",
is a very biased opinion. What about the clubs that spend weekends cleaning
trails, building trails or otherwise helping build the hobby?

Jim Smith

"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149181356.441456.148000@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> C. E. White wrote:
>
>> I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four wheeling." I run a
>> small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my fields are
>> just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around in my
>> field
>> cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride around in
>> unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to leave only
>> to
>> catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small (very small)
>> percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the category
>> as
>> a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private property, I
>> can only imagine how they treat "our" land.
>
> Thanks for telling it like is really is. "Tread lightly" is a big joke
> for many of them.
>
> R. Lander
>

Oh and your lies are okay to spread. Look, you can have your opinion, I
will have mine. Agree to disagree, that's the best we can hope for.

Jim Smith

"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149182150.929230.165970@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I replied to your Limbaugh-script comments using my original subject
> header, not your altered one.
>
> You forget that the Nazis were far-right punks with no respect for
> "lower life forms." They shared traits with modern right-wingers who
> think nature should yield at will beneath their Jeep tires. Don't
> pretend you're operating on some higher moral plain with all your lies
> about endless frontiers.
>
> R. Lander
>
> Corey Shuman wrote:
>> Nice agenda, but complete bull****. Sorry, but Id like to see any proof
>> of this other than just your unsubstantiated ramblings.
>> Maybe you should define what you think an enviromentalist is, because
>> if you are talking about your average hippie hiker, out on his bike or
>> walking through the trails they leave more impact than the average 4wd
>> trail rider. Powerbar wrappers, feces and "biodegradable" toilet paper
>> to name a few, oh and the ability to turn an area upside down to
>> accomodate their extended camping stays.
>>
>> But since you are on a roll, lets explore your extremely flawed logic.
>> The "Conquer Nature" mentality is the reason you even have these spots
>> to enjoy. Mining companys, prospectors and railroad companys were out
>> here not to conquer nature but to make a living from it and make it a
>> livable space at the same time. This land is our land, not yours not
>> ours, but OUR land collectively, that means that what may be fun to
>> some is not fun to other but you tolerate or are at least respectful to
>> each other.
>>
>> Since you have so much to say about this, I assume that you have
>> positioned yourself to do something about it though, right. You are out
>> every weekend cleaning up the trails and organizing groups to monitor
>> the land, right? Id be willing to be not. You know the history and
>> geography of the lands you visit and leave them in a better state than
>> when you arrived. Right?
>>
>> Sorry, but you just really have no clue as to what you are talking
>> about here. There is plenty of wild frontier, unexplored canyons,
>> mountains and valleys. But you have to be motivated to get out there
>> and usually it is the offroader who has that drive and sense of
>> adventure. The average enviromentalist waits for an area to be opened
>> up, then wanders in and says it should be closed to the very same
>> people who found it. Great logic, if it wasnt for the explorers you
>> guys wouldnt have any areas to whine about.
>>
>> So keep this kind of unsubstatiated BS on the SUWA and other
>> short-sighted groups sites, cause it holds no water here.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Corey T. Shuman
>> cshuman@goldrushexepeditions.com
>> www.goldrushexpeditions.com
>>
>> R. Lander wrote:
>> > The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
>> > all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
>> > Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
>> > view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
>> > it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.
>> >
>> > People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
>> > sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
>> > Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
>> > to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
>> > It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.
>> >
>> > It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
>> > environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
>> > protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
>> > Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
>> > impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
>> > the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
>> > to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.
>> >
>> > In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
>> > more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
>> > places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
>> > trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.
>> >
>> > R. Lander
>

Steve Foley wrote:

> It seems like you're saying that all of the land will eventually be
> bulldozed, but until that happens, you want it 'preserved' for your personal
> enjoyment.

Of course we can never pave all the land, but it shouldn't need
constant protection from growth unless it's lucky enough to be saved as
a park. The idea that more land must to be used all the time is
illogical. We should lower our birthrates instead of living like cattle
always trying to break down fences for a bigger range.

Instead of making it about hikers vs. Jeepers, we need to stop pitting
Man against nature, period. It's a philosophical thing, not a Jeep
thing. Noise and wilderness don't mix. You can raise a ruckus in town
or test your 4WD capabilities on a local dirt plot. We are running out
of places where the true appeal of nature can be experienced. Nature
is, in many ways, the absence of mechanical noise. When I hear a
powerboat on a lake or an engine in the woods, I wonder why I traveled
that far just to be reminded of the blasted city.

R. Lander

Ever been to Montana? More 4 wheel drive vehicles there and more open land
than almost any other state.


"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149184562.833916.202840@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Steve Foley wrote:
>
>> It seems like you're saying that all of the land will eventually be
>> bulldozed, but until that happens, you want it 'preserved' for your
>> personal
>> enjoyment.
>
> Of course we can never pave all the land, but it shouldn't need
> constant protection from growth unless it's lucky enough to be saved as
> a park. The idea that more land must to be used all the time is
> illogical. We should lower our birthrates instead of living like cattle
> always trying to break down fences for a bigger range.
>
> Instead of making it about hikers vs. Jeepers, we need to stop pitting
> Man against nature, period. It's a philosophical thing, not a Jeep
> thing. Noise and wilderness don't mix. You can raise a ruckus in town
> or test your 4WD capabilities on a local dirt plot. We are running out
> of places where the true appeal of nature can be experienced. Nature
> is, in many ways, the absence of mechanical noise. When I hear a
> powerboat on a lake or an engine in the woods, I wonder why I traveled
> that far just to be reminded of the blasted city.
>
> R. Lander
>

Where the hell did you come from? It is SO easy to make so many
generalizations when, in fact, you really don't have a clue about which you
speak. Many of the folks here are the true environmentalists. Since you're
a professed environmentalist, what specifically have YOU done to help the
environment, other that come to a place like this and anonimously bitch
about what we do? The best generalization you come up with is "people who
bash environmentalism don't respect the environment that much." That is so
illogical it's stupid. Someone may like a certain musician's music, but not
the musician himself. Oh, and the made-up name "R. Lander" is just so
typical of someone so far on the fringe that you have put yourself in the
category of "Wacko" without anybody here having to fling that your way.



"R. Lander" <r_lander60@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149175697.422954.235760@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
> all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
> Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
> view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
> it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.
>
> People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
> sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
> Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
> to prove, but the number of offroad litterers is probably at least 25%.
> It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.
>
> It's very simple: people who bash environmentalism don't respect the
> environment that much. They talk of "extremism" but effective
> protection will always seem extreme to those who want land UNprotected.
> Environmental problems are people problems and more people create more
> impact. Population can't continue without stealing more land. That's
> the crux of all these conflicts. It's not about shadowy entities trying
> to block your rights, it's more people fighting over less acreage.
>
> In the lower 48 states, there's no real frontier left. We don't need
> more machines, noise and trail(er) trash invading the last wild, quiet
> places. Be happy with all the trails you've got. If you find those
> trails overcrowded, blame human overbreeding, not environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander
>

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote in message
news:447f1d17@kcnews01...
>I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four
>wheeling." I run a
> small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my
> fields are
> just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around
> in my field
> cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride
> around in
> unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to
> leave only to
> catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small
> (very small)
> percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the
> category as
> a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private
> property, I
> can only imagine how they treat "our" land.
>
> Ed
==========================
Excuse me while I don't believe you. In fact, I'll even call it
a lie. I don't 4-wheel, but no farmer I know would be such a
pussy about people driving through their bean fields.(I also
don't know any farmers that spcifically say soybean field instead
of just bean field)
Hell, even if you 'accidentally' run off a road and damage crops
around here, you're going to pay for them.




>
>

R. Lander did pass the time by typing:
> The "respect" for nature shown by offroad enthusiasts is documented by
> all the cans, bottles and wrappers they toss on scenic trails. The
> Rubicon near Lake Tahoe shows how these anthropocentric mouth-breathers
> view the land. They can't be bothered carrying a trash bag and packing
> it out. No room in the Jeep or some other excuse.

Excuse me, but I would love to point out the "respect" for nature
left by non-off-road enthusiasts. The trash that litters the road,
the bottles and cans left all over the park and lakeshore, the piles
of tires and shingles dumped along river access roads by builders
that don't want to pay the $20 to use the city landfill, the drivers
that mindlessly fick cigarette butts out the window, the folks that
leave full baby diapers in the mall parking lot. The empty candy bar
wrappers I have to pick up that were dropped by kids walking to school
every day. Shall I continue?

I doubt very much these "anthropocentric mouth-breathers", as you put
it, are anything more than teenage kids whose parents have failed
miserably to educate them in the proper respect for property that
is not theirs. You can't fix a lack of proper parenting with Ritalin.

> People with a conquer-nature mentality have little respect for its
> sanctity. The show stealer is their fancy machinery, not the land.
> Nature is just another place to make noise and whoop it up. It's hard
> to prove, but the number of off-road litterers is probably at least 25%.
> It goes beyond a few rotten apples making the rest look bad.

Now hold on a bit. I have that conquer-nature mentality and never
break new trails. Point of fact most of my "conquering of nature"
involves my own two feet and marked trails. The Jeep is just to get
to the trailhead. I also doubt you will find _any_ readers of ra4,
rb, or ramjw that leave any trash behind and quite a few that cart
out what they can even if it isn't theirs.

Furthermore I (along with others and not just enviros or 4WD folk)
actually work to pick up the garbage left by folks dumping their
trash on public and private lands.

There were locations around here specifically for folks to "whoop it up".
At the lake there was actually several but in order to maintain water
quality they had to re-sod and shut down one of them. (I helped
plant sod there). The area was fenced but a bunch of assholes tore
down the fence and tore up the sod. Now all the recreation area was
shut down and concrete caissons put in to block the road. Now we have
a private area (private land) where control can be maintained and the
litter is now a non-issue.

--
DougW

I'm no farmer but even if I was, I'd be VERY ****ed if offroaders were
screwing up my plowed fields that I use to earn my living with. But as
an active offroader, I wheel with and know no one that would do such a
thing. Although ANY sport has its jerks, offroaders today are very
respectful of private property and other areas that are off-limits to
offroading. "Tread Lightly" is taken very seriously by most offroaders.
Those that don't are like jerks anywhere... they do what they please
without regards to others.

And Rick, I can't believe you'd call a farmer a "pussy" because he got
****ed over offroaders who screwed up his cultivated fields. I'd bet
big money if someone came onto any of your property that was cultivated
and screwed it up that you'd scream bloody murder.

rick wrote:
> "C. E. White" <cewhite3@removemindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:447f1d17@kcnews01...
>
>>I have a lot of dislike of people who like to go "four
>>wheeling." I run a
>>small farm. Lots of the wannbe four wheeling masters decide my
>>fields are
>>just perfect for trying out their vehicles. They cruise around
>>in my field
>>cutting tracks and distributing trash. I've even had then ride
>>around in
>>unharvested soybean fields. I have stopped and asked them to
>>leave only to
>>catch them again the next week. Now maybe thius only a small
>>(very small)
>>percentage of four wwheelers, but they sure make me dislike the
>>category as
>>a whole. Given that they have no regard for obviously private
>>property, I
>>can only imagine how they treat "our" land.
>>
>>Ed
>
> ==========================
> Excuse me while I don't believe you. In fact, I'll even call it
> a lie. I don't 4-wheel, but no farmer I know would be such a
> pussy about people driving through their bean fields.(I also
> don't know any farmers that spcifically say soybean field instead
> of just bean field)
> Hell, even if you 'accidentally' run off a road and damage crops
> around here, you're going to pay for them.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>

--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/