Irresponsible offroading ...

[CanMan]

I could see if there was lots of off road 'traffic' going through a certian part of a creek/river, then there could be some ecological damage. But, a few rigs every week or two, I see that doing no harm. I don't know of too many creeks/rivers around here that you can actually drive through that are close to where fish reside. Most stuff are way up in the hills, away from the main stream or whatever.

I love fishing too, but like 'goodburbon' states, there are quite a few rivers that are not clear at all, and there are still great fish. I can't speak for other states tho.

One of the few are the Green River here in W. WA. I've rafted down it from Flaming Gyser Park, to about half way back to the Hwy 18 bridge, and it was roughly 5-6 miles, That is one beautiful river let me tell ya, and yes I would hate to see it get all fawked up from people being stupid.

I also hate it when asshats leave garbage and chit on trails. I frequent the hills past Wilkeson, and there is a lot of crap that people take out there to shoot, and don't bring back. We even found a perfectly working space heater out there, and sold it on Craigslist for 15 bucks! We shoot clay targets and cans, but bring the cans back so we can sell the aluminum for $$$. There are also at least 4, if not more, burnt down cars, obviously stolen. A camper that someone totally destroyed, a sink, matresses, insulation, bunch of crap! It pisses me off!

Drinking on trails should be treated like drinking on a public road. Save the boozin for the campfire, after the fun has been had. And drugs are another thing, leave that tweaker chit at home.

Blazin' your own trail is a no-no in my book. If it is blocked off, its probably for a reason. Why risk the chance of getting a ticket or fine just to see what is down that path. Stupid. Just don't go out there jackassin around, tear up untouched land, and ruin it for all.

In the words of the Southpark boys, What I have learned today is that, um, well nothing, because I already know whats right and whats wrong.

 

[goodburbon]

where the water flows clearly

that doesnt happen very much in South. La. the clearest water I have seen in this state, you couldnt see more than 3 feet down.

I will agree with you on a point.

1. Louisiana is not Montana, and as such different species with different tolerances to environmental stimuli do exist.

I do not see how a stream crossing is devastating to the local fish population.

People whose vehicles leak hydrocarbons should fix their junk so it doesn't contaminate the environment we all treasure/enjoy.

It's all about balancing acceptable losses. I run on trails, those trails are unable to grow grass, an accepted loss. I wheel in mud, some tadpoles die, and some mosquito larvae are displaced, an accepted loss. If we can cross streams, and have a minimal impact a stressed out fish is an acceptable loss. If everyone who owns a 4x4 decides to drive up and down stream beds every day the impact becomes unacceptable. It's all about moderation, but simply driving through a stream is not irresponsible wheeling.

 

[DrMoab]

Montanaman, I wasn't advocating driving up through trout habitat. You said creekbeds. I was under the impression you were talking about dry creekbeds.

We have a problem here in utah with areas like Salt Creek in Canyonlands. This is a creek that doesn't even run all year. There is very little life growing in it and it runs full of silt regardless of vehicles being in it or not.

The "wacko" Environmentalists think it is destroying everything to have vehicles in this creek. Never mind the fact it has been an open road for well over 50 years.

Half of the good trails in this area are in dry washes "creek beds" and they environmental movement tries very very hard to say that the once in five year storm that will wash the oil out of the rocks is going to destroy everything. I just don't subscribe to that nonsense.

To drive up a pristine trout creek though...I agree with you totally.

 

[Tom in KY]

There are several places here in Kentucky where there are Fords instead of bridges. The state keeps them adequately filled with rock, so there is very little sediment disturbed. I don't mind to see a clean crossing like that, but busting a creek, edging a farm pond, or running up or down stream, seems excessive to me. There is a river near here also called Green River. It flows muddy run-off most of the year from the farmland that borders most of it's length. The agricultural pesticides and herbicides are bad enough to deal with. Then there are the coal barges. The boats stir up more than their fair share of the silt and sediment. The fish in this river have suffered for it, obviously. Upstream from here where the big boats have no access, it's like a different world. Largemouth and sauger, muskie in Green river lake, but here, it's catfish and drums. Many days there just isn't anything biting. But why would anyone think that it would be OK to bail off into water that supports any kind of wildlife? It's not just the fish that depend on the rivers and creeks, especially in the heat of summer. Every creek bed that supports trout and crawfish is fragile. One pass up a creek bed like this could take months, even a year to heal. The eggs, the fresh hatch and the minnows all feed the larger fish in the area. If you destroy their resources, what happens to them?

Simply put, brush your teeth in muddy water some time. Drink a big glass of muddy water and call me in 3 days.,,No takers?

Tom in KY, Not a tree hugger, not happy about all of the land closures either.

 

[montanaman]

yeah ... let me clarify what I was talking about ... I was talking about actual creeks ... not just dry creekbeds ... that's mostly in arid regions, so I couldn't tell you much about that.

I've seen vids of guys running their rigs up the actual creek .... it looked like a clear water type of creek. Rocks -- lots of fast-flowing water. I've seen creeks here in montana -- beautiful trout streams -- where long sections of the banks are all torn up from obvious wheeling activity. That kind of stuff takes forever to repair itself, and in the meantime, you're flushing tons of crap down the creek.

About creek crossings ... I've got no problem with that at all ... if you're following a road or trail, and it comes to a creek, you have to cross it. Most dirt roads cross a creek at a shallower, more gravely spot anyway, and most governments that cut the road in the first place usually put more rocky stuff in the ford anyway. The only greenie thing I would add is that its best to just cross the creek gently and get away from it.

Wetlands are another sensitive area I wouldn't tear up.

 

[CRASH]

Ditto the fishery impacts of driving in flowing creeks, but it's very dependant on the type of creek.....a discussion onto itself.

One of the biggest problems we have is that more wheelers are crowded onto an ever shrinking trail system. Increase oppurtunities for OHV access, and the impacts to specific areas decrease.

Crash, Fisheries Biologist

 

[DrMoab]

Ditto the fishery impacts of driving in flowing creeks, but it's very dependant on the type of creek.....a discussion onto itself.

One of the biggest problems we have is that more wheelers are crowded onto an ever shrinking trail system. Increase oppurtunities for OHV access, and the impacts to specific areas decrease.

Crash, Fisheries Biologist

Why aren't there more Biologists out there like you Crash? People who see the real world but still stick up for our sport.

 

[Ed A. Stevens]

yeah ... let me clarify what I was talking about ... I was talking about actual creeks ... not just dry creekbeds ... that's mostly in arid regions, so I couldn't tell you much about that.

I've seen vids of guys running their rigs up the actual creek .... it looked like a clear water type of creek. Rocks -- lots of fast-flowing water. I've seen creeks here in montana -- beautiful trout streams -- where long sections of the banks are all torn up from obvious wheeling activity. That kind of stuff takes forever to repair itself, and in the meantime, you're flushing tons of crap down the creek.

About creek crossings ... I've got no problem with that at all ... if you're following a road or trail, and it comes to a creek, you have to cross it. Most dirt roads cross a creek at a shallower, more gravely spot anyway, and most governments that cut the road in the first place usually put more rocky stuff in the ford anyway. The only greenie thing I would add is that its best to just cross the creek gently and get away from it.

Wetlands are another sensitive area I wouldn't tear up.

You fail to get much opposition here because most of the people here are responsible 4x4 enthusiasts, not people who use a vehicle as a tool to support other sports (people who drive to hike, hunt, fish, etc. but fail to respect the land when behind the steering wheel). The majority of drivers that damage the habitat in a vehicle are not motorized enthusiasts (no more than hikers who shortcut established trails and build fire rings on dry brush can be called backpacking enthusiasts). While the general public perception of hikers is the middle ground (somewhere between the leave-no-trace folks and the crass exploitation hikers who bring the boombox and 60 quart cooler), the general perception of an off-road driver is more likely to be the extreme idiot (with two 60 quart coolers, and the 2000 Watt sound system). One day the perception will change, and hopefully participation in clubs like will change this peception to a more realistic (more eco-friendly) vision of responsible wheeling.

I understand the sedmentation issue is one of turbidity (Sp?). Driving across a stream with a rock base presents minimal impact on the environment (with a healthy vehicle). The rock base prevents the removal and transmission of turbid debris in the water that can cause harm to the habitat over long term usage. A bridge is an alternative to "paving" a stream crossing with rock or concrete, but expensive and considered by many to be an eyesore. A recognized stream crossing can be hardened to minimize the habitat impact from vehicle crossings without creating an eyesore.

Your comment about inexperience with dry creekbeds highlights a problem common to managing responsible vehicle usage on public lands (and private land as well), the differences of habitat worldwide. The rapid decay and high rainfall erosion common in the humid southeast demands a different management prescription from the dry southwest. A citrus peel tossed out of window in Alabama is compost, but the same peel in Moab Utah is dry trash that will remain for a thousand years (one reason why education of habitat protection and stewardship is so difficult in this country).

The same difference needs recognition comparing management of dry and seasonable streams in the southwest and alpine streams in the northwest and mountain states. A Wild and Scenic River in Montana presents a completely different picture from "rivers" given the same consideration in the southwest desert. Driving a dry sand and rock streambed is quite different from driving a flowing streambed consisting of mud and clay soil, and yet WSR management is based on protections that are needed for the more sensitive habitat (closure management protections that are excessive in less sensitive "rivers"). If we can educate others (those not intimate with motorized sport) to be responsible drivers we might have a chance to educate the more radical (all or nothing) environmental advocates that wheeling and habitat protection can coexist (given active management to minimize the habitat threats).

I hope you will join the many of us that choose education (of others) over apathy?

 

[DrMoab]

Once again Ed, your words hit it right on the head...wonderful post!