View Poll Results: Does central Colorado need more wilderness?
Yes. We need to protect these areas. 66 70.21%
No. We have enough land that is already designated. 27 28.72%
I do not care because I sit at home and surf the buzz all day 1 1.06%
I care, but am to lazy to do anything about it. 0 0%
Voters: 94. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-28-2009   #41
Bugtussle, Kentucky
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 161
good topic, and more informed posts than I thought there would be...I helped work on these campaigns for many years, hiked a lot of these areas and hope Colorado can get more than Dominguez Canyons and RMNP desginated as new official Wilderness.
Keep up the good work, balance on our public lands is a good thing. They are not just for people, but wildlife too. Conservation efforts like this are visionary, but they need to be supported and grown locally. Colorado does a good job of this.

The Hidden Gems were picked after many years of debate, lots more acreage out there that's worthy, especially lower elevation BLM lands.

bjett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #42
Golden, Colorado
Paddling Since: 2000
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 490
I grew up in an area that had some pretty cool places that used to be accessible to it's population and it's population enjoyed them respectfully. We loved it because we were left alone to enjoy it. The typical weekend trip used something motorized to get us to a place where the hiking or skiing began, basically out of the lowlands. Then we'd ski or hike for miles. So it wasn't like we weren't there for the human-powered aspect, it was just impossible to do these trips in a weekend if you had to hike 20 miles of logging road before the real hike began. It's the difference in experience between skiing on a groomed loop versus out a windswept ridge.Brendo, you're point about the fuel usage is appropriate in this context, too. I could ride my dirtbike all day and it would use about 4 gallons of gas, but I ride the same bike to work and get 60 MPG. You guys that drive for miles to someplace to go hiking and think that's so pure need to think about that recreation commute if you're going to bring up the hydrocarbon thing.At the end of the day, I'll just smile and wave to the other folks I meet outside. I'd rather see them on a dirt road in their D4's (jeezus), then think they're shopping at the mall or watching TV inside.

Damn it feels good
Schizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #43
hotchkiss's Avatar
Pejivalle, Costa Rica
Paddling Since: 1993
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 188
Listen to what you are saying! You can't leave five percent of the land noise and pollution free? You have to ruin it all?!!! Listen to yourself, you're a mad-man!

I don't live on the front range. I don't live within 150 miles of an interstate. I don't live within 5 miles of a highway! My road is dirt! A VW? Wish I had one... low emissions.

Casper, I'm in a ranching family. I know the value of a 4 wheeler, snow machines and Fords. Do go acting like you know me at all. The difference between you and I is a matter of intelligence and foresight, not differing interests. My quads will outrun yours and so will my snow machines, guaranteed so don't talk to me about heart warming past times. I hunt yotes off a snow machine, but I also ride horses, all the time. You obviously don't.

I want a place where I can ride my horse without people like you around. That's the wilderness. God forbid I actually want more room to ride without a city slicker like you.
hotchkiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #44
cedar city, Utah
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,932
For the general concept of wilderness but it needs to be approached with foresight of how it will impact stakeholders. Much has been learned over the last 20 years about how wilderness designation affects direct and indirect users. Even more importantly, we are seeing how it affects the socio-economics of counties around newly designated wilderness. Home prices go up, job market changes, etc. None of these changes are inherently good/bad but they need to be studied to fully understand the implications of change. Its a shame that many of the recent studies are proprietary to academic journals and hard/impossible to access by non-students.

They only thing I am against, is the cliche flame-wars that happen over these issues. We seem to have been taught to demonize and antagonize our "opponents" at any given occasion. Wether they be oil riggers, "motoheads", or "wilderness fruitcakes." Not much respect out there for diverse opinions.
restrac2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #45
Redpaddle's Avatar
Newport, Oregon
Paddling Since: 1989
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 206
Good point Blue, perhaps a distinction needs to be made between wilderness preservation and the use of wilderness designation as a political tool? I believe strongly in wilderness preservation but can also see that without sufficient access to land set aside for motorized and/or mechanized use you shut out desires of some of the community and encourage "bandit" use of the protected areas.

I do disagree, however, with the argument that if a wilderness cannot be reached by weekend warriors it is without value or excessive. Anyone who has been on an extended wilderness backpacking/paddling trip knows the value of large and remote wilderness areas.

Lastly, I think that fuel consumption, greenhouse gas and global warming have little bearing on this argument as they are a global issue with little direct effect from wilderness vs national forest designations. The vast majority of our environmental impact comes from our day to day lifestyle rather than our outdoor recreation.
"Paddle silently, boof loudly"
Redpaddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #46
caspermike's Avatar
Bozeman, Montana
Paddling Since: 1999
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,507
hotchkiss go to a national forest. theres an idea.
caspermike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #47
I kayak DH.
Waterwindpowderrock's Avatar
Greater tri cities metro area, Colorado
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 794
simple answer.

Discover Denver, stay there!
Waterwindpowderrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #48
Longmont, Colorado
Paddling Since: 98
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 328
Ah yes, the old wilderness argument. Yes, we need more wilderness, but wilderness must be clearly thought out and a balance must be brought forth to include both conservation and recreation. I am not in support of creating large amounts of new routs however I strongly believe those that do exist should be protected for recreational use. There are a few very isolated exceptions that should be reviewed and acted on due to environmental concerns such as high rates of erosion. These can usually be fixed through preventive measures in certain section of the trails as opposed to complete closure.

I pains me to see the arguments in this thread, most are simply lies that have been spued from one uneducated hypocrite to the next. I’ll comment on a few:

Just because an area is not wilderness does not mean that it is torn to bare dirt by drunk red necks on over powered ATV’s.

OHV users are some of the most environmentally conscious stewards of our environment. There is an amazing amount of activity in that group revolving around cleaning up and protecting our environment for future generations.

A single dirt road does not constitute destruction of the environment.

Most mechanized travel is not loud, obnoxious and polluting.

Mechanized travel does not significantly impact wild life. Currently use outside of suburban areas is so limited that interactions are minimal and often uneventful for wildlife when they do occur. Concentrating use due to closures will increase the occurrence and severity of interactions.

You have no more “right” to NOT hear my engine as I do to use it.

If you so much hate being near me and my rig then walk somewhere else, Colorado is big, the area directly surrounding 4wd trails is small.

OHV use as a whole has a completely insignificant impact on water quality. Anti access groups like to use the argument but finding substantiated scientific data to back up the claims is almost impossible. The FS buckles under the claim so it’s effective and used often. Lefthand canyon outside of Boulder is an excellent recent example.

I burn more gas and thus emit more pollutants driving my Subaru to work than I do traversing most trails in my Jeep.

I enjoy hiking, 4 wheeling is a different way to see a different area. Different folks, different storks. We can all get along.

Oh yea, and despite what you are lead to believe. It is law that OHV’s stay on designated trails, and believe it or not, 99.9% of us do. Over snow is obviously different since there is no impact to the ground. Every user group has bad apples, don’t judge us by what you have seen by a few. If you are a dick to them they will probably reciprocate appropriately, try having an open mind and being kind.

Oh yea, one more thing. I don’t care how much of Colorado is wilderness, I care how much of Colorado public lands are wilderness. Here’s a statistic for you, almost 54% of Colorado National Forest is currently roadless, weather through” wildness” or “roadless” designation. On top of that somewhere around 13% of BLM land is off limits. All of this totals up to about 39% of our public lands in Colorado. An incredibly small amount of the remaining 61% are actually open to motorized travel since you can only legally drive on designated roads.
GPP33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009   #49
Longmont, Colorado
Paddling Since: 98
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 328
Originally Posted by caseybailey View Post
I have inherited a 1958 D4 bulldozer (seriously). I live in town and was hoping for some public land to mess around on this thing. Every time I approach a motorized access group, they want nothing to do with me. I find it frustrating that they get to decide where the line is drawn. I guess I just find it a bit hypocritical.
This is the one completely fucked up post that I will quote and respond directly to.

You are suggesting the use of a bulldozer to alter and deeply impact the environment. OHV enthusiasts are not out to destroy nature, but rather enjoy it. We do not alter it to suit our needs, we make use of existing roads to explore with very little impact.

In the case that new roads are created (very rare) it is done under the guidance of the governing agencies after extensive environmental studies.

Your comparison is akin to that of suggesting that if you Kayak then I should be able to damn up the river so I can water ski on it. Why do you get to draw the line?
GPP33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009   #50
hotchkiss's Avatar
Pejivalle, Costa Rica
Paddling Since: 1993
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 188
Gotta love the people who jump into a thread and repeat something some other redneck, goat roper said 2 pages back, but I guess I'll give in and respond:

"Just because an area is not wilderness does not mean that it is torn to bare dirt by drunk red necks on over powered ATV’s."
-Name a place that is used by quads that doesn't suffer from soil erosion, noise and air pollution and an over population of drunk rednecks. I can't think of one: Moab, Hartman's Rocks, Rabbit Valley, they all look like hell and I've named .00001% of the places in Colorado/Utah that are open to quads.

"OHV users are some of the most environmentally conscious stewards of our environment. There is an amazing amount of activity in that group revolving around cleaning up and protecting our environment for future generations."
-Wildly irresponsible generalization. According to what standards? Certainly not "Leave No Trace."

A single dirt road does not constitute destruction of the environment."
-Then what does it constitute? It that non-impact? Is that Leave not trace? Is that reclamation? What exactly is that dirt road then?

Most mechanized travel is not loud, obnoxious and polluting."
-Oooooops, showing your ignorance, laziness and complete lack of education. You're bad. You've just shown why people suffer at the hands of people like you who take a stand because they think they're "entitled" to an opinion. Mechanized travel makes NO noise and NO pollution. You mean "MOTORIZED." That's the argument you're trying to make, for MOTORIZED vehicles. AND YES THE DO CREATE NOISE AND AIR POLLUTION. Can't hear the engine roaring with your helmet on? I can hear your quad from over 5 miles away. THAT'S NOISE POLLUTION.

If you so much hate being near me and my rig then walk somewhere else, Colorado is big, the area directly surrounding 4wd trails is small."
-Yea, I see, it's all about you. I have to avoid you.

God I wish I could, but you just keep riding up my ass with that quad because you're too lazy to walk, to poor to buy a horse and to dumb to think about the future.

hotchkiss is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Topic Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No boats in Wilderness? CGM Whitewater Kayaking 14 09-13-2007 07:40 AM
Wilderness First Aid Course vmiller Commercial Posts 0 08-04-2007 05:48 PM
Wilderness exchange Unlimited erdvm1 Kayaking | Gear Talk 3 10-13-2006 10:57 AM
Wilderness first responder class? Travis Whitewater Kayaking 2 03-07-2005 11:49 AM
Wilderness First Responder course Rocky Mtn Outdoor Center Whitewater Kayaking 0 07-30-2004 05:23 PM

» Classified Ads
Pyranha Burn 3 Large B/G/W

posted by Rendezvous River Sports


*!* Pyranha S6 200 with...

posted by MaxwellSilverKayak

Pyranha S6 200 playboat for sale. Great for larger...

Jackson Superstar

posted by Gary Rempe

Beautiful boat with awesome performance. Very lightly used...

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities

Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.