Can anyone think of one good reason

[Burton58]

Thats what they do in Wharton in Jersey. Seems to work. From what I remember those trails were pretty clean.... for the most part

so what we have learned here is that it is better to live in nj for legal wheeling than in ct

[HeavyMetal]

so what we have learned here is that it is better to live in nj for legal wheeling than in ct

sure if you consider a bunch of sand roads legal wheeling

[Burton58]

sure if you consider a bunch of sand roads legal wheeling

where do you wheel legally? oh, the merritt

[HeavyMetal]

where do you wheel legally? oh, the merritt

my backyard. next question?

[hippie metal]

my backyard. next question?

[HeavyMetal]

just so happens it has more rocks than the entire pine barrens as well

[Burton58]

my backyard. next question?

you've seen my backyard, lets not go there

[wannabejeep]

Your post is all fine and dandy, but it doesnt bring any value. Mainly because anything you just typed is a direct result of the state making it illegal to off road. Dirt roads in Nepaug is not legal off roading.

Several timber harvests, thats swell. How much % of the land is that taking up?

Even though it is illegal to wheel these places people still get injured all the time and try to sue the state. It happens more often than you'd think.

I never intended to say that driving dirt roads in Nepaug was legal wheeling. What I am saying is if you went up there and saw the damage that has been caused by illegal wheeling in that particular state forest you'd see why it could never work. If there was legal wheeling there or anywhere else the amount traffic would be drastically higher than it currently is and would lead to more damage.

In another state forest there are problems with mountain bike use. It is legal to ride mountain bikes there, and there are clubs that are supposed to regulate new trail creation and breaking down illegal trails but guess what? There are new trails illegal trails getting cut in all the time. It's the same principle.

As to the % of land the timber harvest are taking up, I don't carry that figure around in my back pocket. My point was that the land has a value and a purpose and isn't just a bunch of open space where people dump trash.

A figure I do know for a fact to be true is that 85% of CT forest land is owned by private landowners.

[HeavyMetal]

The basis of my argument is that abuse is formed through restriction...and restriction is formed through ignorance.

I spent 2 days on the Rubicon trail and dont think I saw a single piece of trash. I spent a full week in Moab and dont even remember seeing trash (and Moab is huge, there are 1000s of wheelers there during EJS.). I go to johnson valley every year and dont see a single trash item on the trails.

My point is that there is no better shepard of the land than the people it means the most to. These are three of some of the most popular/well known off road areas in the entire country, maybe the world, and there is more trash in the CT woods than any of these combined...because it is legal for off roaders...who in turn clean the land and keep it in check. There are countless legal off road designated trails all over the united states that work fine, however the tri-state area will never enjoy this.

I am plenty realistic and realize CT will never have a state owned off road park, that will literally never occur. This is nothing more than a discussion topic.

My point with the percentage figure is off road trails take up an extremely small actual footprint of forest or whatever terrain you may have, versus timbering/developments and what have you.

Ignorance drives the problem. People hear off roader, they think
A. Mud truck
B. dirt bike douchebag
C. ATVs tearing up soccer fields

Even though it is illegal to wheel these places people still get injured all the time and try to sue the state. It happens more often than you'd think.

I never intended to say that driving dirt roads in Nepaug was legal wheeling. What I am saying is if you went up there and saw the damage that has been caused by illegal wheeling in that particular state forest you'd see why it could never work. If there was legal wheeling there or anywhere else the amount traffic would be drastically higher than it currently is and would lead to more damage.

In another state forest there are problems with mountain bike use. It is legal to ride mountain bikes there, and there are clubs that are supposed to regulate new trail creation and breaking down illegal trails but guess what? There are new trails illegal trails getting cut in all the time. It's the same principle.

As to the % of land the timber harvest are taking up, I don't carry that figure around in my back pocket. My point was that the land has a value and a purpose and isn't just a bunch of open space where people dump trash.

A figure I do know for a fact to be true is that 85% of CT forest land is owned by private landowners.

[Burton58]

the point in my original argument was that we have limited area compared to out west. the land here is regular working class people's back yards. they ride a mile into the woods from there house with friends, have a fire, drink and leave garbage among other reasons. moab and johnson valley are thousands of acres and hundreds of miles from civilization in areas.

pretty much it's harder to find a needle in a haystack than a needle in your pocket

[HeavyMetal]

the point in my original argument was that we have limited area compared to out west. the land here is regular working class people's back yards. they ride a mile into the woods from there house with friends, have a fire, drink and leave garbage among other reasons. moab and johnson valley are thousands of acres and hundreds of miles from civilization in areas.

pretty much it's harder to find a needle in a haystack than a needle in your pocket

i used them as huge examples, there are plenty of other off road areas I have been away from here that aren't as retardedly remote that aren't a big problem area.

For what its worth, none of these areas are 100s of miles from civilization in any areas, or even close to that.

[Burton58]

just making a small point amongst the debate. my facts aren't 100% this is just opinion

[wannabejeep]

The basis of my argument is that abuse is formed through restriction...and restriction is formed through ignorance.

I spent 2 days on the Rubicon trail and dont think I saw a single piece of trash. I spent a full week in Moab and dont even remember seeing trash (and Moab is huge, there are 1000s of wheelers there during EJS.). I go to johnson valley every year and dont see a single trash item on the trails.

My point is that there is no better shepard of the land than the people it means the most to. These are three of some of the most popular/well known off road areas in the entire country, maybe the world, and there is more trash in the CT woods than any of these combined...because it is legal for off roaders...who in turn clean the land and keep it in check. There are countless legal off road designated trails all over the united states that work fine, however the tri-state area will never enjoy this.

I am plenty realistic and realize CT will never have a state owned off road park, that will literally never occur. This is nothing more than a discussion topic.

My point with the percentage figure is off road trails take up an extremely small actual footprint of forest or whatever terrain you may have, versus timbering/developments and what have you.

Ignorance drives the problem. People hear off roader, they think
A. Mud truck
B. dirt bike douchebag
C. ATVs tearing up soccer fields

The physical footprint of the trail may be small but the impacts it can have on the area can be much greater than you might think. Soil compaction from wheeled vehicles can stunt tree growth and create erosion problems. This is especially true on steep slopes, which (lets be honest) is where most of us would like to go. Additionally, water running downslope on a compacted surface will bypass the natural filter system and won't go into the soil as well as in a non compacted area So here's how the story goes,

Compacted soil= Stunted tree growth= poor tree health and eventually death of the tree.

No more tree means no more roots to suck up and filter the water as it permeates the soil. Also, no more roots to hold soil in place.

With the soil not being held in place, it make it more likely to erode which leads to sedimentation of nearby streams and seasonal drainages which bring water to place like reservoirs, or wells or other places we like to get clean water from. This can easily harm aquatic life in any of these areas as well.

So while it seems like a few trails would be no big deal because they only take up a small percentage of the area, if they happen to be in a sensitive spot they can still make a big impact. So your idea of the "actual footprint" I think is fairly short sighted.

[HeavyMetal]

I get it, you have a forestry degree. Can you debate/argue any other points beyond soil impact?

Fact of the matter is none of this has to do with environmental impact (or very little), because with the right amount of money and support, people can do whatever they want to any land, except for the most delicate/protected.

If the government (or some organization) were to make a good deal of money off an off road park, you can bet the soil would get impacted

Read this.
http://www.crawlmagforum.com/forum/s...=2521#post2521

[wannabejeep]

I get it, you have a forestry degree. Can you debate/argue any other points beyond soil impact?

Fact of the matter is none of this has to do with environmental impact (or very little), because with the right amount of money and support, people can do whatever they want to any land, except for the most delicate/protected.

If the government (or some organization) were to make a good deal of money off an off road park, you can bet the soil would get impacted

Read this.
http://www.crawlmagforum.com/forum/s...=2521#post2521

woah ya don't have to be condescending. I can't use my education in this discussion? The fact of the matter is I would like to see something like this happen just as bad as the rest of you, but I know it never will.

And other points? Yeah, disturbs wildlife, can wreck unique habitats like vernal pools, someone could argue pollution, (air, noise, actual leaking petroleum products) transfers invasive species, barks up trees etc.

There's plenty of arguments stacked against the offroad community, and we don't have the anywhere close to the same political sway that the environmental groups have.