Where to shop and not to

[coloradocarlisle]

Im new here but have spent years and years on Dirtbikes. I have two landcruisers a 97 and a 2000 and I just sold a 1973 FJ 40. These hobbies have lead me to this site. One thing that I try to do is shop at store that support OHVr's and I think we all should all do the same and also we should not buy gear and supplies from those that support the people that are trying to shut us down

Lists for non supporters include
REI - they donate tons of money to the growth of "non motorized" while closing down motorized trails. Dont believe me look at the website

Eddie Mcstiffs in Moab




Supporters include
Cabelas
Bass Pro Shops

[mountainpete]

Welcome to ExPo coloradocarlisle :friday:

For a first post, you sure jumped right into a topic that can generate a lot of different emotions and points of view. Here is my two cents on the subject:

I think you will find that the community of users of this site try their best to respect the choices these companies make, many due to the specific markets they target with their product.

For example, a company like Patagoina will only sponsor "human powered" events or expeditions. Why? It's their target market and they have decided to focus their company and advertising on that market only. Companies like REI support the "Leave no Trace" aspect of travel and as they define it, tire tracks are a trace. The bottom line is that OHV users are not their target market, so if you boycott them it's up to you - but they simply don't care if you do or not.

Instead, can I suggest making a list of qualities a good supplier should have? Do they promote conservation, Tread Lightly! techniques, education and co-habitation with other trail/park/area users? (basically companies that target OHV users)

Then when people are choosing places to purchase things from they can make the decsion for themselves on who they want to spend their hard earned dollar with and some of that dollar can go back to helping the cause.

Thanks,

Pete

[DaktariEd]

Greetings and welcome to ExPo, coloradocarlisle! :wavey:

This is an interesting topic, no doubt about it!
I actually recall a similar thread last year, I believe, but can't seem to locate it.

In any case, the forum has grown by leaps & bounds since then.
It may be interesting to see how people feel about it now.

I personally have been quite torn by the issue.

I try to be responsible when driving off the beaten path, and also in choosing where I spend my hard-earned $$. I was a very early REI member...way back in the 60's...and still apparently have my name on file with them. But I don't necessarily do all my outdoor gear shopping there any more. Mostly because of the rise of internet commerce rather than for philosophical reasons. But my concerns about REI supporting the closure of areas that I believe should be done much more selectively DOES enter into my thinking and I choose instead to buy from vendors who support more reasonable (in my opinion) land use, and sponsors of forums like this.

It's pretty darned complex...
I'll check back and see how others respond...
Again, Welcome aboard!
:sombrero:
Ed

[coloradocarlisle]

Thank you! Great site
I know its a big topic and I may be jumping the gun and only looking at the big picture.

Why would anyone here support REI when they are a force determined that no one will ever be able to complete any off roading let alone an expedition.
This forum looks to be one for OHVr's. I simply think that awareness will keep our sports alive and we better stick together to save them. This is one way, I cant understand why someone who truly enjoys "lightly" 4x4ing to a fovorite area would be intrested in supporting a company who donates money to ensure that this freedom we have will not continue

[Dave]

I personally have been quite torn by the issue.

Same here. While I want to support companies that support me (or at least don't go against me), it's not always possible. I like to touch and feel a piece of gear before I drop any coin on it and in St. Louis, REI is pretty much the only place I can do that. There is a locally owned outdoor shop that I stopped shopping at because they have always treated me like crap and I would almost bet their stance on OHV is pretty similar to that of REI.

Speaking of Patagonia, I think it was their marketing or advertising executive that pitched a fit because one of their advertisements was adjacent to an article that featured motorized OHV travel in Outside Magazine. The picture in the article featured an H2 driving in a the woods in a partially man made driving course...I think even the mud pits had a concrete bottom. People went ape sh*t over the article!

This will, no doubt, be an interesting topic.

[cruiseroutfit]

Here is a good list to avoid ;)

http://www.suwa.org/page.php?page_name=links_bus

[coloradocarlisle]

That list has grown 20 times scince the last time I saw it


Thanks for posting

[Seldom Seen]

I guess by your screen name and that you are a member of COHVCO that you live in CO. As a Coloradan you I'm sure you are aware of the situation at Wheeler Lake. Right? For those that aren't familiar with the situation let me explain.

Wheeler lake is on USFS land between Hoosier Pass and Mt Lincoln. It's a beautiful place accessed by a fun and challenging road. In order to get to the trail head you must drive around Montgomery Res. Montgomery is owned by the city of Colo. Springs. A few years back Colo. Springs decided to lock the gate at Montgomery, baring access to Wheeler. The reasons, they said, were because people camping out in the parking lot, starting fires, and trashing the place. The fishermen blamed the climbers, the climbers blamed the OHVers and on and on. The Access Fund (a climbers advocacy group) SUPPORTED BY AND WORKING CLOSELY WITH REI, stepped in and worked out the problems with the Springs and kept Montgomery and Wheeler open!!!!!!!

A few years back, in April, I headed up to mt Lincoln to get in a little late season ice climbing. Most years I would need snow shoes for the approach to Lincoln Falls. When I got to Montgomery I was surprised to find the road around the Res. cleared of snow. I left the snowshoes in the truck and started hiking the road up to the falls. Imagine my surprise when I rounded the last rock outcrop when I saw a pickup truck parked near the gauging station and a man shoveling snow from the road. I stopped and chatted with him for a while. Come to find out he was the ditch rider hired by the Springs. As a result of the compromise reached between the Springs and The Access Fund along with REI, it's now his job to monitor the parking lot and open the road (by shoveling it out BY HAND) every spring. The ditch rider told me that the local sheriff, USFS and EMS crews needed access to the wheeler trail head in-case there are lost or injures climbers, hikers, snowmobilers, atvers, etc. The ditch rider also told me part of the problem was because Wheeler melted out sooner than the drifts around Montgomery, to many knuckle heads were trying to access Wheeler by drift busting their way to the trail head. To many be came helplessly stuck causing severe damage to the road.

It was due to the efforts of The Access Fund and REI that EVERYONE enjoys unrestricted access to Wheeler Lake and this is only 1 of several cases where the OHV community reaped the benefit from groups supported by REI.

Before spewing the party line BS, check to facts, know the truth and stop drinking the Kool-aid:wavey:

[cruiseroutfit]

...Before spewing the party line BS, check to facts, know the truth and stop drinking the Kool-aid:wavey:

Well mabey in "your" neighborhood the OHV'ers should have acted sooner and prevented the need for REI to save the day. And in my neighbor hood REI is behind a plan to close hundereds of miles worth of trails with their support of the America's Wilerness Bill... Don't kid yourself and think REI was interested in shutting out the OHV's (non climbers of course).

I will say however that REI's name has dropped off of Suwa's latest list of supporters... not sure what the deal is though it is fair to say they are still an anti-motorized co.

[cruiseroutfit]

...It was due to the efforts of The Access Fund and REI that EVERYONE enjoys unrestricted access to Wheeler Lake and this is only 1 of several cases where the OHV community reaped the benefit from groups supported by REI...

Oh, and what are the other cases?

I can't speak for Colorado, but I can speak fairly reasonably about the land use scene in Utah. To my knowledge REI has never been proactive (even when asked nicely) to protect motorized access. They have historically promoted anti-access groups that want nothing more than to block out motorized recreation... unless of course its to their "special spot" ;)

[Seldom Seen]

Oh, and what are the other cases?

REI worked with The Back Country Alliance among other to keep winter access to Vail pass open to ALL user groups, including snowmobiles, and the USFS from making it a fee area. The fight against the fees was lost but access was kept open. REI supports projects by American Trails (a group support by the BRC as well), Hell I found out about Tread Lightly at my local REI store years ago. REI no longer supports SUWA because SUWA is a joke. Their only purpose in life is to take pretty pictures and sell their calenders. They collect most of their money from bleeding hearts who don't have a clue. SUWA has become a 4 letter word, even in groups to the left of REI, because of their ethics and tactics.

As for Wheeler Lake The local offroad advocates didn't even have a clue there was a problem before TAF had it solved.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Okay, I'm going to jump in here by paraphrasing Harry Callahan:

Nothng wrong with closing roads, as long as the right roads get closed.

Roseann and I work with a group in Arizona that does quite a lot of road closures, mostly at the request of the U.S. Forest Service and other agencies. The roads they close and revegetate are illegal roads, wildcat trails started by bozos.

The off-road community makes a lot of noise about treading lightly, etc. Most participants do just that. But hundreds of miles of seemingly legitimate trails on public land were in fact the result of a single moron who decided he didn't want to walk from here to there. That single set of tire tracks entices the next bozo to follow, and before you know it there's a real trail there that any of us would assume was an official byway. When a group comes along and proposes closing it, everyone shrieks about access being stolen by treehuggers.

I know people who would outlaw all backcountry driving. I also know people who would ban all wilderness areas. Whenever discussions such as this one concentrate on the fanatics of either side, that discussion will go nowhere, because there will always be lunatics at both fringes.

There is a basic truth we need to admit as backcountry drivers: Our desire for 4x4 trails is a selfish one. You cannot point to a single study showing that roads are beneficial to wildlife, because they're not. You can't say roads are needed for fire crews, because the forest service's own studies show that catastrophic fires occur much more frequently in roaded areas. Roaded and logged areas experience increased erosion and runoff into streams, which affects fish habitat.

Those who want to close down roads for their own "selfish goals" are no more selfish, and arguably less so, than those who want to keep all roads open no matter what evidence might exist for closing them.

Arguing that we are "losing access" ignores the last century of ever-increasing road intrusion into natural areas. The drive to preserve the remaining vestiges of our nation's wilderness is a simple reaction to that reality. We're talking about five percent of the land in the country here, which does not seem unreasonable to me.

The United States is blessed with millions and millions of acres of public land. We need to have much of that land accessible to vehicles, both on paved roads and unpaved trails. But we also need to preserve what is left of the country that bears some resemblance to what the first explorers and trappers experienced. I'm willing to fight for both. Fighting for only one or the other marks one as a fanatic, and severely reduces your credibility with the elected representatives who can effect policy.

[calamaridog]

Jonathan,

I think you might have posted that one in the wrong thread:)

This thread is about where not to shop;)


I don't shop at REI for personal reasons, similar to the reasons I don't shop at Walmart. I choose to shop at the locally owned Adventure 16 store instead. They have 7 stores in Southern California.

Here are the non-profits supported by A16:

http://www.adventure16.com/discover/nonprofit.html

If you choose to shop at REI I don't care either way, just like I don't care if you choose to shop at Walmart.

[cruiseroutfit]

...Nothng wrong with closing roads, as long as the right roads get closed...

Alot of great points there... and while I agree many "wheelers" complain about a trail closure, they are usually the apathetic crowd that does nothing until their favorite trail is closed, then they decide to make some noise.

Once again, I don't claim to know anything about landuse outside Utah, but I spend my fair share of time within the scene here.

The roads we are fighting to protect here in Utah are usually 50-100 years old, not trails blazed by bozos or renegade wheelers. Rather counties, historic mine/ranch roads, even roads blazed by the BLM, FS or National Park Service. Some of these roads we cut to promote recreation, but if they were done legally, they should not be shut IMHO. Bypasses, weaves, renegade roads... we help shut them down.

Think about it this way...

Its easy to justify the closure of a road based on the amount of remaining land access. But have you considered the amount of trails legally open per capita to the amount of OHV's, that number has dwindled exponentially as the number of OHV's as multiplied by nearly 20x in just the last 20 years. How can it be "environmentally responsible" the corral so many users into a dwindling amount of legally open trails???

I don't think it is selfish for me to want to use public lands the way I want to use them. Can you look a 75 year old OHV rider in the eye and tell him to hike or forget about it? I don't think OHV's belong everwhere, but Utah has plenty of wilderness and closed areas already.

A note about myself...

I was the apethetic OHV user just a couple years ago. A local favorite trail was starting the closure (due to urban sprawl), and I was starting to research all of the lost recreation access in my locale. I found out about our states 4 wheel drive association and offered to help. Fast forward a couple years and I have been the President of the Association for ~3 years now. We have 20+ members clubs and over a thousand members. We work WITH the BLM, FS, etc all over the state to promote responsible recreation, and keep PUBLIC LAND PUBLIC. We do 20+ service projects each year including our upcoming National Public Lands Day event which will have 500+ involved in a single day, statewide service project in just about every wheeling hotspot in the state. We have been very sucsessful preventing the past trend of trail closure, through adoption, stewardship, and positive influence. I may come off arrogant in regards to my views on anti-motorized groups and their supporters, but I have put in enough of my sweat and time to justify it IMHO.

[cruiseroutfit]

REI worked with The Back Country Alliance

Once again, please don't be soooo naive to beleive that the Backcountry Alliance had ANY motorized interests in mind... rather cross country skiing. They know when to work along with others when it means protecting their "kingdom". The Backcountry Alliance has historically been against motirized recreation, spend a couple minutes on their website... "advocate for non-motorized interests"... says enough for me.



As for Wheeler Lake The local offroad advocates didn't even have a clue there was a problem before TAF had it solved.

Then they need to get organized and on the ball... enough said.

I'm not here to argue, but I'm not going to watch you hail REI because they piggy-backed on a couple of good projects... Even the Sierra Club does that once in a while ;)

[calamaridog]

I may come off arrogant in regards to my views on anti-motorized groups and their supporters, but I have put in enough of my sweat and time to justify it IMHO.

Kurt,

Passionate comes to mind, but not arrogant:beer:

[VikingVince]

Jonathan - what a well-informed, balanced, intelligent, and succintly stated posting....thank you.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Thanks for that, Vince.

Cdog - A16 is still around? That's great news. I thought they'd died when their national catalog disappeared. I would definitely shop there.

Kurt - I don't think you're arrogant either.

To get back to the whom-to-support question, my roundabout intent was to maintain that just because a business supports non-motorized recreation is no reason to boycott them, unless they also show an inclination to support the banning of all motorized recreation. Roadless areas need advocates, just as do backcountry trails. But the general trend in recent decades has been toward the steady loss of pristine habitat, so I prefer to err on the side of preservation.

What really annoys me is why wilderness advocates and motorized backcountry users can't put aside their differences and fight the real threats to open space everywhere: urban sprawl, overpopulation, and the massive waste of natural resources mandated by our current solipsistic national lifestyle.

Wilderness advocates: "We hereby state that while we enjoy the solitude, silence, and unsurpassed wildlife habitat potential of wilderness above all, we also realize that there needs to be space for those who choose or need to access natural areas by vehicle. We believe a balance of the two is possible."

Motorized users: "We hereby state that while we enjoy accessing and exploring wild areas by vehicle, we also realize that there are places where vehicles do not belong, places where the health of the habitat should be our number one priority as stewards of public land."

There. Was that so hard?

[coloradocarlisle]

http://www.sierraclub.org/benefactors/


UMMM Seldom did you do any research????? ----- Last I heard the sierra club doesnt really like us

I think someone may be misinformed, and this is what this is about---- new information so take it with a grain of salt your money you spend at REI does infact go right into a cup located in the hand of the sierra club.

[Jonathan Hanson]

See? Here we go again, right back into the us versus them mentality. Useless.

Coloradocarlisle, as a counterpoint I note you belong to the Blue Ribbon Coalition, which, to be quite frank, is essentially a front for extractive industries. The corporate donor list for BRC includes seven timber industry trade associations, at least 12 mining companies by a quick count, and eight oil and gas companies. Do you really believe all those corporations care about your freedom to drive on trails? Or are they really concerned with their own freedom to make big profits off of public land? A BRC press release called the Forest Service's Roadless Area initiative, which was supported by a huge majority of Americans, a "totalitarian lockup of public lands."

My point is this: It is much, much easier to point fingers than it is to compromise and work out differences. We can all gesture rudely at each other while open space disappears, or we can break out the Hi-Lift jack, get ourselves out of our respective ruts, and make sure there will be both plenty of wilderness and a healthy backcountry trail system for our grandchildren to enjoy.

[Ursidae69]

I just spent a gob of money at REI yesterday. No single business or political slant will meet all of my expectations, but REI meets the majority of mine so I shop there. When I need gun supplies or hunting gear I go to Sportsmans Warehouse.

[whitethaiger]

...
What really annoys me is why wilderness advocates and motorized backcountry users can't put aside their differences and fight the real threats to open space everywhere: urban sprawl, overpopulation, and the massive waste of natural resources mandated by our current solipsistic national lifestyle.
I usually don't posts in these political discussions with all their all-or-nothing black-and-white arguments from each side, it's simply too frustrating to participate in these "discussions". But seeing Jonathan's responses I had to post. I very much agree with his points.

I wish I was articulate enough to make points this well and I also wish I'd remember more from Latin class to understand words like 'solipsistic' without googling dictionary sites.:rolleyes:

Someone mentioned Adventure16, they have a store not far from here and we do a fair share of our adventure related shopping there. I like the smaller store and the knowledgable staff. It's so much easier to get answers/help there than at REI.

[coloradocarlisle]

Wow Im blown away no wonder we are loosing

Ursidae69

Thanks for shopping at REI now if you will just take a minute and donate some more money to the Sierra Club and sign some petitioins to close down the trails you use.

Oh never mind you just did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Is there something IM missing or do you guys really not care. If you dont care thats fine but dont come on to this website rant and rave about how much fun you had on your last trip and then accually help is speeding up the process of closing down trails.

I belong to a lot of outdoor websites some with well over 1000 posts and this one is the one I thought would be on target but so far only a few people here in my opinion deserve to use the trails some of us fight for the others are setting our sport back. If you told half the people I ride, race and wheel with I dont know what they would do.

I too am about balance. Im 33 and have spent over 6 months of my life with a back pack on my back, Somewhere around 500 days in a sleeping bag in a tent or on dirt, my best friends are some of the best river guides in Colorado and have been for years, probally more than 1250 ski days so dont tell me about balance. My friends who KNOW Chaco sandles are the best for river guides wont buy them because the 120 mile enduro we are riding in will only continue if we all help.

Jonathan ever think those big companies have money. The BRC needs money because people dont care enough right now to donate time or money so someone has too. If you dont want the big pockets involved use some of YOUR money and talk some of YOUR friends into donating so the BRC can go rely on the people they are protecting the most.......ALL OF YOU!!!!

Do you like the sound of www.whatexpeditionswewentonyearsago.com

Im getting upset so Im think Im done here for a while, I dont mean to snap but I personally have lost thousands of acres of riding. Tomorrow if I want to ride my dirtbike on trails I have to drive a hour and a half. It used to be 20 minutes but we lost those areas. The 4x4's will be next

[cruiseroutfit]

...Do you like the sound of www.whatexpeditionswewentonyearsago.com...

Hahahaha ;)

[VikingVince]

ColoradoCarlisle...oh what's the use...instead of having the capacity to acknowledge and absorb (if possible) the valid points Jonathan has presented, you just keep ranting and raving from your one-dimensional perspective...bottom line: that makes you more a part of the problem than part of the solution.

[flyingwil]

Wow Im blown away no wonder we are loosing

Ursidae69

Thanks for shopping at REI now if you will just take a minute and donate some more money to the Sierra Club and sign some petitioins to close down the trails you use.

Oh never mind you just did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Was this comment really needed? This site has been free of flaming, and bashing of other members or their vehicles up until now...:smilies27


Is there something IM missing or do you guys really not care. If you dont care thats fine but dont come on to this website rant and rave about how much fun you had on your last trip and then accually help is speeding up the process of closing down trails.

Yeah, you are missing the point that we all have the right to think independently and spend our money where we wish. The reason we spend money is to buy something in exchange, and normally we all stride to buy the best product we can for our money. If we wish to support organizations that help support our interests we can support them too with our money.


I belong to a lot of outdoor websites some with well over 1000 posts and this one is the one I thought would be on target but so far only a few people here in my opinion deserve to use the trails some of us fight for the others are setting our sport back. If you told half the people I ride, race and wheel with I don’t know what they would do.

This forum is not all about 4 wheeling, it is about vehicle dependant living, and enjoying our environment and it's surroundings. If we want to go camping at a place that doesn't allow vehicle travels to the camp, we hike and not pave our own trails. I think you were expecting the support of off-highway enthusiasts, but this forum has a good mix of every type of outdoor wildlife supporter you could imagine, and thus you got a mixed result for feedback.


I too am about balance. Im 33 and have spent over 6 months of my life with a back pack on my back, Somewhere around 500 days in a sleeping bag in a tent or on dirt, my best friends are some of the best river guides in Colorado and have been for years, probally more than 1250 ski days so dont tell me about balance. My friends who KNOW Chaco sandles are the best for river guides wont buy them because the 120 mile enduro we are riding in will only continue if we all help.

Do you like the sound of www.whatexpeditionswewentonyearsago.com

I agree that we need to help educate others that are new to the sport, on how to treat our environment with respect. My biggest pet peeve is on the TV shows they say "now it is time to go test this and tear up some trails!" or something to that sort. That teaches so many people who really do not know any better the wrong right off the bat. People need to learn and it is our job knowing what is right and wrong to help teach them proper edict when enjoying the wilderness



Im getting upset so Im think Im done here for a while, I dont mean to snap but I personally have lost thousands of acres of riding. Tomorrow if I want to ride my dirtbike on trails I have to drive a hour and a half. It used to be 20 minutes but we lost those areas. The 4x4's will be next

If you help teach with some of those 1000 posts, you can help make a change on the environmental impacts of off-highway travels. I do not think you are helping people learn by stating where to shop, and where not to. For a first post, you are opening your self wide open to criticism and need to take it with a grain of salt rather than bash others for their opinions and where they choose to shop.

Bottom Line: I think your effort level is great, but needs to be directed more to educating people you meet on your travels and adventures on how to treat the environment properly and with respect to keep our trails open for years to come. For me I support Tread Lightly, which focuses its programs and efforts in education and stewardship to further the goals of responsible and ethical recreation. To me that is the key. On their site they list each of their supporting organizations and companies you might want to do business with.

[FourByLand]

Jonathan,

Love the new avatar... almost brings a tear.

Just like seeing you ride off with her into that amazing Tucson sunset!

Your hat properly placed on your head and smoke rolling from her pipe, she still calls out to me....

:archaeolo

[DesertRose]

Hi everyone - just back from 7 weeks in Africa, and so just catching up.

As co-moderator of this area (at least on the Conservation page), I want to jump in here and say first:

- this is an important topic, and we all have our opinions and have the right to express them. ExPo is excellent for exploring new ideas, hashing old ones, and just having some good old fun ranting and raving;

- that said, it is our duty, not our right, to do so in a manner that sticks to issues and opinions about the issues, and does not personally attack or libel anyone.

So - a gentle reminder here coloradocarlisle: your opinions are important to share and we do want to hear them, but we have standards here on ExPo and personally jumping all over ursidae will do nothing but escalate an important issue to a nasty personal battle (should he choose to do so - but I think he won't). You can be vehement about an issue and stick to the facts. Take a look at many of the ways opinions are expressed on these more heated topics, and you can see how good "regular ranters" here are at doing do.

Welcome to ExPo, and enjoy this awesome community of people who explore and care - and let's keep the mud on our trucks, not our friends!

[coloradocarlisle]

Was this comment really needed? This site has been free of flaming, and bashing of other members or their vehicles up until now...:smilies27



Yeah, you are missing the point that we all have the right to think independently and spend our money where we wish. The reason we spend money is to buy something in exchange, and normally we all stride to buy the best product we can for our money. If we wish to support organizations that help support our interests we can support them too with our money.



This forum is not all about 4 wheeling, it is about vehicle dependant living, and enjoying our environment and it's surroundings. If we want to go camping at a place that doesn't allow vehicle travels to the camp, we hike and not pave our own trails. I think you were expecting the support of off-highway enthusiasts, but this forum has a good mix of every type of outdoor wildlife supporter you could imagine, and thus you got a mixed result for feedback.



I agree that we need to help educate others that are new to the sport, on how to treat our environment with respect. My biggest pet peeve is on the TV shows they say "now it is time to go test this and tear up some trails!" or something to that sort. That teaches so many people who really do not know any better the wrong right off the bat. People need to learn and it is our job knowing what is right and wrong to help teach them proper edict when enjoying the wilderness




If you help teach with some of those 1000 posts, you can help make a change on the environmental impacts of off-highway travels. I do not think you are helping people learn by stating where to shop, and where not to. For a first post, you are opening your self wide open to criticism and need to take it with a grain of salt rather than bash others for their opinions and where they choose to shop.

Bottom Line: I think your effort level is great, but needs to be directed more to educating people you meet on your travels and adventures on how to treat the environment properly and with respect to keep our trails open for years to come. For me I support Tread Lightly, which focuses its programs and efforts in education and stewardship to further the goals of responsible and ethical recreation. To me that is the key. On their site they list each of their supporting organizations and companies you might want to do business with.

If you help teach with some of those 1000 posts, you can help make a change on the environmental impacts of off-highway travels. I do not think you are helping people learn by stating where to shop, and where not to. For a first post, you are opening your self wide open to criticism and need to take it with a grain of salt rather than bash others for their opinions and where they choose to shop.

Ah this we have done in one site dedicated to motorcycles www.ktmtalk.com 50000 members and growing there has been a HUGE amount of awareness weather you believe this or not probally 97% of the members who frequent that site are doing what they can weather its trail clean up. Going to public land hearings, donating money, or not spending money at certain outlets or stores. I do understand you have the right to spend money and that this site will have a larger number of people who enjoy the back country in diffrent ways however I still see this as a 4x4 site. I looked for discussions and did see some. I brought some information I knew of and was trying to bring another way to help to light.

Ursaede69 Im sorry for the punch bellow the belt

[Ursidae69]

Ursaede69 Im sorry for the punch bellow the belt

No worries, it's just the internet. :friday: No hard feelings here.

[BajaTaco]

Ursaede69 Im sorry for the punch bellow the belt

Thank you sir, for posting that. And thanks for sharing your views and opinions without getting the thread locked up or deleted. I can appreciate your passion for supporting what you believe in, whether I happen to agree with it or not.

And by the way, welcome to Expedition Portal. :beer:

[flyingwil]

I contacted REI to see where exactly they stand in regards to this thread... this is the reply I got from them that might shine some light on opinions about REI:




Thanks for your question and providing this opportunity to answer your
questions.

REI supports a balanced use of public lands. We have supported
wilderness designations. We have also supported access to public lands
for recreation, particularly for mountain bikes.

In all cases, we encourage a dialog between the various constituencies
who have an interest land management questions. On a few occasions, in
order to help this dialog to happen, REI has acted to bring groups with
differing interests together to come to a solution that works for
everyone.

We have been criticized by some off-road vehicle enthusiasts for our
support for specific wilderness designations. These efforts do not
preclude that in other areas vehicle access can be appropriate.

Mike Foley
REI Public Affairs

[bigreen505]

I contacted REI to see where exactly they stand in regards to this thread... this is the reply I got from them that might shine some light on opinions about REI:

Actually I feel more in the dark than ever. He did a decent job of reciting corporate key messages while dodging the question entirely. He is obviously smart enough not to answer a question that will likely get posted on the Internet in a way that could possibly upset any of his constituent groups. However I will admit to being annoyed by the answer.

In the past I have never really had a problem with REI (besides the obvious comparison to Starbucks), but their refusal to answer a simple question openly and honestly does not sit well with me.

[cruiseroutfit]

Though I appreciate the fact he even responded... that is a pretty much a carbon copy of a letter received by another curious wheeler sometime ago. Corprate jumbo designed to appease the masses IMHO. Their track record alone is enough for me. At a time they were supporting SUWA, they were asked to support the Utah 4 Wheel Drive Association, a non-profit group aimed at education and stewardship of public lands... needless to say they didn't think it was up their alley :wavey:

[coloradocarlisle]

Im happy to see this discussion continue. I think it is very important no matter what people do with the info.

[Jonathan Hanson]

I had a different reaction to this (to be expected?!). First, it was commendable that Mr. Foley responded. Second, his answer elucidates just what I'd expect the policy of REI to be, which is oriented toward human-powered use of public lands. Complaining that REI doesn't support OHV-favored legislation is like protesting because Yamaha and Polaris don't contribute to wilderness groups.

And he's correct, as has been pointed out before: Just because one lobbies for wilderness - as I do regularly - doesn't mean one can't also support access for four-wheel-drive vehicles, each in its proper place (remember - I own THREE 4x4s!). If every single piece of current proposed wilderness legislation was passed, the percentage of land "locked up" in the U.S. would increase from the current five or six percent to maybe six or seven.

In the end, unless you're one of the fanatics who don't believe there should be any wilderness, or that 4x4s should be outlawed, we're talking about literally a percentage point either way here and there between wilderness, roadless areas, and vehicle-accessible areas. The real threat is development. If wilderness advocates and 4x4 enthusiasts got together to protect open space in its entirety, there would be more of it for all of us.

But I agree with Coloradocarlisle that information is always a good thing to have. You can't make an intelligent choice without it.

[justfred]

I'm just wondering because I haven't seen it mentioned.

Why are we pitting the off-roaders vs the hikers/bikers/environmentalists rather than asking why the government would like to close off public lands to public use, but encourage and subsidize mining, logging, cattle grazing, and private development of that public land. Because that's what I see as the problem - and as far as I can tell, REI and the Sierra Club and so on - that's who they're really up against. Given the choice between seeing a trail closed to 'wheeling' but open to stripmining or clearcutting, I'd choose to have it closed or just walk-in. It's not that I'm against industry - I just think that industry and profit get top priority way too often.

That, and I think boycotts are entirely ineffective. There's another thread on another forum I'm on advocating boycotting Citgo because of Hugo Chavez' remarkes about our "Dear Leader", er, President. (Personally I thought the "smell of sulphur" statement was pretty amusing.) They claimed 7-11 dumped Citgo because of it; but in reality 7-11 dumped Citgo to sell their own gas because of...unsurprisingly...profit!

Letter-writing campaigns are a lot more effective than boycotts. They care more if you say "I shop at XYZ and I want this..." than if you say "I'm not shopping at XYZ anymore because of this...". The former is a loyal customer, the latter is a flaky kook who may never have been a customer.

[Desertdude]

I don't shop REI ...my reason? they are clothing size challenged - I feel they are completely size profiling - I am insulted that the best clothes they offer are all in size small - and the color choices all suck - lime green - puckey orange - sewer brown -

[sarcasm alert]

REI needs to close up all the retail stores and make room for more parking lots and roadways - we need more open space pavement...

[End sarcasm alert]

[bigreen505]

I don't shop REI ...my reason? they are clothing size challenged - I feel they are completely size profiling - I am insulted that the best clothes they offer are all in size small - and the color choices all suck - lime green - puckey orange - sewer brown -



Funny, my sister shops almost entirely at REI for outdoors stuff because she can fit in the kids clothes. That translates into better, more fun colors at a price that is usually less than half the sale price of the adult clothes. Last year she bought a really nice soft shell jacket for about $40.

[cruiseroutfit]

...If every single piece of current proposed wilderness legislation was passed, the percentage of land "locked up" in the U.S. would increase from the current five or six percent to maybe six or seven.

In the end, unless you're one of the fanatics who don't believe there should be any wilderness, or that 4x4s should be outlawed, we're talking about literally a percentage point either way here and there between wilderness, roadless areas, and vehicle-accessible areas. The real threat is development. If wilderness advocates and 4x4 enthusiasts got together to protect open space in its entirety, there would be more of it for all of us.

When you make a sweeping generalization of numbers it doesn't sound too bad... And in some states it might not be, motorized recreations in Utah on the otherhand would be destroyed IMHO...

Total Wilderness Acreage in US:
106,506,635 acres

Total Wilderness Acreage in Utah:
900,614 acres

Proposed Wilderness in Utah by SUWA/Sierra Club et al:
OVER 9 MILLION acres that SUWA's inventories have shown qualify as "Wilderness"

So "by the numbers" Utah stands to lose ALOT, and almost every area targeted by these groups has high value and history to the motorozed community.

Oh, and people have done plenty of complaining to the OHV & auto manufacturers... of course that was done by the other side of the stick.

[flywgn]

[Disclaimer: I re-read this post, and it's so long that if you wish to skip to the next post, I'll not be offended. A.R.]

Welcome to ExPo, Carlisle. You’ll find a bunch of die-hard, stimulating, off-highway travelers here. You’ll not regret having initiated this thread, as controversial as it may be. The good thing is that all of this dialog is good.

I read the entire thread this afternoon and was trying to decide whether to reply then or think about it for a while when Diana, my expedition partner for 46+ years, alerted me that dinner was ready. Knowing that it was to be elk stew (I didn’t harvest this one. A friend did.) with parsnips, turnips, our own organically-grown Yukon Gold spuds (I did harvest.), plenty of parsley, and red wine, I decided that my response could wait a bit…maybe two bits.

First of all, I rarely, almost never, boycott a business owing to its affiliations, unless their connections are ethically or morally wrong. Ergo, I have BF Goodrich tires on three of our five vehicles, regardless of…..well, you know. Back in the ‘70s’ I did boycott grapes, even though I felt the gesture was fruitless. (God, I can’t believe I’m going to leave that pun alone!)

I happen to be one of these persons who does not EVER vote the party line. I’ve voted for, and campaigned for, Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians. I choose the candidate, not the affiliation. I look at every road-closure from both sides.

In the ‘70s I joined a bunch of folks in an effort to defeat the paving of a road into the Los Padres National Forest. The decision to pave this track was to enable “more persons to enjoy the backcountry”. I sided with my mentor, Paul Squibb, who wrote a lucid, compelling editorial in the Santa Barbara News-Press (CA) in which he stated, “You can’t pave a road to get away from people.”

The coalition against this paving was a mixture of Sierra Clubbers, Auduboners, 4Wders, ranchers, hunters, and just-about-any-kinders.

We lost.

The road was (is) paved. More folks got into the ‘backcountry’.

Jonathan H has already written the solution. If all of us who care for our freedom of roaming the dirt roads of this country don’t coalesce, then we will lose the ultimate battle against the pressure of humanity.

It’s not a question of losing a specific area to ‘wheeling’- or ‘expedition’-travel. It boils down to people-pressure. We can’t allow the constant pressure on our beloved backcountry without some measures set in place to mitigate this pressure. We’ll have to have areas set aside where no motorized vehicle is allowed, and some of these areas may be those in which we have enjoyed our past privileges. That’s sacrifice.

I don’t know. Maybe it’s owing to being in my seventieth year. Maybe I’m beginning to see that the “Big Yellow Taxi” travels a two-way street. (Apologies to Joni Mitchell.)

You really “…don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone”…and that goes for both sides. If we lose the wildernesses, they’re gone. Period. If we lose the open roads, they will be gone as well. (On this, I have not seen any new roads opened, only existing ones closed.)

I’m willing to sacrifice, though, in order for our granddaughter to experience “wilderness”. If losing some roads that I’ve enjoyed ensures that Marley, or her children, will have the opportunity to experience that wilderness, then so be it. I’ll die with a clear conscience.

We’ve traveled extensively on dirt roads throughout North America. I could not begin to give you the number of days/nights spent with backpacks, in tents, around campfires, extricating ourselves from predicaments (yeah, my fault). Nor the pounds that we’ve carried up peaks, into swamps, around pitches. But I will confess to this. If it ever comes to the point when we must make a decision to side with open roads or wilderness, the wilderness will win, hands down.

It’s not because we’re in our sixties, we’ve already had the experiences. We want the country to last, and humanity is pressuring us to abandon that goal.

We just returned from a grand four-day trip into the Owyhee Uplands, partly on a BLM “By-Way” and partly on side tracks off this by-way. There were several places where we were forced to put the Xterra (with attached Horizon trailer) through and over some rather testing ruts and boulders that lay in our path. I don’t object to rock-crawling as a sport, but with us, it’s only part of the trip.

Again, to re-visit the issue, we may have to give up some of our highly-valued backcountry in order for any of it to survive. We don’t like it. We’ll miss it, assuming we have a few years left in these bones and muscles, but we’re willing to see it locked out if it means that it’s the only way to keep this country for all those who may wish to visit it in the future.

I asked Ansel Adams once what he thought was the most destructive force on the wilderness, and we had been talking about floods and fires. He replied without hesitation, “People.”

He was correct. The forces that we as a population have placed upon our open lands is enormous.

I can look out my office window here on the Snake River Plain and see BLM. We can leave our driveway and drop onto a track and drive until our fuel tank on the Xterra is empty and never leave public land. That, to me, is amazing. There will be some who might read this post and not fathom what it’s like to be able to do that.

If I knowingly purchase materials from a company that has a “steel-trap” mindset, that is does not look at both sides of issues, I hope that I take the time to point out what I believe to be the importance of looking at both sides. I don’t always do that, but, more often than not, I do—sometimes much to the dismay of the company. I would not have accepted that rather perfunctory reply from Mr. Foley of REI.

“We have been criticized by some off-road vehicle enthusiasts for our
support for specific wilderness designations.” –

“Yes, Mr. Foley, and what were those criticisms?” I might have replied. Not to be combative, but to be clear on the issue.

The bottom line is that I don’t feel that REI’s decision to give to any organization (again using the moral/ethical measure) is a reason for not purchasing from them. After all, we eat mostly organic products, but that doesn’t preclude us from occasionally purchasing a Big Mac®. :)

Thanks for bringing up this issue. It's an important one.

Allen R.

[Jonathan Hanson]

Well-said, Allen, and not too long. This is an important issue.

Kurt, I understand what you mean regarding acreage, and that's why I agree we need advocates for motorized use as well as wilderness.

But of course those nine million acres were only identified as potential wilderness, and SUWA et al do not expect to win but a fraction for official designation. Like anyone else involved in any type of negotiation, they start out big.

And remember: From their point of view, they have identified nine million acres of potential wilderness and are faced with a bunch of 4x4 users who are unwilling to give up even one acre. To them that's just as outrageous and inexplicable. I spend at least as much time explaining the need for compromise and multiple use to wilderness fanatics as I do to fossil-fuel junkies.

I'm pleased, but not surprised given the Expo community, that most responses in this thread have more or less agreed that preservation should be the default strategy in deciding public land useage. We can borrow an axiom from the medical profession when deciding how to protect habitat: First, do no harm.

For me as a conservative and conservationist, it's emblematic that the most advanced and industrialized country in the world can also be at the forefront of habitat and wildlife preservation.

[coloradocarlisle]

If its a wetland or an area that needs to be closed to revegitate or for an endangered species then by all means we have to close it. But to merly close trails to close trails will hurt us because as flywgn mentioned people do more harm than anything. I agree to this and have seen it. In my area as trails have been closed more people flock to the trails that are open and then twice the damage is done. Now those trails will have to be closed because of the impact sustained only because by closing one we lost two. It is a cycle.

One thing and maybee Im missing something here but when trails and roads are closed how will people get there. Sure 1 out of 1000 might backpack 60 miles in but some of these areas can only be reached in a resonable amount of time using means other than foot. So to me when I see the deep forest and deep canyons and far off lakes, that to mee is the wilderness and I know I would have NEVER seen much of it unless it was for the motorcycle or truck that got me there.

The only way I see people in the future seeing the great outdoors is from a hiway that winds up through the mountains (I 70 in Colorado) is a good example as to how I view my grandchildren seeing the mountains and that to me is said, so thats why Im the way I am. To some it may be bad but to me if my grandchildren have the oppertunity to see as much of the wild west as I have that would be great but absolutly garanteed they wont. In the future when everything has been closed no one will be allowed anywhere off the beaten path and I will start my stories to my grand children "I wish I could take you here, this is where your Great Grandfather loved to come fish but that road is closed so we cant get there". There is a stocked pond along I-70 I can take you to, although we will have to make a reservation.:(