Does Tread Lightly stop at the border?

[Ursidae69]

What do the Tread Lightly principles mean to you?

In your world:

--Are they guidelines that you follow because you want to lessen your impact while recreating in your OHV?

--Are they a necessary compromise you follow due to potential land closure issues? In other words, if there were no land closure issues, would you still Tread Lightly?

--Is it a combination of the two?

This leads me to my subject line, do Tread Lightly principles stop at the USA border? Are they simply “feel-good” standards here in the USA or do they transcend borders?

A couple of examples for you to think about. First, the Baja races. No don’t get me wrong, one the most-watched DVDs in my collection is Dust to Glory, I’m simply posing the question for discussion. There really isn’t much Tread Lightly in the race as it’s pretty tough to do so in a racing environment. During the race, roads deteriorate, accidents happen with vehicles abandoned, and so on. Many of the sponsors, as well as participants, all tout Tread Lightly at home, yet during the race, it is not a consideration. So, this leads me to think that it does stop at the border. The race is a huge boost to the local economy, I know that, I’m simply looking at one aspect, Treading Lightly.

Example two, the huge trophy events that take place around the world. Again, one of my favorite DVDs is the Outback Challenge that our own Mr. Brady owned in 2006. The same sort of questions arise. If it is frowned upon to drive across the desert here, why not anywhere else? Scott is a Tread Lightly master trainer here in the USA showing great skills in his driving, lessening his impact on every trail run I’ve ever been on with him, yet on TV I see him screaming across the desert. Sorry to call you out Scott, it’s just for demonstration purposes. :peepwall:

I’m not looking for a flame war, I want to hear different opinions on what tread lightly means to you and whether or not it is in your thoughts on a trail run here or abroad. I hope the thread doesn’t go downhill, if it does, I will make sure to delete it.

Thanks for your input. :lurk:

[Scott Brady]

Good thoughts for discussion.

For me, like most of the codes I live my life by are filtered down to right and wrong. It is wrong to drive off-trail in the US in most cases. Racing in Baja and in the Outback Challenge are both entirely legal activities, and result in many new products that reach the consumer. On private land in Mexico, it is permitted to drive fast and possibly stray from the main track (it is not permitted to drive cross country). In the Outback Challenge, the races are also held on private land or open areas, where it is legal for the race participants to drive on the course. Leaving our home at all (even our homes make an impact on the environment, so we must choose at what point we believe is acceptable. Using our 4wd's, even minimally still has an impact. Hell, even Green Peace burns fossil fuel in the pursuit of "defending the earth", so treading lightly can be argued down to the most basic of human activities, even in the effort of doing "good".

Preserving access to trails in the US requires us to tread lightly and limit damage. There are even SCORE and BOTD races in Nevada and Arizona that permit high-speed driving.

Racing is just another piece of the human puzzle, just like war and other forms of competition are. It is part of what shapes our society, leaders, winners, explorers, etc. All push the envelope of what is possible...

[BajaTaco]

Chuck, these are definitely good (and tough) points to discuss. Personally, I do not differentiate my respect for the environment on one side of the border or the other. "Tread Lightly" ethics can (and should) easily be practiced in Mexico (or any other country) as well as the U.S. And I DEFINITELY respect the environment regardless of whether or not my actions have anything to do with policy regarding trail closures. It's just a part of who I am.

Regarding the "tread lightly" concept, it all boils down to common sense. Racing and rally events are sanctioned events that are organized and conducted with extensive rules and regulations. This goes a long way in supporting the actions of an event as responsible and not a free-for-all. As Scott mentioned, much of the designated course(es) may travel over private property, and if on public lands, the event must be legal and conform to public laws for the use of that land. When you consider how many countless miles of roads criss-cross our lands and are used for high-speed travel by autos, the amount of dirt roads used for sanctioned events becomes a miniscule percentage (even in Mexico). Add to that the fact that the events only happen once or perhaps twice a year for a given course or race, and the percentage of "incidents" where man and the environment may conflict becomes even less when compared to our every-day road systems. Yes, there are bad side-effects that can (and do) happen as a result of off-road racing and rally events. Things like irresponsible spectators, irresponsible pre-running, irresponsible pitting activities, and the list goes on. This is the part of it that could use improvement for sure.

[sinuhexavier]

Tread lightly to me means leaving an area the way I found it.

My biggest pet peeves

1. Lazy people that won't back up to turn around in a wide spot.

2. People that create a new trail to avoid an obstacle, sometimes as piddly as a mud puddle.

3. People that lead big groups up muddy trails causing long lasting ruts.

Only take pictures, leave only footprints.

[Ursidae69]

Thanks for indulging my topic. It is a difficult topic and excellent points have been made so far. :ylsmoke:

For myself, I sort of view tread lightly as a combination of the first two concepts I mentioned. There is the legal aspect and then the ethical aspect. Sometimes an activity is legal but maybe not very ethical and other times an activity might be illegal but ethical due to misguided legislation. Each country and each situation is unique.

One area where I find myself in a dilemma is when I take trips to Mexico. I have several sweet remote beaches I like to access in Baja. In fact, I will be trying to get to a new location on the mainland side in a couple weeks. Problem is, under Mexican law, it is illegal to drive on the beach. If something is not enforced, does that make is misguided? I do take the law seriously in southern Baja due to the fact that several endangered sea turtles nest on southern beaches in Baja. Tire depressions, like any other physical impediment, affect how fast hatchling sea turtles can make the dash to the sea. Most are picked off in this vital point by predators and I’d hate to think that my rut in the sand caused that. So, I avoid beach driving in the winter months in southern Baja. Last March I saw sea turtle tracks on a beach near Bahia Tortuga, outside of most nesting seasons, but maybe it was a late nester. It was in an area I was contemplating driving through, but opted not to.

In other words, I take the legal and ethical arguments and combine them in a way that works for me. Tread lightly really seems to be an individual decision making process.

[kellymoe]

Tread lightly to me means leaving an area the way I found it.

My biggest pet peeves.....

3. People that lead big groups up muddy trails causing long lasting ruts.

.


Hmmmmm:iagree:

[1leglance]

for me it is not about "tread lightly" when in other countries but about "land respect" & "people respect"....we from the USA are viewed harshly in many other countries and that makes it even more important that I respect the land and the people who live on it when in other countries.
This summer I was in Peru and there you can 4x4 all around archeological sites, walk right up to ruins and take what you want, bash on the dunes and drive most anywhere....however while none of this is against the law I know it is abusive and I don't want to be the evil American that someone takes pics of....
The summer before I was in Cuba and I could have rented a vehicle and drove over all kinds of land that rarely sees rigs, but again that might have been an abuse of my abilities...not that I wouldn't mind trying to figure out how to put together a Cuban Expedition someday..and land impact will be 1 of many issues to work out.
I look forward to offroading in many other countries and not only do I plan to respect the laws of off-highway travel there but I will try to act according to my own personal feelings about land use.
We have impact, there is no way around that, we must choose how much impact we have vs. the overland travel style we enjoy.
As noted by my post about mud puddles I am still working out all of these issues myself.
Great topic and thanks for posting it.

[Clark White]

It's a bit of both to me I guess. I avoid damage to the environment as much as possible, staying on the trails, minimizing tire spin, never leaving trash behind (and often picking up others trash as I go) etc. I believe it's fundamentally wrong to tear up the environment, speed across the desert, doze through the brush etc. However, I also don't see how an eroding trail is going to bring down a mountain any time in the relevant future, so I don't fret about it either. Trail erosion is minuscule when compared to the size of a mountain, and with out erosion we wouldn't have some of the greatest wonders in the world (yes, I know things like the Grand Canyon are natural, not caused by man, but an eroded trail isn't going to cause another Grand Canyon anytime before doomsday). My philosophy is to go out, have my fun, clean up any trash I see, minimize my disturbance, and enjoy the beautiful out doors. I carry this philosophy where ever I go. :safari-rig:

[viter]

Tread Lightly should be an ethical principle IMO, and therefore apply everywhere - just like you wouldn't steal just cause you just crossed into Canada. ;) Legalities are separate and are not always even conserned with environment.

Races are a separate topic, and like others mentioned usually follow very specific rules and ofcourse do make "environmental" sacrifices in favor of racers. However, I could easily show you roads in US (for example in the desert near El Centro, California) were frequent races leave huge whoops in the road, eroding them beyond recognition, and yet it is legal and is not considered at treating "unlightly". Just because a road is left eroded doesn't necessarily mean it makes a negative impact on the surrounding environment. It might and it might not, but I am just trying to point out that people gotta remember to logicvally connect changes in road surface with actual influences on the environment (kinda liuke you did with your tire tracks in the sand and turtles), instead of just blindly following the rule that if you make a rut deeper, a whoop higher, or displace some rocks ON the road "THE ENVIRONMENT" will suffer. anyway, I am getting off-topic...

my own main concern is people leaving their trash on the trail. This was probably the biggest environmental impact of baja mil on the mexican environment from my personal observation, for example. un fortunately, spectators (both mexican and american) are the ones to blame. :(

[PhulesAU]

To me the "tread lightly" idea has the least amount of "Feel Goodism", and is simply based on common sense. Why would there be a difference in using common sense in my back yard or someone elses?? The down side is that, "Common Sense" dosen't seem so common anymore.

[Kermit]

Chuck,

With the dirt bike races we hold. We always go back and clean the course, take down ribbon, course markers, knock down berms, ruts, braking bumps.

The race we did in September, was recently ridden, just on a trail ride, you can hardly tell a race was ever there, because of our efforts to turn in back to its' natural state.

All of the Arizona dirt bike clubs promote Tread Lightly. If a racer is found cutting the course, it is an automatic disqualification.

[Ursidae69]

That's awesome Kermit. No question about it, many of the organized groups here do a great job. I helped BLM map out areas for dirtbike races north of me a few years back. The problems were not the dirtbikers, but illegal dumpers, but that is another thread...

[Kermit]

The problems were not the dirtbikers, but illegal dumpers, but that is another thread...


ahh...yeah...I have been on a few of those cleanups.:mad:

[Nullifier]

Wow great topic and a touchy one to boot. I think that it should be a balance. I mean yes we have to worry about trail closer and for most I think that is what keeps those of us that are honest well honest. I think the basic nature of humans is to test the envelope so to say. That is why you see so many people driving their rigs in areas that they "shouldn't". The development of things like rock buggies, swamp buggies, air boats, mud motors etc. are results of pushing the envelop.

I have mixed emotions on the way Tread lightly is promoted and on the expectations of park services and hard core conservationist groups.

First all the auto manufacturers plaster pics of thier trucks doing donuts in the mud, hauling butt across the desert and general mayhem style driving. Then in the Corner in small print is the phrase "tread lightly". Yea right the consumer was just shown how to tear it up not tread lightly. Marketing the ruggend nature of the trucks could be shots of the family camping at a remote area with incredible views. The kind of shot where people would know that they could not get thier in a Camry. Then the small print of Tread lightly would mean more possibly. All new buyers of 4wd vehicles should be given a Tread lightly booklet as part of the owners manual. If manufacturers were serious about promoting tread lightly they would do those basic things. However they do not care about it becasue it does not help them sell more vehicles.

We are all guilty of running amuck on the trail at some point. However there are varying degrees of the foul. Personally I try to make sure that when I lead a trip the rigs that come have the neccessary equipment to navigate the terrain to minimize the chance of breakdowns or excess flogging of the rig and trail. I try to pick up any trash I see on the trial. I always use tree savers and other devices to minimize impact on public or private property. I have a good level of respect for all living things so I can not destroy plants just because. I will call out people for being blatently bad on the trial weather it's drinking, blasting radios, driving up trees etc.

Now having said that, these are my thoughts on trials. Well actually parks in General. Although it is better to have confins on where people can drive or hike or ride horses or even paddle in our wild lands. Parks are really bad for the environment. You are basically taking a dedicated area and concentrating a large amount of usage to it. Soil compaction is a serious problem, erosion cased by bike tires, heavy lugged hiking shoes, and tires are all issues. Importing foriegn dirt to make picnic areas like shale for example creates high spots that rain will wash to areas not intended to recive the dirt. etc. SO IMO it is crazy how sensative Park managers are to trail wear and tear. In a way I see dedicated trails as write offs. I mean sure you want to maintain a trial so it ooks good and has minimal impact on the surrounding area however you establish a trail to have a dedicated wear and tear area. I think it is terrible how many closures there are for the OHV becuase by closing trails you increase wear and tear on the remaining ones. Chances are that reguardless of tread lightly tactics the sure number of hikers, bikers horses, or ohv users on the fewer and fewer trials will lead to overusage and significant trail damage will occure even if everyone was playing by the rules. This is compounded as every year more and more people are discovering the outdoors, It goes against all logic to decrease the amount of trails when participation is increasing. Example Ocala national forest has always allowed cross country travel. Now they not only took that waay which they should never have allowed in the first place, but they went from 1100 mile sof trails to 150 mile sof trails. They still provide no maps of the trials that are legal and are now talking about closing more of the remaining 150 miles to trail damage. Well it is a no brainger when the #1 OHV national forest in the state clese 90% of it's trails the little bit that is left is going to have over use issues. Plus if the rangers catch you in mud at all even if it is on the trial you will get a $500 fine! this is crazy.

Findng a balance is difficult. However practicing the aspects of tread lightly is something you should do reguardless of political borders.

[viter]

great points there, Nullifier!

[TheRoadie]

First all the auto manufacturers plaster pics of thier trucks doing donuts in the mud, hauling butt across the desert and general mayhem style driving. Even moreso the Monster Truck mags, and even 4 Wheeler and the rest. I think only Overland Journal is the exception in this universe of sleaze.

Any mag that shows a JUMPING truck on the cover is suspect in my eyes, and those subscriptions are not going to be renewed anymore.

[Redline]

I have a similar view about your point of concentrated use and “Parks”.

I have often said, it you want to ruin a natural wonder or site "Make It A Something"

With any designation short of a Wilderness Area (of which I'm not a fan because of the the very limited uses) there is at least increased interest and use. The next step is better roads, signs, and sometimes pavement. Better access allows more people to visit more easily and concentrated use occurs. Yosemite and Yellowstone/Teton Nat'l Parks are good examples of excessive, concentrated use. The south rim of the Grand Canyon may be another. The easy access ‘somethings’ are used to death with much of the rest of the area ignored.

Proper dispersed use seems like a better experience for both those visiting and the land. The operative word is proper. I think most if not all here on The Portal are aware and careful enough as to not cause undue wear and tear on our lands.



.........

Now having said that, these are my thoughts on trials. Well actually parks in General. Although it is better to have confins on where people can drive or hike or ride horses or even paddle in our wild lands. Parks are really bad for the environment. You are basically taking a dedicated area and concentrating a large amount of usage to it. Soil compaction is a serious problem, erosion cased by bike tires, heavy lugged hiking shoes, and tires are all issues. Importing foriegn dirt to make picnic areas like shale for example creates high spots that rain will wash to areas not intended to recive the dirt. etc. SO IMO it is crazy how sensative Park managers are to trail wear and tear. In a way I see dedicated trails as write offs. I mean sure you want to maintain a trial so it ooks good and has minimal impact on the surrounding area however you establish a trail to have a dedicated wear and tear area. I think it is terrible how many closures there are for the OHV becuase by closing trails you increase wear and tear on the remaining ones. Chances are that reguardless of tread lightly tactics the sure number of hikers, bikers horses, or ohv users on the fewer and fewer trials will lead to overusage and significant trail damage will occure even if everyone was playing by the rules. This is compounded as every year more and more people are discovering the outdoors, It goes against all logic to decrease the amount of trails when participation is increasing. Example Ocala national forest has always allowed cross country travel. Now they not only took that waay which they should never have allowed in the first place, but they went from 1100 mile sof trails to 150 mile sof trails. They still provide no maps of the trials that are legal and are now talking about closing more of the remaining 150 miles to trail damage. Well it is a no brainger when the #1 OHV national forest in the state clese 90% of it's trails the little bit that is left is going to have over use issues. Plus if the rangers catch you in mud at all even if it is on the trial you will get a $500 fine! this is crazy.

Findng a balance is difficult. However practicing the aspects of tread lightly is something you should do reguardless of political borders.

[TheRoadie]

I have often said, it you want to ruin a natural wonder or site "Make It A Something" Hmmmm. Makes me think of the way cavers have their "sacrificial caves" they allow the yahoos of the world to know about, and the "good" caves that are kept confidential.

[viter]

Any mag that shows a JUMPING truck on the cover is suspect in my eyes, and those subscriptions are not going to be renewed anymore.


I agree on the whole advertising thing of showing one things and saying another, but I hope you are not trying to say that JUMPING a truck in general is bad for the environment... if you are landing on a dune in the middle of the desert or back onto the dirt road - what's the problem?

[TheRoadie]

...I hope you are not trying to say that JUMPING a truck in general is bad for the environment... Nah. I was mixing up two ideas and shouldn't have in this thread about other things. My personal expedition-style driving, restricted by what I drive and carry and how I want to build it, doesn't involve jumping. And I subscribe to about 25 magazines and need to cut out 5 or 6 of them. Rock crawling, baja bashing, mudding, the Hammers, and Top Truck Challenges aren't my bag, and mags with those sorts of things on the cover are going to be looked at with more scrutiny for cancelling. My stereotype is that sort of magazine is also more likely to include pictures of winching with no tree straps, scraping trees, damaging desert habitat, stirring up stream silt, noise polluting with excessive unmuffled engines, landing on trees after a jump with no visibility, etc. Perhaps I'm extending a false stereotype to the magazine subscribers, that owners who build trucks that jump are more likely to be non-Tread-Lightly people. Not ExPo readers, of course, but those redneck mullet-head mudder yahoos. [just kidding!] Boy, it sure is easy to let the prejudices take over - thanks for the reminder.

Maybe Scott should add a test to the OJ tent and fridge reviews how they withstand repeated jumping?

[viter]

got it!

Maybe Scott should add a test to the OJ tent and fridge reviews how they withstand repeated jumping?
:D