41 replies to this topic

[kcowyo]

Anyone who thinks that promoting "advocacy" here is going to be anything but divisive, is kidding themselves... That's 10 years of following and contributing to numerous online forums dedicated to off-roading, adventure travel, expeditions, wandering the west, overland travel, 4wd trips, etc. speaking.

My "opinion" is SUWA is operating under the facade of being an pro-environmental organization. The "facts" are they are corrupt and anti-land use. They would close trails and public land to any use but foot traffic (and in some places even that); Mountain bikes? No. Horseback? No. ATV's? No. Trucks & campers? No. That's another 10 years of following them speaking, after researching all sides of their campaigns and political machinations and educating myself about SUWA.

Is this what this forum is going to become now..? Fine. But you might as well change the name from 'Wandering the West', to "Locked out of the West". But hey, that's just my "opinion"...

Let me know when that subforum is up and I'll tell you what I really think -
.

[DirtyDog]

Anyone who thinks that promoting "advocacy" here is going to be anything but divisive, is kidding themselves...

I'm not kidding myself. This is what we are going to do and we are going to succeed. The only reason this issue is divisive at all is because a handful of people such as yourself are too emotional about these topics to engage in civil discussion about them, or to practice tolerance for viewpoints that differ from yours. The response to this has been OVERWHELMINGLY positive. You should see all the PM's and emails I have gotten in strong support of these initiatives and many of these people are willing to put their money where there mouths are and donate time and/or money to the effort.

There are several organizations I have looked at recently that are popular with many WTW members, but that I have issue with some of their positions. But rather than complain about it or leave them out of the upcoming directory, I am going to included them and let those who like them advocate for and support their causes, and those that don't support their causes...... don't have to do anything at all. It's called choice.

On a personal note, I am somewhat disappointed that an issue that really shouldn't be divisive at all - the preservation of the areas we enjoy, should have to start with so much debate. The truth is that most of us are on the same side on this issue, but we differ on many of the details. Why we can't come together on such basic issues and work through our differences is disheartening and indicative of our societies larger problems.

You don't think that closures or restrictions are valid methods of preservation? That is an absolutely valid point. So participate and engage in healthy adult conversation about it or ignore this part of the site completely. The sentiment that we should simply shut down debate and forgo advocacy just because you don't like the tone or people are going to disagree with you, is unacceptable.

We are moving forward. If you don't like it, stick to the camper section. It's really that easy.

[kcowyo]

Your forum Aaron... do with it what you will. You say you're going to succeed and I hope you do.

I stated a couple of facts and opinions about one group in particular after years of following them. Was I not civil? Was I not trying to point out to you what could be a potential hot-button issue with that one group, for your best interest? As with everything I have contributed to this forum over the last 5 years, I mentioned watching out for them and their shady practices because I want to see you succeed.

I have long been a supporter and contributor to groups doing good work like Tread Lightly, Utah Shared Access Alliance, National Park Foundation, Respected Access, Yellowstone Park Foundation, Friends of the Alpine Triangle, Conserventures and The Blue Ribbon Coalition. Do I take exception with SUWA and their policies? Darn right I do.

After a decade of following and supporting the aforementioned groups - because I am a land-use advocate & environmentalist, not just because it's trendy to be green, or because I'm looking to boost the number of visitors to my struggling forum - I am capable of seeing and informatively speaking about which groups do good work and which groups operate under false pretenses. If you wish to promote any and all groups, hey, your call & your forum.

I'm glad to see you're trying to light a fire under yourself, to rejuvenate your interest and your investment in this forum. I'm not being hostile or dealing in absolutes... I was trying to give you a heads up before you put your name and the forum name behind a group that operates in direct conflict with your original intent for this place - "A place to share the experience."

I never stated you should shut down the debate and forgo advocacy... But you can't realistically expect that there will not be conflicting opinions on the subject. When you invite opinions, you're going to have conflicts & disagreements. You knew it when you stated your two rules for participation in this section - "Play nicely, or leave nicely". Hell, I haven't had a cross word with you or anyone on this forum in 5 years... Now two days after announcing your new direction and you're already telling me to take it or leave it.

Does that sound "civil", after years of me contributing time, content & knowledge to this place while promoting it on other forums for you..? It's ironic... you say you want to use the forum to promote advocacy, but you just took a big cheap shot here at one of your biggest advocates.

See ya in the camper section -
.

[MarkBC]

We are moving forward. If you don't like it, stick to the camper section. It's really that easy.

Thank you Aaron!

[Nimbl Vehicles]

OK, how about PETA -- People for the Eating of Tasty Animals?

[HERR42]

here is hot topic that i support.

http://saverichardsongrove.org/

they want to butcher up hwy 101 as it passes through a very beautiful spot.

this is not progress

[Steve Scearce]

My "opinion" is SUWA is operating under the facade of being an pro-environmental organization. The "facts" are they are corrupt and anti-land use. They would close trails and public land to any use but foot traffic (and in some places even that); Mountain bikes? No. Horseback? No. ATV's? No. Trucks & campers? No. That's another 10 years of following them speaking, after researching all sides of their campaigns and political machinations and educating myself about SUWA.

That is your opinion. It is my opinion that SUWA does a fine job preserving something very near and very dear to me: Southeast Utah. My wife and I live in Durango because of its proximity to SE Utah. I've been exploring there since 1979, and I support the mission of SUWA with my dough.

[HERR42]

here is another issue: how many of you have been to USAL beach ? http://www.wildcalif...redwood-forest/

[leadsled9]

I guess I'm getting confused about this new "Advocacy Group" idea in this forum. I'm all for heading in a direction that will help support this forum as I've learned a lot here and I would like to see the forum survive.

Land closure is a very controversial subject and is bound to create lots of opinions on both sides of the fence. Some of my favorite hunting country in Colorado is being systematically closed off to 4X4 vehicles and I'm not happy about it. I am talking about National Forest Service land that I've hunted for 30+ years. To me it makes no sense to protect land so much that no one can enjoy it.

I read and re-read the posts in this thread and I have to say that to me, it seems kcowyo was just expressing his opinion about a specific advocacy group....and he didn't sound uncivil to me. I don't know the man and we are not acquaintances....it's just my take on what I read.

If opinions are not allowed on the advocacy group forum I guess I'll hang out in the Camper Section too.

[DirtyDog]

Land closure is a very controversial subject and is bound to create lots of opinions on both sides of the fence. Some of my favorite hunting country in Colorado is being systematically closed off to 4X4 vehicles and I'm not happy about it. I am talking about National Forest Service land that I've hunted for 30+ years. To me it makes no sense to protect land so much that no one can enjoy it.

I'm not going to do an analysis of every post, nor should I have to. But this quote here is how it's done. Now if you were interested in participating in advocacy on this site in the future (which is entirely optional), you would do so in line with your interests and beliefs as you have stated them. This is my last post here that is unrelated to the original topic.