Now that Fin-N-Things is well marked there is no reason to go off trail. When I first started to go down to Moab, before the trails were well marked I’d always get lots on FNT … so much we started to call it Fins-N-Cul-de-sacs. Anyway .. like Todd said if you’re sure you was on trail, write parks and rec and tell them your side of it
I got a ticket for being off trail, Who makes the laws?
- Thread starter taylorj123
- Start date
closhedbb
Registered User
- Location
- Valdosta, GA
Here's a good source of info...
This is a good website I have found that helps, or should give a good start to find more info.
http://www.ut.blm.gov/OHV/ohvinfo.html
scoutabout said:
This is a good website I have found that helps, or should give a good start to find more info.
http://www.ut.blm.gov/OHV/ohvinfo.html
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
Greetings scoutabout -
Yes, there are maps which exist which show the land use/ownership/management of the land sections within the Range and townships. These are like the 1:100,000 metric maps of the Topographic variety, and are published by the same agencies. BLM also has some which are similar, but the sizes of ~ 8x10" are too small to be useful.
The maps I refer to at the 1:100,000 scale are also a bit small to be practical. One would really need to obtain the 1:24,000 Topo maps and a GPS (or whatever software map disks/laptop) to effectively have enough ready and current info at ones disposal. Even so, even these 1:24,000 maps (7 1/2 minute) are woefully inadequate, and have required extensive personal modification to reflect the current actual situation.
But ultimately, as of a modification of the RMP (~ 1993/1994) there are very few places left where one can (or should, imo) just go *cross country*. Prior to that time, there wasn't an actual regulation precluding such activities (IIRC). I for one, am personally happy that no such activity is now permitted, except in the few places which were allowed to continue with that sort of thing.
Many years ago this area was relatively unvisited. Even if it had a share of events which pertained to four-wheeling at that time, most just came for the event and then departed for home. In between such events, the relative number of visitors out wheelin' were low. If with the trend of today, with the numbers (and ideas) of visitors, one were to allow such uncurbed activity the entire place would be a complete mess (imo).
Best rule of thumb... *STAY ON THE TRAIL*. Whether it be tough or easy; thrilling or boring; Stay on the trail at all times. A foot or five feet to the left or right, is *off the trail*. The next visitor is one foot or five feet to the left or right of the previous one foot to the left or right, and so on. 50 visitors later and.....Get my drift?
As far as marked trails; existing trails; designated trails... that's a very complex and difficult issue to address. Think about that for a moment. If a trail existed for years and years, it would seem to be valid (as per RS2477). But then, if a new trail/ route is created in recent days and is used by a number of vehicles, given enough time, it too looks like it's been around for years and years. Fact is that it hasn't been. To a new visitor, they *don't know that*, and assume that any well used trail is original and valid.
Then the BLM or whatever agency steps in and starts with the *designated trail* signage deal. We are lucky if we have input as to which are valid and original/useful/enjoyable and which are not.
This issue has been batted around for years and years now. Tough one to call, but as usual, I do have an opinion. That opinion is based upon more than 25 years experience (21 years 4-wheeling here almost to entire exclusivity)with this area of the Colorado Plateau.
There are areas where prospectors and mining operations and early ranchers made roads and trails. Many are no longer used - but still *totally* valid in my opinion. They should remain open (imo). They are nearly invisible to all but the caring, experienced and trained eye, but are very interesting to explore and use (always with care... all around... in *every* sense of the term.)
Few things are more interesting (to me) than to travel a road not used for years, or actually only appears to have not been used (More about that later) and to keep it looking that way. In this day of ever increasing visitation, that is a quality which could soon disappear. Rare it is to even have such areas left at this very late day in the game.
Regarding these roads I've just tried to describe/outline; I've been on some, many actually, which are so faint that if one travels at 2 MPH, you can 'lose them'. They are very difficult to see and follow, but there *really* is a trail there. I've been on some trails a number of times, even GPS'ing it, and subsequent travel down the same trail 6 months or a year later is still a challenge to me in terms of seeing, finding and remaining on the trail. What a joy! ;-))
This requires stopping and getting out of one's rig and walking about to see just where it is. It is helped by experience to know (and look) as to where it *obviously isn't/couldn't be*, It also helps to try and know just what the original road builder had in mind and where they were trying to get to when the road was made. One cannot really know this in many cases. But driving around and leaving new tracks isn't going to help matters; not for you and surely not for the venturesome few (many?) who will ineveitably follow. If everyone just drove to where *they think/thought* the trail was, try to imagine how many tracks and how much more confusing it would be.
Anyway, what I'm saying here is that in Grand county Utah alone, there's more than 5,000 documented miles of roads and trails. That's a heck of a lot of trails - and most, if not all - are valid and useful. That means that there already is a trail existing *before you ever got here* which can access just about any place that one could consider going to. The main pleasure (for me) in that is that these places are still accessible, but don't look like a rummage sale of destruction. They habe all the qualities of a great outdoor wheeling experience, and the increasingly rare quality of being beautiful, peaceful, interesting, challenging, scenic, and *APPEAR UNVISITED*, but actually are still sought out and used by persons such as myself. BUT BECAUSE I CARE, YOU'D NEVER KNOW THAT I (or others such as myself) WAS THERE.
Therefore by this means, the legacy that caring individuals leave for you and your children is this: If and when you chance upon such a beautiful trail, you too can feel like you're the only one to know about it and the only one that's used it in years and years. ;-))
It doesn't get better than that.... in a place whose average population hovers around the 2.8 Persons per square mile in this year of 2005, it's nice to keep it looking that way, and not like some busy place such as a California freeway, New york city - eastern seaboard, or divided highway.
My 2¢.
Kind Regards,
Capt. Picky
Yes, there are maps which exist which show the land use/ownership/management of the land sections within the Range and townships. These are like the 1:100,000 metric maps of the Topographic variety, and are published by the same agencies. BLM also has some which are similar, but the sizes of ~ 8x10" are too small to be useful.
The maps I refer to at the 1:100,000 scale are also a bit small to be practical. One would really need to obtain the 1:24,000 Topo maps and a GPS (or whatever software map disks/laptop) to effectively have enough ready and current info at ones disposal. Even so, even these 1:24,000 maps (7 1/2 minute) are woefully inadequate, and have required extensive personal modification to reflect the current actual situation.
But ultimately, as of a modification of the RMP (~ 1993/1994) there are very few places left where one can (or should, imo) just go *cross country*. Prior to that time, there wasn't an actual regulation precluding such activities (IIRC). I for one, am personally happy that no such activity is now permitted, except in the few places which were allowed to continue with that sort of thing.
Many years ago this area was relatively unvisited. Even if it had a share of events which pertained to four-wheeling at that time, most just came for the event and then departed for home. In between such events, the relative number of visitors out wheelin' were low. If with the trend of today, with the numbers (and ideas) of visitors, one were to allow such uncurbed activity the entire place would be a complete mess (imo).
Best rule of thumb... *STAY ON THE TRAIL*. Whether it be tough or easy; thrilling or boring; Stay on the trail at all times. A foot or five feet to the left or right, is *off the trail*. The next visitor is one foot or five feet to the left or right of the previous one foot to the left or right, and so on. 50 visitors later and.....Get my drift?
As far as marked trails; existing trails; designated trails... that's a very complex and difficult issue to address. Think about that for a moment. If a trail existed for years and years, it would seem to be valid (as per RS2477). But then, if a new trail/ route is created in recent days and is used by a number of vehicles, given enough time, it too looks like it's been around for years and years. Fact is that it hasn't been. To a new visitor, they *don't know that*, and assume that any well used trail is original and valid.
Then the BLM or whatever agency steps in and starts with the *designated trail* signage deal. We are lucky if we have input as to which are valid and original/useful/enjoyable and which are not.
This issue has been batted around for years and years now. Tough one to call, but as usual, I do have an opinion. That opinion is based upon more than 25 years experience (21 years 4-wheeling here almost to entire exclusivity)with this area of the Colorado Plateau.
There are areas where prospectors and mining operations and early ranchers made roads and trails. Many are no longer used - but still *totally* valid in my opinion. They should remain open (imo). They are nearly invisible to all but the caring, experienced and trained eye, but are very interesting to explore and use (always with care... all around... in *every* sense of the term.)
Few things are more interesting (to me) than to travel a road not used for years, or actually only appears to have not been used (More about that later) and to keep it looking that way. In this day of ever increasing visitation, that is a quality which could soon disappear. Rare it is to even have such areas left at this very late day in the game.
Regarding these roads I've just tried to describe/outline; I've been on some, many actually, which are so faint that if one travels at 2 MPH, you can 'lose them'. They are very difficult to see and follow, but there *really* is a trail there. I've been on some trails a number of times, even GPS'ing it, and subsequent travel down the same trail 6 months or a year later is still a challenge to me in terms of seeing, finding and remaining on the trail. What a joy! ;-))
This requires stopping and getting out of one's rig and walking about to see just where it is. It is helped by experience to know (and look) as to where it *obviously isn't/couldn't be*, It also helps to try and know just what the original road builder had in mind and where they were trying to get to when the road was made. One cannot really know this in many cases. But driving around and leaving new tracks isn't going to help matters; not for you and surely not for the venturesome few (many?) who will ineveitably follow. If everyone just drove to where *they think/thought* the trail was, try to imagine how many tracks and how much more confusing it would be.
Anyway, what I'm saying here is that in Grand county Utah alone, there's more than 5,000 documented miles of roads and trails. That's a heck of a lot of trails - and most, if not all - are valid and useful. That means that there already is a trail existing *before you ever got here* which can access just about any place that one could consider going to. The main pleasure (for me) in that is that these places are still accessible, but don't look like a rummage sale of destruction. They habe all the qualities of a great outdoor wheeling experience, and the increasingly rare quality of being beautiful, peaceful, interesting, challenging, scenic, and *APPEAR UNVISITED*, but actually are still sought out and used by persons such as myself. BUT BECAUSE I CARE, YOU'D NEVER KNOW THAT I (or others such as myself) WAS THERE.
Therefore by this means, the legacy that caring individuals leave for you and your children is this: If and when you chance upon such a beautiful trail, you too can feel like you're the only one to know about it and the only one that's used it in years and years. ;-))
It doesn't get better than that.... in a place whose average population hovers around the 2.8 Persons per square mile in this year of 2005, it's nice to keep it looking that way, and not like some busy place such as a California freeway, New york city - eastern seaboard, or divided highway.
My 2¢.
Kind Regards,
Capt. Picky
Last edited:
closhedbb
Registered User
- Location
- Valdosta, GA
Great post!
Capt. Picky,
These trails you speak of, would one find them on these maps you spoke about, or do you just have to know them from word of mouth or experience? I would love to find some trails like those. Would camping be a legal option along most of these trails?
Capt. Picky,
These trails you speak of, would one find them on these maps you spoke about, or do you just have to know them from word of mouth or experience? I would love to find some trails like those. Would camping be a legal option along most of these trails?
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
faint roads and camping
Greetings closhedbb -
These very faint - yet very real - trails are hard to find in the general sense. That is, they are obscure and because they are either so seldom used, or else only sought out by those of a similar persuasion as myself, tend to always look unused.
No... you'd virtually never see them (there are exceedingly rare exceptions) on any topo maps, except for the ones we personally possess in which we've added the GPS data to. Even so, the map would be of little use since the trails are never more than a single vehicle wide, now mostly resembling grown over two-track when visible at all. Thus, one needs to either know where they are or else stumble upon them. Then a map is still useless, except to get a general idea of where they might lead or if they would connect to something somewhere else. As I've stated, they are very hard to see except by telltale signs which elude most casual viewers. Many can be plainly seen from a vantage point of being up high looking down upon them, or when one looks - at the exactly precise moment - down the length of one. Still, once once has successfully found one, the 'trick' is to determine exactly where it is when one is on it. That's the hard (yet most enjoyable) part, aside from the actual experiece of being on un-messed up over-populated trails. The pleasure of exploring and experiencing this is unmatched (in my view). True 4-wheeling with a purpose. ;-))
To be borne in mind is the fact that *most* trails - even the better known and named ones - as well as many, which while not known by any name to the public at large are also not shown on many topo's, or are inaccurate in alignment and even in description.
Case in point as far as description: The "Hey Joe Canyon" trail is marked as a 'pack trail' on the 7 1/2 minute map. It's obvious that its not a pack trail. I mean there's a mine at its terminus and a derelict bulldozer adjacent to the trail near the dugway leading up out of the Green River Canyon. Musta been some hefty pack animals to haul that there! lol
Some examples of roads shown which no longer 'exist', are impractical, or have been superseded and are not shown would be found in the San Rafael Swell region. When the Interstate was constructed (which remained but two lanes - undivided - up until ~ 1990), it effectively cut off a number of N-S trending trails. Some are still shown on the 7 1/2's, but go nowhere as they come face-to-face with the built-up I-70 side berm and fenceline.
Others were made which then accessed under-roadway culverts to continue the route (a practice - which while not legal on most, if not all Interstates - was legally allowed in Utah at such locations) which had been effectively blocked by the subsequent Interstate construction. Those newer and up until recently used routes were not shown on any maps.
Of course this example is now left to general 'history' and have been reduced to mere academia, as when the final 2 lanes of the Interstate were completed circa 1990 (or so), cloverleafs were constructed which conform with the federal standards for Interstate Highways. These are now the only legal means whereby one may access/egress I-70 and the roads and trails which surround the Interstate.
Finally, regarding camping and so-forth. Yes, the rules for camping are unaffected for these faint road areas as they are still within the domain administered by the respective agencies such as BLM or Utah State land (generally). The basic rules - both written and unwritten - would be that the maximum time you may remain at a campsite on public land is limited to 14 days (if this hasn't changed). That you pack it in; you pack it out. Unwritten might be something like to consider the public lands as you would of your own well cared for and maintained home; something in which you have pride and care... and to treat it with the respect it is due.
I hope this has helped you in some way.
Respectfully,
Capt. Picky
Greetings closhedbb -
These very faint - yet very real - trails are hard to find in the general sense. That is, they are obscure and because they are either so seldom used, or else only sought out by those of a similar persuasion as myself, tend to always look unused.
No... you'd virtually never see them (there are exceedingly rare exceptions) on any topo maps, except for the ones we personally possess in which we've added the GPS data to. Even so, the map would be of little use since the trails are never more than a single vehicle wide, now mostly resembling grown over two-track when visible at all. Thus, one needs to either know where they are or else stumble upon them. Then a map is still useless, except to get a general idea of where they might lead or if they would connect to something somewhere else. As I've stated, they are very hard to see except by telltale signs which elude most casual viewers. Many can be plainly seen from a vantage point of being up high looking down upon them, or when one looks - at the exactly precise moment - down the length of one. Still, once once has successfully found one, the 'trick' is to determine exactly where it is when one is on it. That's the hard (yet most enjoyable) part, aside from the actual experiece of being on un-messed up over-populated trails. The pleasure of exploring and experiencing this is unmatched (in my view). True 4-wheeling with a purpose. ;-))
To be borne in mind is the fact that *most* trails - even the better known and named ones - as well as many, which while not known by any name to the public at large are also not shown on many topo's, or are inaccurate in alignment and even in description.
Case in point as far as description: The "Hey Joe Canyon" trail is marked as a 'pack trail' on the 7 1/2 minute map. It's obvious that its not a pack trail. I mean there's a mine at its terminus and a derelict bulldozer adjacent to the trail near the dugway leading up out of the Green River Canyon. Musta been some hefty pack animals to haul that there! lol
Some examples of roads shown which no longer 'exist', are impractical, or have been superseded and are not shown would be found in the San Rafael Swell region. When the Interstate was constructed (which remained but two lanes - undivided - up until ~ 1990), it effectively cut off a number of N-S trending trails. Some are still shown on the 7 1/2's, but go nowhere as they come face-to-face with the built-up I-70 side berm and fenceline.
Others were made which then accessed under-roadway culverts to continue the route (a practice - which while not legal on most, if not all Interstates - was legally allowed in Utah at such locations) which had been effectively blocked by the subsequent Interstate construction. Those newer and up until recently used routes were not shown on any maps.
Of course this example is now left to general 'history' and have been reduced to mere academia, as when the final 2 lanes of the Interstate were completed circa 1990 (or so), cloverleafs were constructed which conform with the federal standards for Interstate Highways. These are now the only legal means whereby one may access/egress I-70 and the roads and trails which surround the Interstate.
Finally, regarding camping and so-forth. Yes, the rules for camping are unaffected for these faint road areas as they are still within the domain administered by the respective agencies such as BLM or Utah State land (generally). The basic rules - both written and unwritten - would be that the maximum time you may remain at a campsite on public land is limited to 14 days (if this hasn't changed). That you pack it in; you pack it out. Unwritten might be something like to consider the public lands as you would of your own well cared for and maintained home; something in which you have pride and care... and to treat it with the respect it is due.
I hope this has helped you in some way.
Respectfully,
Capt. Picky
closhedbb
Registered User
- Location
- Valdosta, GA
Thanks!
Capt. Picky,
Goodness man! You are a wealth of knowledge! Thanks very much. Is there any way you could describe to me through the forum how I could get to one or a few of these trails you know of for sure, or would that be a difficult task? Or you could even post GPS coordinates. I have no experience with GPS, but I'm looking at getting a receiver and would like to learn it.
-Brian
Capt. Picky,
Goodness man! You are a wealth of knowledge! Thanks very much. Is there any way you could describe to me through the forum how I could get to one or a few of these trails you know of for sure, or would that be a difficult task? Or you could even post GPS coordinates. I have no experience with GPS, but I'm looking at getting a receiver and would like to learn it.
-Brian
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
Right on utahjixter! :greg: Guess someone's been soooo......busted! lolutahxjer said:
But in reality, it's not truly a laughing matter; not by a longshot. Taylorj may have to pay some fine, but think of the investment we all have put into our rigs (and more... much more). What good is any of that if trails are further and further restricted or closed altogether?
It might be wise to consider the fact that Soccer, Football and Golf are played in contrived and constructed areas. I know the parallel *might* seem far-fetched and not appear to really apply for any number of reasons, but then again, I'm sure there are those who would entertain that notion. I'd hope that all would think about that seemingly remote possibility. I'd hope that all might consider the possibilties of a countless number of *insignificant and miniscule* actions adding up to a collective perceivable result which cannot be brushed off as minor when multipled by the 100's or 1,000's.
As for Taylorj123
Please Taylorj123... just because no-one saw you do it - if you did do it - which surely *appears* to be the case, it's no better than theft and saying it's OK cause no-one saw you steal something, and they can't prove it. However, if photos were taken of you and your vehicle, and they aren't 'doctored', and cannot be misconstrued... you must accept the consequences, if I may be so bold.taylorj123 said:
To really address only a small portion of your points/questions would require a *book* from me. In no order of appearance:
1) If you don't know if you were on a trail or not, how can you dispute or argue about what portions of a <quote> "... good parts of the trails." </quote> are actually closed?
2) When you question about who makes the laws, and asks why and how a person might be cited for being a foot or five feet off the trail proper, I can only say as an example, that if you were to go off by any given amount and made new perceivable tracks, and then the next person did the same by being off your tracks by a like amount, and so on, eventually the trail would be as wide as a highway.
This is precisely why rules, regulations, codes and laws are then enacted. First the symptom; then the prognosis, and finally the 'cure'.
This leads us to the reason *they* have for making regulations:
3) Because we cannot maintain a reasonable respect of the land and think about the actual long-term results of our individual selfish actions X the countless number of other *individuals* who have their own idea of where to leave a trail surface.
4) The main point of all of this is actually to ask whether you recognize the damage being done and really care about that *unnecessary* and purposeless damage, which could very easily be avoided. If you consider that, then you might become more aware thereby reducing the cries of pressure groups who ask the administering entities to dream up of further laws. Laws which have yet to be enacted, but which might be, if we continue to be cavalier and blasé in our actions.
Regards,
Capt. Picky
taylorj123
Registered User
No I did not come to this forum in search of ways to lie about my situation in court. I clearly state that that is not what I am doing or would I ever consider. I do not lie and I surely would not drive down to Moab and appear in court to lie!! I only came to this forum with the question I had in hopes that someone could enlighten me with some information (i.e. capt. picky). I also wanted to hear opinions from others who have been in my shoes. So thanks to everyone for the good comments and info.. This is a good resource to have to share info. with others involved in our sport, and I appreciate it. Thanks. Taylor
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
You're most welcome Brian. *smile*closhedbb said:
Regarding your question on such ways as to describe how or where: that would be unwise in a public forum as then *everyone* could potentially come to know of these areas. I'm not generally one to advertise the whereabouts of a goose which lays the golden egg. I don't want to sound secretive or selfish about this, but please try to see this from a certain POV and please try to understand that if you can. So, no.... no GPS coordinates, sorry.
Then there are those who capitalize monetarily with guidebooks who would do precisely that. Blab at large the exact coordinates and then the whole of the four-wheeling world would be there. That would be counterproductive to what these sort of trails are about; it would end them as we know them. There'd be not one place left where one could four-wheel without encountering crowds, beer cans, chicks looking at their painted and manicured fingernails wishing they were somewhere else, not seeing a trail widened into oblivion, Driving eight or more vehicles off the trail so that someone can take a 'group photograph' of "what we did last Sunday", finding each and every hill and rock wall covered with tracks because the original route was just too boring (crushing anything and everything in sight as they did so), or because *"No one is there to see who did it"*
I can say this much though: The simple act of finding such trails is as big (perhaps bigger) a joy as is traveling on one. Consider if you will, that it's the love of the country and scenery. The love of the serenity of *slowly* cruising along, just enjoying being outside that has enabled me to find these trails. It is suited for the patient and laid-back wheeler who takes pleasure in taking their time. So, if you're so motivated and have that innate desire within you and are 'made of the patient relaxed stuff', then finding these trails will be no more of an effort than it is to lay one's eyes upon a vista of some grandeur. ;-))
It's generally not for the mega-group type which generally have a more 'social' way about them. If one were to be non-discriminative in that, the next time one went there, it would almost certainly be all messed up, since in a large group people vary in their discretion and choice of companions. One mistake there and ...poof... goodbye. Furthermore, it is said that some people will behave differently when in a group than they would as an individual. I don't feel these trails are suitable for spectator/spectacle purposes, and I've rarely actually wheeled such with more than one (sometimes two, but that is my limit) other vehicle. Mind you that I've only done so with friends who are the same exact mindset, and would *never even dream of sharing it with anyone I had a single doubt about regarding their 4-wheeling 'habits'*.
By the same token, these are public trails on the public land, and as such are open to anyone and everyone (regardless if they be good, bad, or indifferent; an asset, a liability or a non-entity) who *cares* to find them. Many times (most) they are not the types of trails where one would be likely to hear "Wow, man! Didja see the way Arnie grenaded his front end? It was spooky!" Then again, there are some sections which can very well be like that because these trails are an 'unknown' quantity. They are truly disused, and in some cases quite dicey.
I guess what I'm getting at is that these trails are probably more suited for those (meaning the driver as one who would deem the trail interesting) who are not into social gatherings and who would prefer to four wheel with a purpose; not for some glory or the entertainment of onlookers and to make a spectacle of their skill and rig or just 'screwing' around.
The vehicle being just that; the vehicle (means) by which to experience beautiful country without the need to hoof it some 30 miles. The vehicle is the means to an end and not the end in and of itself. Not to develop enemies here, but, naturally I'm reluctant to share that with the "Potato Salad Hill and Dump Bump" crowd. They'd probably find it boring anyway; and in that state of boredom................ 'nuff said?
Addenda: I don't wish to come off as 'elitist' here, for I am not. If you've read any of my numerous posts, you'll see that I've been very willing to share in as many aspects which I hope would benefit - in a positive educational way - the four-wheeling community as a whole.
The other thing I can say to defend that which *may* be viewed as elitist is that as a former Land-Use officer and other officer positions I've held in the RR4W, that my behavior must be beyond reproach. I've always tried my utmost to uphold that honor and privilege. I also *know that I'm not one to leave the trail at any time*, and no trail is too boring for me that I must seek excitement in some other way to justify the time and cost of my being there. Anyone who personally knows me and my way of wheeling will attest to that. So again, I apologize if I might seem to come off as haughty, but for those who understand and respect the land and our right/privilege to use it, my motives will be seen in the proper light.
Kind regards,
Capt. Picky
Last edited:
Well just so you know ahead of time... If you do try to fight it and you use the excuse, "that you didn't know what was legal or not"
They will tell you ignorance isn't an excuse of the law...
Like someone said before: Just cause you didn't know the speed limit doesn't give you the right to speed there...
They will tell you ignorance isn't an excuse of the law...
Like someone said before: Just cause you didn't know the speed limit doesn't give you the right to speed there...
roktaxi
Locked Up = More Freedom
- Location
- Grand Junction CO
One thing I’d like to add about Capt. Picky’s post. Back when we were sniffing out these obscure trails, they were just that… OBSCURE! Today we’re plagued with renegade tracks that an untrained eye or casual observer would note as a “faint” trail and worth exploring. This can lead to disaster as you can well imagine. A trail that has no meaning and just rambles aimlessly only to connect to a well used trail perhaps. Most, if not all of the old “faint” trails had a purpose. Mostly for mineral exploration or ranching (which by default could be very scenic or challenging). Other trails lead only to a scenic overlook. Whatever the purpose was, they were usually well investigated before the route was established. The terrain here in Moab dictates that! The shortest distance to a given point here is generally NOT a straight line. To get to a northern point one may have to travel south first. And in closing, I am one of the few that has gone up the back side of Lions Back (and lived to talk about it). For those that know this route can attest to the adrenaline rush of that accomplishment. But the greatest 4-wheeling exhilaration I have ever experienced is having gone with a (true) friend on some of these “faint” trails. Time to rekindle old times Bob.
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
Thanks for expanding upon my post and adding your long-time knowledge and well rounded experience to it. This should serve to illuminate most clearly the seemingly peculiar way that some trails - even in relatively open country - are routed.roktaxi said:
Equally importantly, your emphasis on the point regarding the:
This should be taken to heart. As you and I have recently discussed, this *is* becoming an issue even in some of the most remote *undesirable/uninteresting* areas (if there is such a thing). Now it becomes even more of a challenge - but not necessarily a pleasurable one - for the occasional visitor to find their way around. Not to mention the idea of perhaps running out of fuel traveling down some mistaken route that does absolutely nothing.... and there you are ...waaay the heck out in *ain't a gas station within 25 miles land*. It has even gotten to the point where old hands at this type of travel can become confused. Of course we will not add to the burden placed upon subsequent travelers by driving at large and creating even more tracks and will also be a bit wary of driving on some 'suspect", "gee... I don't remember this the last time we were here" type of track. But woe be to the newcomer, or even the experienced individual with this sort of trail who ventures into a new, not yet explored area. It could be more than tough; and I well imagine many a wasted mile, hours of time, and some gallons of gas following some 'bozo track' made last week. :-/
Some additional food for thought: It should also be noted by readers that these days its *not uncommon* at all to see a *well used/ heavily used* track that goes nowhere and dead-ends in some brush or insurmountable obstacle/area too. How come? Because dead end trails get twice the traffic that a through-trail will get.
Marty... As always, I'm with you 100% on this. And right... we are waaaay overdue; You lead and I'll back you up ('cept up the back side 'o Lions back. Thanx... but I'll pass. lol. ;-)) ) This Spring... that's a promise.
Bob
closhedbb
Registered User
- Location
- Valdosta, GA
I understand completely.
Capt. Picky,
In understand why you won't let it out in public. Not a prob. I'll just have to go out and find some for myself. But this brings up the question that originally inspired this thread. If I do find what appears to be a trail on public land, is it illegal for me to leave the obviously legal trail to explore this unknown trail? If these wonderful trails are not on any map, then how can I know if they are legal? From what I have read on the BLM website and in Utah laws over the past few days of searching, it seems that only trails specifically designated are legal. Am I wrong? I hope so! I don't want to be afraid of breaking laws every time I want to explore something. So I guess my basic question is this: I am going along a nice marked and developed trail, and I see off to the side or in the distance what could be a gem. Can I leave the big trail to explore this possibility without fear of breaking the law? How can I tell the difference?
Capt. Picky,
In understand why you won't let it out in public. Not a prob. I'll just have to go out and find some for myself. But this brings up the question that originally inspired this thread. If I do find what appears to be a trail on public land, is it illegal for me to leave the obviously legal trail to explore this unknown trail? If these wonderful trails are not on any map, then how can I know if they are legal? From what I have read on the BLM website and in Utah laws over the past few days of searching, it seems that only trails specifically designated are legal. Am I wrong? I hope so! I don't want to be afraid of breaking laws every time I want to explore something. So I guess my basic question is this: I am going along a nice marked and developed trail, and I see off to the side or in the distance what could be a gem. Can I leave the big trail to explore this possibility without fear of breaking the law? How can I tell the difference?
Capt. Picky
quite
- Location
- Moab, UT.
Yes, so long as it isn't *legitimately* marked as otherwise (by an entity which has that official power). I've seen instances where 'do-gooders' have placed signs of their own making to prevent or discourage use. Those posted signs have *zero* validity. Of course it is for you to recognize a genuine notice from a bogus one.closhedbb said:
As far as I know, 'Travel limited to designated trail' only applies in certain areas which have had too much abuse, or fall under some special land-use guidelines (e.g. - SandFlats recreation area, as but *one* example. Same for Steelbender and others of a similar nature.) Many factors come into play regarding the decision to apply that status to a trail/area.
Next, it is evident that not every trail or area will come under that heading/protection. Again, IIRC, the status of trails /roads off the beaten path remain unaffected, specific exceptions notwithstanding. Always check first hand, and always respect bona-fide trail markings / signs. If in dispute or wrong, these issues can legally be contested.
1) Yes... providing it isn't marked as closed or otherwise.
2) You're generally unlikely to find such trails in the vicinity of those known trails. Exceptions *may* exist however. But they will be precisely that - exceptions.
3) By first inquiring of the adminstration which manages that parcel/area.
And/or always being alert to signs which may be posted. In short, it shouldn't be to difficult to determine that.
<sidebar> We were mapping (and exploring) the Chute Canyon trail in the San Rafael Swell a good number of years ago (around 1994/5/6 or so if I remember correctly). We accessed the canyon from the inner reef side (west side) and continued down canyon to it's mouth on the Reef side (East side). When we arrived at the terminus of the trail, there was a sign stating closed to vehicular traffic! Now, IMO, that was lame!!! If vehicular traffic was to be prohibited from travel there, wouldn't it have been sensible - and thorough - to have placed signs at *both* of the only means of access to that canyon? Botched job. Maybe we should have turned around when exiting and ran it up-canyon back to where we started. lol
ALSO, it was my understanding early on that the WSA's surrounding that trail (two separate sections) should have allowed continued access through that canyon. Such was apparently not the case. Most trails are "cherry-stemmed" from the WSA's so as to allow continued access, providing that one does nothing to degrade the existing status of the proposed WA - known until such time as designated otherwise as a WSA. This proviso excludes *certain* activities from being executed while under review as a WSA. This does not *generally* preclude ordinary vehicle use however. </sidebar>
Capt. Picky