Off road photography - ARGH!

Mozziephotography

Mozziephotography

Messages
1,620
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Maybe it's just me, but I'm not a fan of the damage done to Green Roads by 4x4, quad bikes and motorcycles. Started to watch a vlog by a famous photographer and had to switch it off. He was taking his motor with a group of others across rough terrain and I dread to think of the damage done to the track. I know that vehicles are allowed on these roads but I just can't wrap my head around it. Walking and snapping along Mastilles Lane (Yorkshire Dales) a few years ago, it became almost impossible to avoid the deep gulleys made by an assortment of vehicles. Hoped he would damage his vehicle beyond repair, not a "nice" thing to think. It's my age I suppose. Walkers can cause damage too, but not to that degree. There's a favourite run that I enjoy doing and that's become a bit of a mess due to it being a mountain bike route. I can run faster than they can bike up there and I'm nearly 70. Each to their own I suppose. Preparing myself for the flak from off roaders.
 
Well, I'm an off-roader, sort of, but hardly ever drive on anyone else's land. I drive my mud plugger, various tractors, quads and telehandler on our own land because it's essential to do so, but the trick with driving off road is (whenever possible) to leave no trace behind. Deep ruts are nearly always caused by poor driving.
 
Large areas of our local hill has been ruined by off road bikes and quads. I'd guess most are stolen or otherwise somehow illegal and 100% driven by uncaring idiots.
 
I've been an off-roader all my life, having been partly brought up on a farm. I've driven Jeeps all over the world, both on the road and off it. There is a core off-road community who are very careful and respectful and are also the ones who form emergency transport when needed during snow storms etc.. However, there are always young eejits and old eejits who care not a farthing for anything nor anyone. Those two groups must not be confused. One of them is an asset, the other is not.
 
Many fells in the Lakes need ongoing repair from the damage caused by walkers.
Who says walkers or runners have more rights than offroaders or mountain bikers?
(P.S.) I'm neither an offroader nor a mountain biker. I feel that just because it slightly inconveniences your hobby you shouldn't have the right to dictate to others.
 
Peter123 said:
Many fells in the Lakes need ongoing repair from the damage caused by walkers.
Who says walkers or runners have more rights than offroaders or mountain bikers?
(P.S.) I'm neither an offroader nor a mountain biker. I feel that just because it slightly inconveniences your hobby you shouldn't have the right to dictate to others.
Click to expand...

I'd guess that a twit on some sort of off road motorised thing can do damage in an hour that it'd take hundreds of walkers and runners to replicate in months or even years.

The damage to our local hill is immense as they've caused deep ruts which could be there for years even if motorised things could be somehow prevented from getting there again. I'm guessing that our local hill will not recover in my lifetime from the damage that's been done in just a few years, such is the change they've inflicted.
 
woof woof said:
I'd guess that a twit on some sort of off road motorised thing can do damage in an hour that it'd take hundreds of walkers and runners to replicate in months or even years.

The damage to our local hill is immense as they've caused deep ruts which could be there for years even if motorised things could be somehow prevented from getting there again. I'm guessing that our local hill will not recover in my lifetime from the damage that's been done in just a few years, such is the change they've inflicted.
Click to expand...

One of the problems in this country is that there's almost zero land provided for the use of off-road vehicles. As a result the same few tracks get used repeatedly.
 
woof woof said:
I'd guess that a twit on some sort of off road motorised thing can do damage in an hour that it'd take hundreds of walkers and runners to replicate in months or even years.

The damage to our local hill is immense as they've caused deep ruts which could be there for years even if motorised things could be somehow prevented from getting there again. I'm guessing that our local hill will not recover in my lifetime from the damage that's been done in just a few years, such is the change they've inflicted.
Click to expand...

Hundreds if not thousands walk up those hills monthly. You said the ones near you have been illegally damaged, that's a different story to the legal tracks.
 
Green lanes are roads above all else. And perfectly legal to drive on.
If you want to walk somewhere without "damage" stick to footpaths.

Isn't it odd though how many popular footpaths where vehicles can't go are damaged and torn up... Bit like the paths to Snowdon and loads on the Peak District.

I bet you wear a bobble hat.
 
Peter123 said:
Hundreds if not thousands walk up those hills monthly. You said the ones near you have been illegally damaged, that's a different story to the legal tracks.
Click to expand...

My point relates to the amount of damage done.

Perhaps you can agree that one motorised vehicle can cause damage to the landscape PDQ. That seems undeniable to me. Actually I'll drop the word "damage" and instead use "change the landscape." Guessing how many people would take how much time to create the same change to the landscape is difficult. All I can say is that I don't think the changes to the landscape I've seen locally could or would be replicated by people on foot as the number of people on foot we see on the hill is tiny and people on foot tend to avoid water filled ruts which wheeled vehicles repeatedly use or in trying to avoid make larger and in doing so exacerbate the change to the landscape they bring.

I've no problem with people enjoying off road activities but they should IMO be enjoyed legally and in ways and locations which do not dramatically alter the landscape in a way which effectively excludes others.
 
woof woof said:
My point relates to the amount of damage done.

Perhaps you can agree that one motorised vehicle can cause damage to the landscape PDQ. That seems undeniable to me. Actually I'll drop the word "damage" and instead use "change the landscape." Guessing how many people would take how much time to create the same change to the landscape is difficult. All I can say is that I don't think the changes to the landscape I've seen locally could or would be replicated by people on foot as the number of people on foot we see on the hill is tiny and people on foot tend to avoid water filled ruts which wheeled vehicles repeatedly use or in trying to avoid make larger and in doing so exacerbate the change to the landscape they bring.

I've no problem with people enjoying off road activities but they should IMO be enjoyed legally and in ways and locations which do not dramatically alter the landscape in a way which effectively excludes others.
Click to expand...

I think in this case, though, we're talking about a green lane with legal vehicular access.
 
woof woof said:
people on foot tend to avoid water filled ruts
Click to expand...


Those people also enlarge the paths as they take the "desire line" to keep their feet dry.
 
woof woof said:
My point relates to the amount of damage done.

Perhaps you can agree that one motorised vehicle can cause damage to the landscape PDQ. That seems undeniable to me. Actually I'll drop the word "damage" and instead use "change the landscape." Guessing how many people would take how much time to create the same change to the landscape is difficult. All I can say is that I don't think the changes to the landscape I've seen locally could or would be replicated by people on foot as the number of people on foot we see on the hill is tiny and people on foot tend to avoid water filled ruts which wheeled vehicles repeatedly use or in trying to avoid make larger and in doing so exacerbate the change to the landscape they bring.

I've no problem with people enjoying off road activities but they should IMO be enjoyed legally and in ways and locations which do not dramatically alter the landscape in a way which effectively excludes others.
Click to expand...

If off roading is done on green roads (i.e. legally) then it is a legitimate use. If the damage near you is illegal it is not and therefore you have every right to complain.
The walking paths up some our most famous mountains and hills are legal yet cause significant blight on the landscape.
 
Nod said:
Those people also enlarge the paths as they take the "desire line" to keep their feet dry.
Click to expand...

The few people I see on my local hill on foot will make nowhere near the change to the environment that mortised vehicles create. Not even close, not even over multiple years. I know this as I've been going up and down that hill for decades and I've never seen it in the state it's in now and that change is due to the use of motorised vehicles.
 
There's a FOOTpath at the bottom of our road which has steps and an anti-bike/horse barrier on it. The local riding school uses it as a route for their pupils. There's a bridle path which runs parallel to it and which is closer to the school but which they don't use because it's been damaged. Far too narrow for 4x4s and never heard a motorbike going down it so it can only be horses and bicycles that have done the damage.
 
Peter123 said:
If off roading is done on green roads (i.e. legally) then it is a legitimate use. If the damage near you is illegal it is not and therefore you have every right to complain.
The walking paths up some our most famous mountains and hills are legal yet cause significant blight on the landscape.
Click to expand...

And yet again someone brings the damage caused by walkers into this. As justification?

Yes, walkers can and do change the landscape but surely those of you bringing walkers into this and presumably using them as justification can accept that one motorised vehicle can do more in minutes than multiple walkers can over a much longer period?

If you can't see and accept that then what's the point in continuing any discussion?

I don't really care if vehicle use is legal or not, I just care about the change they effect. If people using motorised vehicles can effect this change and not see it or not care all I can say is, perhaps they should.
 
Irresponsible users of anything can (and do) cause damage.
 
woof woof said:
And yet again someone brings the damage caused by walkers into this. As justification?

Yes, walkers can and do change the landscape but surely those of you bringing walkers into this and presumably using them as justification can accept that one motorised vehicle can do more in minutes than multiple walkers can over a much longer period?

If you can't see and accept that then what's the point in continuing any discussion?

I don't really care if vehicle use is legal or not, I just care about the change they effect. If people using motorised vehicles can effect this change and not see it or not care all I can say is, perhaps they should.
Click to expand...

Read what I wrote. I am not justifying damage. I'm saying that complaining about legal use of off road vehicles because it affects your hobby (read the original post) is a bit rich when your (i.e. the OP's) hobby itself causes damage. We can argue all day about what is worst.
 
People also seem to neglect to consider natural erosion.
A footpath behind my house, used to be an old mining track. It’s steep and through the woods. The only vehicles are very occasional forestry commission pickups checking on the mine shafts.

When we moved here, 3 years ago, it was a steep, solid rocky track.. now it has big gullies carved out of it.. it gets walked a fair bit by locals and some horses use it, but the damage is purely water running down it Washing it away.

Now if a bobble hat happened to be walking it, and a 4x4 happened to be on it at the same time, it’s pretty likely the bobble hat would immediately think it was the 4x4s causing this damage, and no doubt they’d go onto their local facebook page, or photography forum and start berating 4x4 drivers for destroying the world.

Nature does just as much, if not far more damage than 4x4s do.. just look at the damage the wild boar do around here, it looks like someone has gone crazy with a plough... but the next season, everything regrows bigger and better... until the little buggers destroy it all again.
 
I used to occasionally ride the man-made trails at Afan among othe places. A friend was riding there some years ago and was berated loudly by a dog walker going the other way on the mountain bike trail, complaining about the damage and the menace of mountain bikes and how he'd been walking that way all his life (the trails had been built just a few years before this incident).

I rather think if people want to 'have fun' off roading (which usually means wheel spinning & sliding around, unlike Gary's description) then they need to do it on purpose-built trails. Otherwise yes, green lanes are absolutely roads and fine to drive sensibly on.
 
Years ago, I did an off road driving course and the mantra was "As fast as necessary, as slow as possible".
 
Nod said:
Years ago, I did an off road driving course and the mantra was "As fast as necessary, as slow as possible".
Click to expand...
Yes, that's about right. The "entertainment" approach to off-roading (Jeremy Clarkson and many others) wrecks vehicles as well as land and bears no relationship to the real thing.
 
Green laners are pretty much anti social tossers that just like to stick two fingers up at society and tear up back roads, should be banned and there vehicles burnt.
 
Mr Bump said:
Green laners are pretty much anti social tossers that just like to stick two fingers up at society and tear up back roads, should be banned and there vehicles burnt.
Click to expand...

Excuse me?
Well you’ve offended several people on here with your idiotic remark.
 
Mr Bump said:
Green laners are pretty much anti social tossers that just like to stick two fingers up at society and tear up back roads, should be banned and there vehicles burnt.
Click to expand...

As per normal a well-reasoned argument by Paul.

If you actually knew anything about BOATS you would perhaps understand a bit more.

Not saying there isn't an issue but please don't tarnish all those who actually use their vehicles offroad in such a derogatory way

Took my bog-standard Freelander along a "green lane" today, I can guarantee you won't be able to tell I have been along it.
 
warning issued
munch said:
As per normal a well-reasoned argument by Paul.

If you actually knew anything about BOATS you would perhaps understand a bit more.

Not saying there isn't an issue but please don't tarnish all those who actually use their vehicles offroad in such a derogatory way

Took my bog-standard Freelander along a "green lane" today, I can guarantee you won't be able to tell I have been along it.
Click to expand...

nope they are mainly arrogant tossers.
my local council is taking action against them at the moment

Antisocial 4x4 drivers to be banned from these 'green lanes' in Holme Valley - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)
 
Mr Bump said:
nope they are mainly arrogant tossers.
my local council is taking action against them at the moment

Antisocial 4x4 drivers to be banned from these 'green lanes' in Holme Valley - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)
Click to expand...

So a small group in one area cause issues and every single "Greenlaner" is an arrogant tosser?

Righto.

You'd never know when I've driven down a perfectly legal greenlane, so not quite sure why you are calling me an arrogant tosser and I'm not particularly pleased about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top