Hey Folks
This is perhaps a rambling effort to consolidate my understandings and present some potentially interesting thoughts to those of you also interested in the future of ORVing as we know it. I am not trying to start any feuds, but if you read this short dissertation and have some thoughts, I would be interested in reading them.
Being a relatively new dirt bike rider [old guy – third season], a long term full-sized vehicle 4WD fanatic, and one who has only ridden ATVs but a few times, reading the recently posted themes posed by different wheeled variants of our ORV community on DRN-MTR has captured my attention. Despite the combined efforts of many of our more conservative fellow bikers, the recent posts by several activist ATVers appear to me to be emulating an ominous [personal opinion] trend of politics in this country. Namely, we are more and more becoming a polarized nation wherein the democratic principle of majority rule is failing to produce the desired effect ... e.g.; we discuss an issue, present different sides, actively promote our positions, then vote on the possibilities and finally, having counted the votes, everyone accepts the majority position and moves on with their business. The principle of "majority rule" seems to apply admirably when the voting population lopsidedly favors one side or the other. However, when the voters take opposite sides of an issue in nearly equal numbers, the concept of “majority” becomes one of a simple numerical difference defined by only a small number of actual votes. Under such circumstances neither side feels that they are in the minority ... both sides feel they should have their way ... neither side wants to concede their position ... and both sides begin looking for ways to default the elective process. We have seen this in the last two Presidential elections, the current gubernatorial election in Washington State and many other current interest issues of our time. Barring the inability to find means to invalidate the elective process, the losers of such close elections never really concede their positions … they instead take activist positions and continually rain criticisms on the “winning side” in an effort to offset the opinions of a small portion of the electorate so as to make the next election come into their favor, even if by only a small margin. Such a victory leads inevitably to a repeat of the scenario with the winners and losers simply changing sides. Under these conditions, fact is often less important than ‘volume,’ and indeed, the actual issues may take a back seat in any discussion or debate of the proposition at hand. While those who are informed on a given issue may be villainized … the ignorant may become heroes when they regurgitate what the ‘crowd mentality’ wants to hear … certainly not the best of circumstances for arriving at a consensus opinion.
The above described situation may be well on the way to becoming a behavioral norm in our Country? As the number of issues upon which our fellow countrymen become ‘polarized' increases, the lower the level our societal regards for each other seem to achieve. In fact, it seems more evident that this same phenomenon is becoming the behavioral norm for situations which are far from near-equal numbers on each side of an issue. How often of late have you witnessed this scenario: “elections be damned … my side is right … I refuse to cooperate … I will not negotiate or debate … I will overcome … or else!”
One might ask what has happened to courtesy. I believe it was much stronger in generations past than now … however, it is not just the concept of courtesy that was different, but more importantly, its routine application in public situations. We seem to have lost ground in many important social morays when it comes to interpersonal relationships … especially involving folks who are on the opposing side of “our” issue.
While I respect the needs of every ORV enthusiast and encourage one and all to get out and participate [legally] on our wonderful Michigan Trail System ... I believe I am beginning to see the writing on the wall regarding future implementation of the system. The postings of late seem to be: ‘but the clouds on the horizon of an impending storm’ [my opinion]. The public realm is undergoing a rapid influx of new “participants” as the baby boomers begin to retire. These folks are eager to do all those things they were not able to do while they were working … many are impatient … many have considerable ‘expendable’ funds to support their newly adopted hobbies … they are taking notice of the Michigan Trail System … they may have little or no regard for the System’s history, growth, ideals or current directions … they are accustomed to “paying” their way and getting what they want based upon their numerical superiority. They represent a formidable foe. Unfortunately, a vast majority of these folks will likely not adopt our beloved sport of two wheeled dirt biking.
While the Michigan Trail System has a long and illustrious history evolved mainly through the interest, sweat, tears and loving attention provided by generations of dedicated motorcyclists … its future may well rest in the hands of a majority whose opinions are far from the likes of us who desire the “single track” format. While we tend to resist this concept based upon a lack of visible evidence to the contrary, I offer below the pictured “ORV” scanned from the February 2005 issue of Dirt Wheels magazine. This vehicle is a Rhino; it is basically configured to be a miniature 4WD vehicle that operates exactly like a Jeep for all intents and purposes. It comes equipped with all the accoutrements of a motor vehicle designed for the road, to include such items as lighting, stereo with multi-speakers, seat belts … and is operated with the same set of controls as is any automobile [i.e.; seat, steering wheel, accelerator pedal, brake pedal, emergency brake, transfer case shifter]. In effect, a Rhino permits essentially anyone capable of operating an automobile an immediate route into the wilds of Michigan provided the trail system will permit [admit] its girth … and that is the “Good News”!
The “Bad News” is that the Rhino is but one of perhaps five or six such inventions of the past few years being presented to the riding public. Each of these vehicles are iterations of the same design concept … and to make matters worse, according to the ATV oriented publications that I read, their sales are beginning to rapidly climb in proportion to all other forms of 2, 4 and 6-wheeled ORVs.
It does seem but only a matter of time these, and other ‘larger-scale’ ORVs, will be seeking greater access to the Michigan Trail System. In that respect, we 2-wheeled advocates must take seriously our positions with regard to integration of the necessary trail types needed to support a changing distribution of ORV enthusiasts for it is not the past which will define us, but the future!
Respectfully submitted for your criticism, terry nestrick :ugg:
This is perhaps a rambling effort to consolidate my understandings and present some potentially interesting thoughts to those of you also interested in the future of ORVing as we know it. I am not trying to start any feuds, but if you read this short dissertation and have some thoughts, I would be interested in reading them.
Being a relatively new dirt bike rider [old guy – third season], a long term full-sized vehicle 4WD fanatic, and one who has only ridden ATVs but a few times, reading the recently posted themes posed by different wheeled variants of our ORV community on DRN-MTR has captured my attention. Despite the combined efforts of many of our more conservative fellow bikers, the recent posts by several activist ATVers appear to me to be emulating an ominous [personal opinion] trend of politics in this country. Namely, we are more and more becoming a polarized nation wherein the democratic principle of majority rule is failing to produce the desired effect ... e.g.; we discuss an issue, present different sides, actively promote our positions, then vote on the possibilities and finally, having counted the votes, everyone accepts the majority position and moves on with their business. The principle of "majority rule" seems to apply admirably when the voting population lopsidedly favors one side or the other. However, when the voters take opposite sides of an issue in nearly equal numbers, the concept of “majority” becomes one of a simple numerical difference defined by only a small number of actual votes. Under such circumstances neither side feels that they are in the minority ... both sides feel they should have their way ... neither side wants to concede their position ... and both sides begin looking for ways to default the elective process. We have seen this in the last two Presidential elections, the current gubernatorial election in Washington State and many other current interest issues of our time. Barring the inability to find means to invalidate the elective process, the losers of such close elections never really concede their positions … they instead take activist positions and continually rain criticisms on the “winning side” in an effort to offset the opinions of a small portion of the electorate so as to make the next election come into their favor, even if by only a small margin. Such a victory leads inevitably to a repeat of the scenario with the winners and losers simply changing sides. Under these conditions, fact is often less important than ‘volume,’ and indeed, the actual issues may take a back seat in any discussion or debate of the proposition at hand. While those who are informed on a given issue may be villainized … the ignorant may become heroes when they regurgitate what the ‘crowd mentality’ wants to hear … certainly not the best of circumstances for arriving at a consensus opinion.
The above described situation may be well on the way to becoming a behavioral norm in our Country? As the number of issues upon which our fellow countrymen become ‘polarized' increases, the lower the level our societal regards for each other seem to achieve. In fact, it seems more evident that this same phenomenon is becoming the behavioral norm for situations which are far from near-equal numbers on each side of an issue. How often of late have you witnessed this scenario: “elections be damned … my side is right … I refuse to cooperate … I will not negotiate or debate … I will overcome … or else!”
One might ask what has happened to courtesy. I believe it was much stronger in generations past than now … however, it is not just the concept of courtesy that was different, but more importantly, its routine application in public situations. We seem to have lost ground in many important social morays when it comes to interpersonal relationships … especially involving folks who are on the opposing side of “our” issue.
While I respect the needs of every ORV enthusiast and encourage one and all to get out and participate [legally] on our wonderful Michigan Trail System ... I believe I am beginning to see the writing on the wall regarding future implementation of the system. The postings of late seem to be: ‘but the clouds on the horizon of an impending storm’ [my opinion]. The public realm is undergoing a rapid influx of new “participants” as the baby boomers begin to retire. These folks are eager to do all those things they were not able to do while they were working … many are impatient … many have considerable ‘expendable’ funds to support their newly adopted hobbies … they are taking notice of the Michigan Trail System … they may have little or no regard for the System’s history, growth, ideals or current directions … they are accustomed to “paying” their way and getting what they want based upon their numerical superiority. They represent a formidable foe. Unfortunately, a vast majority of these folks will likely not adopt our beloved sport of two wheeled dirt biking.
While the Michigan Trail System has a long and illustrious history evolved mainly through the interest, sweat, tears and loving attention provided by generations of dedicated motorcyclists … its future may well rest in the hands of a majority whose opinions are far from the likes of us who desire the “single track” format. While we tend to resist this concept based upon a lack of visible evidence to the contrary, I offer below the pictured “ORV” scanned from the February 2005 issue of Dirt Wheels magazine. This vehicle is a Rhino; it is basically configured to be a miniature 4WD vehicle that operates exactly like a Jeep for all intents and purposes. It comes equipped with all the accoutrements of a motor vehicle designed for the road, to include such items as lighting, stereo with multi-speakers, seat belts … and is operated with the same set of controls as is any automobile [i.e.; seat, steering wheel, accelerator pedal, brake pedal, emergency brake, transfer case shifter]. In effect, a Rhino permits essentially anyone capable of operating an automobile an immediate route into the wilds of Michigan provided the trail system will permit [admit] its girth … and that is the “Good News”!
The “Bad News” is that the Rhino is but one of perhaps five or six such inventions of the past few years being presented to the riding public. Each of these vehicles are iterations of the same design concept … and to make matters worse, according to the ATV oriented publications that I read, their sales are beginning to rapidly climb in proportion to all other forms of 2, 4 and 6-wheeled ORVs.
It does seem but only a matter of time these, and other ‘larger-scale’ ORVs, will be seeking greater access to the Michigan Trail System. In that respect, we 2-wheeled advocates must take seriously our positions with regard to integration of the necessary trail types needed to support a changing distribution of ORV enthusiasts for it is not the past which will define us, but the future!
Respectfully submitted for your criticism, terry nestrick :ugg:
