Ah, summer. Time to return the snowmobile to the shed and load up the four wheeler.

This past winter I was privileged to get out on cross country skis in an area along the New Mexico – Colorado border. A sunny day spent in the snowy high country is a beautiful experience – except for the snowmobiles.
Under the official policy of “multiple use,” the U.S. National Forest Service is required to allow not only skiing, hiking, and equestrian travel but also logging, mining, livestock grazing, and something called motorized recreation on millions of acres owned by the American people.

As annoyed as our small group was at the inescapable roar, I couldn’t help thinking how downright threatening the clamor was to the fulltime residents of the woods, for whom winter means a do-or-die struggle against cold and hunger. Snow machines weren’t around during these species’ evolution, and calories expended fleeing loud intrusions can mean death, especially for large ungulates like deer and elk. In warmer months, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), aka off highway vehicles (OHVs), aka four wheelers, add the dimensions of plant, soil, and stream destruction to the mix.

For anyone other than the elderly or physically disabled, it’s a stretch to consider riding atop an internal combustion engine as recreation. But since gaining dubious legitimacy through political pressure, proponents of off road vehicles have seen their numbers explode in recent decades, even as the damage they cause engulfs land managers.

I hope to avoid heading down the well-worn and futile path of arguing that my concept of refreshing myself in nature is superior and therefore deserving of exclusive use of lands we hold in common. I would suggest though that the issue of motorized recreation is clouded by economic interests and ideology, and has deep connotations for our society.

It is an empirical fact that noise, tailpipe emissions, and soil and wetland damage caused by motorized vehicles threaten the ecological viability of the very places their proponents seek out. Meanwhile the rapid growth of off road vehicle use means fewer and smaller sanctuaries for wild species as riders stray further and further outside designated use areas in search of more pristine places.

But the debate over vehicles on public land isn’t confined to logic or reason. Instead, investigation quickly reveals the connections between groups devoted to off-road “access” and vehicle manufacturers, as well as a network of logging, mining, drilling, and stock grazing corporations – industries desiring to exploit public lands for private profit. It’s a symbiotic relationship: the off road community benefits from the professional muscle and PR savvy of deep-pocketed interests who use them as a wedge into our last remaining protected lands.

A story on the website of ATV Connection magazine titled “Bob Cat Hunt” indicates a new brand of morality rampant in the mechanized world: "If the footprints went along a ledge or progressed some steep inclines, the ATV was always nearby . . . I quickly took the shotgun off my shoulder and made a quick shot, hopped on the ATV and scurried down the ledges. The "cat" was found a short distance away; the shot was a success.”

We should ask ourselves how this story fits into the eons of human interaction with the natural world. Has the culture that brought the wonders of mechanization yet learned how to live with their own creations?
I recognize that without motor vehicles, I would (and possibly soon, “will”) have to undertake my outdoor experiences in my own neighborhood. But meanwhile, isn’t it better to get out and walk, run, pedal, snowshoe - rather than contributing to the backside spread so many Americans have accumulated at the drive-up window? Personally I’ve never watched a motorized “recreationist” at play without wondering if s/he ever really tried it on foot.

Ideologues of the right have had success convincing a significant number of the public that their “freedoms” are violated when anyone tries to “tell them what to do.” A multitude of examples includes everything from campaigns against seat belts and smoking bans to the nonsensical yet widespread popularity of the Hummer. The reaction to perceived threats completely overshadows reality or consequence. By these standards, a guy like me, strapped to a couple hundred bucks’ worth of ski gear, becomes an elitist snob denying Joe Six-pack access for his $11,000 Arctic Cat M8 EFI 153 LE (hauled up with 50,000 bucks’ worth of truck and trailer).

The argument is an emotional one, with the ultimate target being – you guessed it - “the government,” that cruel monster determined to restrain our (and industry’s) right to engage in whatever we want (including rampant exploitation of both land and people.)

Don’t get me wrong. If recent history has reminded us of anything it is that we must always guard against genuine government intrusions upon our liberties. But being a conscious member of society requires a reasonable level of emotional maturity. Just because someone else tells you it’s your god-given right to trash Mother Nature doesn’t make it so. It’s time to grow up and show some restraint, before the wild places are gone forever.

Copyright 2009, Dave Wheelock; all rights reserved. Dave Wheelock, a member of the Oneida Nation, is a collegiate sports administrator and rugby coach. Reach him at davewheelock@yahoo.com. Mr. Wheelock's views do not necessarily represent those of the Socorro News, but frequently do. This article originally appeared in the Mountain Mail, and is reprinted with permission of the author.