GUEST COLUMN: ADS EMPHASIZE AGGRESSIVE, DESTRUCTIVE RIDING
Manufacturers Promoting Irresponsible OHV Behavior
The extreme rhetoric of the industry-supported, Idaho-based BlueRibbon Coalition hurts the constructive efforts of local ORV clubs to encourage responsible behavior.By Harrison Schmitt, Guest Writer, 4-29-09
 |
|
 | |
| Unpopular sign, photo courtesy of Responsible Trails America, and, below, signs of ATV abuse in the Green Tops area in Oregon. Photos courtesy Mike Beagle, Trout Unlimited. | |
|
Thousands of Americans responsibly use off-road vehicles (ORVs) for work and recreation. But a growing number of reckless riders damage public and private land, get themselves hurt, burden law enforcement, and ruin hunting, fishing and hiking experiences for the rest of us. Their actions are creating a backlash from sportsmen, property owners, ranchers, safety advocates, and taxpayers tired of paying to clean up the mess from irresponsible riders.
I believe the companies making and marketing ORVs have contributed to this problem and it is past time they took responsibility for advancing solutions.
In March, the Wall Street Journal began a feature piece on Scott Wine, the new CEO of off-road vehicle (ORV) manufacturer Polaris Industries, with an anecdote about how, two weeks into the job, he crashed and destroyed a $14,000 ORV on the company’s woodsy test trail site. “‘I was driving beyond my ability,’ admits the 41-year-old Naval Academy graduate with a boyish grin.”
This culture of recklessness even goes back to his predecessor, Tom Tiller, who remains on the company’s board. In a series of TV ads, he formally challenged the CEOs of other ORV manufacturers by name to an ORV competition he described as a “duel.” The follow-up ad shows Tiller denouncing the other companies for declining or not responding and closes by saying, “Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got some frustrations to work out with six other guys.”
His frustrations don’t compare with what I’ve been hearing from property owners, ranchers, law enforcement, and people who simply want to enjoy the outdoors. I’ve had literally hundreds of conversations with people across the country, and especially in Western areas, who are facing a growing problem from reckless riders of ORVs, including vandalism, trespass, and harassment. The problem is spinning out of control and people are starting to take matters into their own hands.
Responsible Trails America (RTA) gives voice to people who are fed up with the growing problems caused by reckless ORV riders. Last month we released a report, ”Ads, Rhetoric, and Behavior” examining the effects of aggressive marketing, like that demonstrated by Polaris. After reviewing over five years of TV advertisements by four major ORV manufacturers (Suzuki, Polaris, Arctic Cat, and Bombardier Recreational Products) we found there may be a correlation between the growing subculture of reckless off-road riders and the image of rugged lawlessness we observed in the ads. Click here to see for yourself.
Through an analysis conducted by the independent Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG), we also learned that these manufacturers spent millions on TV ads, including $23,280,148 on 26,130 TV airings of commercials that mentioned only an ORV product, its extreme capabilities (and many times what we found to be aggressive behavior). These ads ran in 87 different Designated Market Areas covering every region of the country. One ad that we feel really highlighted this lawless subculture was filmed by Suzuki in Death Valley National Park in California. A man describes his ORV by saying, “There’s not a trail where I couldn’t take it.” The irony is you’re not supposed to take it to Death Valley National Park, where ORVs are not permitted.
Other examples of aggressive advertisements include: “If it intimidates you, step aside” and “If you hesitate, I’m going right by you.” Another prominent ad flatly warns those who don’t ride ORVs to “get out of the way.”
Fanning the flames of this aggressive advertising is the most vocal, industry-supported user group, the Pocatello, Idaho-based BlueRibbon Coalition (BRC). After reviewing over 20 years of BRC statements, we found that they compared individuals proposing increased law enforcement presence, ORV training course requirements, and trail restrictions to “environmental jihadists,” “terrorists,” “bigots,” and “Nazis.”
BRC Public Lands Director Brian Hawthorne summed up what motivates their actions, “What drives a lot of this stuff is fear. If you’re an off-roader, you don’t know if you’re going to be able to go to your favorite campsite or trail. You become bitter, angry and a little afraid.”
There are many ORV organizations and clubs throughout the country that promote responsible riding and community service. Unfortunately, the years of aggressive advertisements by the manufacturers and the extreme rhetoric of the industry-supported BlueRibbon Coalition hurt the constructive efforts of local ORV clubs to encourage responsible behavior.
We think the ORV manufacturers need to take a hard look at the growing liability and public relations problems that are building for them in the near future because of this growing reckless riding problem. These manufacturers are facing very tough economic challenges already and they would benefit from re-examining both their marketing materials and their sponsorship of the BRC. Otherwise, Mr. Wine, Mr. Tiller, and others in the ORV industry may really have some frustrations.
Editor’s note: Harrison Schmitt is executive director of Responsible Trails America, which according to its website, is “a broad coalition of people, including those who enjoy the backcountry, private property owners, and those who responsibly use off-road vehicles for work or recreation.”
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
One need only recall the number of times they are run over rocks or through bogs or up steeply inclined hill (on television commercials) to realize it is no skin off the asses of corporations to encourage troglodytes to act irresponsibly toward our environment...
I live in an area where ORV use is extremely high (the Big Horn Mountains), with an enormous number of dirty roads and trail riding opportunities. Most of the riders I've encountered while on my mountain bike have been friendly and courteous. Yet I see the remnants of their tracks in marshy meadows and the user-created trails that they leave behind in high alpine areas.
I honestly don't know if changing advertising campaigns will do much to stem the problems and the attitude reflected by the BRC. Land managers are overmatched and understaffed and people are going to continue to ride them the way that they want to. Stiffer penalties and better enforcement is a start, but changing the culture of ORV users is a difficult task.
I consider those on ATVs part of the outdoor "elite". I always hear the motorized crowd crying about restricting use so only the elite can use it. If using one's muscles is being elite, that's news to me. I don't have the kind of money one needs to buy an ATV or fancy mountain bike. I can afford a pair of boots. Someone from the motor camp, please enlighten me.
Never mind this Harrison Schmitt isn't the senator astronaut, but a union political operative. Never mind that RTA is the pet project of one Arabella Legacy Fund, which is the nonprofit toy of one Eric Kessler.
Kessler is a Dave Brower protege, worked for League of Conservation Voters and then followed his boss Bruce Babbitt into Interior. Kessler is also an heir to the Fel Pro automotive gaskets fortune...the family sold out at least partially because they were afraid that electric cars would render the gasket OEM market dead. No kidding.
So, is Geo Wuerthner going to say something here about "thrillcraft?"
http://www.sharetrails.org/magazine/article.php?id=1632
And who are You, RWE? Is someone else paying you not to play on the computer or what?
I'll be back later, because RTA is an interesting case.
There are good people and bad people in everything we do. There are extreme people on both sides of every issue, and each makes their own side look stupid. No offense intended.
When you see people, like the real mike, horst and others, try to lump isolated incidents together with an entire group, it really smacks of idiocy.
That being said, any damage that these "troglodytes " do to the environment will be gone within a few years after the "troglodytes" are gone. Nature wins. Always. Just like horse trails, just like hiking trails.
That's not true for everyone's homes, where we work, the roads we drive on, the trash we create, etc etc.
That damage, fellow troglodytes, will take hundreds of years to go away after we are gone, so come down off your holier than thou attitude because you're no better than they are. We all do damage in some way or another.
As one who works very closely with the likes of the BLM, the DoF and other outdoor and recreation agencies, I can tell you from experience that the majority of people using OHV equipment do it responsibly and respectfully.
I can't say the same about hikers. It has been my experience over many years that they have trashed more areas than OHVs.
They throw trash on the ground, they (and their dogs) defecate right next to (in many cases ON) hiking trails, they throw rocks at signs, stomp on plants, and they often cause arguments with law-abiding bicyclers and when they can corner them, OHVers.
Some of you know who you are, so keep that in mind before you start railing on a specific group because chances are you're just as bad as they are. Or worse. :)
Go ahead, folks, go back up to that link so generously posted by the great Runs With Elk and read the story, then come back here for my brilliant analysis.
(Jeopardy Music plays)
The question, "Where have we seen this kind of thing before?" is correct. You win!
As a long term National Rifle Association member, RTA rings bells that sound a lot like those that rang for AHSA, the "American Hunters and Shooters Association" run by ex Redskin and bird hunter Ray Schoenke, who just happened to be an unsuccessful Democratic federal candidate out of Maryland and just happens to be married to a lady that was on the board of directors for, I think, Handgun Control, or the Brady Campaign.
AHSA was, of course, promoted here on New West as a perfectly legit gun owners organization, when the tiniest amount of Googling around shows its pretty much anti-gun Astroturf.
And here we are with Responsible Trails Alliance, which pops up on the radar, hiring all sorts of people with "wilderness" and "environmentalist" histories as representative of "Responsible" ATV riders. I can't imagine any of the people publicly presented by RTA as having any pre-existing recreational proclivities that have anything at all to do with motors, unless we're talking driving the Subaru to the trailhead.
Does Mr. Schmitt own an ATV? I'd sure like to see the registration form, dated BEFORE ALF and RTA were created. I doubt very much that Mr. Kessler has ever sullied himself aboard any kind of recreational motor unit, 2 3 or 4 wheeled.
But RTA and AHSA fit the same rhetorical mold, of people acting like someone they really aren't in order to promote an agenda. Let me put this in another context. Remember Joan Claybrook, Jimmy Carters "highway safety" lady from Ralph Nader's gang? Now, just imagine Joan promoting herself as an automotive enthusiast:
"Oh, well, I'm an automobile driver myself. I have a Prius which I wax on weekends and drive only to the public transportation hub. I'll admit (giggle), I recreationally drive to REI on Sunday afternoons, and the traffic is so SPORTING."
"But seriously, I see no "need" for ANYONE reasonable to have a V-8 motor, or a pickup, or, really, anything that goes faster than 55 miles per hour on level ground -- and think the government should control those who WANT such things. There must be something WRONG with them!"
No, I think there is something wrong with people so intolerant of others that they will so shamelessly deceive, and for New West and other "journalistic" outlets to blithely pass blatant propaganda off as legitimate, thoughtful consideration of complex issues, well, I think that's wrong, too.
Nope...nada....go crawl back under it Skinner until you learn to not be quite so insulting!! Some folks like TR actually do have friends!!
Let me spell it out for you. The author contends that, although "thousands of Americans responsibly use off-road vehicles (ORVs)... a growing number of reckless riders damage public and private land, get themselves hurt, burden law enforcement, and ruin hunting, fishing and hiking experiences." He backs up his contention with photos and even some anecdotal evidence taken from pro-ORV advertisements.
He then offers some very clear examples of very unethical advertising behavior on the part of some ORV manufacturers and some truly despicable rhetoric on the part of a pro-ORV group. He contends that these manufacturers and groups are making a cynical decision to use this kind of advertising and rhetoric to lure in impressionable customers and supporters from the lower levels of society with no regard for the consequences of the resulting behavior that this kind of advertising and rhetoric encourages. In fact, he contends that "years of aggressive advertisements by the manufacturers and the extreme rhetoric of the... BlueRibbon Coalition hurt the constructive efforts of local ORV clubs to encourage responsible behavior."
The not particularly well hidden question he raises is whether "the ORV manufacturers" and the coalition as well "need to take a hard look" at their role in encouraging what he sees as "this growing reckless riding problem." You may argue that he doesn't like ORVs and wants to get rid of them and you may be right; but, he is not advocating anything of the sort here. In this article, he is advocating a more mature and civil tone the advertising and rhetoric, a moderation of the kind of over-the-top advertising and gutter talk of which he has cited clear examples in his piece.
Are you making a cogent argument against any of his premises? No! Are you refuting what he contends? No! Are you debating the question, the issue that he has raised, or his recommendation for more mature and moderate advertising and rhetoric? No! You're not making any specific point, not backing up any of your views regarding the topic; you're just proving his point by refusing to acknowledge anything on the table, refusing to even acknowledge that ORVs sometimes do cause a problem, and instead just slinging more of the very same gutter rhetoric he talks about, trying to intimidate and distract from the real issue with accusations about who he is, who hit whom, with just more of that ALF, RTA, NRA, AHSA distraction.
...and with regard to whether or not he has a right to speak out because he does or does not own an ORV, are you drunk? I don't need to own or fly an airplane to know when aircraft safety is an issue that needs to be addressed. I don't need to have food poisoning to believe in and speak out about the need for food safety regulation. I don't need to be a trespasser to order one off my property. Taken to the extreme, I don't need to be a murderer, a rapist, a thief, or a child pornographer to have a right to speak out about the need for laws that regulate, restrain, and control murder, rape, thievery, and child abuse. Do you not understand these points? After all the strutting and bluster, is your depth of understanding really at the level at which you think this Schmitt character has to own and ride an ORV before he has a right to raise questions about a public nuisance?
Hey Dave, how are those donations from Chevron and Exxon? Do you like working as a puppet for big inudstry? Why does the BRC champion industry useage of roadless areas rarther than it's stated motorized recreation stance?
It all makes sense now.
http://www.commondreams.org/news2000/0620-06.htm
Findings of the report include:
The Blue Ribbon Coalition receives financial support from numerous timber, oil and gas, and mining companies including Boise Cascade Corp., Exxon, Chevron, and the American Forest and Paper Association.
Companies funding the Blue Ribbon Coalition are also involved in intensive lobbying efforts in Washington, DC to advance their anti-environmental agenda, including the demise of the proposed policy to protect roadless areas in our national forests. These companies have spent $46,115,748 lobbying Congress the Forest Service and other federal agencies in during the period the Administration has been working on a roadless area proposal (1997 — 1999), and have had 146 lobbyists on average working on their behalf during this period.
The political action committees (PACs) of companies funding the Blue Ribbon Coalition are also actively funding candidates, having contributed $ 1,833,241 to candidates -- $1,767,416 to current members of Congress and $65,825 to presidential candidates Governor George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore in the last three and half years (1997 — May, 2000). Top recipients in the House include: (1) Helen Chenoweth-Hage ($42,242); (2) Michael Simpson ($33,500); and (3) Don Young ($33,227). In the Senate the top three recipients are: (1) Michael Crapo ($48,950); (2) George Voinovich ($34,675); and (3) Ben Nighthorse Campbell ($28,500).
The Blue Ribbon Coalition repeats and disseminates the anti-environmental rhetoric of their extractive industry supporters, including calling for increased logging in national forests, even if the statements are incompatible with the stated recreational values of the Coalition. The Coalition has mischaracterized federal land management policies, calling the roadless initiative a "totalitarian lock-up of our public lands." The roadless initiative instead seeks to create a publicly supported policy that would preserve clean water sources, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities in our last wild national forests.
"The timber, mining, and oil and gas industries are using the Blue Ribbon Coalition as a front group to advance their agenda to keep as much of our public lands open to logging, mining, and oil and gas exploration — uses hardly compatible with recreational interests, " said Viles.
The RTA is linked to many pervasively ANTI-ATV organizations.
The 4 Consumer & Safety Groups and the 3 Conservation organizations on the links page all have supported positions to place extreme limits on the when, where and who can ride ATVs. They would institute age, training and equipment regulations like these were street vehicles [unprecedented actions by the way]. I also wonder why YAMAHA, KAWASAKI and HONDA ads are excluded? I know of their "aggressive content" as I have personal experience with tv production for the OEMs. That's what I do.
FYI Mr. Harrison Schmitt - I have worked with the ad agencies who made of 3 of the videos posted and I have sent links to them of your video page. I think you are using these without consent and YouTube should pull them. I bet you at least get some interesting emails from legal departments. I see that a couple are taped with a camera in Huntsville area.
I quote Harrison, "ruin hunting, fishing and hiking experiences for the rest of us" The REST OF US, that is clue #1 I don't want this fool saying he is representing ATVs. He doesn't
As a MEMBER of the Powersports Industry I will tell you that we DO NOT like having non-riders try to speak for us. We DO NOT trust them. Any time, at any powersports company, the FIRST thing you do when you get a new employee or even a major outside supplier that doesn't ride is to get them on a bike or ATV. I have been in this industry over 30 years. I have seen accountants, PR agents, computer geeks, corporate presidents and every job description validate their position by becoming one of US. And I have seen people passed over and let go over their non-involvement too. At my company, if you don't ride I won't hire you, no way, no how.
So if Harrison Schmitt doesn't have at least a 100 hours on a 450 Raptor or equivalent ATV, then he doesn't count is a just fine criteria by which to judge his ability to represent responsible off-roaders.
The BRC is HUGE, take a look at their list of supporters, Thousands of companies, clubs, and individual enthusiasts. Jeeps, Snowmobiles and Powered WaterCraft too
Your statements about the ads doesn't include all the disclaimers to ride in authorized areas and ride safe. Because you don't ride or experience powersports and through your lack of understanding you distort the ads points. And Oh yes we do this because we like speed and power, so what. You know nobody supports tearing up Wilderness but our manner of appreciation of life is different than yours, can you say diametrically opposed? Doesn't make us wrong or you right, just means we both have to compromise.
Expect a lot of BRC supporters to post, I just sent a link.
What is your opinion the BRC sister group, "WARC", which was created to "finally do something about the wilderness act"?
That is an incredibly extreme position.
From their PR;
"The Wilderness Act is antiquated, inflexible, anti-resource management and flies in the face of sound and responsible public policy principles, There can be no doubt that it would never pass any modern Congress in its present form and that alone should be a warning signal to the public that it is seriously flawed."
I think most MTB users and IMBA would agree. Not too extreme.
I've been a rider for about 40 years now, dirt and street. I really like to do both and by golly, I'll support organizations that support my freedoms. Further, youbetcha I write on occasion for BRC, AND they pay me for my brilliant analyses when I do. Much better to work for and with friends than enemies, right?
Max raises a pretty good point. Again, its a parallel with another issue, that of guns. The anti's tend to not like guns on a visceral, emotional level, and in the political arena, work to eliminate guns and their uses.
The problem is, anti-gunners operate from a platform of ignorance, trying to "control" something they don't understand at even the most basic levels. The clip of great anti-gun crusadenik Carolyn McCarthy guessing a "barrel shroud" is the "thing that folds up" is an illuminative classic. She's fundamentally clueless...no wonder the legislation she writes is fundamentally clueless as to root cause and effect.
And this brings me to Joan Claybrook, the Nader Nanny I mentioned above. Her agency under Carter wasted a bunch of money trying to create a "safe" motorcycle, one that turned out to be absolutely un-rideable. They had no understanding of motorcycle physics.
And even if they had understood that part, and someone COULD ride the dang thing (nobody ever successfully did), they took away a motorcyclist's most important safety tool, a high eyepoint. If you don't know what that is and what it means in terms of survival in a hazardous environment, too bad.
The bottom line is that Mr. Schmitt (again, NOT the astronaut Senator) probably just hates ATV's and motorized rec on a visceral level, understands the concept only in terms of what he dislikes, and seeks to "regulate" OHV's from that ignorant point of view.
And like the anti-gunnies who seek age prohibitions on firearms possession, the anti-OHV'ers want blanket prohibitions on OHV use by minors.
After all, if you don't hunt, fish, ride, shoot, smoke, drink, chase girls, eat red meat, play with cars, use power tools -- or any other fun thing -- before you turn 21, you'll probably never develop such, um, vices. And you'll be a perfect "citizen" then.
That my friend is about as extreme as it gets.
Thank you for noting my dedication and consistency.
Mike, let me help:
It's called TRYING to support the people who might support YOU rather than leave you fighting the massed swarms of the no-to-everything-but-ME crowd. Why don't you and Vandeman join forces or something?
Take a look at http://www.wildlandscpr.org/ and the agenda is clear: "Like cigarettes, the machines satisfy riders but cause damage when used as intended. ... We seek to require that designated routes occur only on roads and trails where the agency can demonstrate that off-road vehicles will not cause adverse environmental and wildlife impacts. We further advocate that off-road vehicle use shall be prohibited unless adequate monitoring and enforcement are fully funded and implemented."
Vilify users as immoral, unhealthy, unsafe, and possibly mentally unbalanced. Scare the general populace with extreme examples. Ratchet up the taxes, usage fees and regulations. Make it impossible for users to meet the mandated requirements. Legislate it out of existence, and move on to the next target.
Are there irresponsible OHV riders? Yes. Should we attempt to negotiate with Schmitt and others like him? No. We should fight fire with fire.
Let's take Schmitt seriously. But let's also recognize his rhetoric for what it is, and respond in kind. Read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals". Schmitt is an obvious devotee.
http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/8925/alinsky.htm
Steve Aunan
http://www.cultofdualsport.com/
So Dave, are you saying you can't have fun if it doesn't involve the things on your list?
I read here Laptop Repair but couldnt make sense?