National Parks will Cite AWD Cars for Driving on 4WD-Only Trails

Ddays said:
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. In today's world you have to watch out for the majority and not the exceptions. There are so many IG and TikTok dipshits out there thinking they can do anything and go anywhere because some jackass influencer posted a video where they did it that I applaud the NPS for doing this. Someone has to save the idiots from themselves. šŸ¤·ā€ā™‚ļø
Click to expand...
It seems better to charge $100k per extraction, and the extraction is required in order to ever drive again.
 
wayoflife said:
Maybe it's just me but all the signs I've seen in National Parks like Death Valley, Canyon Lands or the like are pretty specific.

View attachment 436133

Not gonna lie, I especially like the fact National Parks and Preserves are now including signs prohibiting Side by Sides, UTVs and ATVs as well.

View attachment 436134
Click to expand...
This sign in particular makes me happier than the AWD restriction to be honest. Most of the RAV4ā€™s canā€™t reach the hard shit that the SxSā€™s like to fuck with. That being saidā€¦ can we just rid our trails of both šŸ¤”
 
As others have mentioned and itā€™s not spoken about enough is that just because you have a capable rig, AWD or 4WD doesnā€™t mean much as most folks just throw a credit card at a showroom new rig and then get themselves into trouble.
Eddie hit the nail on the head. Most people lack the skill even in a fully built, race ready rig. Just spend 20 minutes watching EJS or Trail hero highlights and the amount of people that have $100k plus rigs with zero clue how to drive will astonish you.
Now you add the typically setup RAV4 or Subaru Outback etc AND zero skills and you have a recipe for disaster.
Skill WILL get you a lot of places in a lesser rig to a point, but there are some things skill just canā€™t overcome and, you canā€™t have a park ranger at every trail head quizzing you on what kind of driver you are.
 
Ha1 said:
If NPS is going to restrict (or prohibit) a trail to particular type of vehicle, they must define what type of vehicle may or may not utilize the trail in order to enforce it. How would you propose defining the vehicles in an easily understood language at the trailhead so when someone pulls up in an AWD vehicle they understand that some AWD vehicles are acceptable but others are not - and whether *their* AWD vehicle falls within that definition?

I'm sure most can agree that the restriction based on "You can drive your AWD vehicle on this trail, but only if you have the driving skills necessary to do so" would work just peachy.
Click to expand...
Gate keeper obstacles used to be a thing. If you can get through, you can do the trail.
 
epriev said:
Gate keeper obstacles used to be a thing. If you can get through, you can do the trail.
Click to expand...
Yeah and it needs to be brought backā€¦ even the entrance to hells revenge is complete paved nowā€¦ the harder trails in Moab and sand hollow luckily still get you pretty quick butā€¦ Iā€™m finding that more and more people are able to go further in than they should and by then, itā€™s too late.
 
wayoflife said:
Maybe it's just me but all the signs I've seen in National Parks like Death Valley, Canyon Lands or the like are pretty specific.

View attachment 436133

Not gonna lie, I especially like the fact National Parks and Preserves are now including signs prohibiting Side by Sides, UTVs and ATVs as well.

View attachment 436134
Click to expand...
That's the point. They can enforce it because they are specific. No 2WD or AWD. Repriev making the argument that some AWDs have done this or that trail opens up the issue of how to provide sufficient notice of whether a particular AWD vehicle is or isn't prohibited. The sign above makes it clear, if it's AWD it's prohibited and a driver is going to have a hard time arguing that they couldn't have reasonably known that their AWD truck was prohibited.

And I guess I forgot to use the sarcasm font in reply to the skilled driver element of whether you can take your AWD on that trail is going to be met with "I always kick all of my friends' asses in the Playstation Jeeping Jam game!" followed by "Gee, I didn't know it was going to be like that!"
 
Last edited:
epriev said:
Gate keeper obstacles used to be a thing. If you can get through, you can do the trail.
Click to expand...
That's a red herring, though. While a gatekeeper feature is a good idea (and I know a number of MTB trail builders design trails to include them), that's not relevant to whether a rule or regulation is sufficiently defined to be enforceable.

If there is a law or regulation just says "you can't do that thing" the State cannot punish you for doing that thing unless you can be reasonably notified what the "thing" is (or least, not yet).
 
epriev said:
And yet, AWD vehicles have done hells revenge and the gate.

This fine is totally BS and should only be issued upon a needed request, plus rescue costs. A lifted AWD can and does trails without issue. It's more driver skill on the NPS roads than vehicle.

Isn't White Rim road and Schaefers Road marked 4wd, but Shaefer can be done by most 2wd sedans, and the eastern half, at least to the Thema and Louis point on White Rim?
Click to expand...

Who cares.
Why advocate for shitty AWDs on our trails? Take the win.
 
Cousin Clyde said:
Who cares.
Why advocate for shitty AWDs on our trails? Take the win.
Click to expand...
Should we advocate for shitty 4WD? There is plenty of shitty 4WD out there which is not much better than some AWD.

"4WD high clearance" is not specific enough in many cases since it may still allow 4WDs which should not be on the trail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom