Death Valley Off-Road Adventures

I watched an episode of Ghost Town Living where Brent gave the history of the salt tram and hiked the entire line. Pretty amazing that it was built in a time where pack mules did the grunt work of moving.

To you guys that get to explore the area frequently- do the videos from Ghost Town Living have any negative impact by drawing too much attention to the area?

 

I think many people are genuinely interested in the history of the area but recently, tourons were stuck in the mud and used one of the tram's towers to winch themselves out...it topelled--clearly, they had no idea (since been rebuilt) what it was. Do I think those videos have a negative impact? I think for a long time, the parks have enjoyed a moderate level of visitation but have seen a serious increase since the pandemic--most of the newbs need Tread Lightly help.

 

The rise of social media in general has contributed to lots of areas getting way more visitation. Luckily, the park and surrounding area still holds a few places that the Gram crowd hasn't blown out yet. Yet being the key word.

 

Do we really know that it’s social media? Not a rhetorical question … I just wonder if there’s more to it than that. More reliable and capable vehicles, better roads getting to the park, etc. And perhaps (old geezer mode on) a decline in care and thoughtfulness and respect.

I first visited in the winter of 1981, part of a spur of the moment road trip that included DV, Zion, and the Grand Canyon in my Honda Civic hatch, inspired by seeing the California desert exhibits at the Academy of Sciences museum in SF. A few years later I returned to DV and explored a lot off pavement on my dual sport motorcycle, and then in the late Eighties with my 4wd Ford Ranger. It always seemed pretty busy, and all we had were guide books and National Monument (yes, pre-DVNP) maps. But that was also an era when kids were taught in school to respect nature. “Give a hoot, don’t pollute”. “Don’t be a litterbug”. “Take nothing but photos, leave nothing but footprints”.

 

From my personal experience over the last 40 years? Yeah, it's social media and sheep mentality. lol

https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/hiking-and-backpacking/national-parks-social-media/

 

I think it's a fair question and I believe that social media and media in general bring extra focus on topics. A great example is this site--look at the number of people focused on Tacomas in the backcountry. In the 80's, Toyotas were popular. You learned about mods through magazines. Astronomy/photography have enjoyed a huge resurgence in large part because it's easier to learn and participate because of SM--of course, modern equipment has helped and social media has allowed people to organize workshops and share results. I think social media has had a huge effect on many things. Some good, some not so good.

 

I share the sentiments of the preceding posts in regards to the impact of social media and outdoor places.

The tram in my photo is not the Saline Valley Salt Tram but rather it is from the Keane Wonder Mine.

 

You just described the difference between a social media visitor and your visits. Yours took effort and interest to plan. A museum, guide books, things that force one to learn a bit and appreciate what they are going to see for what it is. Of course that also makes you respect it and appreciate it for what it is.

Social media is absolutely not that. It is about grabbing a photo of you with the place serving only as a backdrop to make you look enviable. Getting there is a geotagged photo and a phone map, there is no effort, research or appreciation of the place for what it is. Rather, it is all about what the place does for you, your brand, your self image.

Social media is absolute poison for these places. The influencers on it are worst kind of filth and any one of those scum lying to themselves thinking they are helping the world are the same kind of self deceivers that end up participating in history’s atrocities.

Hopefully I didn’t understate my point…

 

In the magazine era, you could do the same. Tony Huegel published a bunch of guidebooks with GPS coordinates, same with Peter Massey's Backcountry Adventures: Northern California--you only get stems in both books and you do sorta need to know a little bit about the area (BTW, if you can find it, Backcountry Adventures is a fantastic guidebook). In the modern era, very few look to the past by reading a book about Death Valley history before deciding where to go.

Look at all the threads that start out with "does anyone know" or "I know this has probably been asked before" for a topic that's been covered ad infinitum for proof of what's wrong with the social media era.

 

I used the Tony Huegel books for family exploration even well into the Internet era, though before social media per se. I’ve met him; he’s a cool guy, Toyota (and KLR650) enthusiast, but people just stopped buying his books at some point. I find the Backcountry Adventures guides to almost be TOO detailed, not to mention the first editions that I have are phone book sized.

 

Interest isn't the issue, convincing someone that it's important enough to spend money on is the challenge..Money is crazy low right now for any field based research, I can't believe I actually get to do field work this year with all the cuts going on.

Would be awesome to see the ROV footage though.

 

The Backcountry Adventure Guides cover a lot of area. Maybe a few paragraphs on any trail.



perfect size for the reading room.

 

Yeah, but you had to decide to buy the magazine or the guidebook first! That's a big difference from an algorithm meant to drive profits through psychological addiction pushing you a post specifically crafted to create experience envy. People will end up in the wilds for entirely different motivations based on those two paths. It is more than just a "more visitors" problem or a "too easy to find things" problem. Sites that have been in guide books (i.e. trivial to find) for decades and have survived the greatly increased visitation of the past decade or so can suddenly be ruined in a year or two once a few Gramholes post about it. It is literally the fundamental intent and implementation of social media that makes it poisonous compared with most any other media associated with the outdoors.

Obviously there are similarities between different types of media as well as a spectrum of uses and users for any given medium. The NPS is on social media of course, for them like many businesses it is essentially just a different walled garden within the internet where they can hopefully guide visitors to more responsible use. And there are asshats who read books too. I'm fine with increased visitation - they are public lands. Increased visitation can be done responsibly and has been done across the NPS in many places. I'm not fine with companies and individuals exploiting our public lands so they can try to make a quick buck off of them while causing irreparable harm to the sites they exploit for views.

Thanks for the recommendation on Backcountry Adventures - I've never actually seen that before!

 

Yes, and you had to know about it or search for it.

I think we can agree on this. I might be a little more harsh and suggest things like films, protests, and the like don't belong.
[/quote]

You'll have to find it used. It was first published in 2000? I thought I had lost my copy but found it.

I don't want to limit who goes or has access to our public lands because they are public. What I would like to see is better access (ie, truly impartial leadership and not parks that are effectively run by "Friends of" groups) for all and that includes expansion to allow better access.

 

I'm so glad someone else gets it. Social media is pure brain rot. Think of all the time the spent on social media per day. Teens are on it 4 hours a day on average. That's like having a part time job except there's nothing produced or learned from that time. Fucking nuts.

Access is only an issue because of increased visitation because of, you guessed it, social fucking media. I go agree we need better access and unbiased people running the system though. The NPS should not have "partners". Period.

 

California State Parks "partners" with various groups. I was curious what that meant. In CSP system, it means partners get around 80% of what's collected and 20% goes to the state. The split is different for different parks but 80/20 is about average. It's also difficult to find out exactly what the public gets as these groups tend to maintain an environmental focus judging by their own website. I visited a 501(c) website to find out budget info.

I honestly believe "partners" have no place in the administration or management of public lands.

 

TacomaWorld is social media.

I get a lot of good information and certainly appreciate the membership here. This discussion reminds me of Edward Abbey. I certainly appreciate the couple of books I read, the information they contained and Abbey as a character himself. But he thought you should WALK everywhere. I'm not doing that, and I don't agree.

 

It isn't even remotely such. There is a huge difference between forums, which have existed in one form or another since before the WWW existed, and what social media sites/apps do. This false equivalence that many folks seem to fall prey to is a large reason why so many people are trivially victimized by social media companies.

 

Your post got me thinking. Playing devil's advocate (not wanting to start a urinary Olympiad), can you explain your false equivalence thought?

As one who has used forums since before the WWW (as you have), I have a view of forums and their use. But I wonder what the new generation views forums as? They, in essence, grew up with "social media" - do they not just see a forum as an extension or another view of "social media"?

Sure, there is technical information on a forum that you will not find in SM. However, there are pretty pictures (and selfies). We research truck problems, and post/discuss the problem and solution. And, research places to go, the history of said places, etc - and post pictures of camping in said areas.

Couldn't one just skim the photos, letting that be their research, like on SM? To me, this is where forums are equated to SM.

I'm just rambling, remembering the world of CompuServe...

 

I'd have to disagree. They are, by their very nature social media. Very different audience, some of which are not even directly a part of TW (check out the number of bots that are viewing posts) and very specific content but they do create community, share profiles, etc.