What fascinates me more about your position are the implications it has for common held property actually. I believe we have to protect the environment too. There is no way around the fact that we always going to create high entropy waste. Fine, I accept that fact. The issue I think that is more important here isn't the waste issue completely but how do you deal with the intersection of rights. its classic game theory in this case we can model it with prisoner dilemma game with long term interactions. So, a tit-for-tat or two-tits for a tat strategy usually yield the best results. And I found it course that essentially most of you saw this game not as a long term series of interactions but as one interaction and zero-sum in the end.
That's really what I thought was so fascinating. Because I think we can actually solve this problem of land allocation and usage in a better way and actually reduce these costs if we make more of these off-road parks state owned and free use.
Because contrary to your beliefs I don't and I've said it before don't want to shut down parks. I want be able to use my toys too. I just don't want to damage other people's enjoyment of say stream 1 mile or 2 miles down from the park if they want to use it for fishing with all the silt and oils I might put in to it.
Yes offroad parks that are state owned and free use. Almost like trails on BLM land. Trails maintained mostly by volunteers and clubs who hold cleanups and such to keep them open (not the state).
Then the state closes those trails, you know to preserve the environment, then approves large amounts of land to be developed into condos for rich people in very sensitive areas. (Look up Moab trail closures and the Kane creek development project).
It seems the solution when people have control over an offroad recreation area is to do infrastructure projects (shore up hillsides, put pads in creek beds to keep silt from getting kicked up, bridges over streams, trail cleanups, etc.) Almost like they care about areas and the sport and want their children to get out and enjoy this country just as they are enjoying it today, perhaps even better.
The government's solution is to close it down so nobody can have it.
A great example of a project is something the Rubicon Trail Foundation is doing on the Rubicon lately to prevent soil erosion into a creek, which is to reroute the trail to a different path. Will keep silt out of the river, the trail open, and provide an even more challenging route. Something done by a non-profit, not the state. The state wanted to close down that section of trail instead without creating a new route. Would have ruined the trail.
