I respectfully request..

Need some help:
Every time I bring up outdoor etiquette with another recreationalist, I find my altercation resolution skills tested.
I used to be the director of operations at a hockey rink, so I'm well polished there. But the fact I'm almost into a fight every time I ask someone to stay on the trail means I need to work on my approach.

How do you approach educating others about the perils of not respecting our access?
And better yet, what fun stories do you have of your d-bag run-ins? I use every experience as an opportunity to learn, so let's also learn from yours.

I just want to do everything that I can to ensure that one day my grand kids have the same (if not better) quality of life (access) that I enjoy.

People always accept criticism better when it is linked with the "why." Make sure you include the reasons why you are asking them to stay on the trail. Basically, everything you just told us here.

You're very right. 99% or more of your affect on someone is in the delivery and the rest is what you actually said.

You could try leading in with "I was out here last week and a forest service ranger (or insert other officiant title here) was correcting people that were wandering off the trails..". If they seem receptive, go from there with some other supporting facts on impact and what not.

An even milder approach would be to ask them to look at something for you like "Hey is that an alligator juniper over there?" then go from there. When they start glancing it over, they might say they're not sure, then it's wide open: "I've always wondered but I can't tell from the trail".. or whatever.

I get you on the brawling tendencies, and I'm anything but refined in my approach to blatant morons (a story might surface here soon regarding myself, a splitting axe and a couple of guys that stole my pile of firewood). What helps me in these situations is preparing myself ahead of time. Logic dictates that most people ignorant enough to trample everything but the trail are not going to be very receptive to criticism but this isn't always the case.. just the norm. I've actually seen really nice, gratuitous individuals doing high impact things but only because they just didn't know any better. As people that spend a ton of time outdoors, we tend to take our knowledge of LNT, impact, etc for granted. It's a learned behavior.. not instinctual.

Anticipate their personality and response and adjust fire accordingly before you even speak. Also, if you piss them off, they're more likely to do it passive-aggressively in the future in a rebellious style.

::Edit to add some other thoughts::

Try to tell them how it will benefit them or what they can get out of it. When you tell them what they CAN'T do, people get ornary.

Humans, especially Americans are relatively selfish at the core. They want to know what they are gonna GET from compliance.

Start by assuming they are unaware that their actions have negative impacts on the ecology and on access. Do not assume they are jerks. Even if you KNOW they are jerks, begin as if they are simply unaware. It gives them an out.

I once encountered a couple and their dog in Little Cottonwood Canyon outside of Salt Lake. This canyon is a watershed, and dogs are not allowed. Understand that I don't really care where responsible dog owners take their dogs, but I came across this couple while they were waiting for their dog to finish taking a dump. In the creek.

I said, "Hi. You might not realize this, but Little Cottonwood is a watershed, and dogs are not allowed."

"Oh? We didn't know that." (There is a giant neon sign at the base of the canyon which flashes only one message: NO DOGS!)

"Yeah," I continued, "the fine is pretty steep, too. $450, and you can be fined just for having your dog in the car while you drive through."

"Thanks! We'll be careful to not get caught." They said.

"I think you are misunderstanding me," I explained. "I am giving you a chance to take your dog home before I call the sheriff's department."

"Oh." They called their dog and left.

I don't mean to change the subject.........but do the rangers have all off the other wildlife trained to not relieve themselves near the creek? I went through all off that nonsense in 1988 during the comp at snowbird, when I had my puppy with me and had to have him babysat at the fire station (where they have their own working dogs).

Never has made much sense to me.

Jim Gloeckler wrote:I don't mean to change the subject.........but do the rangers have all off the other wildlife trained to not relieve themselves near the creek? I went through all off that nonsense in 1988 during the comp at snowbird, when I had my puppy with me and had to have him babysat at the fire station (where they have their own working dogs). Never has made much sense to me.

Really? I am guessing you arent that dumb but just in case....

Salt Lake has like half a million dogs living withint 15 minutes of little cottonwood canyon. Hundreds of dogs shitting and pissing on the same trail right next to the creek is a lot different than the occasional moose wondering through.

I really hope you werent serious.

DexterRutecki wrote: . Hundreds of dogs shitting and pissing on the same trail right next to the creek is a lot different than the occasional moose wondering through. I really hope you werent serious.

I can't believe I am in agreement with Dexter, but it really is about the fecal coliform bacteria that is in the dog poop.

Edit: In addition, the soil that is in some areas may not contain the bacteria and fungi necessary to properly break down waste from animals that are not indigenous, like dogs.

Jim Gloeckler wrote:I don't mean to change the subject.........but do the rangers have all off the other wildlife trained to not relieve themselves near the creek? I went through all off that nonsense in 1988 during the comp at snowbird, when I had my puppy with me and had to have him babysat at the fire station (where they have their own working dogs). Never has made much sense to me.

Because of what people feed their dogs, their shit isn't exactly the same as a wild woodland creature.

I also try to approach with a gentle hand when correcting newbie action when outdoor rock climbing. The other day I saw some people set up a top rope at a place that had a good chain anchor. They added rap rings to one of the chains and then slung a block off to the side. Now the rope goes up, through one of the anchors, then went a foot straight left to get to the sling they added, and then back down to the ground. I opened with asking them why they added that extra stuff instead of just using the anchor and then trying to explain that it probably ended weakening the anchor overall instead of helping with that setup.

Thread Derail..
I'm not saying I'd take my dog there either way but we have him on a Raw Diet(raw chicken back, eggs, raw vegetables) so its pretty close to a natural diet. But I agree, adding a large influx of animals that would otherwise not be there can dirty the water very fast.

DexterRutecki wrote: Really? I am guessing you arent that dumb but just in case....

LOL! Oh the irony. So Jeff, here's how to NOT lead into your corrective reasoning blurbs when meeting new people. Forgive me for being Mr. Obvious if that was the point of your delivery method Dex! ;)

Daryl Allan wrote: LOL! Oh the irony. So Jeff, here's how to NOT lead into your corrective reasoning blurbs when meeting new people. Forgive me for being Mr. Obvious if that was the point of your delivery method Dex! ;)

Well when Jim makes a smart ass comment about "rangers training the wildlife to not poop near the stream" he is kinda asking for it....

Does he honestly see no difference between the natural wildlife and 50,000 dogs brought up by the Salt Lake population? Some people just DONT get it and never will I guess, Jim being one of them.

DexterRutecki wrote: Well when Jim makes a smart ass comment about "rangers training the wildlife to not poop near the stream" he is kinda asking for it.... Does he honestly see no difference between the natural wildlife and 50,000 dogs brought up by the Salt Lake population? Some people just DONT get it and never will I guess, Jim being one of them.

Dexter, you're absolutely right. I too am greatly aggravated when people "just DONT get it". It doesn't take a wildlife biologist to understand that poop is not just poop and doesn't all decompose the same. Besides that people should not be flaunting their obviously invalid opinion on the internet. Like the old saying goes, if you don't have something smart to say, then STFU noob. I greatly respect your opinion and look forward to hearing more on the canine fecal problems of SLC.

Someone may have said this already but don't have time to read through this.

After I introduce myself and engage in some small talk. I often start with the question, could you do me a favor? I do this a lot when I find people top-roping on the anchor. People like to be helpful.

1Eric Rhicard wrote:Someone may have said this already but don't have time to read through this. After I introduce myself and engage in some small talk. I often start with the question, could you do me a favor? I do this a lot when I find people top-roping on the anchor. People like to be helpful.

Could you do me a favor and not resell shoes for $4 that my buddy gave to you for free? I might just have to start a thread bashing you :)

I was always told that water becomes clean after running undisturbed for a mile.

Also, doesn't salt lake city have a water treatment plant that could clean up the water?

Now it's 50,000 dogs...........really?

Have you ever looked at "clean water" under a microscope? You might learn that the word "clean" is relative.

Anyhow, if you folks from Utah think that it is important, then I guess it is your business.

Jim Gloeckler wrote:I was always told that water becomes clean after running undisturbed for a mile. Also, doesn't salt lake city have a water treatment plant that could clean up the water? Now it's 50,000 dogs...........really? Have you ever looked at "clean water" under a microscope? You might learn that the word "clean" is relative. Anyhow, if you folks from Utah think that it is important, then I guess it is your business.

Well just cause someone once told ya "water becomes clean after running a mile" does not make it true. Do you think about the things you are saying or do they just come straight out of your mouth? Does that statement about "water running a mile then its magically clean" even make the least bit of sense to you if you really think about it logically.....?

Jim come on man use that brain of yours!

And yes 50,000 dogs was obviously a generalization but lets just say there are A LOT of dogs in SLC. I dont want to drink their shit and you and your doggy are not special or the exception to the rule.

Jim Gloeckler wrote:I was always told that water becomes clean after running undisturbed for a mile. Also, doesn't salt lake city have a water treatment plant that could clean up the water? Now it's 50,000 dogs...........really? Have you ever looked at "clean water" under a microscope? You might learn that the word "clean" is relative. Anyhow, if you folks from Utah think that it is important, then I guess it is your business.

Mt. Sanitas in Boulder was a perfect example of why people need to clean up after their dogs. Some dude, some bored dude who obviously doesn't have a job or responsibilities (in Boulder? NO WAY) went around a few years ago and GPS mapped every turd. There were like 4 or 5 hundred sites. It smelled at my parents house blocks away. Now, Salt Lake is basically a toxic sludge pile so I don't really care what happens there anyways but tons of yuppies and their dogs can create quite a cluster F. And will you test out that water cleaning theory and drink from streams and rivers around the west and tell me how you feel a few days after? No? Then, yeah.

Evan S wrote: And will you test out that water cleaning theory and drink from streams and rivers around the west and tell me how you fell a few days after? No? Then, yeah.

Agreed, not sure how water running for a mile is going to somehow magically wash out all the bacteria or toxins. But Jim heard it once somewhere from someone so it must be true!

Anyhow, if folks from Colorado don't think they need any common sense, then I guess its their problem.

DexterRutecki wrote: Agreed, not sure how water running for a mile is going to somehow magically wash out all the bacteria or toxins. But Jim heard it once somewhere from someone so it must be true!

Natural gravel filtration and UV from the sun WILL do a lot. But not when there are literally dozens of pounds of non-natural fecal matter in it, as is the case most places around here.

Evan S wrote: Natural gravel filtration and UV from the sun WILL do a lot. But not when there are literally dozens of pounds of non-natural fecal matter in it, as is the case most places around here.

Yes I realize that. But making a over generalizing statement like "water running a mile undisturbed will make it clean" is a load of BS and more gullible people like Jim will buy into it if someone doesnt say something. Not to mention the creek we are specifically talking about def does not run undisturbed for a mile.

Water running on the surface of the river will come in very little contact with the gravel and UV from the sun might work but would you take a bucket of river water, sit it in the sun for an hour, then feel okay to drink it? I think I just found the cheapest water purifier ever!