Offroad-Express

Should we be doing more for ourselves on topics like vehicle heights,land access,tyre sizes etc.It seems like individual people and organisations are attempting to bring in new rules and regulations that if passed will effect some of us.We appear to have no say in the matter yet are the biggest group of 4 wheel drivers in NZ.How do we find out how to be heard and lobby for what is important to us.The NZ4WDA is not communicating with us and seem to be doing all the negotiations.What can be done.How do we get a voice out there were it matters.

Might be worth joining the NZ4WDA and raising your concerns through that platform. Otherwise set up a separate lobby group and start lobbying organisations that set the rules.

You did say United voice, which it wouldn't be if it's different agendas through different lobby groups.

The only problem I have with the NZ4WDA is if your not a member they don't communicte with you which leaves you in the dark.When I say a united voice I mean ORE members.

Thats no different than any other organisation, NZ4WDA is primarily for the members and their interests. If you create an ORE Association, it's charter and mandate is likely to be for the benefit of its members. Why should it be any different, I mean if paying members and Joe Public were to benefit equally then why would anybody pay their dues to join.

This thread is going to end up containing most of the mumbo jumbo
that the other 2 threads have, too much reading for people to keep informed of developments, maybe the other two should be locked then as this one is inspiring a united front?. Thats where this is going-all of us whether online forum guys or club guys...everyone is gonna have to pull together to sort this or at least settle on something that is agreeable to all and not forced onto us.

Someone also mentioned on one of the other threads that the Murray Waters fella and anybody else who he is preaching to (or is being seduced by him) is highly likely to be watching these threads. Why do you think he is so quiet on here these days

If that were to be the case then discretion should apply to whats being said as it could be used in a negative way against us.

Are rational debate can only be good for everyone. Trick is to keep emotions out, even when the view point is different.

klompy wrote:The only problem I have with the NZ4WDA is if your not a member they don't communicte with you which leaves you in the dark.When I say a united voice I mean ORE members.

would a ORE lobby communicate with NZFWDA? and it members?

lift laws were going to be pushed thru, nzfwda caught the ball and ran with it, options were either NO lift or a Sanctioned lift, if nzfwda had not run with it we would all be royally screwed on lifts,
when nzfwda try to communicate with this forum it turns into a slinging match between them and the forum , i dont exactly agree with various decisions that have been made in the past on my/our behalf, but if i really has a issue, i would put my hand up and get on the exec to change it from withen,

i am a life member of one large club and a founding member of another, i have made noises on various issues that pissed me off and lost, it is now in, and we have to deal with it as required, joys of democracy, ORE would be better off aligning themselves with nzfwda rather than trying to replace them.

the GOVT is going to deal with who comes across as a respected and representative of the majority, and who has established tentacles to general members and a long history.

Pedro

my 02 cents

Pedro - Why align with NZFWDA? Why NOT have a voice independant of an establishment that a lot of folks are offside with. Old resentments and grudges and personal issues would soon surface... human nature is what it is.

Klompy, you have pre-empted me by a few hours.

As I left my number on the "other" thread for folks to contact me directly if they had any thoughts on my comments, I have recieved feedback from a few.. all of it positive and pro-active and right along the lines of what you are suggesting. Ive been giving it further thought today and wanted to get my head clear in what I wanted to put forth.

Here it is in a nutshell, Im going to try to keep each point very simple:

1) Lift card thingy, wether popular or not, regardless of how its come about, IS looking like its going to happen, those affected are going to have to deal with it.

2) More than one person/organisation IS putting forward ideas to DOC specifically re max tyre sizes on DOC land. Some that will effect, esp in the SI, perhaps not so much in the North. This WILL PROBABLY, in some way, shape or form, become another reality. (Not soley due to Mr Waters stance either)

People on here have had a lot to say, me included. Alot of people on this forum and who are part of this community are going to be affected by these proposed changes.

I would propose a discussion, and I mean DISCUSSION, based on what can be done to involve ourselves more proactivly with any imminent discussion. As coily has suggested, vehemently, we do have some power to make a difference if we can form a concensus on a way to move foreward.

Whilst the internet is a great mode of allowing people to have their say, it also becomes a liability with it being too large to structure a controlled and ordered DISCUSSION. I was going to suggest the following as a stating point, both with topic and structure....

1) We accept the lift card lark is going to happen, although the vast majority of us dont KNOW what that height will end up being.
2) We look into the future a bit and accept that there is a DISTINCT PROBABILITY the some kind of tyre size limit on DOC land Will eventually happen
3) We discuss these things in a rational manner
4) A moderator or two is assigned to monitor all conversation, any irrelevant commentary or rantings etc to be discarded.
5) Anyone wishing to be devisive to be removed from the conversation (a little draconian perhaps, but some lines need to be kept, and a positive discourse needs possitive commentary to move forward)

Personally, due to various reasons, I would put forward at this juncture that if tyre sizes are to be looked at, which they ARE (mark my words) we could look at a discussion on what is a reasonable size to have the limit set at.
I would suggest 35inch - its a very common tyre size on vehicles now. To enforce a change of less than 35inch would push an unnecessary hardship on a lot of people. WE KNOW that its how the truck is driven, and not solely the size or type of tyre that can cause drama... lets get over that part. Obviousy those with bigger than 35 would be adversly disadvantaged, but Im looking at suggesting some common ground between thouse that would have 33 max and nothing, to those that want 44's.
Additionally, IF the lift card is to be set at 100mm/4inches, it would tie most vehicles with suiting 35inch tyres

Lets all get in and do some research on erosion, and gather some information to support our stance, not rant and rave about it. Ive seen first hand, as have many of you, ruts attract water and make the ruts deaper, but also seen tracks repair themselves in a matter months in other places. Lets log/diarise experiences with these differing situations.

Thoughts?

Ideas?

Suggestions?

Perhaps some polls to see the interest from the ORE community (with management consent too I should add)
1) resigned to a tyre size limit, what should it be 31, 33, 35, 38 etc
2) who wants to see a reasoned discussion about all this y, n, not interested

Once the community has had a chance to vote, then a discuusion moving forward can commence.

Best to speak up now and have a crack and being heard than saying nothing. Then at the very least we can say we tried, rather than doing nout and sitting here bemoaning how it all sux the big kumura in a years time.
Mark
021475822

While rules and regulations that suit most are the obvious debate to have, that's fine and will make a difference to joe average who abides by the rules... however this country is small in population and large in size especially in the south, all that rule making will just drive some normally law abiding folk "underground"

Well written and thought out Mark. I fully agree with all you have written.

It would be a great thing if a large proportion of the 4WD community, the whole of NZ, not just ORE could get together on this and make a proactive stand. Hopefully proving that although we are a group made up of people from a greatly varying cross section of society, we can get onside with each other to support and protect our shared past time.

A tyre size would keep log skidders out

And what if i wanted to take my fergie tractor up a track and plant some kumaras?
Or some guy who has a MOG and wants to take it for a play?
I think it is wrong to discriminate. Unless its about poofters trying to marry each other then go for it:)

Coily your second post is going off topic.

Good or bad, NZ4WDA has its own place. ORE members may not agree on most things. I don't see how going alone for either would work. Going alone as an individual would definitely not likely to work. So, the only way forward I see is to cooperate with each other. A bit of give and take on both sides.

Two key issues with modifications are lift height and tyre size. If we can agree and sort that, then we can concentrate on land access. At the moment there are too many fronts being attacked by too many people. All that effort gets diluted.

In the interest of disclosure, these are my personal views. Though I am a member of Auckland 4wd Club, hence a member of NZ4WDA through club affiliation..

Looking forward to digging deep into this lift / tyre debate at the upcoming WOF update course run by a local LVVC who opposes the new laws & three LTNZ staff coming along for a listen.

Shame its closed to anyone not an AVIC but should answer a few questions & stop the chinese whispers to some extent

Mark(XJ) you have thought it thru more than me,I have only been associated with the association involuntarily thru club membership and think ORE is of age and mature enough to stand alone.TJ I think what happens if any thing will be agreed upon by all on here who are interested and if that involves the association all good if not may be we can awaken a sleeping giant,we certainly have the members to do better.

can i suggest that we look at a maximim diff clearance instead of tyre size.
Maybe having it set with tyres at a certain pressure. Would help in keeping it at a "level" playing as everyone knows that every vehcile has a different diff height with a certain tyre size.

Fair comment. So perhaps someone, or a group with different vehicles can offer up comparative dimensions. I know that the XJ/TJ/ZJ on 33s is on a par with with a Saffa/Cruiser on 35s when we talk diff clearance, what those dimensions are though I no longer recall.

Coily, whilst I love your passion to the topic, as has been seen in the Thommos thread, the last couple havent been quite what I was aiming at for constructive commentary. We all know about the skidders and that angle of arguement, but simply, that aint gunna fly as a point of debate for what some of us are proposing. 99.9% of us dont own either unimogs, or Fergs nor have the desire to enter DOC land to plant veggies.

Lets keep it constructive and based on a way forward.

Fair enough. What i was trying to bring to the table was there should be nothing in regards to access based on tyre size. If you have a mobility scooter or a monster truck then thats fine by me. I dont like these limits you are trying to suggest. No limits is what i vote for.

Curiously there is a mechanism to become NZFWDA members without joining a 'club' and it's already called 'United 4WD'.
It will still cost the NZFWDA fee of $30 per year (there's no free lunch) and you become a basic member of NZFWDA, but the 'club' has no officers, simply an administrator who records the United members and forwards the fees to the NZFWDA.

http://www.nzfwda.org.nz/clubs/47/

Oh, there's also already a 'United Voice' in the 4WD arena too... http://www.ufwda.org

COILY wrote:Fair enough. What i was trying to bring to the table was there should be nothing in regards to access based on tyre size. If you have a mobility scooter or a monster truck then thats fine by me. I dont like these limits you are trying to suggest. No limits is what i vote for.

And Coily, your opinion is respected, a poll is up, click away.

Im not trying to suggest anything aside from "if the shits gunna happen anyway pushed by only a few, let the majority have a formal say as well"

If a majority of the poll users click no.. then it dies there, conversation over. No skin off my nose.

PeterVahry wrote:Curiously there is a mechanism to become NZFWDA members without joining a 'club' and it's already called 'United 4WD'.
It will still cost the NZFWDA fee of $30 per year (there's no free lunch) and you become a basic member of NZFWDA, but the 'club' has no officers, simply an administrator who records the United members and forwards the fees to the NZFWDA.

http://www.nzfwda.org.nz/clubs/47/

Oh, there's also already a 'United Voice' in the 4WD arena too... http://www.ufwda.org

Not quote so curious when its still a part of the NZFWDA which, if you read some of the earlier posts, quite a few folk either dont wish to be a part of, dont like all of what they see, or dont trust.

Feel free to click on your option on the poll thats been opened up Peter.
[edit.... well, if you could click on it!!]

Mark, your poll doesn't work.

NZ4WDA is just an entity, I am assuming it's the executive that people have differences with. You could always join and contest the seats and influence the outcomes.

Executive without members is like a leader without a People.

TJ wrote:Mark, your poll doesn't work.

NZ4WDA is just an entity, I am assuming it's the executive that people have differences with. You could always join and contest the seats and influence the outcomes.

Executive without members is like a leader without a People.

Erm nope it dont. Darn.

TJ, I choose not to be a NZFWDA member for my own reasons. Some know why, some dont.

Ok so if we want to get involved in the decision making process how do we go about it.What sort of structure or organisation do we need.Some of this will be hard as being a public forum we are transparent so no secrets.What do we need to be recognised and listened to.

Hi all I have posted in xj's poll thread before I read this one, I should have posted here , please have a read,

OR DON'T

FITZY.