“Rogue” Trails

Over the years it has been interesting to note the latest buzz words going around in government circles describing trails in K Country, such as “designated” and “sustainable.” The latest is  “rogue” to describe unofficial trails made by hikers, bikers, equestrians and wildlife. I must protest. Used as an adjective it means “ corrupt, dishonest, operating outside desirable (government) controls.”  Words are powerful and must be carefully used. Use the wrong words and you can start a war! In this case the word “rogue” does nothing to help  relationships between  K Country  and the users, the general public. It is downright unfriendly and should be nipped in the bud  before it spreads like a virus. Is there something wrong with the word “undesignated”?

I welcome all comments and opinions on this.


Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Vern Dewit Apr 6, 2010, 6:23 am

    I agree. The only rogue trails are the ones that either end with an uphill grunt to your car or don’t have a good view at some point… 😉

    If every scramble route is considered ‘rogue’ then I’d say there’s more than a few of these!


  • Dan Overes Apr 5, 2010, 7:23 pm

    I agree with your statement 100%. The term “rogue” carries a very powerful connotation and immediately sets the tone for relations between the government and the users. If the management of K-Country wants to be engaged with the users in a meaningful way they need to think carefully about the message they are sending.

  • Peter Goodman Apr 5, 2010, 6:54 pm

    Hello all “Rogue” Trail users!

    Just about every ridge and hill in K-Country has at least one unofficial trail following the most logicial ascent route. Most are not often travelled, but all are appreciated by those who do use them and I must say the environmental damage is usually far less than that experienced on the heavily used “official Trails”.

    I agree that the word “Rogue” should not be used to describe these very useful trails and it does indeed carry the absolutely wrong connotation.

    Peter Goodman

  • Rachel Apr 4, 2010, 6:43 pm

    I can’t think of what else to say except to second your opinion.
    I understand frustration with trail-braiding, short cutting, and trails developing in sensitive areas, but trails have to start somewhere, and a well-made but not designated trail is often welcome in an area.
    To designate any trail not officially created as ‘rogue’ is to suggest that only government-maintained trails are at all permissible. That isn’t the attitude I want applied to public lands.

  • Brenda Apr 4, 2010, 9:03 am

    I agree that the term “rogue” gets the wrong attention. With all the funding cutbacks, K-Country needs to harness and take advantage of the energy out there for new trails. The number of undesignated trails will continue to grow and no doubt, some will appear in undesirable areas and have the wrong impact on the environment.

    I stumbled across a new trail yesterday that I don’t believe has “approval”. Yet, someone has put a lot of energy in picking a nicely graded route, marking it and even building a bridge!