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.
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!
V.
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
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.