Something has been bothering me for a while: the whole SUV-as-civilian-tank-in-the-wilderness TV ad campaign. The concept of becoming one with nature by driving over it in your car pisses me off.

We've been shown Rangers and Monteros and 4Runners and Crapkickers...and more...driving up, directly up the sides of mountains. We've been shown Sports Utility Vehicles cruising comfortably across frozen, trackless Arctic expanses, and rolling effortlessly through lush green jungle settings. More damnably, we've been shown SUV's splashing happily across the shallow end of a pristine mountain lake, complete with trout jumping and a moose lifting his head from the water to appreciably regard the... beauty... of the rugged SUV.

The subtext of all this is: this is okay. It doesn't hurt the environment. Fish and wild furry creatures welcome their shiny, wheeled brethren which, of course, would never leak oil, squash Bambi, silt up streams, crush plants, or erode soils.

We've even been shown the Man in the Moon leaning down from the heavens to voice his approval to the proud owners of an Isuzu Trooper, resting peacefully in the grass beside a mountain lake. Apparently, even the gods approve.

The choices that have been made for SUV names are intriguing, too. You might think that animal names might be appropriate, but they're not being used (Ford no longer makes its Bronco.). SUV names fall into three basic categories:

1) Rugged-sounding place names, like Denali, Montana, Outback, and Tacoma (the latter might sell well nationally, but I'll bet none of those people have actually been to Tacoma. Here in western Washington, the only ones who drive Tacomas are, well, from Tacoma.)

2) Designations of humans in the act of controlling the environment, such as Trailblazer, Explorer, Trooper, Montero (Spanish for 'hunter' - which, in English, might have been a bit intimidating to find yourself next to on the freeway), and the small and spunky Sidekick.

3) Rugged and/or noble-sounding names that are either made-up or are not particularly pertinent, like Nissan's XTerra or Cadillac's Escalade (which, if you look it up, means " a scaling or mounting by means of ladders, esp. in an assault upon a fortified place."), What, were all the good names already taken?

And now, advertisers have added a new wrinkle: "And while you're there, fuck with a bear!"

Advertisers plugging not just beer but other manly products have with increased frequency been hitting the "wild beast as comic foil" routine. I suspect it's a continuation of the whole Judeo-Christian man's dominion over the earth-theme.

In one such ad, guy #1 sprints across the clearing in the woods, yelling, "Get in the car! Get in the car!" Doors slam, a sporty SUV accelerates smoothly through the forest (N.B. You seldom get to see the actual surface they're driving on or what they're doing to it. Ignorance remains bliss.) Guy #1 now shows guy #2 the newly-developed Polaroid of guy #1 with a black bear in a friendly headlock, as he snaps off the photo WITH HIS FREE HAND. Guy #2 utters "You're an IDIOT" as their SUV whisks them quietly away.

In another ad, five guys SNEAK UP ON AND ATTACK two or three grizzlies that are busily shredding the guys' packs and campsite. The men surprise the bears, attacking with loud voices and waving arms. The bears, terrified, run away immediately. Punch line: one guy indignantly huffs, "Ya' just don't mess wif' a man's salad!" I forget what the ad was selling; I doubt it was salad dressing.

In yet another, one guy sprays his pal with honey (from a honey bear squeeze bottle, no less!) to get a raging grizzly's attention away from himself. In the next scene, the sprayer is now sharing the alcoholic beverage of choice with two pneumatically-endowed bimbos, as, in the distance, the other guy dangles precariously from the top of a small tree as the grizzly bounces the tree trunk mercilessly. As one guy contemplates a three-way, the other considers getting torn three ways from Sunday.

On one level, I guess it's all okay with me. After all, anyone who actually TRIED something like that would be quickly and effectively removing himself from the gene pool. And that's a good thing.

But then the survivors and/or the kin of the shredded and stupid would doubtlessly sue - not the auto companies for suggesting that such antics are feasible - but, rather, the national parks, for harboring such... criminal elements... masquerading as big, cute, fuzzy things. The innocent bears would lose out, in any case.

You and I might reasonably assume that such ads are meant to be funny, and know that we should never attempt such a stunt with any wild animal. But, in dealing with the general public, never assume intelligence: we've all heard enough horror stories of visitors to Yellowstone trying to sit little four-years-old-going-on-dead Ashley on top of the head of a resting bison for a photo op...

Actual close interactions with large wild animals such as bears are rare, and are always potentially extremely dangerous to the human involved. Despite that inescapable fact, most of the bears that I have encountered personally have, immediately upon noticing me, turned tail and run like hell away from me. I've just been lucky. Regardless, such experiences can simply scare the hell out of you. When you meet something the size of a refrigerator, with legs, on the trail, ANY sudden move it makes captures your FULL interest.

TV ads presenting such interactions as comical, while obviously impossible to most of us, establish an inaccurate and dangerous perception of these animals as cute, cuddly, and approachable.

Man's apparent dominion over nature has been distorted hazardously by advertisers to include treating large wild animals like neighborhood knuckleheads and thinking of the backcountry as a drive-in movie.

Author Dave McBee's idea of a Sports Utility Vehicle is a leaky Grumman canoe and a stick to discourage mooching Canada geese when they come after his m&ms. What he saves on gasoline he spends at Costco for the five pound bag.