|
Post by isawtman on Apr 2, 2016 8:10:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Lonewolf on Apr 2, 2016 20:23:56 GMT -8
One thing he has wrong... bikes are not "benign". The tracks they leave are "gutters" for rain water, causing serious trail erosion.
But if this comes to pass, there should be a mandate that every bike be equipped with a continuous, motion activated tinkling bell so those on foot can hear them coming.
|
|
|
Post by absarokanaut on Apr 3, 2016 6:03:49 GMT -8
This will not come to pass Lonewolf. Bikers have proven that simply because of their shear numbers they can be seriously destructive to a trail. And sadly bikers discount the destructive nature of their simple numbers, and they don't have the "time" let alone decency to stop riding when it rains and let the trail dry.
As a former horse outfitter I readily admit irresponsible horseback riders can seriously damage highly used trails and a relatively small number of horse trails should be far more heavily regulated; but almost every trail we hike on in most of our wildernesses were made by horses and mules. Unlike bikes they were there before, and they will remain. Thousands of people can't jump on a horse and ride a single trail in a day like bikers can.
Mt. Bikers have held up the designation of millions of acres of wilderness in Colorado for years because it would kick them off some of the most prized trails [less than 30 total miles] around Crested Butte that they have HEAVILY impacted. I know Swimswithtrout is a bike proponent and I'm sure we have others here. With all due respect to our friends this will never happen unless Americans REALLY want their wilderness overrun.
|
|
|
Post by isawtman on Apr 3, 2016 8:17:18 GMT -8
I really don't want to hear a bell when I'm out in the Wilderness. Ted Stroll's Bill is a bunch of baloney filled with misinformation. He's the same guy that wants mountain bikes on the Pacific Crest Trail. It's obvious that when the Wilderness Act say "no other form of mechanical transport" that bikes are excluded from the Federal Wilderness.
|
|
whistlepunk
Trail Wise!
I was an award winning honor student once. I have no idea what happened...
Posts: 1,446
|
Post by whistlepunk on Apr 3, 2016 8:34:11 GMT -8
It is not a matter of inevitability. Mountain bikes are using Wilderness Trails and the PCT now. The FS and BLM have given enforcement such a low priority the ban on bikes is like the illegality of pot -- routinely ignored and one can engage the act in safety.
The agencies give the same corporate spin "We enforce all laws" while the LEOs are too busy with timber theft, archaeology theft, vandalism, meth labs, and property crimes to chase mountain bike tracks on trails. The occasional well publicized citation does not alter the reality on the ground.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2016 9:55:13 GMT -8
While bike riders may be successful in trespassing on some wilderness trails, that is not a comprehensive fact elsewhere. It's not such a current problem in all wilderness areas. But to legalize the trespass would be to promote a problem in those areas that it has yet to appear in force. Personally, I find some of the arguments used by bike advocates to be pretty darn dull-witted. For instance, take the claim that allowing wheeled vehicles into wilderness will create more user-advocates for wilderness. But if you have to compromise or destroy wilderness to make yourself an advocate for wilderness, then you've done nothing more than make yourself an advocate for compromising or destroying wilderness. Wilderness does not depend upon human impact for protection. Wilderness has many values beyond human visitation. Often these areas serve to protect clean water and native habitats, and to preserve species of both plants and animals. Wilderness areas benefit huge portions of the population that may have never stepped foot in a wilderness area. It seems the entire bike-advocate argument is founded on the idea that a little compromising of wilderness will not hurt. But the direction of compromise is in the wrong way. We need to strive toward stricter, rather than more lenient, standards of wilderness. The International Mountain Bike Association (IMBA), under Wilderness FAQs, takes the following positions: "Insisting" that any of us support IMBA's positions is arrogant. I feel that I am being plenty generous to even tolerate their positions. But I have no intention of supporting them. Certain secessionist forces that precipitated our Civil War claimed the right to nullify federal law. The bloodiest war in US history ensued. Now comparable forces in Congress have a similar attitude of nullifying laws by de-funding enforcement. Those forces have been far too successful for our own good. Laws often need enforcement, and that requires funding.
|
|
swmtnbackpacker
Trail Wise!
Back but probably posting soon under my real name ... Rico Sauve
Posts: 4,886
|
Post by swmtnbackpacker on Apr 3, 2016 11:55:32 GMT -8
Think it's been hashed out somewhere down South (Carolinas?) where part would be traditional wilderness while part would be reserved for mountain bikers. If they can get the bureaucracy to cooperate, now. I don't mind sharing a summit but bikes move too fast around blind corners to be safe for hikers IME.
|
|
|
Post by trinity on Apr 3, 2016 12:08:25 GMT -8
Stroll's article is beyond silly. "As for the call for us to “go somewhere else,” we would never patronize these critics by saying they’re not welcome in wilderness unless they travel by bicycle. We prefer to bicycle, but we don’t insist that everyone else has to ride." Um, brilliant logic. Thank you for not demanding that we all use bicycles in the wilderness. By the same logic, we should allow ATVS in the wilderness, as long as the ATVers don't demand that everyone use ATVs. This guy's an attorney? As for bicycling being "environmentally benign", anyone who has been to any area popular with mountainbikers knows how untrue this is. There always seems to be a contingent of mountainbikers that feels the need to constantly go offtrail. Though I'm sure it is mostly a few bad apples, I have seen some pretty terrible erosion as a result of mountainbikers blazing new trail after new trail after new trail until entire hillsides were just big mazes of slowly eroding trail networks. Not a pretty sight. Thanks, isawtman , for your response and your advocacy for wilderness.
|
|
|
Post by Lonewolf on Apr 3, 2016 16:10:26 GMT -8
but bikes move too fast around blind corners I was about 10 miles into Bull of the Woods (OR), just reaching the end of a long uphill when I suddenly hear "LOOK OUT!". I jerk my head up and lunge sideways into some rocks, barely being missed by a biker blasting down the trail. He screamed "A$$HOLE!" as he went by, never even slowing to see if I was hurt (I was). Dumbass is 10 miles into a wilderness where he's not supposed to be and I'm the a$$hole?? That's when I decided if it ever happens again, my trekking poles are going through a front wheel.
|
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 13,527
Member is Online
|
Post by BigLoad on Apr 3, 2016 16:40:18 GMT -8
Bikes today, ORVs tomorrow. Goodbye Wilderness.
|
|
amaruq
Trail Wise!
Call me Little Spoon
Posts: 1,264
|
Post by amaruq on Apr 4, 2016 6:11:11 GMT -8
Dumbass is 10 miles into a wilderness where he's not supposed to be and I'm the a$$hole?? Sorry to the cyclists on the forum, but that holier-than-thou/never-in-the-wrong attitude is common among most of the cyclists I've had encounters with here in and around Toronto. Including the one cyclist going to wrong way down a one-way street without stopping at a T-intersection (why would there be a stop sign facing the wrong direction) where the stem has the right of way (where I was coming through) at night with no lights on his bike. I got flipped off. I spent an afternoon hiking around Apex Park outside of Denver last year and looked up the mountain bike rules before going in so I'd know where to expect them. Park management should have saved the ink.
|
|
Westy
Trail Wise!
Diagnosed w/Post-Trail Transition Syndrome
Posts: 2,008
|
Post by Westy on Apr 4, 2016 6:24:32 GMT -8
Mountain bikers we encountered in many portions of the Colorado Trail last summer were using multi-access sections of the trail as an obstacle course or race course. In 20% of the encounters we were the obstacles and realized actual fear for our safety at times. Of course that's not all mountain bikers. We literally ran into mountain bike competitions and were dutifully forewarned in advance. When we entered into designated wilderness area it was with a sigh of relief. Mountain bikers have a right to enjoy public lands, however public lands must be managed to benefit all. Wilderness areas should remain just that.. wilderness areas.
|
|
FamilySherpa
Trail Wise!
Tangled up in Rhododendron
Posts: 1,791
|
Post by FamilySherpa on Apr 4, 2016 6:37:59 GMT -8
couple of bad eggs always ruins the entire batch. mountain bikes won't be allowed into the wilderness in our lifetimes, imo.
not all cyclists are a-holes, btw.
|
|
|
Post by Lonewolf on Apr 4, 2016 14:21:55 GMT -8
not all cyclists are a-holes, btw. No but I'll say that the ones who violate the wilderness ban are.
|
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,959
|
Post by rebeccad on Apr 9, 2016 9:13:40 GMT -8
not all cyclists are a-holes, btw. The problem is that it only takes a small sub-set to ruin it, as you note. I think the same is true about the attitude that "all bikers a scoff-laws who run red lights." Not true--I'm pretty sure I see more bikes stopping than running lights. But enough are (suicidal) idiots that drivers are forced into a position of assuming that all bikers are idiots. As a biker myself (road, not mtn; I hate meeting bikes on the trail) I very much resent riders whose arrogance makes drivers P.O.d at all bikers. Their disregard for laws and safety endanger me.
|
|