Bush to open national parks to mountain bikes and other Public Lands

[taildragger]

This is the kind of sentiment I have a hard time understanding. Does our presence validate the existence of a piece of land or wilderness and without our presence the place should not exist? When you say no one is using the area, uh, how about the wildlife? The trees? Reptiles? Should not wilderness exist for its own sake, w/o human interference? Brings to mind a Aldo Leopold paraphrase: "What good are the forty freedoms w/o a blank spot on the map?"

If the only way people can use an area is by rolling over it, then in your opinion there should be no wilderness areas designated as such since the Wheeled Ones must keep out. And if the Rolling Ones are kept out, does it mean no one is using the area? But the fact is, if an area is made a wilderness and is closed to cars and bicycles and ATVs and helicopters, it is still open to the foot traveler, and this is good enough for me.

Vote for the change, at the point that its no longer being utilized its sold off, or used in another way (grazing, timber etc...)

[chomp]

And bikers so far have been totally absent from the list volunteers that do the day to day work of acquring land, managing land, and maintaining the trails.

Um, that statement is completely and totally false. Here is one case of a mtn bike group BUYING LAND that I know of in my back yard. Not working to conserve land, actually purchasing the land:

http://nemba.org/Articles/Vietnam/NE...mProperty.html

Mtn bikers and mtn bike associations have come a long long way in the last ten years. Its a disservice to all the work we have done to not acknowledge that.

[Homer&Marje]

Um, that statement is completely and totally false. Here is one case of a mtn bike group BUYING LAND that I know of in my back yard. Not working to conserve land, actually purchasing the land:

http://nemba.org/Articles/Vietnam/NE...mProperty.html

Mtn bikers and mtn bike associations have come a long long way in the last ten years. Its a disservice to all the work we have done to not acknowledge that.

Thank you for that link. I used to live in Hopkinton MA right next to where the Vietnam trails are. I have ridden most of them if not all of them many times and is a fantastic area. I used to work at a restaurant in milford and the group that bought that land and put the money together used to sit at my table every sunday after their ride.

They did a HELL of a job raising money and there was such support for them to do it that it took them much less time than originally planned for. Really good people. And absolutely fantastic trails back there, I HIGHLY suggest it.

[mudhead]

Whatever Tipi, most WB'ers should take up mountain biking. They might start to look like hikers then instead of metabolic syndrome poster kids.

Agreed! I do dislike plane noise, so I give Tipi a smile for his opinion.

- The Unabomber Manifesto,

Paragraphs 188 - 189

You have the right to your opinions, and such.


I don't know why, but I found the use of this whackjob's ramblings distasteful.

[Jim Adams]

Not when you factor in schoolkids. Probably at least 40:1 in favor of backpacks then.

Those aren't backpacks, they are daypacks used to carry books, video games and guns. They have nothing to do with backpacking.

geek

[Tipi Walter]

You have the right to your opinions, and such.


I don't know why, but I found the use of this whackjob's ramblings distasteful.

Using the Unabomber quote was in my opinion a baiting attempt to diffuse some anti-bicycle comments by offering an extreme example of an incendiary anti-technology rant, thereby tacitly ridiculing any effort to get the danged bicycles off foot trails.

[weary]

Walter,
Again, I agree with you however the hikers are in the minority and the wheels are in the majority. I'd venture to say that Honda sold more ATV's LAST YEAR than backpacks sold in the US in the past decade.

geek

Based on my observations, I doubt if that is true. My town has a dozen or two avid ATV users. Many times that number of walkers. Our guided walks this year attracted around 150 people. At least three times more people just walk the trails by themselves, though accurate counts are impossible, since our 20 miles of trails have no gates, or sign up requirements.

Weary

[dessertrat]

I can't see trail maintainers being so willing to volunteer their time when it comes to patching up trails torn up by mountain bikes. (And yes, I used to bike offroad a lot, so I know the culture, the damages to the trails, and the efforts that some mtb'ers put into repairing damage).

[Mags]

If trails are constructed with MTBers in mind, how you feel about that? What is MTBers adopt a section of a well known regional trail?

I readily admit Western trails are different than Eastern Trails. The horse population means that the trails are more forgiving (I think). I think horses do more damage to trails than MTBikes to be honest.

But, I also think there are so few people who appreciate the outdoors vs the population as a whole it is b etter to work together than against each other.

I'd like my own private Idaho as well. Realistically it ain,t gonna happen.

Finally, quoting the unibomber does seem...odd?

[weary]

Um, that statement is completely and totally false. Here is one case of a mtn bike group BUYING LAND that I know of in my back yard. Not working to conserve land, actually purchasing the land:

http://nemba.org/Articles/Vietnam/NE...mProperty.html

Mtn bikers and mtn bike associations have come a long long way in the last ten years. Its a disservice to all the work we have done to not acknowledge that.

Chomp, if you will take the time to read my post, you may discover that I was referring only to the mountain bikers that use our town land trust preserves. I don't have a list of all the volunteers nationally. Just those in my town and a few that work on the AT in Maine.

Weary

[Jim Adams]

Based on my observations, I doubt if that is true. My town has a dozen or two avid ATV users. Many times that number of walkers. Our guided walks this year attracted around 150 people. At least three times more people just walk the trails by themselves, though accurate counts are impossible, since our 20 miles of trails have no gates, or sign up requirements.

Weary

Weary,
That may be true in your town but Maine is fairly sparsely populated compared to most eastern towns. I would venture to say that in Pennsylvania, 65-75% of households own some type of ATV.

The figures that Honda posts for ATV sales are staggering and you still have Yamaha, Suzuki, Kawasaki, Polaris, Can am, Bombardier, etc.

geek

[weary]

Just an addendum. Our 800 acres of town land trust preserves were all bought or donated for use as nature preserves and walking trails. We haven't banned mountain bikes, though we may have to one of these years.

I continue think it would be nice if bikers would voluntarily remain away during the critical mud times, and occasionally work to repair the obvious special damage the tires cause. An occasional cash gift would help also.

Preserving land is not easy. We've raised a million dollars over the past 20 years and donated hundreds of volunteer hours building and repairing trails, all in a town with a population of 2,100.

I know most walkers don't volunteer labor or money either. But a few do. No mountain biker has done so, at least on the preserves I know best, those in my town.

Weary

[Homer&Marje]

Using the Unabomber quote was in my opinion a baiting attempt to diffuse some anti-bicycle comments by offering an extreme example of an incendiary anti-technology rant, thereby tacitly ridiculing any effort to get the danged bicycles off foot trails.

If you want to find some an example of an incendiary anti-technology rant, you might check back at your own posts.

Of course I was showing an extreme example. You obviously think that wheeled vehicles is a serious problem in this country. Neglecting mostly the fact that people and their desire to explore and procure understanding is what led us to the problem. Stop thinking that the worlds trails are yours and start thinking of them as ours.

A little more lee way in both directions I say is the best course of action. Dont close line me with your hiking stick the next time I go riding by, pardon me for enjoying more than one activity as a "Progressive" human being, hike on all fours if you want to. Might get awfully cold in the winter time hiking in a loin cloth.

[Kirby]

I like the idea of letting park leaders decide what trails are open to mountain bikes, not federal regulators.

Kirby

[Custerslaststand]

If they get this passed it will be great!! Can't wait to tear into some dirt. Give the trail maintainers something to do. Maybe put some WBers to work. (smile)

[Rocks 'n Roots]

I used to maintain the New York Long Path in Rockland County. It was always a hiking trail and was built by hikers specifically for hiking. Mt Bike and ATV companies built a product and sold it with enthusiam and profited from our free market society. They didn't however account for or take any responsibility for their product and the damage it does to hiking trails. After the Palisades section was obviously becoming a popular section for New York City area bikers the Palisades Park Commission shut it down to bikes. It was close enough to roads and rangers to do so. The more remote areas on the Palisades cliffs up in Rockland were harder to police so riders rode there with impunity - ATV's too. The increased erosion caused by mt bikes on the fragile mountain clay soils with over 53 inches of rain a year was immediately apparent. Mug bogs that were never there before started showing up and climbs had outshoot dirt and run-off from knobby tires blowing out trail. I built a brand new section on a virgin ridge to get it up off a road by some houses - something I wanted to do for years. I went back to maintain it and noticed it had several years worth of trail wear within the first year. It was being frequented by mt bikes. And I assure you their attitude was "that's life, get used to it". These groups never organized to build their own trails and never helped maintain the hiking trails they invited themselves in on.

I suspect many of the offhand multiple use commenters are not maintainers and probably have a hiking connection to the AT mainly. They probably don't have a firsthand knowledge of the problems AT volunteers go through because of mt bikes and ATV's.

Bush is the devil.

Good to see you still posting 'Weary"!

[Lone Wolf]

Bush is the devil.

Good to see you still posting 'Weary"!

bye bye political loser. you guys are buds obviously? cute

[Gray Blazer]

Bush is the devil.

Why? Cuz Hugo Chavez said so?

This post to be deleted soon. So many brainwashed people in this country.

[nitewalker]

hikers cause the least impact on the trail. bikes would be 2nd, horses 3rd, atv 4th, jeeps 5th and so on. the bigger the means of travel the bigger the impact on the used area.. i really dont mind if mtbikers use our trails because most of the trails i hike are impassable by most bikers. low lying trails will get most of the use by the bikers. how many of you have seen a mtn biker on a summitt in the whites? not, it doesnt happen. i guess if we give them a chance it may happen at some point. hell some of the mtns down south have roads that go up and over them and we are going to worry about a bike, uggh....i usually agree with tipi but i am going to let the bike issue slide for now... noisy atv's are the bigger problem along with people who have no regaurd for others.......

[weary]

I like the idea of letting park leaders decide what trails are open to mountain bikes, not federal regulators.
Kirby

Hey, Kirby. The folks proposed to make the decisions work for the federal government, and thus are "federal regulators."

Weary