Bikes in Wilderness Again

[BigAntlerGetter]

Proposed wilderness allows bicycle usage at least it does where I'm located. Everyone's fight with horses tearing up trails more than bikes is completely false. The way a horses foot is shaped packs trails down, the reason trails get destroyed is in the spring when water runs down the middle of he trail pulling loose dirt and causing erosion. If a horse destroys a trail then hikers do just as much as horses. Bicycles tires spinning turning and all that loosen dirt and push it around. Causing berms on turns, braking on downhill pulls dirt down.

I'd like to see someone make a trail for bikes only and a trail for horses only and see which one gets destroyed first. I've got trails I have trails that have been ridden on daily 5-6 times a day of groups of 2-8 trail riders and those trails have been the same trails for at least 10 years. I have seen bicycle trails made 2 years ago that were completely dug out and destroyed.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

They are not pirated trails, they are "undocumented"

And myself as an outfitter gets heavy fines for making "undocumented" trails.

 

[Billinsd]

Ha, I called my representatives office, Duncan Hunter and was told he co-sponsored the bill that was written by Tom McClintock. Both these men are very conservative in a very dark blue state. I can't remember when I have ever disagreed with them, certainly not on this issue.

So, yes I said to tell Duncan hunter to vote yes on a bill he is co-sponsoring!!!

 

[Billinsd]

And myself as an outfitter gets heavy fines for making "undocumented" trails.

Correct!!! Anyone getting caught making undocumented trails can get a heavy fine.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

Correct!!! Anyone getting caught making undocumented trails can get a heavy fine.

And I believe anyone caught using these same trails should receive the same fine. I can get fined in the forest for driving down a road that was closed, even if someone pulled the marker out. It's my responsibility to know documented trails and what is and isn't allowed.

 

[Billinsd]

And I believe anyone caught using these same trails should receive the same fine. I can get fined in the forest for driving down a road that was closed, even if someone pulled the marker out. It's my responsibility to know documented trails and what is and isn't allowed.

Right!

 

[Billinsd]

Proposed wilderness allows bicycle usage at least it does where I'm located. Everyone's fight with horses tearing up trails more than bikes is completely false. The way a horses foot is shaped packs trails down, the reason trails get destroyed is in the spring when water runs down the middle of he trail pulling loose dirt and causing erosion. If a horse destroys a trail then hikers do just as much as horses. Bicycles tires spinning turning and all that loosen dirt and push it around. Causing berms on turns, braking on downhill pulls dirt down.

I'd like to see someone make a trail for bikes only and a trail for horses only and see which one gets destroyed first. I've got trails I have trails that have been ridden on daily 5-6 times a day of groups of 2-8 trail riders and those trails have been the same trails for at least 10 years. I have seen bicycle trails made 2 years ago that were completely dug out and destroyed.

I'm all in favor of horses. Those that I have heard complain about horses do not complain about trail damage, they complain about all the poop and stink on the trail. It does not bother me, in the least bit, though.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

When people complain to me about the poop on the trail and the smell I tell them welcome to Colorado. I hear the same complaints about the cattle on forest service land that graze. Different subject all together though, but the horseman and horse riding has been around longer than any other form besides hiking. That's why I believe it deserves a spot in wilderness.

Sorry to anyone about the horse poop but I don't hear complaints about wild animal poop on the trails especially bear poop. Or the dog poop that is left in a bag on the side of the trail for someone else to pick up.

 

[Billinsd]

When people complain to me about the poop on the trail and the smell I tell them welcome to Colorado. I hear the same complaints about the cattle on forest service land that graze. Different subject all together though, but the horseman and horse riding has been around longer than any other form besides hiking. That's why I believe it deserves a spot in wilderness.

Sorry to anyone about the horse poop but I don't hear complaints about wild animal poop on the trails especially bear poop. Or the dog poop that is left in a bag on the side of the trail for someone else to pick up.

Absolutely!! So, they do that in Colorado too? Leave a bag of dog poop on the side of the trail? I thought that was a California thing? And I have seen it in just the past couple of years. I've always wondered, what are those people thinking? Do they just not want to carry it to the end of the trail and throw it in the trash? Do they believe there is a good dog poop fairy that disposes of the bags? When I am walking my dog on the trail I kick his poop off the side of the trail so people don't step on it. That's old school. Horse riders are being made to carry out their horse poop in some places in California, which seems very crazy to me.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

My question is always why pick it up, and bag it if ur not gonna throw it away would do less damage, on its own off the trail than in the bag. I believe it is the California people that bag it and leave it Hahahaha no you can't classify who does it besides the lazy people.

If they want me to pack out horsepoop I'll leave it at the trail head for them. But I've trained my horses and mules not to poop on the trail, only at the trailhead.

 

[elkduds]

Our legal institution of Wilderness is not about how people access it. It is about nature existing without technology impacting it. That does not prevent jets from leaving contrails crosshatching the sky overhead, or road apples, or tracks in the mud. The point of wilderness is not how fast you can move through it. Technology changes the experience of wilderness, then it is no longer as wild. Wilderness as an ideal and set of laws came to be because the truly wild places were vanishing under the blade, the motor, the wheel, and because this nation elected to preserve some of these wild places. It is a contentious process; advancing technology and growing populations push against the ideological boundary of wilderness with ever-increasing pressure. Wilderness is intended as the reference standard for the absence of technology, as one counterbalance to human progress. That is why cycling in designated wilderness is antithetical.

 

[JWP58]

I'm all in favor of horses. Those that I have heard complain about horses do not complain about trail damage, they complain about all the poop and stink on the trail. It does not bother me, in the least bit, though.

How about all the cigarette butts left by the riders. Nothing like a pristine wilderness eh? And ya horses destroy trails...well maybe just make them a complete p.i.a. to traverse on foot.

 

[Jason Snyder]

Absolutely!!! Mountain biking is becoming extinct like hunting is. The push is to keep people from pedaling in the backcountry and instead dumping their cars and pedaling in the city on streets because this is "greener" to do so.

Curious what your basis is for this statement? Are trails actually being closed where you are at? Who is the administering agency? Have you contacted them?

I haven't seen anything of the sort where I ride. In fact, I am see expanding opportunities.

 

[Billinsd]

How about all the cigarette butts left by the riders. Nothing like a pristine wilderness eh? And ya horses destroy trails...well maybe just make them a complete p.i.a. to traverse on foot.

Within the mtn bike community, the young guys on the big, heavy, bikes with huge suspension travel that usually shuttle up hill are characterised as leaving cigarette butts on the ground. I would imagine the older guys guys on lighter cross country bikes, who I associate myself with would not litter and don't smoke. To them it's all about exploring and exercise.

 

[Billinsd]

Curious what your basis is for this statement? Are trails actually being closed where you are at? Who is the administering agency? Have you contacted them?

I haven't seen anything of the sort where I ride. In fact, I am see expanding opportunities.

I live in Southern California and in the last 10 years over 50% of the public mtn bike trails have been closed. It's the State of California threatening and strong arming local government agencies and the military that looked the other way for decades, and/or did nothing to deter mountain biking. I used to ride the hell out of an old army base that was used for training in WWII. It was bombed, and shot to hell. The Navy aquired it and let people run all over it. They really didn't care because they weren't using it. The Marines aquired it and started using it more for training and their management decided that they did not want to be liable for people getting hurt, liability, and more importantly it's one of the last open spaces and the local Marine management got taken over and/or pressured by the environmentalists. The environmentalists claimed that people riding bikes on a 12 inch trail were ruining everything in a place that had been bombed to oblivion in the 40s. Mountain bike groups, although very passionate are very ineffective at getting anywhere. Hunters are much better at organizing and influencing. Mountain bikers seem to be as bad or worse than hunters in liberal California eyes, I would have never believed it, if I had not experienced it. Almost everyone has had some A hole mountain biker basically run them off the trail, it does happen and many want all mountain bikers gone. I tried to get mountain bikers and hunters and other recreationists together, however it seems like many hunters don't like bikers and vicsa versa. Most mountain bikers are moderate or liberal, few are conservative. Here in California everything near and dear to me is being taken away or restricted like crazy.

 

[Billinsd]

This all kinda makes sense to me, I think. Very Conservative California Congressmen wrote this bill and I'd bet it's to increase recreational opportunities here in California because they are being taken away. There was a push to open up parts or all (I can't remember) to mountain biking along the Pacific Crest Trail. That's where I believe all this is coming from, California. I'll bet in other states mountain biking is pretty wide open?

 

[Billinsd]

To me cross country mountain biking is a hoot. Great way to exercise, and cover ground fast. The new bikes ate so light and the suspension and drivetrains are fantastic!! I really miss stopping on my way home and riding 20 miles in really remote areas surrounded by suburbia!! Well I could still ride there, but it would be on the boring fire roads.

 

[mtnbiker208]

Proposed wilderness allows bicycle usage at least it does where I'm located. Everyone's fight with horses tearing up trails more than bikes is completely false. The way a horses foot is shaped packs trails down, the reason trails get destroyed is in the spring when water runs down the middle of he trail pulling loose dirt and causing erosion. If a horse destroys a trail then hikers do just as much as horses. Bicycles tires spinning turning and all that loosen dirt and push it around. Causing berms on turns, braking on downhill pulls dirt down.

I'd like to see someone make a trail for bikes only and a trail for horses only and see which one gets destroyed first. I've got trails I have trails that have been ridden on daily 5-6 times a day of groups of 2-8 trail riders and those trails have been the same trails for at least 10 years. I have seen bicycle trails made 2 years ago that were completely dug out and destroyed.

region 1 of the forest service treats proposed wilderness as wilderness. this is not a policy, but region one of the forest service has been given a directive to treat all proposed wilderness as wilderness. Basically if you know some of the desigantions 1a and 1b are treated the same way. Region 1 consist of north Idaho and most all of Montana and I believe a lot of the Dakotas. My understanding is this will be the way a lot of forest service regions will be treated when the forest plan revision phase goes thru the different forest's. Basically creating defacto wilderness.

 

[Violent Hippie]

I mountain bike a good bit and think this bill is lame. Wilderness needs to remain wilderness with NO vehicles IMO. theres plenty of places to mtn bike .

 

[Lawnboi]

Dang cigarette smoking mountain bikers, worse than this cigarette smoking runners. Obviously there's a lot of anti bike in the hunting community and it's too bad.