JWP58
Banned
Do you think Zinke is a mtb'er?
House bill moving forward to allow bikes in Wilderness
- Thread starter elkduds
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
Wilderness needs to remain the same as was intended in 1964...NO bikes, no wheelchairs, and no strollers.
We have 640 million acres of public lands...if a handicapped person cant ride a horse, there's plenty of other places that they can access to enjoy public lands. If that isn't good enough, well, tough luck. I wont ever get the chance to blast a hanging curve ball out of Fenway either...as badly as I always wanted to.
As for the mountain bikers, go find somewhere else to ride, you're choices are almost endless.
Dumb bill, bad idea, and absolutely ridiculous. There is NO good argument for changing any part of the 64 act.
We have 640 million acres of public lands...if a handicapped person cant ride a horse, there's plenty of other places that they can access to enjoy public lands. If that isn't good enough, well, tough luck. I wont ever get the chance to blast a hanging curve ball out of Fenway either...as badly as I always wanted to.
As for the mountain bikers, go find somewhere else to ride, you're choices are almost endless.
Dumb bill, bad idea, and absolutely ridiculous. There is NO good argument for changing any part of the 64 act.
As usual, there's about as much substance here as you'll find in a fart.
Mountain biker, horse packer, backpacker, trail runner, and 100 % opposed to mountain bikes in wilderness areas. As a mountain biker, I am certainly sensitive to creating new wilderness areas versus other management alternatives. That's not all bad. Not everything should be protected via wilderness designation, and the areas that warrant such protection should not have mountain bikes in them, IMO.
I think many mountain bikers push for this because there are so many miles of single track trails within wilderness areas, and not necessarily the same in non-wilderness. Simple fix, IMO is to expand trail complexes through grant monies and work supplied by local mountain bike clubs.
I think many mountain bikers push for this because there are so many miles of single track trails within wilderness areas, and not necessarily the same in non-wilderness. Simple fix, IMO is to expand trail complexes through grant monies and work supplied by local mountain bike clubs.
Schaaf
Well-known member
You ride the guy for posting numerous threads that only stir the pot and it was warranted. When he makes a post not at all related to Zinke you post something just to stir the pot. Do you bring anything of value to this forum?
A year ago you asked to have your Hunt Talk account deactivated, citing your inability to deal with some of the people here. Sorry it took me so long. Your password no longer works.
Lawnboy
Well-known member
Thank you for your honesty. What you posted is the reality around Bozeman especially South south side and the much of the Bridgers. If you don't believe me go try Corbly and Truman on the Bridgers then give South Cottonwood, History Rock, Fox Cr. trails a go and tell me I'm wrong. With that said I now avoid those with the horses. There are thousands of miles of logging roads in this country that could be had before giving up the Wilderness area to the bikes.
Phaseolus
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2014
- Messages
- 735
I am a mountain bike enthusiast who is active in COPMOBA (Colorado Plateau Mountain Bike Association) to build and maintain trails. I do not support mtn bike use in wilderness areas, there are more than enough non wilderness public lands to use for mtn biking.
Last edited:
Hem
Well-known member
Been riding Montana for thirty years. Absolutely not with mountain bikes in wilderness.
I get a kick out of the dumb local sticker that states "Share it"...to suggest motorized trails are the minority.i suggest splitting National Forest..50 percent motorized trails...50 percent non-motorized. THAT would be sharing it.
Leave wilderness alone to foot and horse.
I get a kick out of the dumb local sticker that states "Share it"...to suggest motorized trails are the minority.i suggest splitting National Forest..50 percent motorized trails...50 percent non-motorized. THAT would be sharing it.
Leave wilderness alone to foot and horse.
onpoint
Well-known member
"Share it"
Ah, our friends at CFBU. One can make your own humorous acronym (and an entirely controversial thread) from their initials:hump:.....
Ah, our friends at CFBU. One can make your own humorous acronym (and an entirely controversial thread) from their initials:hump:.....
Last edited:
I agree that Wilderness needs to stick to the standards as established in '64. If this goes through, expect a wave of other concessions to be brought forward...
PS- I threw a "great" hanging curve back in the day. My changeup was money though...
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I tend to think the goal of NP is more aligned with the mt bike crowd than wilderness is, and that's something I can support as I try really hard to steer clear of NPs.
Flatland Crusoe
Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2014
- Messages
- 572
I'm very much as mountain biker as much as I am a hunter, but I definitely oppose the idea of mountain bikes in wilderness.
A problem from the mountain biking world is there is no cohesive or comprehensive voice within the mountain bike community and there never has been. IMBA is against the legislation but the Sustainable Trails coalition is for it. Mountain biking is very regional and has always resisted going beyond being anything but grass roots. Trails, riding and racing has always been about local organizations and what goes on in Colorado vs Michigan vs California vs North Carolina is very different on every level. A lot of this push from within parts of the Mountain biking community is kickback from the Boulder White Clouds wilderness designation and the loss of trails. Once again groups within the mountain biking community were not aligned on drawing the boundaries instead of trying to block the total designation.
Wilderness areas almost always are NOT prime mountain bike playgrounds. Riding, hiking and horse trails usually isn't very fun compared to dedicated modern, purpose built mountain bike trails let alone on steep rutted out grades at high altitude. A great example is how bad of trails the famous Leadville 100 mountain bike race runs on while bouncing off the Boundaries at least 3 different wilderness areas. I would much rather ride a developed bike trail system just about anywhere over areas of prime wilderness areas of the high Rockies. Epic places do not really correlate to great mountain biking, but rather good trail design with some degree of terrain makes for great riding.
I agree the biggest issue is not the bikes in the wilderness, but rather the idea of cracking the fundamental ideas of the wilderness act. Parts of the mountain bike communities do not understand the devil they are aligned with in pushing for this access. Having the Utah delegation on board for public lands legislation is a huge red flag.
A problem from the mountain biking world is there is no cohesive or comprehensive voice within the mountain bike community and there never has been. IMBA is against the legislation but the Sustainable Trails coalition is for it. Mountain biking is very regional and has always resisted going beyond being anything but grass roots. Trails, riding and racing has always been about local organizations and what goes on in Colorado vs Michigan vs California vs North Carolina is very different on every level. A lot of this push from within parts of the Mountain biking community is kickback from the Boulder White Clouds wilderness designation and the loss of trails. Once again groups within the mountain biking community were not aligned on drawing the boundaries instead of trying to block the total designation.
Wilderness areas almost always are NOT prime mountain bike playgrounds. Riding, hiking and horse trails usually isn't very fun compared to dedicated modern, purpose built mountain bike trails let alone on steep rutted out grades at high altitude. A great example is how bad of trails the famous Leadville 100 mountain bike race runs on while bouncing off the Boundaries at least 3 different wilderness areas. I would much rather ride a developed bike trail system just about anywhere over areas of prime wilderness areas of the high Rockies. Epic places do not really correlate to great mountain biking, but rather good trail design with some degree of terrain makes for great riding.
I agree the biggest issue is not the bikes in the wilderness, but rather the idea of cracking the fundamental ideas of the wilderness act. Parts of the mountain bike communities do not understand the devil they are aligned with in pushing for this access. Having the Utah delegation on board for public lands legislation is a huge red flag.
Schaaf
Well-known member
After earlier voting for a bill that would allow bikes in wilderness areas, Montana’s lone congressman, Republican Greg Gianforte, says his views have changed and he no longer supports the legislation.
“I’ve spent a lot of time in the backcountry, and I’ve always believed that travel in the backcountry should be foot or horseback,” he said Monday.
http://helenair.com/news/state-and-...cle_4171a4cd-7f15-5855-bed7-504bc2fb61e0.html
“I’ve spent a lot of time in the backcountry, and I’ve always believed that travel in the backcountry should be foot or horseback,” he said Monday.
http://helenair.com/news/state-and-...cle_4171a4cd-7f15-5855-bed7-504bc2fb61e0.html
Nameless Range
Well-known member
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
I love to ride my mountain bike ... but we don't need no stinkin bikes in the Bob!!!!!
COEngineer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2016
- Messages
- 1,513
I thought for sure I would be in the minority, but after reading all of the posts here I am glad to see that the majority of us that ride mountain bikes don't want to have them in the wilderness.
I don't think I have anything to add that hasn't been said, but maybe I can summarize some of the points that made me nod my head:
1. Adding a huge user group to an already pressured resource is a bad idea for us users and for wildlife.
2. Anyone that thinks bikes cannot go up and down a steep mountain have not been paying attention. Just search Youtube for "Red Bull Rampage" (downhill) and "electric mountain bike climb" (uphill, https://youtu.be/V_XOxBB2K-g?t=333). Look at these bikes! Most people will not be able to tell that they are electric and who would be there to enforce it anyway?!
3. Mtb'ers go fast and make lots of noise. My buddies and I are always yelling (stuff like, "Stay left" "Huck it" etc). It's a fast-paced high adrenaline activity that does not fit with current wilderness uses. And have you ever had a brake pad dragging? Happens to me all the time. It's really loud and really annoying.
4. There are plenty of mtb trails and not very much wilderness. We should keep the little bit of wilderness we have.
I don't think I have anything to add that hasn't been said, but maybe I can summarize some of the points that made me nod my head:
1. Adding a huge user group to an already pressured resource is a bad idea for us users and for wildlife.
2. Anyone that thinks bikes cannot go up and down a steep mountain have not been paying attention. Just search Youtube for "Red Bull Rampage" (downhill) and "electric mountain bike climb" (uphill, https://youtu.be/V_XOxBB2K-g?t=333). Look at these bikes! Most people will not be able to tell that they are electric and who would be there to enforce it anyway?!
3. Mtb'ers go fast and make lots of noise. My buddies and I are always yelling (stuff like, "Stay left" "Huck it" etc). It's a fast-paced high adrenaline activity that does not fit with current wilderness uses. And have you ever had a brake pad dragging? Happens to me all the time. It's really loud and really annoying.
4. There are plenty of mtb trails and not very much wilderness. We should keep the little bit of wilderness we have.
Knight.54
Well-known member
...they need the wheels to pull the pipeline right through the middle of it.
Similar threads
