Is Mountain Biking the Biggest Threat to New Wilderness Designations?

[WeLikeCamping]

I don't see myself as a Mountain Biker, although I own two and I still ride them occasionally. I am, however, an OHV user and I enjoy getting out in the wilderness. It troubles me when I see anybody behaving in ways that are damaging to the environment, regardless of their mode of transportation. Target shooters, for example. I enjoy shooting as much as the next person, but FFS, pick up your brass and target remnants. I recently hiked a popular trail up on the Mogollon, foot traffic only - yet I could have taken out a trashbag full of refuse from just the first mile. I think the OP draws conclusions that simply are not fair or valid and he counts on public ignorance in just accepting his statements as fact without support.

Are there people such as he describes? Yes. Are they in the majority? I would argue not. It is up to us to police ourselves. I once drove five miles to report some idiots burning a huge fire when stage 1 was in place. I happen to like my forests with green, leafy trees, not black and barren, and I've put out my share of abandoned campfires, so yes, I will rat you out.

 

[craig333]

I don't see myself as a Mountain Biker, although I own two and I still ride them occasionally. I am, however, an OHV user and I enjoy getting out in the wilderness. It troubles me when I see anybody behaving in ways that are damaging to the environment, regardless of their mode of transportation. Target shooters, for example. I enjoy shooting as much as the next person, but FFS, pick up your brass and target remnants. I recently hiked a popular trail up on the Mogollon, foot traffic only - yet I could have taken out a trashbag full of refuse from just the first mile. I think the OP draws conclusions that simply are not fair or valid and he counts on public ignorance in just accepting his statements as fact without support.

Are there people such as he describes? Yes. Are they in the majority? I would argue not. It is up to us to police ourselves. I once drove five miles to report some idiots burning a huge fire when stage 1 was in place. I happen to like my forests with green, leafy trees, not black and barren, and I've put out my share of abandoned campfires, so yes, I will rat you out.

Couldn't have said it any better!

 

[PirateMcGee]

Great advertisement and message from Continental Tire....

 

[Christophe Noel]

Great advertisement and message from Continental Tire....

Meh. Some phrases mean different things to different user groups. Wanna bet that bike is less impactful than your Montero?

 

[PirateMcGee]

It certainly is. I also ride mountain bike and road for my commute when I lived in a place that was possible. Treadlightly means the same thing to hikers, bikers, and the OHV community. Just a silly ad the same if Jeep had used the phrase.

Edit: I realize this is super pedantic and ridiculousness

 

[Christophe Noel]

Edit: I realize this is super pedantic and ridiculousness

Two of my favorite things.

Keeping to this thread: Several years ago I went out on a ride and found half a dozen beer cans at one of my favorite trailheads. I picked them up, stuffed them in the mesh pocket of my pack, and later posted an image to FB out of frustration. Three months later a local equestrian club, protesting the evils of mountain biking, said that mountain bikers often travel at high rates of speed––––while drunk. They posted my picture of the beer cans and outed me as the drunkard. It was actually hilarious and sad at the same time.

So, yes, just as I try not to paint all SxS users with the same brush, I see how others lump all mountain bikers into a nefarious group of yahoos.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Great advertisement and message from Continental Tire....
View attachment 403706

This is a peeve I have with Niner. Their videos since moving to Ft. Collins show d00ds ripping, railing and skidding. That's all great for dynamic ads but we're fighting with land managers who get constant complaints from hikers being run off trails by rude cyclists. There's a lot of newbie cyclists who don't just don't know the yield triangle or trail etiquette. You don't always have to yield but you have to acknowledge the hiker or horse and consider giving the option for them to yield back. Not to mention our trails are widening and getting really beat up (many are cut poorly so agro use isn't the sole reason) from people not willing to just pause a second and instead run off trail. It's maddening.

 

[Christophe Noel]

Dave, here in Prescott about 15 years ago we had virtually no trails. By 2014 we had one of the most extensive trail systems in the Southwest and it's even bigger now. Today we have a massive number of riders in town including a couple pros and Olympians who moved here simply to ride. However, I'd wager at least 70% of our riders started riding in the last 3-5 years. As such, many of them are still learning how to ride delicately. They can cause significant damage when they ride over their abilities.

Fortunately....and this is a very important element relative to this thread, they are also enthusiastic about trail building AND maintenance. Just when I get annoyed to see some rookie blowing out the apex of a turn, or dragging off the shoulder, I see a group out the next week fixing that damage.

The regional nuance is really varied from one place to the next.

 

[Redline61]

This is such a load of bs. This also doesn't take into consideration the shear amount of land there is in this country. Granted I live in Idaho but if you add all the local trails up and all the land on the hillsides around them it is still a tiny drop in the bucket compared to all the land in our area. Sure there needs to be some responsible trail development but when did we get to the point that people should be ashamed and ridiculed for using the land in this world? You can call it entitlement if you want but yes, trails through the mountains are something that should be allowed and please feel free to tell all the deer, coyotes, turkeys, and even bears that I see that they shouldn't be on the the trail because I "took their habitat".

 

[p nut]

The OP is delusional if he thinks majority of MTB riders are trail thrashing downhillers. I ride on a local trail that sees 100-200 riders per day. Yes, there are idiots that go way too fast. But by my observation, riding here over the years, makes up less than 1%. You just don't see a lot of crazy dudes just ripping it downhill, skidding at every corner, and generally being out of control.
_
Now, the trail system has a lot to do with it. There are DH only trails that people can rip down. Multi-direction trails are tame enough to not even pique the interest of DH guys. There are signs posted of trail etiquette. People are polite and 99% of the time, people headed downhill move over for the uphill folks. The uphill folks in turn shout out a Thanks, and typically tell the downhiller how many are behind him/her. Same with the hikers/runners. Local HS team practices often here, and they are also taught proper etiquette.
Education is key and should be pushed as much as possible. That includes bikers and non-riders (like the OP), as well.

 

[CactusJackSlade]

Quote from NMC_EXP

"Mountain bikers are, as a demographic group, fit the profile of off-road vehicle users. They are predominately male, between 20-40, and tend to have above average incomes and often have the same outlaw attitude and sense of entitlement."

You are very off target on that statement - I'd like to know what study or statistics you got that from? To it looks like an opinion you try to pass on as fact.

NMC_EXP did you know in the ORIGINAL Wilderness Act documents bicycles were specifically INCLUDED... and the wording was to prohibit MOTORIZED travel... but pressure from large groups like the Sierra Club took back that allowance. Did you know many, MANY studies confirm that Equestrians and hikers (especially with trekking poles) cause more impact on trails that MT bikes?

It is very obvious NMC_EXP yo have an axe to grind against MT bikers. There are many THOUSANDS of acres of wilderness and as a hiker, biker and equestrian there is plenty of areas for many different user groups. To disallow a particular group IS bias. There is no reasonable reason why the regional land managers of a wilderness area cannot decide what activities are allowed.

I feel you NMC_EXP are the one who needs to mature and be a bit more open minded.

All this aside, if ALL the outdoor user groups do not start working together we will lose it to oil, logging and industry given the current trend of the current Trump administration.

 

[zb39]

How are people supposed to access wilderness land if there are no trails? Do they walk? What about someone in a wheel chair? They just don't get to go??????

 

[Stumpalump]

Everthing that is white, male and rich is under attack by the progressives. They can't even clean up their own cities. Look at Detroit or the hepatitis outbreaks in California form pooping on the sidewalk.

 

[NMC_EXP]

Quote from NMC_EXP

"Mountain bikers are, as a demographic group, fit the profile of off-road vehicle users. They are predominately male, between 20-40, and tend to have above average incomes and often have the same outlaw attitude and sense of entitlement."

You are very off target on that statement - I'd like to know what study or statistics you got that from? To it looks like an opinion you try to pass on as fact.

NMC_EXP did you know in the ORIGINAL Wilderness Act documents bicycles were specifically INCLUDED... and the wording was to prohibit MOTORIZED travel... but pressure from large groups like the Sierra Club took back that allowance. Did you know many, MANY studies confirm that Equestrians and hikers (especially with trekking poles) cause more impact on trails that MT bikes?

It is very obvious NMC_EXP yo have an axe to grind against MT bikers. There are many THOUSANDS of acres of wilderness and as a hiker, biker and equestrian there is plenty of areas for many different user groups. To disallow a particular group IS bias. There is no reasonable reason why the regional land managers of a wilderness area cannot decide what activities are allowed.

I feel you NMC_EXP are the one who needs to mature and be a bit more open minded.

.

Where to begin? I'll start with your first error:

"Mountain bikers are, as a demographic group, fit the profile of off-road vehicle users. They are predominately male, between 20-40, and tend to have above average incomes and often have the same outlaw attitude and sense of entitlement."

That quote is by George Weurther, a poster boy of the green movement. My post clearly shows it to be an excerpt from an article he wrote. I suggest you vent your indignation on Weurther.

Did you know many, MANY studies confirm that Equestrians and hikers (especially with trekking poles) cause more impact on trails that MT bikes?


Since that claim seems to defy the laws of physics, I am skeptical unless I can see in detail the test plan, the specific test methodology and how the data was reduced. And I would need to know what organization(s) commissioned and paid for the studies? As to the floating abstraction of "Many studies confirm...", until otherwise proven, I suspect this is just another example of the "Woozle Effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woozle_effect

If some draft version of the WA allowed bicycles, that is irrelevant. Why does anyone need a bicycle to enjoy wilderness?

As to speed freaks on bicycles and trail damage, my observations are closer to 25% than 1% are spewing dirt and gravel (aka carving and shredding) on downhill turns due to speed.

 

[sam-aye-am]

Where to begin? I'll start with your first error:

"Mountain bikers are, as a demographic group, fit the profile of off-road vehicle users. They are predominately male, between 20-40, and tend to have above average incomes and often have the same outlaw attitude and sense of entitlement."

That quote is by George Weurther, a poster boy of the green movement. My post clearly shows it to be an excerpt from an article he wrote. I suggest you vent your indignation on Weurther.

Did you know many, MANY studies confirm that Equestrians and hikers (especially with trekking poles) cause more impact on trails that MT bikes?


Since that claim seems to defy the laws of physics, I am skeptical unless I can see in detail the test plan, the specific test methodology and how the data was reduced. And I would need to know what organization(s) commissioned and paid for the studies? As to the floating abstraction of "Many studies confirm...", until otherwise proven, I suspect this is just another example of the "Woozle Effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woozle_effect

If some draft version of the WA allowed bicycles, that is irrelevant. Why does anyone need a bicycle to enjoy wilderness?

As to speed freaks on bicycles and trail damage, my observations are closer to 25% than 1% are spewing dirt and gravel (aka carving and shredding) on downhill turns due to speed.

What is your profession? If not one that studies erosion you are approaching things the same as that dude at EPA or even Trump when he says it is cold in the northeast and therefore climate change is a hoax.

Peer reviewed scientific studies offer at lot more than one persons casual observation.
I get it....hard to reconcile ones casual observations with studies. But if we based everything off of one persons observations, we’d all be in much worse shape.

Maybe you could consider these two thoughts: 1. What really causes the majority of erosion? I’d say water does, even in dry climates. But what do I know? 2. Do you think that restricting cyclists to fewer trails such that user volume in those remaining trails goes significantly up is the right thing to do? I don’t. I moved back to San Diego after 10 years away and with considerably less single track inventory open to cyclists, trail damage and user conflict seems more significant on those few remaining sections of single track open to cyclists. But that is my observation only.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk