Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 77
  1. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    137
    with most of the closures happening in counties with more money than sense, the trend will continue.
    been on the same fsr expert frame since new in 99. It isn't what you ride, it's how you pedal.

  2. #27
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by ripper roo View Post
    Here is a couple examples of trail access.

    At the top of vail pass van loads of people were dropped off by companies to ride mtbs and bike path cruisers down to vail and frisco. The forest service said no more and issued cease and desist orders on anyone doing so.


    Currently the town of breckenridge has shut down in the past couple years a huge amount of trails and trails that were once open to motos. They will continue to shut down trails to everyone as time continues on.

    The town of breckenridge and the forest service have shut down endless amounts of camping that used to exist around town.

    The area between the "dredge" on tiger rd and summit cove/keystone has lots of trails on it. Almost all of these trails were either old ranch roads or moto trails. They kicked the motos out 15 years ago. They have closed down trails and in the next few years they will start seasonal closures of those trails ordered by the forest service. Blair witch a favorite was a moto trail. It wasn't a built trail.

    The continued push of liberal haters will soon create public lands that only certain people will be able to enjoy. Unfortunately public lands are there for the public and for all uses. Hunting, hiking, biking, skiing, mining, camping, and the use of motorized equipment.

    If we are lucky, with enough people crying about one anothers uses of the public land we'll all soon just be looking at the land instead of using.

    So shut the hell up and mind your own business.
    I've been riding around Breck for 20 years and there are a lot more trails to ride now than there were back then.

    The area between tiger road and keystone has a lot more trails in it now than it did even 15 years ago. The only thing that has shut trails down over there for mtbs is development.

    The shuttle company you mentioned was using public land for commercial purposes, which requires a permit, and they didn't have one. I don't know about the camping ban but maybe it has something to do with transient squatters getting murdered with baseball bats a few steps from the Burro Trail.

    If everybody used the land any way they wanted, without restriction, there would be no trees, the barren land would be covered with squatter camps, and just a bunch of quad tracks everywhere.

    "So shut the hell up and mind your own business."

    So you hate freedom now? Confusing...

  3. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    137
    what is the old saying? "When trail riding is outlawed, only outlaws will ride the trails."

    carry on...
    been on the same fsr expert frame since new in 99. It isn't what you ride, it's how you pedal.

  4. #29
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by meat-market View Post
    what is the old saying? "When trail riding is outlawed, only outlaws will ride the trails." ...
    Actually I think it's

    When D9's are outlawed only outlaws will have D9's

    (The AK Files Forums - When you cant own guns, use an APC.... check out the 3rd post)
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  5. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    Actually I think it's

    When D9's are outlawed only outlaws will have D9's

    (The AK Files Forums - When you cant own guns, use an APC.... check out the 3rd post)
    Winning, killdozer style!!!!
    been on the same fsr expert frame since new in 99. It isn't what you ride, it's how you pedal.

  6. #31
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post
    That's what I thought. No examples of a ban on motos leading to a ban on bikes. I can't think of any either.

    People here have it backward. If you want access for mtbs try convincing people that we have more in common with hikers than motos. If you lump yourself in with motorized users who obviously have much more impact than almost everybody else and are the most likely to be banned then you're just screwing yourself. Maybe ripper roo is really working for the horse people.

    But if you have some ideological thing that anybody should be able to trash the 'public' land however they like, then that is your prerogative I guess. Good luck with that. It's an extreme position with no sense of history or reality.

    Millions of acres have been closed to motos and bikes at the same time.
    It's being done with Conservation Easements and Wilderness Designations
    so that the public is deceived about the motives for the closures. Several
    thousand acres that I personally had been looking at for a moto park
    several years ago here in EPC have now been closed off with CE's. And
    the person who did it told me they did it to keep motos out.

    Maybe you're just too young to remember when these areas were open to
    motos?

    Manitou Section 16 used to be moto trails. All the El Paso County parks
    were open to motos at one point in time. Lot's of BLM land and State
    School Board land too. I bet you could ride motos in the Pikes Peak South
    Slope watershed also. Now it's closed to everyone.

    There's nothing extreme about anyone's position and the damage is
    subjective. What you perceive, or define, to be damage as a lay person
    may in fact be seen as being easily repaired to those who work in this field.

    I've seen enough open space ripped up with belly scrapers and then
    reshaped into golf courses (with open space and wildlife habitat) and parks to know better. It grows back. Seed, water, sun and a little time... it all grows back.

    The only thing extreme is the belief that a little moto trail is somehow
    worth dividing the outdoor recreational community into us vs them.

  7. #32
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Millions of acres have been closed to motos and bikes at the same time.
    It's being done with Conservation Easements and Wilderness Designations
    so that the public is deceived about the motives for the closures. Several
    thousand acres that I personally had been looking at for a moto park
    several years ago here in EPC have now been closed off with CE's. And
    the person who did it told me they did it to keep motos out.

    Maybe you're just too young to remember when these areas were open to
    motos?

    Manitou Section 16 used to be moto trails. All the El Paso County parks
    were open to motos at one point in time. Lot's of BLM land and State
    School Board land too. I bet you could ride motos in the Pikes Peak South
    Slope watershed also. Now it's closed to everyone.
    I was born and raised in CS, and I'm older than the earth's crust. So I know that a lot of the trails above town were moto trails created in the 60s and 70s or older hiking trails that were claimed by motos in the 60s and 70s. The chutes trail for instance, 667, forester, cap'n... I was riding these trails before mountain bikes were invented. Some are now closed to motos, but none are closed to bikes. (except severy creek on pikes peak. it was a fun trail but proved to be an isolated closure, not the commie apocalypse. Very few people had ridden it before it was closed.)

    There used to be an incredible network of trails running up the gullies between the high school and gold camp. There was an amazing trail north of the chutes trail, twisting all the way up to the road. It was an awesome descent. One of my all-time favorites. All those trails are gone now. Not closed by evil govt. liberal marxists but the opposite. A gated community was built where the trails used to be. The same thing was about to happen to the chutes and all the trails around it, until the evil govt. stepped in and bought the land to keep the trails open. Maybe you are too young to remember that.


    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    The only thing extreme is the belief that a little moto trail is somehow
    worth dividing the outdoor recreational community into us vs them.
    The extreme position is the idea that users should be able to do whatever they want without restriction. That's a cartoon world.

    I love dirt bikes. I wish I owned one now. If I did, however, I wouldn't be stupid enough to think I should be able to take it anywhere I damn well please. Just like I wouldn't buy a new downhill bike on the Front Range then start whining when I suddenly realize there isn't anywhere to ride it within 50 miles.

  8. #33
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,678
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post


    If everybody used the land any way they wanted, without restriction, there would be no trees, the barren land would be covered with squatter camps,
    Wait... what is it they say about "not knowing history"?

    I've seen some of the photos of Summit County around the turn of the 20th century... no rules... no trees... no problem!

  9. #34
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post
    I was born and raised in CS, and I'm older than the earth's crust. So I know that a lot of the trails above town were moto trails created in the 60s and 70s or older hiking trails that were claimed by motos in the 60s and 70s. The chutes trail for instance, 667, forester, cap'n... I was riding these trails before mountain bikes were invented. Some are now closed to motos, but none are closed to bikes. (except severy creek on pikes peak. it was a fun trail but proved to be an isolated closure, not the commie apocalypse. Very few people had ridden it before it was closed.)
    Sure you can find local trails that motos were on and bikes still are, but
    you ignore the big picture of places that were available to ride but no
    longer are.

    South Slope Watershed - closed, access by special permit only. If
    you're hiking/riding anything in the South Slope other than the 2 or 3 trails
    approved then you are hiking/riding illegally. I believe that includes Severy
    Creek? The rules are just not being enforced.

    North Slope - closed.

    Ft. Carson - closed.

    Bohart and Chico Basin Ranches (State School Land) - 200K acres of public land closed with a Nature Conservancy lease/state conservation land trust.

    Private property along Fountain Creek from Fountain to south of County line - conservation easements, including the old moto track on private property.

    Open space north of County Line Rd to Castle Rock - conservation easements.

    Ring the Peak - incomplete/closed.

    Bijou Basin - conservation easement, closed to bikes and motos.

    All TOPS open space has conservation easements, closed to motos, bikes
    allowed by conservation easement holding Land Trust approval only.

    Oh yeah!
    Top of Cheyenne Mountain - closed.
    Last edited by UncleTrail; 12-04-2012 at 10:58 AM.

  10. #35
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by rogbie View Post
    Two wheels, same team.
    Sort of, not really. As a mountain biker I'd rather ride on trails that haven't been all churned to hell by motorcycles. Just look at the trails in CB that allow motos versus those that don't. Huge difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by rogbie View Post
    Where motos. are removed a precedent is set to remove those perceived next in line: mountain bikes.
    I think we've proven this argument to be complete BS at this point.

  11. #36
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Sure you can find local trails that motos were on and bikes still are, but
    you ignore the big picture of places that were available to ride but no
    longer are.

    South Slope Watershed - closed, access by special permit only. If
    you're hiking/riding anything in the South Slope other than the 2 or 3 trails
    approved then you are hiking/riding illegally. I believe that includes Severy
    Creek? The rules are just not being enforced.

    North Slope - closed.

    Ft. Carson - closed.

    Bohart and Chico Basin Ranches (State School Land) - 200K acres of public land closed with a Nature Conservancy lease/state conservation land trust.

    Private property along Fountain Creek from Fountain to south of County line - conservation easements, including the old moto track on private property.

    Open space north of County Line Rd to Castle Rock - conservation easements.

    Ring the Peak - incomplete/closed.

    Bijou Basin - conservation easement, closed to bikes and motos.

    All TOPS open space has conservation easements, closed to motos, bikes
    allowed by conservation easement holding Land Trust approval only.
    With the exception of a few trails on Pikes Peak, none of the above holds any interest to me whatsoever as a mountain biker. Never have I felt the desire to ride on Fort Carson [?] or around Fountain, etc. I heartily approve of your efforts to open these areas for motos, however, as this may lead to fewer motos trashing my favorite trails in the mountains. However if you and others keep trying to portray moto closures as detrimental to mountain bike access, I will keep calling BS on that. Good luck sir.

    Severy Creek was on the north slope. Closed for about 15 years now I guess. It was epic but I'm sure the stream, the animals and the forest are in a lot better shape than they would have been otherwise. It was a very untouched valley compared to others around there. Anybody younger than 40 is highly unlikely to know what the hell I'm talking about anyway. I'm fine with that closure, especially in light of the fact that the total amount of terrain open to bikes has skyrocketed in the meantime. CM state park, Ute Valley, red rock canyon park, ridgeline, falcon trail, many of the trails in Palmer Park, the whole Ring the Peak thing ... None of this stuff was available when I was starting to ride down there.

    What we've been seeing is increasing access and trails for mtb's, not decreasing.

  12. #37
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136

    Schodringer's Trail

    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    ...

    Oh yeah!
    Top of Cheyenne Mountain - closed.
    Just look at yourself man. Now you are complaining about the (potential) closure of a trail that doesn't even exist yet.

    I will just point out that not long ago CMSP was private property and completely off-limits, and now you have some very cool trails to ride courtesy of the evil govt. and public purse, and might get some more if we figure out how to play nice with the other park users.

    It's okay if some trails are hiker-only. Really. It's okay. That said, I hope they open that trail so dudes like me can creep up it at a snail's pace on a September afternoon. If not, I'll find some other trail to clog nearby.

  13. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    23
    I'm not inherently anti-moto either...the reason I started the thread is that I had heard the trail I was riding was somewhat sensitive but that the forest service was not inclined to make a fuss about it if it didn't become a big thing. Some of the trails actually appear on maps but definitely got their start as "social trails" and certainly aren't designated. I put the question (about calling the Forest Service) out to the community because the trail really isn't in my back yard (don't really know the history/situation) and I didn't feel right stepping in with out consultation. My understanding is that the FS has been notified(by someone else) and that they(the FS) passed enforcement off to the local PD.
    I think the goal for the MTB community is that someday this trail system will be officially designated as open to bicycles but that there is basically no chance that motos will be allowed due to some issues with the neighboring land owners(other gov't agencies). Pretty sure that motos using the trail won't help the cause as the FS is pretty strapped for the resources necessary to manage the area for recreation as it is.

  14. #39
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post
    I will just point out that not long ago CMSP was private property and completely off-limits, and now you have some very cool trails to ride courtesy of the evil govt. and public purse, and might get some more if we figure out how to play nice with the other park users.

    Since when has private property stopped anyone in Colorado from using a
    trail, or making a new one, to get across it?

    Adventures in Endurance: Cheyenne Mountain Honeymoon Lodge
    "We started at the bottom of Cheyenne canyon and proceeded up various trails that had us climbing steep terrain for about 5 miles. "


    What Cheyenne Mtn used to be.
    Then and Now: "Honeymoon Lodge" on Cheyenne Mountain | Radio Colorado College


    Most rational property owners don't get their panties in a knot about
    someone using a trail to get across their land.

    It's not until the government shows up, or McMansions get built, that
    these trails get closed.

  15. #40
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Since when has private property stopped anyone in Colorado from using a
    trail, or making a new one, to get across it?
    ....
    OK, this is really kind of a non-sequiter--sounds like an anti-government guy who thinks private land should be treated the way it is in jolly old socialist England?

    If you don't believe in government meddling, aren't you supposed to simultaneously believe that a property owner has a sovereign right to kill anyone who trespasses, construct a rocket-fuel factory, store nuclear waste, etc?

    What gives?
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  16. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Most rational property owners don't get their panties in a knot about someone using a trail to get across their land.
    I know somebody who has had run-ins with rifle toting landowners on the south side of Pikes Peak who would disagree with that statement...

  17. #42
    157
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Since when has private property stopped anyone in Colorado from using a
    trail, or making a new one, to get across it?

    Adventures in Endurance: Cheyenne Mountain Honeymoon Lodge
    "We started at the bottom of Cheyenne canyon and proceeded up various trails that had us climbing steep terrain for about 5 miles. "


    What Cheyenne Mtn used to be.
    Then and Now: "Honeymoon Lodge" on Cheyenne Mountain | Radio Colorado College


    Most rational property owners don't get their panties in a knot about
    someone using a trail to get across their land.

    It's not until the government shows up, or McMansions get built, that
    these trails get closed.
    I think the runners' route was up the 'back' side of the mountain, off of Old Stage. not the CMSP side. If so, I have been up that road too, all the way to the top. Antenna farm, *****ezz.

    Ever try to ride from section 16 to Manitou? There is sweet singletrack the entire way, but you're only allowed on part of it. Dang evil govt.! No, private property. (I guess you could say that the evil govt. has created the legal, infrastructure and security framework under which private property can be 'owned' in the first place -- dang evil govt.!) Anyway, you run right into a fence. The evil government was trying to open this route for at least a decade, I don't know maybe the magic deal has finally been made.

    EDIT: Intemann Trail. Goes all the way to Manitou and pops out on Ruxton right behind one of the famous springs. Runs right into a fence about 2/3 of the way there.

  18. #43
    Except when I'm driving
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    170
    I'm pretty sure in the National Forest the trail has to specifically state that motos are allowed on that trail for them to go on that specific trail. For mountain biking it has to specifically state that mountain bikes are not allowed on that trail, if it has no mention of mountain bikes then mountain biking is fair game. If someone decides to shoot up a "No Motorized Vehicle" sign and you can't read it anymore it is still off limits to motos.
    I'm bored and at work or else I would be riding

  19. #44
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    OK, this is really kind of a non-sequiter--sounds like an anti-government guy who thinks private land should be treated the way it is in jolly old socialist England?

    If you don't believe in government meddling, aren't you supposed to simultaneously believe that a property owner has a sovereign right to kill anyone who trespasses, construct a rocket-fuel factory, store nuclear waste, etc?

    What gives?
    Maybe that's what the media wants you to believe? and the stereotype
    of land owners that Hollywood has created? and well you know....
    most people believe anything they see on tv.

    Yeah there are kooks out there though who will confront a trespasser.

    But they usually end up dead or in jail... kind of like George Zimmerman.
    Or that idiot in Manitou who wanted the Intemann Trail closed across his property. He spent some time in jail too.

    But I think if you look at all the social trails out there it's hard to believe

    the above is normal behavior. Most rational land owners I've met just turn
    their heads and look the other way.


    Code of the West

    The Code of the West


    Insert Bike for horse.

  20. #45
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    Maybe that's what the media wants you to believe? and the stereotype
    of land owners that Hollywood has created? and well you know....
    most people believe anything they see on tv...
    Oh come on. Are you serious?



    The media didn't show me this.

    Seems to me that maybe you insist on the tyranny of government but deny the tyranny of (American style) private land ownership. Both exist to some extent, both are overblown to some extent.

    In my part of Colorado, one of the very real consequences of the assertion of private land rights is that certain landowners think that a raft/kayak should not be able to float down a river that runs next to their land, even if they don't own the land on both sides.

    Who owns a fuggin' river?
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  21. #46
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    Oh come on. Are you serious?

    The media didn't show me this.
    We had those too. Keeps the government out.

  22. #47
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    We had those too. Keeps the government out.
    I made some edits...
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  23. #48
    Almost Human
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Quote Originally Posted by TomP View Post
    Oh come on. Are you serious?


    The media didn't show me this.

    Seems to me that maybe you insist on the tyranny of government but deny the tyranny of (American style) private land ownership. Both exist to some extent, both are overblown to some extent.

    In my part of Colorado, one of the very real consequences of the assertion of private land rights is that certain landowners think that a raft/kayak should not be able to float down a river that runs next to their land, even if they don't own the land on both sides.

    Who owns a fuggin' river?
    I don't disagree with you and all I can tell you is that in the family I grew
    up in and of the farmers and ranchers I've met, very few of us ever
    confronted trespassers who were just having a good time.

    But I think today we see the effects of how litigious our society has become.

    Example) My cousin had land on the San Marcos River with a rope swing
    across the river. Lots of fun on a hot day. Tubers and canoers used it all
    the time. It wasn't until someone fell out of the tree, broke a leg and sued
    my cousin that it came down.

  24. #49
    Team Velveeta™
    Reputation: TomP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,279
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleTrail View Post
    I don't disagree with you and all I can tell you is that in the family I grew up in and of the farmers and ranchers I've met, very few of us ever confronted trespassers who were just having a good time...
    OK, I respect your point-of-view, and don't wish to be confrontational. I agree that litigation has fscked up way too much in the USA, for sure.

    However...

    Focusing on how government land managers shut out people and limit their freedom by imposing travel policies, but refusing to acknowledge that private land tends to do the exact same thing, only in a more permanent and inflexible way, is not being objective.

    As Robert said,

    "Intemann Trail. Goes all the way to Manitou and pops out on Ruxton right behind one of the famous springs. Runs right into a fence about 2/3 of the way there."

    If that was a government fence, we would have some redress. We could start bugging the land manager and cause them to review the policy. But since it's private land, the book is closed. You can't get there from here.

    There's a cool March-November route up through BLM into USFS land west of 285 here in Chaffeeville, Droney Gulch. Used to be you could do a nice big dirt road loop up Droney and down 250/252. Now the private land owner up at the top of Droney has locked a gate. Tyranny.

    (Yes, it's an easement, a FS road goes through there. But it will take litigation to open it back up for legal transit. And I've been told that people have been turned around at gunpoint. Even though they were just having a good time.)
    Tom Purvis - Salida, CO - http://teamvelveeta.tom-purvis.com

    "I like my wimmen like I like my beer--cold and bitter!"

  25. #50
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,626
    Quote Originally Posted by ripper roo View Post
    Here is a couple examples of trail access.

    At the top of vail pass van loads of people were dropped off by companies to ride mtbs and bike path cruisers down to vail and frisco. The forest service said no more and issued cease and desist orders on anyone doing so.

    Currently the town of breckenridge has shut down in the past couple years a huge amount of trails and trails that were once open to motos. They will continue to shut down trails to everyone as time continues on.

    The town of breckenridge and the forest service have shut down endless amounts of camping that used to exist around town.

    The area between the "dredge" on tiger rd and summit cove/keystone has lots of trails on it. Almost all of these trails were either old ranch roads or moto trails. They kicked the motos out 15 years ago. They have closed down trails and in the next few years they will start seasonal closures of those trails ordered by the forest service. Blair witch a favorite was a moto trail. It wasn't a built trail.

    The continued push of liberal haters will soon create public lands that only certain people will be able to enjoy. Unfortunately public lands are there for the public and for all uses. Hunting, hiking, biking, skiing, mining, camping, and the use of motorized equipment.

    If we are lucky, with enough people crying about one anothers uses of the public land we'll all soon just be looking at the land instead of using.

    So shut the hell up and mind your own business.

    The VP bike shuttle situation is simply an effort to bring the bike shuttle companies into the same system that anyone else who operates a commercial enterprise on federal land has to comply with. There had been uncertainty for a long time as to who was the responsible agency since the bike paths are under an easement owned by the county and they are also under a CDOT right of way. They finally resolved all the issues and determined that commercial shuttle companies would have to be permitted under the FS. The question wasn't if they'd have to be permitted, it was who would be the permitter - the FS or the county.

    The whole Golden Horseshoe area was a moto free for all starting in the mid 90's. Though the moto guys had been creating illegal trails with throttle and tire for years, it really took off in the mid/late 90s. They put trails through wetlands and in one case a fen wetland in the upper Rock Island, and Brown Gulch. They created a large mess of steep, eroded trails on the hill to the west of Lincoln Meadow that was putting large loads of sediment into the wetland. They put trails in across private property without permission. When one trail would turn into a deep rut that even all their HP, tire, and suspension couldn't deal with they'd put in another trail right next to it and would start the whole cycle again.
    When the B&B land exchange took place, the writing should have been on the wall that the free for all was over and it was time to start taking responsibility a little more seriously, they actually accelerated their foolish behavior - more illegal trails, more trespassing, more braiding, 3' deep ruts, etc. A few guys who were involved with SCORR saw the implications of what was going on, but the vast majority of the moto guys didn't and still don't care.
    I was involved with the Golden Horseshoe travel planning citizens advisory group and was involved with mapping and trying to come up with a viable trails plan. We had to work with other parts of the entire group which included people working on protecting natural and historical resources of the area. The travel planning group consisted of Moto riders, ATV riders, 4WD people, MTBers, hikers, and equestrians. The travel planning group was consensus based, meaning that one person could - and often did - hold up the entire process if they wanted to.
    While no small number of people thought that all illegally created routes should be shut down and a trails plan should be created from a clean sheet of paper, what happened was the most unsustainable trails, or trails that impacted wetlands or intruded areas that were determined to be critical for wildlife, or were redundant were closed. Many moto trails that were determined to be able to be made sustainable were left open with the condition that SCORR would take on the adoption of those trails. The density (linear miles/sq mile of trails open to motor vehicle us in the GH greatly exceeds the maximum FS standard.

    Blair Witch was never a moto trial. Blair Witch is no more than 10 years old. The whole Horseshoe gulch/Soda Creek area has been closed to motor vehicle use for more than 20 years.

    Multiple Use does not mean all uses, all places, all the time. If you think it does you have no idea of some very basic concepts of public land management.

    Oh yes, the whole Tenderfoot proposal? It's the FS that is really pushing that. It's the local residents and Summit county that are opposed. The residents because of the noise, their experience with irresponsible moto use and they don't feel the moto community will police itself and the county because the whole proposal conflicts with the Snake River master plan that is antecedent to the proposal. There are al lot of people against the proposal, but the FS ain't one of them.
    Last edited by zrm; 12-04-2012 at 05:29 PM.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •