Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SPEEDMONKEY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    305

    Land Closures Again! Act Now!!

    Not good. Click on link:

    http://degette.house.gov/index.php?o...462&Itemid=189

    I'm sure you'll all notice that BANGS CANYON is included in this plan for wilderness, which means that 8 miles of the Tabeguache Trail will be eliminated. For all of you who think that these land grabs only affect the "motorized" crowd, think again. It affects all of us, and if we don't act, this will only continue to shut down our public lands. WTH!?!?!?

    Take 5 minutes and express your OBJECTION to any closures.

    ANYONE OUTSIDE DISTRICT 1 WILL HAVE THEIR COMMENTS REJECTED!!

    PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE A PHONE TO HER OFFICE IN DC, WHICH WILL BE DOCUMENTED.

    MAKE A PHONE CALL, MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!

    (202) 225-4431

    If not, your next vacation in Colorado may be very different and not include mountain biking.
    [SIZE=3]Don't take the smooth lines fast, take the fast lines smooth.[/SIZE]
    www.yeticycles.com
    SHIMANO SAINT
    Smith Optics
    Maxxis Tires
    www.mrpbike.com

  2. #2
    Desert Rat
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    325

    various areas

    With regard to Mesa County, this also affects areas in the Bookcliffs, on the Uncompahgre in an area with some great trails, and others. Take time to read and comment please.

    Scott
    RapidCreekCycles

    Palisade CO Ride the Palisade Rim Trail
    Niner

    COPMOBA

  3. #3
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,654
    I'm sending in comments to MY House representative as well as Ms. Degette. I'm going to make it clear that I would LOVE to be able to support more Wilderness designation, but as long as they exclude mt bikes I will fight against it tooth and nail.

  4. #4
    Tigers love pepper...
    Reputation: cobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,382
    Regarding Bangs it says:

    The Tabeguache Trail bisects the proposed wilderness.
    The eight-mile trail segment has an “expert” rating
    for mountain bicyclists. The Tabeguache Trail is part
    of the 142-mile Colorado Plateau Mountain Bike Trail
    System.

    Does that mean the "Trail" will remain open (exempted)? I'm still against the wilderness designation for Bangs, but want to have my facts straight before commenting further.

  5. #5
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    10,654
    Quote Originally Posted by cobi
    Regarding Bangs it says:

    The Tabeguache Trail bisects the proposed wilderness.
    The eight-mile trail segment has an “expert” rating
    for mountain bicyclists. The Tabeguache Trail is part
    of the 142-mile Colorado Plateau Mountain Bike Trail
    System.

    Does that mean the "Trail" will remain open (exempted)? I'm still against the wilderness designation for Bangs, but want to have my facts straight before commenting further.
    It does mean it will be "exempted" from the designation. It would be nice to CONFIRM that it is exempted for the whole length through the area...

  6. #6
    Tigers love pepper...
    Reputation: cobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,382
    But, just because the Tabaguache *might* be exempted doesn't mean that other trails in the area would be.

    Magellan for example?
    http://www.gjmountainbiking.com/gj/magellan.html

  7. #7
    user-created
    Reputation: singletrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,181
    They want us to use this form for comments.

  8. #8
    Tigers love pepper...
    Reputation: cobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,382
    I already sent mine in using the form.

    Basically said as much as I would love to support wilderness designation, I can't as long as it excludes bikes.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wormvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,163
    I sent an email. I personally do not support any wilderness designations. If you can enforce a Wilderness designation, you can enforce a strict usage policy as well IMO. And most of these areas get so little use anyway. I know a lot of these plans are to prevent oil and gas drilling but hey I need gas to heat my house and power my car. Where should we get our energy from until Al Gore invents unlimited energy from the active vacuum? We don't want gas from Arabs, We don't want to drill in the US, Wind farms kill birds, Solar panels are an eyesore, We don't want to support Chavez!.. Maybe we can tap all the gas generated from the BS our congressmen spew out!

    Coup d'etat...Coup d'etat!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    242
    Sent my response.

    The original intent of the Wilderness Act was not to exclude of bicycles, and for a number of years after the act was passed bicycles were allowed on Wilderness. It is now and has been for sometime the quick land grab method and this proposal is ridiculous.

    Hopefully more see this and speak their minds.
    Uh-huh, uh-huh. Okay. Um Can you repeat the part of the stuff where you said all about uuhhh, things. Uhh... the things.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gjmtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    41
    Would be a real bummer to lose that area for bikes. Call DC today for what it's worth.
    http://www.gjmountainbiking.com

Posting Permissions

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