Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 58
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296

    Gravity Logic at LV Ski & Snowboard Resort

    Sounds like there was some feasibility assessment going down last weekend about building a potential bike park on the mountain...any other info out there?

  2. #2
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,724
    Sunday I saw peeps that could be involved with something like that
    I dig dirt!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    333
    When I talked with people at the resort they told me that it would be at least 3 to 4 years before they would be able to put trails in due to environmental assessments done by the forest service. That was about 2 weeks before gravity logic came to town.....

  4. #4
    JKA
    JKA is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JKA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    197
    3-4 years sounds about right. I have a friend who works with the Forest Service reviewing and writing environmental studies back east, and if the 3-4 years time frame is accurate, then they started 2-5 years ago. It normally takes 5-10 years for something of that magnitude to get approved by the feds. I sure hope it gets approved quickly. I'm not getting any younger.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296

    Gravity Logic at LV Ski & Snowboard Resort

    Sounds like a long time for bike trails...the solar site I'm managing the same process on has been 3 years from twinkle in the eye stage to start of construction. Although who knows, some things are higher priority for the Feds.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    30
    I was just up there this past weekend playing some disc golf and according to the Lift attendants they are going through with planning of the the trail system even though the ground is not approved as of yet. So it sounds like its gonna happen for sure, just may be a while. Hopefully its fast-tracked because its ski resort.

  7. #7
    JKA
    JKA is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JKA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    197
    I really hope it does happen, but just because they are doing planning doesn't mean it will happen for sure. It typically takes years to do the environmental impact studies and then re-do them many times to please the feds. Most ski resorts don't own any of the land that they use. It is just leased to them on a long term lease from the forest service. LV ski resort has been around for a long time so I don't know the details of land ownership up there, but even if they own the land (which I doubt), they will want to use much more land than just the ski resort land for trails. All of this has to be approved by the US Forest Service since it's "their" land. I always thought that public land was owned by the public and we should have more of a say, but I guess not. There will probably have to be public hearings and comment periods for us all to weigh in on whether we think it's a good idea. I'm sure the sierra club and others will try to "protect the land" from us renegades that just want to destroy nature. Once it hits the newspaper and the sierra club and others get involved in fighting it, then we'll know it's closer to becoming a reality. It would be good for all of us to contact our senators and congressmen NOW to let them know that we want this and try to get them on our side before the opposition starts fighting it and throwing money at them to kill it. They will probably have no idea that it's even planned, but now is a good time to educate them.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    The forest service and the BLM suck A$$. We need to invite them to leave the State of Nevada.

    Look at the level of development of Lee Canyon and then consider the resorts in CO, UT, CA, OR, WA, NM, and even northern NV. We are getting screwed here.

    The BLM and USFS have no legal rights to be here and own the land in NV. They should have stopped managing it years ago.

  9. #9
    JKA
    JKA is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JKA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    197
    I agree 100%, but just saying so won't make it happen unfortunately. They are the ones we have to deal with on all public land issues. If they won't play nice with us, they will listen to our elected officials. If we can convince them to be on our side, then we have a chance to get things developed like in other areas.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Nevada kicked them out in 1980 but let them back in. Time to do it for good.

    Nevada has been getting screwed royally by the feds and Harry Reid for a very long time now. I am going to Deer Valley on Saturday to ride DH and am amazed that I can't do it at Lee. The people getting in the way of our ability to use "our" public lands is obscene at this point. Take a minute and look at Skidmap.com in the Park City area...I could rant about this for hours on end.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    Seems like a lot of assumptions and specious statements being made...is there really a concerted fed effort to limit biking opportunities in the Spring Mountains? Funny that Deer Valley was mentioned, besides fact that the trails there aren't really DH...it's all private property, which is a critical point to be made. My experience with other ski resorts thinking of building bike parks has led me to think that public land management agencies are often not the obstacle. Liability and the cost of additional insurance can be the big...and for DH biking the really big...inhibitor. I have no idea if feds are the limiting factor here, and maybe I'm full of shite in general too, but in any case my intention wasn't to kick off an anti-federal agency rant.

    And Park City is one of the sweetest places anywhere to ride...a lot of the park development is on private land, but it's also an excellent example of how the community, feds, private entities, and organizations like IMBA can come together to develop a real world class biking destination. This doesn't start with the contentious kinds of things offered earlier here.

  12. #12
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Thor Lord of Thunder View Post
    Seems like a lot of assumptions and specious statements being made...is there really a concerted fed effort to limit biking opportunities in the Spring Mountains.....
    I would say to a degree there is.... the problem we really face here is...we live in a desert in a city of a coupa million peeps, with only one lil mtn range to recreate in for all of us. Hence there's only so much available land to allocate to each of the user groups, you guys are all seeing it from your side(MTB eyes) of the fence.(each and every user group does) the Feds have to "try" and see it from all points(groups).
    I dig dirt!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by ImaFred View Post
    there's only so much available land to allocate to each of the user groups, you guys are all seeing it from your side(MTB eyes) of the fence.(each and every user group does) the Feds have to "try" and see it from all points(groups).
    Exactly. The Fed land management agencies deal with multiple use, plain and simple...it's not about "stealing" someone's land, it's more precisely about trying to find a way to accommodate a multitude of user groups.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Why is there so much private land in Park City and none in the mountains in southern NV? Are we not getting screwed simply because the Federal Government changed their approach to land management from distributing it out to the states and its residents to locking it up and then trying to make big bucks on what it does part with? Anyone have any idea how much money the BLM has made of land sales in LV? What happens to those dollars?

    I would stop thinking that the BLM or the FS is ever going to be our friends. We need to put pressure on them so that not working with us becomes untenable for the federal employees sitting at their desks using google maps and strava to try and find "illegal" trails.

    I think you miss the point THOR when you take the BLM and the FS for what they say they are in NV. Do some research into the matter and discover why NV is so largely dominated in land ownership by the feds. NV has very little say in what happens within its state and we are all getting jobbed royally because of it.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    BUMP.

    Fine day for a hike leads to BLM fines at Red Rock | Las Vegas Review-Journal
    Lake Mead property owners forced out until shutdown ends - www.ktnv.com

    There is something really wrong with a federal government who does this kind of stuff for the sake of being petty. We in NV are getting the royal shaft from DC and Harry is the one giving it to us. Educate yourselves about NV and why there is so much federal land here and then look at what they do with it...unbelievable.

  16. #16
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    On the other hand, have you thought of what a sh1tshow access to private lands would be? I'll tell you how it would be...there would be none. Like Texas. Which is the crappiest state for access to any lands in the entire country. Hate The the FS and BLM, but they do protect the land from ourselves.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  17. #17
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,724
    Rideit, love your sig quote ^^^
    I dig dirt!

  18. #18
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Thanks! I had shirts made up with that on it back when we were 'creating' trails in Teton Valley early on...and damn did we eat a lot of burgers.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Rideit. I don't disagree about the need for public lands and that they need to be managed in the west especially but I do contest the federal government being the ones to do it. The State of Nevada should be the ones to manage the land.

    The FS and BLM are not us. They are not controlled here in Nevada, looking out for Nevada's interests. Their motivations are not in line with ours and we cannot elect politicians who will manage them in the way Nevadans think best. This is precisely why we don't have more trails out here...why Gravity Logic at LV Ski & Snowboard Resort is not happening. The sad truth is that NV, and particularly LV was a late bloomer and so we are now seeing the effects of an obstructionist mentality from Washington. We have a descent ski resort and mountain range 30 minutes from downtown LV and there is one cross country MTB trail and a few renegade downhill trails. The terrain and the community could and would support so much more but the FS/BLM doesn't want it and blame it on a butterfly that may or may not have ever existed in the region. BTW, it was just put on the endangered species list and so you can kiss Gravity Logic goodbye forever.

    Educate yourselves about NV and why there is so much federal land around and then look at how Harry Reid screwed NV with SNPLMA. We can do better than this.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    333
    Species Profile for Mount Charleston blue Butterfly (Plebejus shasta charlestonensis)

    I was very sad to read the above post and hear that the butterfly is now officially considered endangered and not extinct. Stupid bug.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    bcall8...you hater.

    The real problem is that no one has really seen one up there. There are 19 species that are barely distinguishable and no one can find the one in question and so it becomes endangered. At least that is what the LV Ski people believe but in reality if it comes out only for 2 weeks out of the year it is almost automatically going to get "endangered" status. I studied environmental engineering and made my emphasis in natural systems and then went to law school and from what I gather, this process of granting endangered status is a largely political one and in this case it is pretty clear that some enviros got this little guy on the list simply because he is shy...or doesn't exist in the region.

    We are fighting a battle that we are not equipped to win unless we understand what we are up against. Does Utah not have any blue butterflies in its mountains? What the hell makes it OK for them to build but no us?

    Mount Charleston blue butterfly declared endangered species | Las Vegas Review-Journal

    Because of this butterfly, the ski resort cannot expand adding new lifts, runs, and ponds for snowmaking. Worse than that, they cannot build trails and downhill runs that would be accessed by the lifts.

    Really stupid if you ask me... The FS is not our friend and they are working against our interests. We are Nevada...this is our state and we should be able to dictate the use of our public lands.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    I really don't see any basis in the article for such knee-jerk reactions by states' rights proponents. Unless I read a different article there was nothing in there about restrictions on the LV Ski/Snowboard Resort. I realize these types of reactions are based solely on general distrust of the federal agencies...obviously entities like the CBD have an extreme agenda but I don't see any hard evidence that land managers are not working to accommodate all sides. I would argue that the concept of states' rights is just as extreme an agenda as CBD or other enviro groups out there have...and management is not often done at the extremes...it's more of a give and take, win some and lose some experience.

    I suppose only time will tell.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    I am curious as to how you think it extreme that NV manage NV land. Is it because we are too stupid to know what is good for us? Did any of the 13 original states have any federal ownership? Explain further please.

    88% ownership of the State of NV by the federal government seems extreme to me. Closing down Lake Mead seems extreme to me...ticketing hikers at Red Rock...kicking old people out of their homes...na, that's all good. A days work I guess.

    I have met personally with the management at the LV resort and their inability to develop the MTB portion is because of the butterfly. The bike park will likely die because it will be too expensive to "prove" that the endangered butterfly will not be harmed by bikers.

    But at least we win some and lose some. The win has to be that we get to keep this land manager who recently landed a helicopter in the middle of the desert and dragged two hooligans off for cutting MTB trails...awesome.

    Thor...please answer the question as to why NV is 88% federal and no other state comes close. It may take some research but the answer is out there. It affects all of us.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    As a side note, I haven't said anything about states' rights rather I am just explaining what Gravity Logic is up against. If you would like to debate states' rights and more specifically the Equal Footing Doctrine of the US Constitution then we can do that but I don't want to derail your thread.

  25. #25
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Well, judging by what a sh1thole Vegas and Henderson are, Nevadans seemingly can't be trusted to make their own 'open space' decisions. The proof is kind of in the pudding, wouldn't you agree?
    States are too easily tempted to sell/lease/privatize 'public' lands, this has been proven over and over again. Not usually he best stewards.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    OK. So what do we do about every state east of Colorado where there is little or no federal land? Don't the feds need to step in there? Or are we just not good stewards in the west?

  27. #27
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Are you kidding? The largest contiguous plate of federal land outside of Alaska is in Ny!
    You are conflating the historical needs with today's needs, which are very different. Look at Texas, 2% federal lands...and 98% of the state is basically useless.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    You should also know that the Southwest Ridge park will not happen in our lifetimes because of the BLM. As quoted to me by a senior official with the county when I presented him with a way to make a little money by building a bike park on the site..."Perhaps our grandchildren can enjoy that" You see, the county has no ability to develop the site without working with private entities but the BLM has a patent on the land preventing the county from making any money off of it. This means that no one can lease a portion of the land and help the county build it through revenues generated from such a lease. And, the BLM has called the county repeatedly to tell them that they had better not even think about doing anything.

    http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/Depts/c...MasterPlan.pdf

    Funny that you blame NV when NV has no control over the public lands. That seems pretty foolish and uneducated to me.

    It really bothers me because there is so much that could be done with this area and we get nothing. Trail gnomes have been doing the work for years. Can you name an MTB trail built by professionals from the MTB world and designed for MTB?

    Seems we are winning none and losing some very big ones.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    I think you are making my point about the large amounts of federal land in NV. Why is it so is the question I am asking...

    Are NV's needs being met by the BLM and FS? That is a very good question and I would ask you to present a case wherein they are. Meanwhile, I have shown two very clear examples of where they are not.

    If you can come up with an example or two then I will go into why we are dominated by federal land and how Harry screwed us with SNPLMA.

  30. #30
    007
    007 is offline
    b a n n e d
    Reputation: 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,017
    Quote Originally Posted by mennylove View Post
    . . . The FS is not our friend and they are working against our interests . . .
    I'm involved in a rather large-scale access issue, and I can speak from experience that this statement, by and large, is correct. Working with the FS is a nightmare and they have very little interest in changing the status quo based on what I've come to realize.
    Alcohol may lead nowhere, but it sure is the scenic route!

  31. #31
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by mennylove View Post
    ..... Can you name an MTB trail built by professionals from the MTB world and designed for MTB.
    Bears Best
    I dig dirt!

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    Well, judging by what a sh1thole Vegas and Henderson are, Nevadans seemingly can't be trusted to make their own 'open space' decisions. The proof is kind of in the pudding, wouldn't you agree?
    States are too easily tempted to sell/lease/privatize 'public' lands, this has been proven over and over again. Not usually he best stewards.
    Vegas is my home....if you are living here and feel that way please leave. I'm sick of all the transient transplants that complain about being here. If you are not living here then not cool....and why take such an active roll in this thread....

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Nice...I can't say enough about the work that has been performed out there by the professional gnomes.

    Unfortunately for this discussion this was never sanctioned by the BLM and they attempted to fine the gnomes in question and were only thwarted by the fact that when they "caught" them building they were on private land. As a thread about a year ago debated it is very clear that BBT is some on BLM and some on private land and our gnomes only avoided a massive fine for disturbing dirt, plants, and rocks because the BLM found them on private land.

    The BLM is a joke.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Isn't this funny. Rideit calls Vegas and Henderson a sh1thole... Based on what? The fact that Henderson is notorious for having a tremendous number of parks and trails integrated within the city limits. Every developer knows that when they build there they will be on the hook to add to them. The fact that all of the urban sprawl is caused by the BLM and the manner in which land is sold off.

    Rideit's comments are most likely born out of ignorance and a blind allegiance to an ideology that tells him that we cannot manage our own affairs here locally even if it hurts the riding scene in LV which according to his handle he is into.

    BUT FOR THE BLM/FS...within 12 months we have a fully functioning bike park at the ski resort and the Southwest Ridge starts to grow into what it can be as a mountain bike area that is rideable from the city. The scope and magnitude of what can be done there is amazing and no one can do a thing about it because of the BLM.

    The reason I am posting this here is that we need to understand that a vocal minority is the only way this is going to fall in our direction. The BLM would likely let the county do something if the right pressure were applied to the BLM. Then the right pressure needs to be applied to the county so that they understand trail building for MTB riders/trail runners. At this time, they have $500k to build trails and they are going to build about a mile of multi use trail at the far north end of the SW Ridge park area. An MTB trail, build professionally would cost at most 10% of that number...

  35. #35
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Quote Originally Posted by mennylove View Post
    The fact that all of the urban sprawl is caused by the BLM and the manner in which land is sold
    Here's my point.
    If even MORE of the land in around Vegas had been federal/Forest Service, the city could have had thousands and thousands of acres of open space, parks, trail networks, all of the things other cities in the west adjacent to massive tracts of FS lands enjoy.
    Instead?
    You have some of the worst irreversible urban sprawl in the country, with no way to 'turn it back' into desert open spaces...if a $ could be made on it, it was sold.
    It cuts both ways.
    My comments were only in regards to land (mis) management within the sprawl, nothing else.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    "If even MORE of the land in around Vegas had been federal/Forest Service, the city could have had thousands and thousands of acres of open space, parks, trail networks, all of the things other cities in the west adjacent to massive tracts of FS lands enjoy."

    Las Vegas is already surrounded entirely by federal land and the BLM actively works against building parks and trail networks in that open space. Meaning, there are thousands and thousands of acres of open space and they won't build MTB trails and we can't either. Perhaps we haven't applied the right pressure but I challenged you to provide me with an example of where they were working to provide trails for the MTB community. I am still waiting.

    "You have some of the worst irreversible urban sprawl in the country, with no way to 'turn it back' into desert open spaces...if a $ could be made on it, it was sold."

    This is way off point but I think you are trying to imply that if more of the land surrounding LV was federal then the sprawl would not have happened.

    To date, the BLM has made about $2 billion off of the land sales around Las Vegas since the inception of SNPLMA meaning that they are the ones walking with the cash.

    As for the urban sprawl, do you have any idea why Mountain's Edge and Southern Highlands are so far south and not just right south of the 215? It is precisely because the land is owned by the BLM in small tracts and with an airport overlay with BLM patents against private development.

    BUT FOR THE BLM...there is no way a developer would go to Mtn's Edge before staying closer to the 215 but they had to because of the BLM once again. The BLM owns a multitude of small parcels in that area and they are very difficult to get sold off due to the high cost of going through the nomination process only to lose out at auction. Largely, the pieces that get nominated are ones that are expensive to study as they are large and generally need utilities brought to them leaving a high amount of risk in the analysis unless you have invested the time. For the smaller pieces, it is easy to eliminate the risk and the auction process becomes much more competitive and the nominating party often loses and then cannot recoup their costs of the nomination process which generally takes 18 to 24 months.

    "It cuts both ways."

    Obviously.

    "My comments were only in regards to land (mis) management within the sprawl, nothing else."

    Who is mismanaging the land? Us? Again, are we too stupid to manage our own affairs and need some bloated monster to step in and fix it? You do realize that this is why we don't have all those fancy things you noted above about trails, parks, and all the things that other cities in the west enjoy.

    I guess my point is that the BLM/FS is not managing the land well. In fact, I think they suck at it really bad. I don't think they are vested in our community and I would like to see our trail system improved upon and made more accessible. I believe that if you did this, the sport would flourish in this area as it has as much potential as any place I have ever been.

  37. #37
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    All your gripes boil down to local decisions by BLM land managers, not national policies. in fact, BLM has the least stringent policies for building of trails of any agency. Sounds like you need to rethink your strategies with them, because what you are doing now isn't working for you.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    The only points that seem relevant here are:

    1) Public lands are, well, public, because the feds manage them for multiple use...a BIG part of that is recreation, which I assume everyone on this thread is in favor of. Sometimes that also includes less conservation-minded activities such as natural resource extraction (which is again for the general public good), but at least it is a more balanced approach than state management of these lands is likely to involve

    2) History has demonstrated that states and generally conservative state legislatures in the western US are not very good at preserving the intrinsic natural qualities of public lands...i.e. providing high quality recreational opportunities for different kinds of recreationists. More times than not they lease/sell for private uses such as energy development...this is not good for recreation anywhere in NV. Consider UT and its system of SITLA land parcels, for example...

    Yes, there are good BLM offices and personnel and there are bad...there will always be this trade-off but what holds true is that the feds are mandated with managing public lands for the public to use. I can't fathom that the state of NV would rank mountain bikers or other recreational user groups as high priority when deciding how to fund their management of the public lands they "took back." We don't exactly provide much in the way of revenue to fund such a concept...you really have to ask yourself who "could" fund the state to maintain these lands...and that to me is a scary alternative.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Again with the state managers being bad and federal managers being good. That is a logically indefensible position to take. We have no very little input in what happens to our federal lands and we elect all of our state officials...meaning, that we have input in matters of state and local government. So what, are you like Rideit in that you think that Nevadans are too stupid to manage their own affairs.

    Tell me more about the problems with SITLA and how its been bad for the State of Utah. Is it because the State sells and develops the land for the benefit of the local school system? That would be nice if there were something like that for NV so that we could better fund our local schools...instead the BLM sells the land and then allocates it as they see fit. That is why you see a $5M path along St Rose complete with decorative turtles and steel cacti.

    Speaking about mis management...what did the BLM do with the $2 billion it took from the land sales. Imagine what that could do to benefit our local school system or to develop a park at the Southwest Ridge.

    Lastly, the feds don't give a damn about MTB riders but the county does and would. The majority of the feedback they got about the SW Ridge was from us...but their hands are tied to do anything without picking a fight with the BLM. Staff there is pining to do something great for the MTB community...the BLM is not.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    I did not say that fed managers are all good. I think you missed my point...

    I also didn't say the people of NV are too stupid to manage their own affairs...I said the "state" did not have the funding to manage their "land." That's a significant difference, and I will add that I think it's "stupid" to twist the actual text of a stated argument into something sensational and lacking substance...isn't that, ironically, the logically irrefutable position?

    SITLA looks good on paper, but UT still has one of the lowest levels of state funding in its public school system in the nation. So it seems that doesn't work...

    SITLA also allows conservative and heavily lobbied (read: corporate) state politicians to lease SITLA land for natural resource extraction...and this outcome is the norm not the exception. This policy on a widespread scale will not help your chances of bike trails and bike parks being built.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    The state would have money if it got the proceeds from the land sales and leases as the BLM does now. We are talking about $2 billion from 1998 to 2007, a 10 year period.

    The fact that Utah has a low level of funding has nothing to do with SITLA. That state spends what they think they need to an generate the revenue through various sources with SITLA just being one of them.

    You may not like the policy of resource extraction in the state of Utah but who the hell cares what you think up there. The residents of Utah are big boys and can figure out how best to deal with their state. That being said, I don't know of any mineral leases getting in the way of building trails but I will keep my eyes open.

    So are you OK with the BLM shutting down and bike park development at Lee Canyon?

  42. #42
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Menny, I think you are also blinded as well by your own ideology. Think of all of the other places in the west where public lands are managed well with recreation in mind...there are thousands of them.
    Use them as a guide as to how to proceed in your local area.
    The county I live in is 97% federal lands. 97%!
    We don't like everything they do, but that fact alone is PRECISELY why Teton Valley, Wy is a recreational it's paradise, and not a mess of poorly planned sprawl.
    There are over 1000 miles of legal singletrack here within 100 miles. All on Federal Lands.
    This is not 'speculation', this is proof that in some areas, it is beneficial. If the parks, forests, and Wilderness ( I won't get into those access issues in his thread, it's another topic) weren't here, most of this land likely would have been sold and developed or destroyed by private interests.
    It's just the facts here.
    And in general, I am no 'Federalist'...but you simply cannot argue with the maps here, and where we can ride.
    I wish you luck in swaying the local BLM brass into seeing the value of recreation, but you are on a quixotic failure of a quest if you think deeding these lands to the state or private enterprise would value the petty desires of Mt. Bikers more.
    In fact, bikers would likelY be marginalized more, as the 'best and highest use' would not be for recreational trails. Revenue generation would come first.
    This is where federal (land protection) mandates come into value, trumping the short term cash needs of local principalities.
    Just how it is.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    Rideit. I believe that the state can do everything the federal govt does but the people of the state get much more input in the process. You disagree with that premise...OK. No further discussion.

    You don't live here and you think it is a sh1thole. Great. We have very limited trails in the area because the BLM/FS is a steaming pile of dung. Our land managers are all looking to get to your office and so they don't do anything to rock the boat until there is an opening elsewhere while we have to suffer through the garbage they produce.

    Thanks for the insight.

  44. #44
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    You are twisting my words and interpretations.
    Are you involved?
    Are you on any boards of committees, advocacy groups, building clubs, or chapters?
    Nothing will change from complaining and imagining outcomes of apocalyptic paradigm shifts...that sh1t is just a time waste.
    A tea party msturbtory fantasy, at best.
    Change will come when the BLM brass ARE mt. Bikers, like yourself. And the Mayors, commissioners, and city council members are, too.
    Have you run for any of these positions yourself?
    Have you thought about it?
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    67
    I hired a lobbyist and met with county staff, the county commissioner for the area, and took it as far as I could to do something with the county to build trails on the SW Ridge. The BLM shut it down. I guess I could join a club or run for office but neither of those will fix the problem. As for me, I am improving EXISTING animal and hiking trails and the like to try and make biking a more accessible and better experience here...we got started later than you guys and so we have to watch out for the black helicopters from the BLM that will come arrest you for moving a few rocks. Or maybe not...the law is not very clear on the issue but we know where the feds stand (ie. this is their land and if they don't get paid then we can all get fined for walking around in the desert).

    I didn't do anything about Lee Canyon but have spoken with people who are trying to make that happen. They were worried about the butterfly when I spoke with them and with the recent listing as endangered I am guessing they have given up on a downhill park. Oh well.

    I am just relating my experiences as to why the BLM sucks. And it goes way beyond some bad managers here but such a discussion is difficult on a forum.

  46. #46
    Viva la Vida!
    Reputation: Camaleon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    790
    So the Feds own the public land...
    Name:  Owner.jpg
Views: 134
Size:  57.7 KB
    But we own the Government and the Public Land right, am I missing something here?
    Can't all just be fixed by voting who ever is in charge out and voting the right people in?
    Last edited by Camaleon; 10-24-2013 at 02:17 PM.
    We do not stop playing because we grow old;
    We grow old because we stop playing

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Thor Lord of Thunder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    296
    I read this today and thought it relevant to this discussion....

    Black Diamond CEO: Shutdown exposed folly of Utah?s federal-land grabbers | The Salt Lake Tribune

    Yes, Metcalf leans toward the enviro side of things (and is wealthy enough because of the success of Black Diamond to have time to care and write op-eds), but I think it is difficult to argue against the points he makes given the experiences gateway and rural communities have had and continue to deal with as a result of the federal shutdown.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    29
    I would like to draw this discussion back towards the origional point of discussion, having a mountain bike park at LVSSR. I would like as the question, could a pay to play mountain bike park be profitable? Given that the Telephone canyon and Blue tree trail systems are free. Couple that with the trail systems going in with the Middle Kyle trail system. Why would someone drive and hour out of town to pay to ride? Is there something I am missing here?

  49. #49
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,877
    Only if there is adjacent lodging, food, and beverage options in which to maximize revenue.

    (Disclosure: I am a trail builder at a ski area that currently has none of these...but we will)
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  50. #50
    Big B's Trails
    Reputation: ImaFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by mattstragalus View Post
    I would like to draw this discussion back towards the origional point of discussion, having a mountain bike park at LVSSR. I would like as the question, could a pay to play mountain bike park be profitable? Given that the Telephone canyon and Blue tree trail systems are free. Couple that with the trail systems going in with the Middle Kyle trail system. Why would someone drive and hour out of town to pay to ride? Is there something I am missing here?
    Ask Brianhead if it is...
    I dig dirt!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ski or snowboard forum
    By richccc in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-19-2012, 06:30 PM
  2. Snowboard/MTB Helmet?
    By SG333e in forum Apparel and Protection
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-15-2012, 12:48 PM
  3. Ski or Snowboard??
    By idaho biker 90 in forum Idaho, Montana, Wyoming
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 11-03-2011, 10:11 AM
  4. Barnum Park... Gravity Logic and Winter Park
    By joelalamo45 in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-04-2011, 05:46 PM
  5. OT: Where to Snowboard?
    By adamm3 in forum Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-04-2011, 01:34 PM

Posting Permissions

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