Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Big news: Feds to consider allowing bikes on PCT

11K views 72 replies 30 participants last post by  Empty_Beer 
#1 ·
For the last two to three years a small group of us has been working to get mountain bike access to non-Wilderness sections of the Pacific Crest Trail. (About 60% of the PCT lies outside Wilderness.)

We have convinced the Forest Service that its 1988 closure order requires reconsideration.

As a result, the Forest Service is going to begin a rulemaking procedure, probably in March of 2013, to consider making the non-Wilderness parts of the PCT multiuse. This will involve public notice and comment.

When something similar happened with the Continental Divide Trail about four years ago, the Forest Service received about 8000 comments. The PCT reconsideration can be expected to generate even more controversy.

If the Forest Service decides to keep bikes off the Pacific Crest Trail, we can expect that closure to stay in place for the rest of our lives and maybe those of our children. If the Forest Service decides to open it, it will be revolutionary.

Stay tuned. We'll be looking for your help in coming months.
 
See less See more
#66 ·
Latest update - We finaly received the letter from the USFS....and it was as we expected

THE LETTER HAS ARRIVED

As expected, we have received a letter from the USFS, which can be effectively summed up in two letters: "NO"

Although not what we were hoping for, none of us here at the PCTRI are even remotely surprised by this, as it has been the anticipated response since our initial meeting with them. Let us be clear, that we are not by any means considering this a defeat. Quite the contrary actually, as our movement is gaining momentum. We are currently in the process of planning our subsequent actions and will be updating our site as we march forward.

We're still in the process of digesting the information contained within the letter, but one thing is clear: the PCTRI and the USFS continue to disagree on several fundamental points, and it may take a much higher authority to formally sort out our differences. Whether or not we want to pursue such avenues remains to be seen.

At this point, we're still in the planning phases and are continuing to add supporters of our cause with each passing day. We hope that you all continue to spread the word about the PCTRI and as always, we welcome your thoughts, suggestions and ideas. A copy of the letter has been posted to our history page, and can be found there or by clicking here: USFS November 2013 Reply
bottom line...this is a stalemate.

USFS has no interest in changing, nor do they have any real interest in enforcement (my opinion only).

from the Sharing the PCT FB page Moderator:
The issue may be decided, for a fraction of the cost, if a Forest Service employee encounters a mountain biker on the PCT and cites her or him, and she or he decides to bring the citation to court and challenge the legality of the closure. This page has hypothesized before that the FS might even be looking to cite a mountain biker so as to get to court and have a court put an end to this morass, one way or the other. Judging by its recent letter to PCTRI, the FS appears not to be happy about those Unabomber-style threats on PCT-L (the PCTA-affiliated discussion group) to sabotage the PCT and/or assault mountain bikers.

As this page has stated before, however, don't make yourself a guinea pig for a citation. With modern computerization of criminal record systems, even a misdemeanor conviction can present problems, such as not being eligible for a job you want or being unable to visit the United Kingdom or Canada. The closure could be legally valid-the FS says it is, anyway-so people should not defy it.
For more up to date discussion you can visit the Facebook page on this subject:
https://www.facebook.com/SharingThePct
 
#67 ·
Update:

response letter from the PCTRI quoted below from the "Sharing the PCT" Facebook page

Mr. Randy Moore
Regional Forester
U.S. Forest Service
1323 Club Drive
Vallejo, California 94592-1110

Re: Nonmotorized multiuse on the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT)-reply to your letter of Nov. 25.

Dear Mr. Moore:

Thank you for your letter of November 25.

We were disappointed, but not surprised, to read that you are not rescinding Regional Order 88-4 at this time. Still we are asking that USFS engage in a public process to consider an order or regulation that is consistent with current best practices and compliant with the Administrative Procedure Act. The 1988 closure order was created and signed by three Forest Service employees only after the Forest Service Chief declined to issue a regulation. We continue to believe that the Administrative Procedure Act calls for a public process to consider the regulation of trail use on the PCT.

The 1978 Code of Federal Regulations declaration, which provides that the PCT is primarily intended for foot and horse use, is not an impediment to reassessing the current use regime. We have no problem stipulating that the PCT is primarily intended for those historically established uses. As is the case with the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, mountain biking can coexist alongside those primary uses. Mountain biking exists alongside horse and hiker use almost everywhere else, including on those tens of thousands of Forest Service trail and road miles to which your November 25 letter adverts.

Additionally, and beyond the questions of Administrative Procedure Act requirements and the application of the 1978 CFR provision, the Forest Service rightfully prides itself on its own participatory rulemaking processes. In the case of the PCT bicycle closure, there was not, nor has there ever been, a process that would meet Forest Service standards of practice. A cautionary, temporary rule has become established, but because of the lack of an adequate promulgation process, its legitimacy is tenuous.

We, like you, are saddened by the acrimony that has emerged over this issue. It continues unabated and no end to it seems in sight, judging by posts on the Internet. We pledge to you that for our part we will continue to conduct ourselves civilly and with a commitment to the community's good as we continue our advocacy.

We welcome the Forest Service's generous offer to "organize a professionally facilitated discussion in the coming year, with the goal of finding common ground for resolving disagreements" and your invitation to us to help locate a qualified facilitator. We are trying to find a facilitator that we can recommend, and we look forward to participating in the eventual conference or workshop. We will help create meaningful and productive dialogue at any meeting that does take place.

We feel very strongly that any such process should have clear goals, milestones and criteria toward planning and creating a national trails system that fairly and transparently reflects conservation and societal needs that have evolved since the current system and management practices were put in place.

Per your invitation, we will be in contact with [the] Regional Trails Program Manager, and/or [the] Pacific Crest Trail Program Manager, on these matters.

Sincerely yours,

PCTRI
 
#69 ·
I just completed the survey, thanks for the link. On a side note, the mountain biker they quote in the intro is me! Just like Steve Martin's phone books, This is the kind of spontaneous publicity that makes people. I'm in print! Things are going to start happening to me now! : )
 
#70 ·
Excellent. I read your comments and appreciated them. I've looked at the map of that area. Could you do a loop ride of PCT and dirt roads without going onto what look like a couple of national forest parcels a few miles north of the Columbia River? The PCT in that area is beautiful as it winds it way through what is almost like a fairy-tale forest. Most of it seems to be on private or Washington state land, not federal, unless the Columbia River Gorge NSA allows the Forest Service to apply the no-bikes rule there.
 
#71 ·
I'm not sure since I try to stay off the PCT as much as possible. Were I ever to use it, I would come out at the parking area across from the dam where the hikers & equestrians stage rather than the trailhead near the Bridge of the Gods.

Here's a link to the Skamania County GIS that shows ownership of the many parcels. If you zoom in until the yellow lines show up & then click in any parcel it will pop up with the owner info.

Disclaimer

Let me know if you want to have me do some exploration on any specific areas & I'll see what I can do. :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top