Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 115
  1. #1
    SS Pusher Man
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    7,366

    LBS Ethics.....Would You Continue To Supoort?

    Here is a good topic of discussion.

    Would you continue to support a LBS if they encourage poaching of trails by leading rides leading by example?
    Bicycles don’t have motors or batteries.

    Ebikes are not bicycles

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,287
    Do they know they're poaching trails? If so, that's completely contrary to helping the mountain bike community, which is a huge role of an LBS.

    I'd call them out in a non confrontational way and see what their response is.
    Vermonter - bikes, beers and skis.

  3. #3
    SS Pusher Man
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    7,366
    Yes, they are fully aware of it.

    I know what their response is.
    Bicycles don’t have motors or batteries.

    Ebikes are not bicycles

  4. #4
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,796
    No, I would not continue to support them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oh My Sack! View Post
    Remember, there's always quilting and knitting if pedalling becomes too tough.

  5. #5
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Nope

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,316
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    Here is a good topic of discussion.

    Would you continue to support a LBS if they encourage poaching of trails by leading rides leading by example?
    No.
    On MTBR, the reputation is infamous.

  7. #7
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    23,994
    Absolutely not. I might even drop a tip with the land manager about it, too. IMO, the fact that it's a business doing this, makes it warrant that sort of response on my part. The land manager can do with it what they will.

    I see this as no different than ebike businesses telling their customers that they can ride on trails where legally, emtbs are not permitted.

  8. #8
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Poaching has a lot of uses, so I'd want to know what variation you're talking about... But I think the answer would likely be the same for me - not cool. It's one thing for shop employees and friends to ride how they want on their own time, but on an advertised ride they shouldn't be encouraging anything that could be a detriment to local advocacy.

    I work at a shop and occasionally lead rides, we try to be mindful that what flies on our personal rides might not be good when leading a group (though poaching isn't really an issue where I ride).

  9. #9
    Asswipe
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,153
    "Poaching" happens around here quite a bit. It's tolerated, not so much a problem. One shop I've done a couple rides with went through some trails that aren't technically legal. I don't see this as a deal breaker or major violation. We all do it to some degree.

    I think it depends on the area and trails in question. Just because you don't have formal written consent doesn't mean it's necessarily a problem, or that anyone doesn't want you riding there.

    For clarification, are we talking about a state or county park? Private land? Is it clearly marked with "No bikes"? I think more details are in order before we crucify the shop.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  10. #10
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    Absolutely not. I might even drop a tip with the land manager about it, too. IMO, the fact that it's a business doing this, makes it warrant that sort of response on my part. The land manager can do with it what they will.

    I see this as no different than ebike businesses telling their customers that they can ride on trails where legally, emtbs are not permitted.
    Hey, that sounds really familiar...

    http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/emtb-...l#post13825186

  11. #11
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    23,994
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDwayyo View Post
    I work at a shop and occasionally lead rides, we try to be mindful that what flies on our personal rides might not be good when leading a group (though poaching isn't really an issue where I ride).
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    For clarification, are we talking about a state or county park? Private land? Is it clearly marked with "No bikes"? I think more details are in order before we crucify the shop.
    I don't think the details matter so much. Frankly, businesses doing rides on an official basis should be held to a higher standard on our public lands. I could even see justification for requiring shops to purchase guide permits for the relevant public lands (though I don't know if any land managers actually require this, since shops don't charge for group rides).

  12. #12
    CEO Product Failure
    Reputation: bingemtbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    939
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    Yes, they are fully aware of it.

    I know what their response is.
    What is their response?

    FWIW, I never knowingly ride illegal trails. If a shop is knowingly doing this, then let them reap what they sow. I would not be the whistle blower. Nor would I publicly share the details of your boycott. I would do my best to avoid the impending sh@t storm the LBS may be facing.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    Thousands of miles of now legal trail including famous and destination rides started out as "poaching" or at least not legal. Infact I'd wager it's the #1 way mtb trails and areas start. As mentioned "poaching" encompasses a large swath of definition and scenarios, you need to be more specific. Are they riding hiking trails specifically marked no mountain biking? Yeah, that's definitely not cool, or are they riding unsanctioned trails in a legal grey area? Big difference.

    Regarding selling and promoting e-bikes in areas where they are not legal, I totally agree. It's completely dishonest. Especially to the demographic that is ignorant to this fact. Your basically ripping them off while at the same time screwing over the established biking community. Seeing a lot of trails specifically marked "no ebikes" lately.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bacon Fat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    289
    I know shops that do this. Riding there is illegal because the county screwed over riders decades ago with an illegal law that wasn't voted on. Then years later when petitioned to open the trails, the county had mtn bikers do a bunch of trail work, then still voted to ban them. I support the shop for saying F you to the county

  15. #15
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    23,994
    Quote Originally Posted by brownpownow View Post
    Hey, that sounds really familiar...

    http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/emtb-...l#post13825186
    Yeah, it happens. I encountered some folks at a USFS trailhead in North Carolina that was HEAVILY signed "NO EBIKES" who were apparently directed there by some shop (I don't know which shop, or I would have called the land manager, who clearly has a problem with ebikers on the trail - not about the riders, but about the shop sending emtbs there).

  16. #16
    SS Pusher Man
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    7,366
    We have a local ebike shop that opened after ebikes were banned in county parks...actually they were never legal.

    Lately county parks dept has been clamping down on Ebikes poaching in the parks. However they continue to blatantly ride there.

    Strava posts regularly show pics of new/latest/greatest ebike they rode this time.






    This is not about whether I like Ebikes or not. This is about the ethics of local business and whether you continue to support them.
    Bicycles don’t have motors or batteries.

    Ebikes are not bicycles

  17. #17
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    23,994
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    This is about the ethics of local business and whether you continue to support them.
    As a business, like it or not, they have a higher standard of conduct to follow.

    Besides, anyone with any sense knows that if you're going to poach, do it quietly and don't publicize it.

    Considering those two points, the shop is violating not just written policies, but also unspoken ones that mtb riders have loosely agreed upon over the course of decades.

  18. #18
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    Quote Originally Posted by brownpownow View Post
    Hey, that sounds really familiar...

    http://forums.mtbr.com/e-bikes/emtb-...l#post13825186
    I was going to cite that same thread. This shop knowingly tells potential customers that ebikes are legal in our local park, when they know full well that they aren't.
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPA Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Thousands of miles of now legal trail including famous and destination rides started out as "poaching" or at least not legal. Infact I'd wager it's the #1 way mtb trails and areas start. As mentioned "poaching" encompasses a large swath of definition and scenarios, you need to be more specific. Are they riding hiking trails specifically marked no mountain biking? Yeah, that's definitely not cool, or are they riding unsanctioned trails in a legal grey area? Big difference.
    Along these lines...it would be pretty difficult to tell in many cases (but one could argue if you are doing a sponsored ride, you should do your homework and find out) what trails are legal around here in my neck of the wild wild west...

    "hmmm...I wonder where that trail goes?"

    "Is that just a game trail? Looks rideable to me"

    "never noticed that trail, wonder if that was ok'd by the Freds?"

    "how'd we get here??? I was just following what looked like the trail"

    I personally would like to see a lot more active management and oversight around here because a bunch of the trails that I've seen become established are pretty stupid...but given the incredible lack of management and oversight, it is often a tough call as to what might be legitimate (and just because the FS or BLM doesn't know about a trail, I don't think that always means it is necessarily illegitimate).
    Riding: '91 Carbon Epic Stumpjumper w/1" Slicks and a Rack on the Back

  20. #20
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,062
    I will not supoort anything.
    Cool heads prevail

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    We have a local ebike shop that opened after ebikes were banned in county parks...actually they were never legal.

    Lately county parks dept has been clamping down on Ebikes poaching in the parks. However they continue to blatantly ride there.

    Strava posts regularly show pics of new/latest/greatest ebike they rode this time.






    This is not about whether I like Ebikes or not. This is about the ethics of local business and whether you continue to support them.
    Really up to you and depends on how you personally feel about the law that keeps E-bikes out of the area in question. If you feel that E-bikes are the devil (like a lot of people seem to) and don't want them in the area, then yes, I guess you should take your business elsewhere. If you could care less about E-bike riding the area, then swipe away.

    I fall into the latter....if it is a good shop that takes care of it's customer base, I don't care at all. And no, I don't have an E-bike nor do I have any plans of ever buying one.

  22. #22
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    I don't think the details matter so much. Frankly, businesses doing rides on an official basis should be held to a higher standard on our public lands. I could even see justification for requiring shops to purchase guide permits for the relevant public lands (though I don't know if any land managers actually require this, since shops don't charge for group rides).
    Eh, I don't know about that. For instance, my local trails aren't legal to ride... But aren't illegal to ride either. We are working out the details of a recreational agreement for the land, but it's not official yet. Because of this, many trails are technically 'illegal' and will be closed at some point, but the land manager just isn't ready to enforce it yet - it's kind of a grace period we are in right now.

    You're saying my shop shouldn't ride that entire system until it's all officially legal on paper? Hog wash. We aren't hurting local advocacy efforts, in fact I'm one of those working on it and the shop supports me a great deal.

  23. #23
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Are they riding hiking trails specifically marked no mountain biking? Yeah, that's definitely not cool, or are they riding unsanctioned trails in a legal grey area? Big difference.
    Exactly. Taking any official group ride on a hiking trail is not cool. I won't act like I've never ridden a hiking-only trail, but it's not something that gets publicized... On second thought, I'm going to act like I've never ridden a hiking-only trail.

  24. #24
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    23,994
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDwayyo View Post
    Eh, I don't know about that. For instance, my local trails aren't legal to ride... But aren't illegal to ride either. We are working out the details of a recreational agreement for the land, but it's not official yet. Because of this, many trails are technically 'illegal' and will be closed at some point, but the land manager just isn't ready to enforce it yet - it's kind of a grace period we are in right now.

    You're saying my shop shouldn't ride that entire system until it's all officially legal on paper? Hog wash. We aren't hurting local advocacy efforts, in fact I'm one of those working on it and the shop supports me a great deal.
    I'm saying that shops shouldn't sponsor/organize group rides on trail systems that aren't 100% legit, legal, and supported by the land manager.

    I'm not saying that individual riders shouldn't ride trails such as you describe. Yet I honestly have a conceptual difficulty with how such trails exist. I've not encountered any like that. It's either been 100% legit and supported by the land manager, or 100% off-limits.

  25. #25
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    32,783
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    For clarification, are we talking about a state or county park? Private land? Is it clearly marked with "No bikes"? I think more details are in order before we crucify the shop.
    Well this takes all the fun out of premature crucifying.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  26. #26
    Don't worry, be happy!
    Reputation: formica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    8,009
    We have one shop that encourages parking outside of the State Park to bypass a day use fee. People notice, trust me.

  27. #27
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    I'm saying that shops shouldn't sponsor/organize group rides on trail systems that aren't 100% legit, legal, and supported by the land manager.

    I'm not saying that individual riders shouldn't ride trails such as you describe. Yet I honestly have a conceptual difficulty with how such trails exist. I've not encountered any like that. It's either been 100% legit and supported by the land manager, or 100% off-limits.
    I can think of many trails like that. They’re mostly on private land, but I can think of several on federal, too. The landowner (or manager) knows they exist and see use, but they aren’t sanctioned and could go away at any time.

    Our local network of system trails was adopted from pre-existing user created routes. Some were newish, some were decades old. Not all of them were obliterated when they weren’t adopted.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    I'm saying that shops shouldn't sponsor/organize group rides on trail systems that aren't 100% legit, legal, and supported by the land manager.

    I'm not saying that individual riders shouldn't ride trails such as you describe. Yet I honestly have a conceptual difficulty with how such trails exist. I've not encountered any like that. It's either been 100% legit and supported by the land manager, or 100% off-limits.
    I think if done well shops can help facilitate a critical mass on grey area or transional tracts of land toward successfully making trails and areas sanctioned riding areas. I think this happens on some level quite often actually. Then again recently in Portland you just ended up with a lot of pissed off people.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  29. #29
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    As a business, like it or not, they have a higher standard of conduct to follow.
    Agreed Harold, as a business they set an example for the community, either a poor example or a good one.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,206
    Quote Originally Posted by formica View Post
    We have one shop that encourages parking outside of the State Park to bypass a day use fee. People notice, trust me.
    That's a bit different than what is being discussed...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    That's a bit different than what is being discussed...

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Not to continue the drift but, am I the only one that finds it irritating to have to pay a day fee to use a "park" that is on public land funded by our tax dollars?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by rynomx785 View Post
    I the only one that finds it irritating to have to pay a day fee to use a "park" that is on public land funded by our tax dollars?
    Definitely not, and I park directly in front of those signs as a matter of practice. Keep it wild, we don't need more shit built to enjoy the outdoors.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,206
    Quote Originally Posted by rynomx785 View Post
    Not to continue the drift but, am I the only one that finds it irritating to have to pay a day fee to use a "park" that is on public land funded by our tax dollars?
    That's why it's a completely different discussion and I agree with you.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    314
    I'd only go to them to order bike brands that they don't carry.

    Actually it would totally depend on what kind of poaching was going on. I've ridden multiple places where access was grey. It was more of a "You technically can't ride here, but don't make a mess and we won't make a big deal" sort of thing. If it was something like that, I wouldn't be be bothered by shop rides going there. On the other hand, if they were riding across land that had been blocked off as ecologically fragile, I would certainly avoid shopping there. It just depends for me.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    What does it means by poaching trail?

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

  36. #36
    Upcyclist
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    What does it means by poaching trail?

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
    Cook by simmering in a small amount of liquid.
    Cool heads prevail

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Definitely not, and I park directly in front of those signs as a matter of practice. Keep it wild, we don't need more shit built to enjoy the outdoors.
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    That's why it's a completely different discussion and I agree with you.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Just glad I'm not alone.... back to E-bike on MTB trails. LOL

  38. #38
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,229
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Definitely not, and I park directly in front of those signs as a matter of practice. Keep it wild, we don't need more shit built to enjoy the outdoors.
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    That's why it's a completely different discussion and I agree with you.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by rynomx785 View Post
    Just glad I'm not alone.... back to E-bike on MTB trails. LOL
    We had a good discussion about the California Adventure pass a few years ago here:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/california-so...r-1004892.html
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  39. #39
    ●●●●●●●●◌◌
    Reputation: phlegm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,087
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Cook by simmering in a small amount of liquid.
    Healthier than frying the trail.

  40. #40
    Bicycles aren't motorized
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,901
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    Here is a good topic of discussion.

    Would you continue to support a LBS if they encourage poaching of trails by leading rides leading by example?



    Nope but this thread needs pics.
    Wanted, SRAM GX 2x11 rear derailleur

    It ain't supposed to be easy.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    517
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    I will not supoort anything.
    https://youtu.be/WmXHLHVTjRc

  42. #42
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    I supoort poaching of the sort that leads to this:
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Definitely not, and I park directly in front of those signs as a matter of practice. Keep it wild, we don't need more shit built to enjoy the outdoors.
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    We had a good discussion about the California Adventure pass a few years ago here:

    http://forums.mtbr.com/california-so...r-1004892.html
    California paving the way once again....

  44. #44
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    32,783
    All I know is there are way too many members and non members poaching this thread right now. Spread it out soldiers. Get out there and find some other threads to poach.

    LBS Ethics.....Would You Continue To Supoort?-2281325e-a9ec-49d5-b9ef-7afa4cfe1be4.jpeg
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  45. #45
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    Curious... What does "Finch Platte+" mean?
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  46. #46
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    32,783
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckha62 View Post
    Curious... What does "Finch Platte+" mean?
    Finch Platte = Pinch Flat. Add the + in and I assume he’s been pinch flattening more than usual.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  47. #47
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    The "+" was the question. The anagram is fairly obvious.

    I mean, he's been accused of having sock accounts. I'm not sure what evidence folks have used to come to that conclusion, but who knows...

    Hey Finch, is the "+" the smoking gun?
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    +Picard
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    Finch Platte = Pinch Flat. Add the + in and I assume he’s been pinch flattening more than usual.
    The moron tends to get flat on the trails

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

  50. #50
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    ^^^ They are NOT an "item".
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  51. #51
    Make America Bike Again
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,433
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    "Poaching" happens around here quite a bit. It's tolerated, not so much a problem. One shop I've done a couple rides with went through some trails that aren't technically legal. I don't see this as a deal breaker or major violation. We all do it to some degree.

    I think it depends on the area and trails in question. Just because you don't have formal written consent doesn't mean it's necessarily a problem, or that anyone doesn't want you riding there.

    For clarification, are we talking about a state or county park? Private land? Is it clearly marked with "No bikes"? I think more details are in order before we crucify the shop.


    If you really want to do the 'good' trails, it happens more than quite a bit lol.

    I'm not surprised at all that an experienced rider at an LBS is wanting to go to a trail system that has questionable access. It happens all the time. The question is what is going to happen to the riders and other nearby 100% legal trail access if they are 'caught'.


    It really does depend on the area and the trails in question, but it's pretty safe to say that there is a hierarchy of severity in trail violations:

    1. Military or other Govt. property, like dams, water towers, etc. where it clearly states someone is breaking a State / Federal trespassing law.

    2. Private property where from the signs and any notes it's clear that the owner absolutely does not want anyone on their property. This is opposed to (4)

    3. County / state / federal lands that clearly say no one is allowed past a certain point, including hikers.

    4. There is a private property sign but it's abandoned, undeveloped dirt with no owner in sight, no home, ranch, farmhouse, etc. The sign has probably been there 20-30 years and is getting rusty. It certainly does not prevent the neighbors from walking their dogs in the evening there.

    5. There are some signs on public property saying restricted access, but they are vague, as in it says no unauthorized access, but the icons above it are a Jeep, a Motorcycle, an ATV, and a Truck. OK...is it those only not allowed??? It doesn't say. As with (4) again it certainly does not prevent the neighbors from walking their dogs in the evening there. A lot of these places also have a real 'designed' opening in the fence for people to walk through, as opposed to 1-3 above where the fencing is clearly designed to keep everyone out, and if not it's been broken/cut illegally.


    Bottom line: the spirit of the law is often more important than the letter of the law. If you see hikers and people walking their pets in a 'restricted' area, it's obviously not so restricted. If you see no one, and it's 100% fenced off, think twice. I try not to do 1 and 3 above, only 4 and 5. Never, ever have done number 2 above because I do not want my head blown off by an overzealous paranoid landowner.
    Last edited by richj8990; 09-24-2018 at 04:31 PM.

  52. #52
    Life's a Garden, dig it!
    Reputation: chuckha62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    The moron tends to get flat on the trails

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
    Blame Canada!
    Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    If you really want to do the 'good' trails, it happens more than quite a bit lol.

    I'm not surprised at all that an experienced rider at an LBS is wanting to go to a trail system that has questionable access. It happens all the time. The question is what is going to happen to the riders and other nearby 100% legal trail access if they are 'caught'.


    It really does depend on the area and the trails in question, but it's pretty safe to say that there is a hierarchy of severity in trail violations:

    1. Military or other Govt. property, like dams, water towers, etc. where it clearly states someone is breaking a State / Federal trespassing law.

    2. Private property where from the signs and any notes it's clear that the owner absolutely does not want anyone on their property. This is opposed to (4)

    3. County / state / federal lands that clearly say no one is allowed past a certain point, including hikers.

    4. There is a private property sign but it's abandoned, undeveloped dirt with no owner in sight, no home, ranch, farmhouse, etc. The sign has probably been there 20-30 years and is getting rusty. It certainly does not prevent the neighbors from walking their dogs in the evening there.

    5. There are some signs on public property saying restricted access, but they are vague, as in it says no unauthorized access, but the icons above it are a Jeep, a Motorcycle, an ATV, and a Truck. OK...is it those only not allowed??? It doesn't say. As with (4) again it certainly does not prevent the neighbors from walking their dogs in the evening there. A lot of these places also have a real 'designed' opening in the fence for people to walk through, as opposed to 1-3 above where the fencing is clearly designed to keep everyone out, and if not it's been broken/cut illegally.


    Bottom line: the spirit of the law is often more important than the letter of the law. If you see hikers and people walking their pets in a 'restricted' area, it's obviously not so restricted. If you see no one, and it's 100% fenced off, think twice.
    I will admit I have ridden a trail was described as a hiking trail online but only said, "no motor vehicles past this point" on the marker at the trail head. It was a fun trail but hikers don't seem to care about downed trees. LOL

  54. #54
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    If you see hikers and people walking their pets in a 'restricted' area, it's obviously not so restricted.
    Lol

    The ignorance of others is not a free pass. You can debate the ethics of poaching all you want, but you are either legally allowed, or not and it's your responsibility to know. In the case of bikes and ebikes, the problems arise when those pedestrians you pass know you aren't supposed to be there, get their nose out of joint and contact your local LM. Or make a point of it in public meetings.

    Poaching happens, everyone knows it. And yeah, I know that social trails can become system trails in some areas, and at some point. It generally does nothing but shoot the local mtbers in the foot though.

    It's really dumb that a shop would lead public rides on not legal trails, which both publicizes that bikes on are on those trails, and gives poaching their tacit approval. Which just increases the probability that the LMs who were likely just ignoring it, now have to make a show of dealing with the miscreants.

  55. #55
    Not helpful.
    Reputation: Finch Platte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    15,634
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckha62 View Post
    The "+" was the question. The anagram is fairly obvious.

    I mean, he's been accused of having sock accounts. I'm not sure what evidence folks have used to come to that conclusion, but who knows...

    Hey Finch, is the "+" the smoking gun?
    Actually, it's not technically an anagram, since there are more letters in fp than in pf.

    And the '+'? Ya got me! I'll I know is that it's probably not a good plus.

    Name:  Bad Plus.jpg
Views: 1110
Size:  14.8 KB
    What's wrong with him??

  56. #56
    Not helpful.
    Reputation: Finch Platte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    15,634
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckha62 View Post
    ^^^ They are NOT an "item".
    Me + Picard = oil & water.
    What's wrong with him??

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    LBS is not in business of ethics. They are in business of earning money.

  58. #58
    Not helpful.
    Reputation: Finch Platte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    15,634
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    LBS is not in business of ethics. They are in business of earning money.
    Do you actually think about some of the things you post?
    What's wrong with him??

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,589
    No reason to poach where I am.

    We have so much legal singetrack in all varieties being built that I can't even find enough time to ride it all. It's a damn good problem to have I tell you.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  60. #60
    the discerning hooligan
    Reputation: MOJO K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post

    2. Private property where from the signs and any notes it's clear that the owner absolutely does not want anyone on their property. This is opposed to (4)


    4. There is a private property sign but it's abandoned, undeveloped dirt with no owner in sight, no home, ranch, farmhouse, etc. The sign has probably been there 20-30 years and is getting rusty. It certainly does not prevent the neighbors from walking their dogs in the evening there.
    .
    Where I live, private land is exactly that, it's private.
    MERCY! MERCY! MERCY!

  61. #61
    Bicycles aren't motorized
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,901
    Traildoc/50 cents/switchblade will be along in a minute to let everyone know that he buffed them up so the 95% could enjoy them too.
    Wanted, SRAM GX 2x11 rear derailleur

    It ain't supposed to be easy.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Traildoc/50 cents/switchblade will be along in a minute to let everyone know that he buffed them up so the 95% could enjoy them too.
    Let's hope he doesn't bring Boris with him.
    Bicycles don't have motors.

  63. #63
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by life behind bars View Post
    Traildoc/50 cents/switchblade will be along in a minute to let everyone know that he buffed them up so the 95% could enjoy them too.
    John Finch is currently too busy patting himself on the back/humblebragging in the Norcal Angwin thread. Give him time though.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    Finch Platte = Pinch Flat. Add the + in and I assume he’s been pinch flattening more than usual.
    The" +"was sticking into the sidewall and popped the tube when he tried to fix his pinch flatte

    Sent from my SM-P900 using Tapatalk

  65. #65
    100% PRIME ALBERTA BEEF
    Reputation: mtnbkrmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    ...I know what their response is.
    I may have missed it, but what IS their response?

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by Finch Platte View Post
    Do you actually think about some of the things you post?
    Yes. I don't know why people expect LBS to have pure morals of Buddhist monks. If there are demands for illegal stuff, someone will sell it to the customers

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    If there are demands for illegal stuff, someone will sell it to the customers
    And those same people should be allowed to run a legal business while selling/promoting illegal activities?

    Odd point of view.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by ironhippy View Post
    And those same people should be allowed to run a legal business while selling/promoting illegal activities?

    Odd point of view.
    Weed is illegal too. Does it prevent creative entrepreneurs from selling it?

    I wish that I had gone to the weed business instead of IT. I have heard of people earn massive amounts of cash money.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    Weed is illegal too. Does it prevent creative entrepreneurs from selling it?
    No... but it prevents them running a legitimate business that sells weed (or any other illegal substance).

    It seems you're just here to troll, so you win.

  70. #70
    Bicycles aren't motorized
    Reputation: life behind bars's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    Weed is illegal too. Does it prevent creative entrepreneurs from selling it?

    I wish that I had gone to the weed business instead of IT. I have heard of people earn massive amounts of cash money.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk



    Why piddle around with low return on investment weed? Cocaine and heroin is high yield. Rhino horns are up there too.
    Wanted, SRAM GX 2x11 rear derailleur

    It ain't supposed to be easy.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    I wish that I had gone to the weed business instead of IT. I have heard of people earn massive amounts of cash money.
    No one has earned massive amounts of cash money from IT?

    Just because you are in the business doesn't mean you'll be successful.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,942
    Quote Originally Posted by ironhippy View Post
    No one has earned massive amounts of cash money from IT?

    Just because you are in the business doesn't mean you'll be successful.
    Weed business hasn't been outsource to India yet. IT has been outsource there a long time ago

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

  73. #73
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    30,119
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold View Post
    As a business, like it or not, they have a higher standard of conduct to follow.

    Besides, anyone with any sense knows that if you're going to poach, do it quietly and don't publicize it.

    Considering those two points, the shop is violating not just written policies, but also unspoken ones that mtb riders have loosely agreed upon over the course of decades.
    This is all that really matters in this thread.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    466
    Poaching trails is a loss for everyone. It makes the mountain bike community look like "outlaws" and can make it much harder to get trail access. Everyone loses except for hikers.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by Bacon Fat View Post
    I know shops that do this. Riding there is illegal because the county screwed over riders decades ago with an illegal law that wasn't voted on. Then years later when petitioned to open the trails, the county had mtn bikers do a bunch of trail work, then still voted to ban them. I support the shop for saying F you to the county
    Pheck yeah, on the poach.

    #noebikes, doe.
    Don't post, ride.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,589
    Quote Originally Posted by Picard View Post
    Weed is illegal too. Does it prevent creative entrepreneurs from selling it?

    I wish that I had gone to the weed business instead of IT. I have heard of people earn massive amounts of cash money.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
    Now that weed is legal for you, I say go for it!
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueCheesehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    916
    Quote Originally Posted by bingemtbr View Post
    What is their response?

    FWIW, I never knowingly ride illegal trails. If a shop is knowingly doing this, then let them reap what they sow. I would not be the whistle blower. Nor would I publicly share the details of your boycott. I would do my best to avoid the impending sh@t storm the LBS may be facing.
    So turn a blind eye? Hmmm, that's an approach.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,804
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Thousands of miles of now legal trail including famous and destination rides started out as "poaching" or at least not legal. Infact I'd wager it's the #1 way mtb trails and areas start. As mentioned "poaching" encompasses a large swath of definition and scenarios, you need to be more specific. Are they riding hiking trails specifically marked no mountain biking? Yeah, that's definitely not cool, or are they riding unsanctioned trails in a legal grey area? Big difference.

    Regarding selling and promoting e-bikes in areas where they are not legal, I totally agree. It's completely dishonest. Especially to the demographic that is ignorant to this fact. Your basically ripping them off while at the same time screwing over the established biking community. Seeing a lot of trails specifically marked "no ebikes" lately.
    Wow, this is the very definition of hypocrisy. Back when MTB was the upstart and fighting for access, all those thousands of miles of trails were poached and it's OK.

    But now that the eMTBers want their piece of the pie, it's completely dishonest and screwing over the established community. In the first scenario, it was the hikers and dirt bikers that got screwed over; now it's "us", so it's bad.

    As for a shop's behavior, sure, I'd base purchasing decisions on things like leading rides on poached trails. I've posted about the shop kitted rider failing to yield when I was grinding up a trail and spewing obscenities as he rode way off trail so he didn't have to mess up his strava or whatever. I stopped going to that shop after I spoke to the manager and basically got blown off. If he's willing to accept behavior of one of his racers towards a customer, what kind of service will I get from that shop.

    Fact is, when you're repping a shop or brand, you do have different rules. Doing careless, rude, illegal or anything that says the shop doesn't care or cuts corners or disregards the rules would make me pretty damned skeptical about how my bike was built or repaired. Or maybe, even, whether I was getting the parts I paid for.

    It's all about perception.

    Oh, and the shop telling eMTB customers it's OK to ride where it's not? Just as bad.

  79. #79
    www.ninjichor.com
    Reputation: ninjichor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    568
    Hypocrisy is also fighting to influence others to spend their money, in order to help a cause you support, yet hating when others try to influence you to support their causes.

    The problem is the fighting and the subjective judging. When there's no universal answer, why not create one that a vast majority can settle on? In this case, isn't there any existing option? Why not settle on supporting some in-between option? How about creating an uber/airbnb of bike maintenance, bike hiring, or guided bike rides, where people with their own workshops, bike part stock, bikes available to rent, and/or deep knowledge of the area can have a secure platform to reach out to those in need? Maybe the creation of a new community, born from satisfied customers, will overcome the feeling of insecurity of entering the business market. Might find people to hang out with, and create new riders in locals kids and whatnot, ones that can also question why poaching is a problem. xD

    I'd question the authority of anyone treating stuff they don't have private ownership in (e.g. bike shops or public land/trails) as something they need to personally protect, by attempting to manipulate/control what others should and shouldn't do to it. If you ride trails where you're not allowed (poaching non-official trails), perhaps unknowingly from mere exploration, do you not feel guilty too, considering you're trying to judge others for doing it? Why don't you lead rides yourself, if you think you can do a better job as an ambassador? You'd benefit from serving whatever agenda you have, whether it's against ebikes thinking that they're bicycles, or something else.

    When you can identify fundamental problems, that are universally agreeable, then you have a case, but this seems like mere controversy over personal/subjective beliefs. You got the strava data. Go find the worst of the worst, and see if that will raise some eyebrows, but make sure their worst doesn't also apply to those with similar strava data...
    Last edited by ninjichor; 2 Weeks Ago at 03:16 AM.

  80. #80
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    Wow, this is the very definition of hypocrisy. Back when MTB was the upstart and fighting for access, all those thousands of miles of trails were poached and it's OK.

    But now that the eMTBers want their piece of the pie, it's completely dishonest and screwing over the established community. In the first scenario, it was the hikers and dirt bikers that got screwed over; now it's "us", so it's bad.
    He made it clear that riding trails that say 'no bikes' is and always has been bad. He made a concession to say that riding 'unsanctioned trails in a legal grey area' is different. Not necessarily OK, but different.

    Riding e-bikes where there are signs that say 'no e-bikes' is bad. Riding e-bikes in places that have not yet made a determination, or are still in a legal grey area, is different. Not necessarily OK, but different.

    I see no hypocrisy there, in fact it's a perfectly consistent approach to both scenarios.

    The real difference is the original mountain bike trails in legal grey areas were built by those mountain bikers who wanted to ride them. In the case of e-bikes I have seen no such effort.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    187
    ....still waiting to find out what 'poaching' means in this context.

    Hard to have an opinion on a topic not totally understanding the context of what the OP means.

  82. #82
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by Forest Rider View Post
    ....still waiting to find out what 'poaching' means in this context.

    Hard to have an opinion on a topic not totally understanding the context of what the OP means.
    Poaching to me means riding a trail that is expressly disallowed for bikes. I ride in plenty of 'grey areas' but I don't ride when specifically directed not to, such as hiker only trails.

  83. #83
    100% PRIME ALBERTA BEEF
    Reputation: mtnbkrmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Forest Rider View Post
    ....still waiting to find out what 'poaching' means in this context.

    Hard to have an opinion on a topic not totally understanding the context of what the OP means.
    Likewise, I am still waiting to hear from the OP what the LBS' apparently obvious (but not so obvious to me) response is. See posts #3 and #65.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,804
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDwayyo View Post
    The real difference is the original mountain bike trails in legal grey areas were built by those mountain bikers who wanted to ride them. In the case of e-bikes I have seen no such effort.
    In some places, but I think in more, the MTBers just started riding moto trails that they built.

    Out here in Bellingham, Galbraith was a moto area long before a MTB haven. And many of the oldest trails were originally built by the moto guys... who are now prohibited. (At one point, everyone was banished, by the private landowner's wishes.)

    As for the eMTBs, sure, riding where there are explicit signs is obviously bad. As is telling buyers, it's OK. Sending them out to areas that aren't signed is the same as what MTBers did back when. The hypocrisy comes from that approach. If it's ambiguous; it was OK for us back when, but not for the eMTB crowd now.

  85. #85
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,835
    Just remember, if you choose to ride"questionable"or no bike trails, eventually you'll be in a situation where you get to explain yourself... Might be a grumpy hiker, might be a DNR...
    I won't say that I've never done it (grey area), but I don't knowingly ride"no bikes allowed" trails , not worth the confrontation, when we have so many places to ride already.

    Now, get us back into wilderness areas please.

  86. #86
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,835
    Oh, and scrambled >= poached.

  87. #87
    Thinking about riding.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,512
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    In some places, but I think in more, the MTBers just started riding moto trails that they built.
    I think you are assuming what is true in your area is true everywhere (or maybe I am?) but I would very much question that a majority of MTB trails started off as moto trails. In my area there isn't a single one in that category (and I'm talking about the entire mid-Atlantic region). There are moto trails, but they are far from singletrack that a mountain biker would be interested in except just to connect a loop.

    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    As for the eMTBs, sure, riding where there are explicit signs is obviously bad. As is telling buyers, it's OK. Sending them out to areas that aren't signed is the same as what MTBers did back when. The hypocrisy comes from that approach. If it's ambiguous; it was OK for us back when, but not for the eMTB crowd now.
    Of course that's hypocrisy, but who is saying that? If there are signs (or regulations in general, with or without signs) saying 'no motorized vehicles' then eMTBs are prohibited. If there aren't, then no issue. The argument begins when eMTB users try to say they aren't motorized despite having a motor to propel them.

    Your analogy would only apply if back in the day MTBers were riding trails that said 'no mechanized vehicles' and claiming that bikes aren't mechanized. They weren't.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,804
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDwayyo View Post
    I think you are assuming what is true in your area is true everywhere (or maybe I am?) but I would very much question that a majority of MTB trails started off as moto trails. In my area there isn't a single one in that category (and I'm talking about the entire mid-Atlantic region). There are moto trails, but they are far from singletrack that a mountain biker would be interested in except just to connect a loop.
    Not talking about trails now, but trails 30-40 years ago. Here, in WA. Don't know about CA; they may have banned dirt bikes from most places already back then! Were dirt bikes pretty much banned back in the late 70s, early 80s in the entire mid-atlantic area? As for moto trails besides our local nes, look at the Kokopelli trail. Moab. Many other places where early mountain bikers just started riding existing trails (moto, horse and hiking trails).

    Sure, today, no mountain biker would really be interested in riding moto trails. And that includes the eMTBers, too.

  89. #89
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,374
    Can anyone who wasn't riding mtbs back in the day and haven't poached, since there are so many legal places to ride now, be a hypocrite if they're now against ebike poaching? Wouldn't that only be a special status reserved for those few who have or used to? I think it's an awfully weak argument.

  90. #90
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,835
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    Not talking about trails now, but trails 30-40 years ago. Here, in WA. Don't know about CA; they may have banned dirt bikes from most places already back then! Were dirt bikes pretty much banned back in the late 70s, early 80s in the entire mid-atlantic area? As for moto trails besides our local nes, look at the Kokopelli trail. Moab. Many other places where early mountain bikers just started riding existing trails (moto, horse and hiking trails).

    Sure, today, no mountain biker would really be interested in riding moto trails. And that includes the eMTBers, too.
    Depends where you're at I guess. There are some Moto trails that are pretty damn fun around here.

  91. #91
    Make America Bike Again
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Can anyone who wasn't riding mtbs back in the day and haven't poached, since there are so many legal places to ride now, be a hypocrite if they're now against ebike poaching? Wouldn't that only be a special status reserved for those few who have or used to? I think it's an awfully weak argument.

    Well...after doing the Spock mind meld on deciphering the half-dozen double-negatives above, I was able to distill down your argument that: newbie riders that only ride in designated areas have the right to condemn e-bike riders who do not ride in the same designated areas? So they are condemning others that they may never even see on any trail or fire road? Is that the argument? OK, sure, sounds great...
    Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres: quod Belgiae, quod Celtae, et quod Aquitainae.

  92. #92
    Make America Bike Again
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Curveball View Post
    No reason to poach where I am.

    We have so much legal singetrack in all varieties being built that I can't even find enough time to ride it all. It's a damn good problem to have I tell you.

    This post 100% hits the nail on the head.

    If 80% of the local trails are legal, and 20% restricted, I doubt this post would ever have even materialized. Access would not be nearly as heated a debate, it would be on the back burner, because there are already plenty of good places to ride.

    But what about the converse, if an area, let's say a county like mine that's about 60x60 miles, or 3600 square miles, has 20% official bike access and 80% some kind of restriction? And on top of that, the 20% of the 'trails' open are on flat, hardpacked boring stuff? This is not some theoretical argument, it's real. What would really happen? Would everyone on here, if in that situation, just ride flatter stuff, that a gravel or hybrid bike would have no problems on? Then what's the point of even buying a mountain bike to ride that? It's very easy to be an armchair quarterback somewhere else and condemn all trail riding that's not 100% approved...unless you yourself are in that situation. Then all of a sudden reality hits. Let's just stop pretending that mountain biking is for goody two-shoes little boys that gave an apple to the teacher every morning in grade school. That is not us, and all of you know it. So just admit it. As far as us being outlaws. C'mon, we are not the ones making meth out there, we are just riding bikes. We are not even in the same class as an outlaw. An outlaw is someone that smuggles illegals across the border for thousands of dollars and doesn't even give them enough water on the trip. And some of you compare riding on restricted trails to THAT?

    Everyone excited about the sport wants to ride the best, most challenging trails. Some have the luxury of a 100% legal sign, some don't. Some bikers 'poach' because they are jerks, some do it because there is no alternative. And if that's an ignorant statement, go ahead and call me ignorant. I've spoken with two ranger stations here about the horrible access situation, and they literally don't even care if people ride there or not. If you don't believe me, I'll reply with their phone numbers, so you can call and check that I'm telling the truth. One ranger at a 3rd office has complained lately, but that's just because the military base is putting pressure on him. Every state, county, and local area has a different situation, no matter what govt. employee put up what sign wherever. A lot of times they openly admit they put up that sign to avoid being sued if someone hurts themselves on govt. property. It's not really about restricting access, it's about covering their pencil pushing butt if there is some injury lawsuit on property they are in charge of overseeing, or there is some private/govt. property dispute and the line/fence between them is being arbitrated for years or decades. That's a lot different than the stereotype of 'poaching'. Trail access, or lack thereof, is not a one size fits all of good and bad. Many shades of gray. But I guess that irritates the perfectionists when they read that. They want everything cut and dried, like a trail is some napkin that can be sanitized.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,804
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    This post 100% hits the nail on the head.

    If 80% of the local trails are legal, and 20% restricted, I doubt this post would ever have even materialized. Access would not be nearly as heated a debate, it would be on the back burner, because there are already plenty of good places to ride.

    But what about the converse, if an area, let's say a county like mine that's about 60x60 miles, or 3600 square miles, has 20% official bike access and 80% some kind of restriction? And on top of that, the 20% of the 'trails' open are on flat, hardpacked boring stuff? This is not some theoretical argument, it's real. What would really happen? Would everyone on here, if in that situation, just ride flatter stuff, that a gravel or hybrid bike would have no problems on? Then what's the point of even buying a mountain bike to ride that? It's very easy to be an armchair quarterback somewhere else and condemn all trail riding that's not 100% approved...unless you yourself are in that situation. Then all of a sudden reality hits. Let's just stop pretending that mountain biking is for goody two-shoes little boys that gave an apple to the teacher every morning in grade school. That is not us, and all of you know it. So just admit it. As far as us being outlaws. C'mon, we are not the ones making meth out there, we are just riding bikes. We are not even in the same class as an outlaw. An outlaw is someone that smuggles illegals across the border for thousands of dollars and doesn't even give them enough water on the trip. And some of you compare riding on restricted trails to THAT?

    Everyone excited about the sport wants to ride the best, most challenging trails. Some have the luxury of a 100% legal sign, some don't. Some bikers 'poach' because they are jerks, some do it because there is no alternative. And if that's an ignorant statement, go ahead and call me ignorant. I've spoken with two ranger stations here about the horrible access situation, and they literally don't even care if people ride there or not. If you don't believe me, I'll reply with their phone numbers, so you can call and check that I'm telling the truth. One ranger at a 3rd office has complained lately, but that's just because the military base is putting pressure on him. Every state, county, and local area has a different situation, no matter what govt. employee put up what sign wherever. A lot of times they openly admit they put up that sign to avoid being sued if someone hurts themselves on govt. property. It's not really about restricting access, it's about covering their pencil pushing butt if there is some injury lawsuit on property they are in charge of overseeing, or there is some private/govt. property dispute and the line/fence between them is being arbitrated for years or decades. That's a lot different than the stereotype of 'poaching'. Trail access, or lack thereof, is not a one size fits all of good and bad. Many shades of gray. But I guess that irritates the perfectionists when they read that. They want everything cut and dried, like a trail is some napkin that can be sanitized.
    I think you're right; many (maybe most?) would poach some of the 80%.

    But I still think a bike shop should not do so. If they're willing to do that, what kind of liberties they might take in their operations? For example, selling older stuff while claiming it's the latest, service on your bike and reusing parts instead of replacing but charging for replacement kits, etc etc. Little things that might go unnoticed, but will eventually get caught.

    It's tough enough to build trust in retail; doing anything that taints that - no matter how cool it may seem to the "bro crowd" will have overall negative impacts on the shop's reputation. Maybe it won't kill it right away, but slowly chipping away until the customer base shrinks enough to make the operation unsustainable.

  94. #94
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,584
    The last time I was in the shop, the owner was wearing a shirt that read, "The best trails are illegal trails

    We do a lot of trail building. These later are designated, "user generated."

    After watching hundreds of trails closed because of an endangered species, only later to become housing tracts, I really don't give a shit anymore. Just about every trail I rode in the 80s is gone.

    One of my favorite stretches of trail is a 15 mile section of the PCT out my back door. I ride it in the off season on foul weather days and have never seen a soul. This is a grey area since it was closed to bikes without input. I don't ride the wilderness part though.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  95. #95
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    7,835
    It's ok for horses to trample wilderness trails but bike tires are somehow worse?

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wickerman1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,330
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej View Post
    Here is a good topic of discussion.

    Would you continue to support a LBS if they encourage poaching of trails by leading rides leading by example?
    Is it the owner of the LBS or certain employees only? That would decide my answer, especially if the owner isn't aware of what's going on.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    One of my favorite stretches of trail is a 15 mile section of the PCT out my back door. I ride it in the off season on foul weather days and have never seen a soul. This is a grey area since it was closed to bikes without input. I don't ride the wilderness part though.
    How is it a gray area? The trail was closed to bikes. Sounds pretty black and white to me. You can't call something gray because you don't like the way it happened.

    And bringing eMTBs back into this, if an area is closed to eMTBs without their input, is that a gray area meaning thay're cool to ride there?

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Shark View Post
    It's ok for horses to trample wilderness trails but bike tires are somehow worse?
    I agree 100%, particularly since I seem to remember reading that horses actually do more damage to a trail than a mountain bike.

    That being said, I don't think horses OR mountain bikes belong in a wilderness area.

    We have plenty of other places to ride that are not as pristine.

    It isn't a mountain bikers sovereign right to ride anywhere and everywhere they want.

    As hard as it might be for some to fathom, there are actually more important things than mountain biking, and preserving and protecting our dwindling wilderness is one one of those things.

    Just go ride one of the trails we are allowed to ride.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    How is it a gray area? The trail was closed to bikes. Sounds pretty black and white to me. You can't call something gray because you don't like the way it happened.
    Considering his overall point I'd say ethically it's a grey area which seems to be the jist of the thread. I'm not advocating for riding the PCT but I know very popular riding areas where one must use a small portion of the PCT to make a loop. To my knowledge this has not caused any problems.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by myt1 View Post

    As hard as it might be for some to fathom, there are actually more important things than mountain biking, and preserving and protecting our dwindling wilderness is one one of those things.
    The more people recreating on public lands the better chance they have at remaining public. Lets collectively worry about mining and other practices that present an actual danger to ecosystems and access.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2014, 02:03 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-14-2014, 08:36 PM
  3. LBS ethics question: new or used.
    By Babygorilla in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-17-2007, 01:41 PM
  4. Uniform Ethics- what would you do?
    By dparis in forum Riding Passion and Stories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-10-2004, 07:33 PM

Members who have read this thread: 535

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2018 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.