Consider signing a petition to remove bicycle restrictions on public lands- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143

    Consider signing a petition to remove bicycle restrictions on public lands

    Go to Change.Org and sign this petition about revising/updating bicycle prohibitions on public lands. Or, start a new one of your own.

    Petition: National park service, United states Forest service, Sierra Club: Allow mountain bikes on National park and wilderness trails | Change.org

    It couldn't hurt.

  2. #2
    BM and PQ Trail Rep
    Reputation: bankerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,921
    Don't take this the wrong way. I would love access to wilderness lands. It is just that these online petitions have no, none, zero influence over the parties who write legislation. Take a few minutes and find out who is your district Representative, Senator, and Congressman and write them a letter. One physical letter will go further than any online signature petition will. The web has made us lazy and we are suffering for it.

    I did sign it for you but don't count on much change from it.
    The world does not revolve around you but your actions impact us all!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,058
    As much as I would like to ride wilderness I don't think it's a fight worth having. Funding is tight and the
    FS doesn't need to get bogged down in a big user fight. Put your boots on and start walking.
    There's a big difference between ripping and skidding. Those who skid don't know how to ride.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    143

    This is a small part of a bigger process

    Our local group is on top of the Congressional Delegation and the current legislation for wilderness. Letters, emails and phone calls are going out regularly, especially when they try to close the trails I ride. I have also backpacked many miles for many years. Now, my knees and I prefer bicycling.

    The way things work now is to cover all the bases, including internet ones. These online petitions are one small part of the movement to bring about a change in the thinking and assumptions about bicycles in wilderness. It's not a fight. It's just a petition. It adds more weight to the discussion and informs more people about the issues.

    Of course, I only suggest folks do it if it feels right for them. We can each do our part in our own way. Ride on.

  5. #5
    BM and PQ Trail Rep
    Reputation: bankerboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,921
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave_schuldt View Post
    As much as I would like to ride wilderness I don't think it's a fight worth having. Funding is tight and the
    FS doesn't need to get bogged down in a big user fight. Put your boots on and start walking.
    Actually this is a fight that NEEDS to happen. More and more we are seeing the wilderness areas misused (pot farms, distilleries) and abused (illegal homesteads, damage to sensitive environmental areas) due in part to the inability to patrol the vary lands the Forest Service is responsible to patrol. Why? Lack of funding. These lands are large and vast. There is no way they can put enough boots on the ground by themselves.

    Responsible use deters illegal misuse. That is where the general public comes in. Hikers are already there. The problem is they cover distances slowly so anything seen in the back country that is illegal can be slow to be reported. Equestrians are quicker but the fact of the matter is they do not represent a large enough group to work by themselves.

    A mountain bike can cover vast amounts of land quickly. This allows penetration into areas that do not regularly see people. This is a huge plus in the enforcement arena. We can be the eyes and ears of the FS. They do their job, we merely report the problems. Heck, just the presents of riders is often enough to force the illegal activity to leave. They don't want the exposure.

    The funny thing about this idea is these are the very reasons the Sierra Club does not want us in the Wilderness Areas. We can cover too much territory and introduce humans into areas where they have regularly been before. Sad truth but here in California, there are large damaging pot farms in the national forests and wilderness areas. Yet we are the problem?

    The belief that we are a bunch of hooligans that will cut random trails through every bit of land, not caring about how we go about it have been proven moot. The damage happening right now in wilderness areas is real and serious. How long before the whole idea that we are in the same league as a motor vehicle is dropped? It can't happen unless people start contacting elected officials in person and by written letter. Electronic messaging is nice but not very effective. Talk to anybody who has worked for some elected office. They will tell you e-polls are not very meaningful.
    The world does not revolve around you but your actions impact us all!

  6. #6
    Unpredictable
    Reputation: Ridnparadise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,187
    Obviously things in the US are as they are here. The LMs have inadequate funds and staff to protect the land WE OWN and yet we are in a hiatus where volunteers and increasing "legal" access to the bush are more of a worry to those LMs than the advantages they offer.

    It is true people (some are riders) will cut trail anywhere to be able to access the bush. I did as a kid, so did my mates and let's face it, what's wrong with the concept of exploring your world? Seems like our species advanced a lot faster when we did do it. However, the logic that they would not need to do it if there was already trail there seems to be missed by everyone other than us. Perhaps in those vast fields of pot that may not apply

    As for the Sierra Club, they seem to be an elitist group intent on prejudicially excluding "us" from what they think "we" don't deserve. Wake up ********s, people have always been there, wherever it is. Protect it yes. Invest in it yes. But you have no more right to it and proximity to "it" than us.

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    473
    Quote Originally Posted by bankerboy View Post
    Actually this is a fight that NEEDS to happen. More and more we are seeing the wilderness areas misused (pot farms, distilleries) ....
    I wouldn't consider that misuse. The government is missing out on a great cash crop that could generate tons of tax revenue. Distilleries? They call those 'Stills' around these parts! And some of them make the best moon shine around.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbikernc69 View Post
    I wouldn't consider that misuse.
    It is misuse when the perpetrators have no respect for the land, dump all kinds of fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides all over the ground, leave tons of trash behind, don't use proper sanitation facilities, etc. The illegal product is one thing, but the trashing of the land is a totally different issue.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,058
    Quote Originally Posted by bankerboy View Post
    Actually this is a fight that NEEDS to happen. More and more we are seeing the wilderness areas misused (pot farms, distilleries) and abused (illegal homesteads, damage to sensitive environmental areas) due in part to the inability to patrol the vary lands the Forest Service is responsible to patrol. Why? Lack of funding. These lands are large and vast. There is no way they can put enough boots on the ground by themselves.

    Responsible use deters illegal misuse. That is where the general public comes in. Hikers are already there. The problem is they cover distances slowly so anything seen in the back country that is illegal can be slow to be reported. Equestrians are quicker but the fact of the matter is they do not represent a large enough group to work by themselves.

    A mountain bike can cover vast amounts of land quickly. This allows penetration into areas that do not regularly see people. This is a huge plus in the enforcement arena. We can be the eyes and ears of the FS. They do their job, we merely report the problems. Heck, just the presents of riders is often enough to force the illegal activity to leave. They don't want the exposure.

    The funny thing about this idea is these are the very reasons the Sierra Club does not want us in the Wilderness Areas. We can cover too much territory and introduce humans into areas where they have regularly been before. Sad truth but here in California, there are large damaging pot farms in the national forests and wilderness areas. Yet we are the problem?

    The belief that we are a bunch of hooligans that will cut random trails through every bit of land, not caring about how we go about it have been proven moot. The damage happening right now in wilderness areas is real and serious. How long before the whole idea that we are in the same league as a motor vehicle is dropped? It can't happen unless people start contacting elected officials in person and by written letter. Electronic messaging is nice but not very effective. Talk to anybody who has worked for some elected office. They will tell you e-polls are not very meaningful.
    I was only thinking of the Seattle area where I live. There's a very well organized establishment hiking community that would fight like hell. Other areas have different situations.
    There's a big difference between ripping and skidding. Those who skid don't know how to ride.

Members who have read this thread: 0

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 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.