.
This is nuts! Public lands should be for recreation. I can understand keeping motorized vehicles out of some areas but not mountain bikes.
” A favorite tool used by these well-funded organizations is the Wilderness Act of 1964. This law was enacted originally to preserve 9 million acres of wilderness so “future generations could see what their forefathers had to conquer.”
Now, there are 702 officially designated Wilderness Areas, covering 107.4 million acres. “
I grew up in this area. The portion of trail they are talking about is really spectacular. I’m not a mountain biker, but I used to hike and hunt in that area. The Hermosa Cliffs north of Durango are beautiful and are featured in many postcards of the area. Truly a magnificent ride/hike. It would be a shame if idiot bureaucrats mucked it all up for everyone (but why should we expect anything different?).
Banning bicycles. Incredible.
A non-polluting device that moves tourists quickly from bathroom
to bathroom.
Thus lowering the pollution load they’ll leave on the wilderness by
needing to stop and relieve themselves while hiking down the same path.
Well, so many roads have been closed to National Parks, so you can’t drive into them any more. Now the bureacrats at the USDA want to up the ante, and the precedent has been set. What’s to stop them? Bikers?
Yeah, and the kayakers hate the trout fishermen.
First it was ATVs, now it’s bikes, next it’ll be people. UN biosphere coming soon to your area.
If the FedGov obliterated the BLM, along with the Dept of Ed, we could all be a little freer and send a little less money to Washington.
NO TRESPASSING
Thank You - The Management
They should ban them--and snowmobiles, too.
Those noisy, smelly, terrain disfiguring things don't belong in place prized for its natural beauty.
Get out and walk, ski, or ride a horse, you lazy cheap thrill seekers.
Schmucks.
I can imagine the scene in a few more years:
Father with children at the edge of some blighted urban landscape, looking at the distance forest and mountains:
Daughter [pointing at a tree]: "Daddy, what's that?"
Father: "Don't touch it!"
Daughter: "I wasn't touching it, I was just pointing..."
Father: "Well, don't point at it."
Daughter: "Can I just look at it?"
Father: "No! No, don't even look at it. I think we've had enough of that one, anyway."
(If you've ever seen "This Is Spinal Tap", then you know the inspiration for the dialog)
We do a lot of back country hiking and see nothing that is wrong with bikes also being on the trails. Hikers can step aside when they meet as we do with horseback. Actually, the bikes are a lot less annoying than the horse poop and damage done by hooves. But don’t get me wrong, bikes, horses and hikers are low impact and fine together on most mountain trails.
We need to ban all humans from forests, wildernesses and state parks.
Wilderness is for people and their machines; coffins are for enviroNAZIs.
Plans for management from the USDA and forestry division are generally proposed in “packages”. Plan A, Plan B etc. They can vary greatly are one or more are designed to attract a specific group. A period is opened for suggestion and it’s mostly the enviro wackos and Animal rights groups that actually reply. Then a plan is adopted. Usually the one that got the most support.
Then the other groups who failed to respond or offer suggestions start to rant and throw a fit because it’s not what they want.
IF you want to really get ticked, research how many US parks are now under the management of the U.N.’s “Biosphere” program.
They’ve been trying to do this for years now. Sad to see them push so hard to ban cyclist from the back country.
Time for him to do a little of this "stroke of the pen, law of the land" stuff.
Cheers!
This will help save the planet by cutting down on the excessive CO2 emitted by cyclists as they strenuously exercise on the mountain trails.