Monday, July 28, 2008

Protest update

They wrote a great article about their protest that probably won't help their cause.

Check it out at New West:

It was late when we left Missoula on a Friday night. We planned to sleep at the trailhead, wake early, hike in six miles, stay overnight, and fish and walk out seven miles the next day. We stopped to fill up our gas tanks in Dillon, where an article in the local paper caught our eye. We weren’t going to be alone in the Lima Peaks. A group of mountain bikers, the Montana Mountain Bike Alliance, planned to ride in the Garfield Mountain area in order to protest the pending wilderness recommendation. We weren’t happy about having to share the trails with the group, and, moreover, we weren’t happy about the intent behind their ride. We soon took matters into our own hands, laughing and tearing up a cardboard box. We were going to have a protest of our own.


The comments are REALLY good


By regular joe, 7-27-08
I love how pretentious city yuppies move to places like Missoula and then try to tell Missoula residents how they should live, where they should recreate, how they should recreate.

"Oh those mountain bikers -- they tried to KILL US with their high-speed fun! We were just walking along, 6-across on the trail, having a pleasant conversation about what a miracle Barack Obama is, and here comes this CRAZY mountain bike rider going at least 3 miles per hour! He tried to KILL US! We actually had to interrupt our impressively deep and sophisticated political conversation! CLEARLY mountain bikes should be banned!"

"Signed,

Peter Predenshus
Jill Konducenshun
Bob Sooperyer
Ted Eauppie
Gladys Cnobb"


Look for a response article from the MMBA in New West soon.


Trail report content: We "rode" from Bridger Bowl to the M yesterday on the Ridge. The trail was dry, the cornices were still large and in charge up on the ridge line.

5 comments:

SingletrackM1nd said...

I like that one person had this to say.

This article provoked me into joining my local chapter of IMBA this week.
Something I've been avoiding for a long time.

Jill-I don't think we would get along but I would still give a hello, a
yield, and say "have a nice hike" anytime I was riding and we met.

You don't have to share views to share a trail. Your hypocrisy is
ridiculous.

Mr DNA said...

John- Thanks for posting this. The article initially left me infuriated but after reading the comments and how they are OVERWHELMINGLY in support of bikes I had a good hearty laugh and felt hopeful that the MT mountain bike community is awakening from its torpor. (sorry for the run-on sentence)
Let's hope that the sense of bike community continues.

-DNA

Unknown said...

yeah, I had the same reaction DNA. It's interesting though that the anti's keep saying the same things that have no backing over and over. . .

Anonymous said...

John,

glad you liked my comments as "regular joe." I also posted one as "Libby Rall."

The sad thing is that many New West published material comes from a similar perspective, and the editor/publisher saw no problems with Jill's essay.

I guess they're at least honest when they call themselves "New" west, because they're clearly not interested in what older, more established Western residents think or have to say.

Arne said...

I've been close to this issue for more than two decades. The Philip Burton Wilderness in the Point Reyes National Seashore used to be open to bicycles. We had been riding on the "trails" - actually old ranch roads - since the 1970's. When the Wilderness Act was re-interpreted in 1984 it was decided that bicycles were to be banned. This so-called "Wilderness" used to be a series of dairy ranches, some of which were logged off at the last minute before the Park Service got the property. Many of the so-called "Wilderness trails" are actually double-track ranch roads. The park rangers can drive their trucks on these roads, but because it is "Wilderness" bicycles are not allowed. We didn't stop riding the trails in 1984. Instead we changed tactics a bit. I have since moved to Idaho, but last year a bunch of mountain bike riders were busted in the "Wilderness" by rangers driving trucks.

Clearly, the Wilderness Act is being used as a political tool to exclude a group that stays on trails, uses fewer campsites than hikers, etc. The problem is that equestrian outfitters' horses have a walnut-size brain and are spooked easily, including by hikers, like when I forgot to remove my hat and sunglasses when I encountered a horse while backpacking. The outfitters pressure local officials to ban bikes so they might have exclusive use of an area. This is true in Point Reyes and other areas.

The only way for mountain bikers to continue to have access to trails and to "un-interpret" the Wilderness Act is to hire lawyers and lobbyists. The rule of politics is the Golden Rule: Those with the gold make the rules.

Mountain biking is a traditional form of wilderness transportation. It dates to the invention of the mountain bike in 1817 by Karl von Drais. It is the most efficient form of transportation and has the least environmental impact of all forms of transportation; you don't have to drive as close to a trail head and you don't need to trample as many back country campsites. Allowing bicycles could easily justify larger designated "Wilderness" areas and you'd have millions more supporters for such legislation.