Tracy Ridge Part 2

As promised at the end of Tracy Ridge Part 1, I would be doing a second post about ideas for getting people to hike at Tracy Ridge. I believe that having two loop trails with overlooks of the Allegheny River should be attracting many people to go hiking at Tracy Ridge. During the Fall Colors Season, the parking lot at Tracy Ridge should be full of cars. Here are some ideas to make that happen.

The Map is Crap
Have you looked at the map of the trails at Tracy Ridge? It is a really bad map for hiking. The overlook loops are shown really small, and there is no topography on the map. Also, there is no mileage on the map itself, you have to look at a separate chart for mileage.

View and print the map here: https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5107583.pdf

And I also found a couple mistakes on the Tracy Ridge Map. Plus, the map doesn’t print out very well for the people at home. It is a good overall map for Tracy Ridge, but if the Forest Service wants more people to hike to the overlooks, perhaps they should have a map just for the overlook trails.  Fortunately, there is a Map Illustrator in the house.

That would be me. I have done several map illustrations including 42 maps for “The Guide to the North Country Trail in Minnesota.”  I have created a new map that features the Overlook Trails in Tracy Ridge. 

you can view and print the map here: http://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0O-3V5RfIrQbTFWZ1dZZkJmY3M/view?usp=sharing

Now, I have taken some liberties being the map illustrator. I believe every trail and campsite should have a name. I was unable to find names for the two loops to the overlooks, so I made up names. The names that I called them are the “North Reservoir Overlooks Loop” and the “South Reservoir Overlooks Loop.” The names actually describe why you should hike the trails. It’s because you want to see the overlooks of the Allegheny Reservoir. I feel that the name “South Reservoir Overlooks Loop” is better than calling it the Junction 13 to Junction 15 Trail. It’s nice that the trail junctions are labeled; especially since there are several trail junctions and sometimes there are also clusters of trail junctions. But actually having a name for the trail gives the trail a little more character and can describe the trail. (Update: apparently, there are no overlooks on the overlook trail because they have been allowed to fill in.  The Forest Service needs to go down the hill and clear out the overlooks again.)

Also, according to the North Country Trail map of the area, there is a campsite at the bottom of the Tracy Run Trail near where the Tracy Run Creek goes into the Allegheny Reservoir. I decided to add that campsite to the map and call it the “Tracy Outlet” campsite. And there is a trail that goes between Johnnycake Trail and Tracy Trail up on the plateau. I decided to call that the Cut Across Trail. And the Trail that goes south from Junction 4, I have decided to call the Sugar Bay Connector Trail because it goes in the direction of Sugar Bay.

have a map box at the Trailhead and the Campground

Perhaps the trails already have names that I don’t know about.  If so, I would be happy to revise the map.  If there is other information that is needed on the map, I can make the changes.  Apparently, according to one video I saw on the internet, there is a trail where you have to ford a creek.  If so, I would like to add that information to the map.  Also, I have rounded off the mileage for the trails.  The Forest Service lists the mileage from Junction 10 to Junction 9 as 0.87 miles.  I really don’t think you have to go to so much detail as listing the mileage in hundredths of miles.In that case, .9 miles is more than good enough.

Amerigo Vespucci

 Yes, I have taken some liberties with the map by making up names for places. But that’s the Great American Tradition. We are the United States of America. The name America was created by mapmaker Amerigo Vespucci who called it the latin version of his first name. Fortunately, Amerigo didn’t use his last name or else we’d be known as the Vest Pukers. 

I need the Forest Service to look at the map and let me know what changes are needed. I will make the changes then ask the Forest Service to approve the map.

Group Campsites are needed for Real Groups 
Yes, you can reserve a group campsite at Tracy Ridge. What happens is that you can reserve a camping loop. The loop can have a maximum of 168 people, 42 cars and costs $50 a night. I’ve never seen a Boy Scout Troop with 168 people and 42 cars. Instead, a normal Boy Scout Troop might need a campsite for 15 tents and 5 cars.

You can rent a whole loop for your group at Tracy Ridge

 So, I propose that the Forest Service create such group campsites by combining 3 or 4 regular campsites.  They would have to remove some of the vegetation between those campsites to make it a more open area and have more tent pads.  For individual campsites it’s good to have vegetation between the campsites for some privacy.  But for Group Campsites, a wide open area with clear sight lines is needed so the Scout Leaders can see what’s happening around the campsite. 

My illustration of combining several individual campsites into group campsites.

 And it is perfectly all right to have one or two spaces for an RV to be included with a group campsite.  Sometimes Groups like to have a RV to cook in.  This is the case with the Heritage Chapter of the North Country Trail Association, which I am a member.   

My Sister and her family cooks for the Heritage Chapter using an RV site next to the Group Camp at Copper Falls

 We camp at a Group Campsite that has room for about 12 tents and we park a camper nearby for our cook.  This would work well for family campouts.  Plus, Boy Scout Troops often have Troop Trailers.  A RV pad would work well as a place to park the Troop Trailer.

a Troop Trailer at a campsite

 Again, I would combine 3 or 4 campsites for a group campsite. Since the Tracy Ridge Campground is usually only 10% full, it really wouldn’t matter too much if you combined a few campsites. I would charge around $30 a night for those campsites. This would still be very reasonable for Boy Scout Troops with only 10 people and would be very reasonable for Boy Scout Troops with 30 people. The Forest Service would probably make more money from this than selling a whole loop for $50 because it will get used more often.

These Group Campsites would work well for Boy Scout Troops, Girl Scout Groups, Church Groups, School Groups, Family Campouts and other groups. The reason I mainly refer to Boy Scouts is that I am very familiar with them from being a Scoutmaster for 10 years. I think the group campsites that I am describing definitely would attract Boy Scout Troops. The main reason is because Boy Scouts need to hike. One of the requirements for Second Class is the following:

“Using a compass and map together, take a 5-mile hike (or 10 miles by bike) approved by your adult leader and your parent or guardian.”

Tracy Ridge is the perfect place for a 5 mile hike. All you have to do is hike from the campground, do one of the Reservoir Overlooks loops to and hike back to the Campground, and you have completed over 5 miles.

Hiking Merit Badge

 Also, Hiking Merit Badge is on the list of required Merit Badges for the Eagle Rank.  For Hiking Merit Badge, a Scout must do 5 hikes in the following order:  one 5 mile hike, three 10 mile hikes and one 15 mile hike.  After all those are done the Scout must do a 20 mile hike in one day.  Tracy Ridge is a perfect spot to do some of those hikes.  Plus Boy Scouts need to do Service Projects to complete their Rank Requirements, so, maybe some of the Troops will adopt a section of trail.

Having Group Campsites like I have described is one advantage the Tracy Ridge Campground would have over the Willow Bay Campground, which has no Group campsites.  Boy Scout Troops could always hop in their cars and go down to Willow Bay for swimming.  They don’t mind driving around a little bit if they have an inexpensive place to camp.
 
If the Forest Service does make some Group Campsites by combining several regular campsites, they should send out a press release to every Boy Scout and Girl Scout Council in the Region. Boy Scout Troops are always looking for new places to camp, so I’m sure many Troops will be headed to Tracy Ridge. Also send out the press releases to all the newspapers in the region.

Bullwinkle and Rocky at Wossamotta U

 And here’s one more idea for the Group Campsites that I am proposing. The Forest Service should allow groups doing trail maintenance to use those campsites for free. Let’s say the Outdoor Club at Wossamotta U wants to come for a weekend to maintain trails. The Forest Service should just let them camp at one of these Group Campsites for free. Wossamotta U is Rocky And Bullwinkle’s Alma Mater, so naturally their students are interested in animals and the environment.

Tracy Ridge Hiking Festival
How about having a Hiking Festival at Tracy Ridge? The Itasca Moraine Chapter of the North Country Trail has been having a hiking fest at Itasca State Park for the last 10 years. It may not be the biggest festival in the world, but it attracts people interested in hiking, and it also garners some news coverage. Check out this story on a TV newscast:

Maybe some organizations like Friends of the Allegheny Wilderness, the Allegheny Chapter of the North Country Trail and the Allegheny National Forest could join together and organize such an event.  I wouldn’t expect it to cost too much to put on because the main activity is guided hikes.  Perhaps, they would need to rent a party tent for presentations, food, etc. You might want to get some porta potties, too, if the party tent is located too far from the Campground Latrines. The groups holding the event could set up their own pop up tents for displays, etc.  

The Heritage Chapter of the North Country Trail has a booth at the Copper Falls Harvest Festival

 Matt Davis, Minnesota Regional Coordinator for the North Country Trail Association wrote in a email to me about their hiking fest.

            “We've had as many as 200 participants over the last 10 years at Itasca but it's never been all at once...meaning they participate in various activities scheduled throughout the day….  Our guided long hikes have drawn anywhere from 20-50 people. We have picked up a few new members from the event and possibly a few volunteers but the biggest goals are 1) promotion of the trail and 2) promotion of the NCTA and what we do.”
 
Do I think a Tracy Ridge Hiking Fest could attract 200 people? Well, not maybe the first time around, but in future years it could become a tradition with over 200 people. The Hiking Fest at Itasca gets more people because there are lots of people already visiting the park and some wander into the Hiking Fest. The same cannot be said of Tracy Ridge. They hold the Hiking Fest at Itasca in late August. But if Tracy Ridge did a Hiking Fest during the Fall Colors time period, it could be quite popular.

Zach Johns on the Lakeland Television News

Plus, the Tracy Ridge Hiking Fest would be an opportunity to have Tracy Ridge get some coverage in local newspapers and even TV stations.  All you need is an enthusiastic hiker spokesperson like Zach Johns

 

There probably will be a Tracy Ridge Part 3 eventually
You can discuss this blog at https://www.facebook.com/preservingthepct/

Tracy Ridge, Part 1

I have read the "Tracy Ridge Shared Use Trails and Forest Plan Ammendment Project Environmental Assessment" for adding mountain biking to that area and I have some comments on it

Jakes Rock Donations
Here is a passage from the Environmental Assessment

Under

“Issue #2 - How would the shared use proposal affect the Forest’s ability to provide various trail/recreation opportunities?”

It reads
“Some commenters remarked that with the Jakes Rocks trail system under construction, additional mountain bike trails are not needed. Currently, ten miles of trails are constructed at Jakes Rocks (out of 45 miles approved for construction). Funding for the full build out is not yet secured.” 

The Community Foundation of Warren County gives the Trails at Jakes Rock an $100,000 donation.

This has changed.  The Trails at Jakes Rock have received a $100,000 donation from the Community Foundation of Warren County.  With $100,000 in hand, many of miles of trails should be able to be built at Jakes Rock.  According to their Facebook page, they are planning to build 10 miles a year.  They have enough money to build 10 miles in 2017 and have made a dent into building 10 more in 2018.  Having a purpose built mountain biking trail just a short ways from Tracy Ridge means that Tracy Ridge might not even be used very much by mountain bikers.  The Tracy Ridge Environment Review even notes that the grade of the trails at Tracy Ridge are “mostly gentle as much of the system is on a plateau.”  This doesn’t even sound like a place that most mountain bikers would like to ride. After all, it’s called “Mountain Biking” not “Gentle Grade Biking.” People are not traveling all the way to the Allegheny Forest to ride on a beginners trail.  They can do that where they live.

Hurting chances of becoming a Wilderness.

Here is another passage from the Environmental Assessment

Under

“Issue #5 - How would the shared use proposal affect future suitability for wilderness designation in the Tracy Ridge Recreation Area?”

It reads

“Furthermore, evidence suggests that Congress will designate Wilderness despite the presence of trails that allow bikes. For example, in 2015, the Boulder-White Cloud Wilderness was designated by Congress. Within the new Wilderness, more than 50 miles of trails previously open to bikes were closed to bikes.”

I really don’t think comparing the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness Area to Boulders/White Clouds is a very good comparison.

In an email to me from Julie Thomas of the Sawtooth Recreation Area she pointed out that only around 40 miles of trail that mountain bikers actually used were closed to mountain biking due to Boulders/White Clouds. So, here is the Comparison.  The Boulders/White Clouds Wilderness is 275,665 Acres.  There were 40 miles of mountain biking trails within the Wilderness.  That means that there was 1 mile of trail for each 6900 acres of Wilderness. Meanwhile, having 12 miles of mountain biking trails in the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness will create a bigger impact than the trails at Boulders/White Clouds.  The proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness will be 9500 acres, which means there will be 1 mile of trail for each 792 acres.  Proportionally, the 12 miles of mountain biking trails at Tracy Ridge will have a much greater impact on whether the area is approved for Wilderness.

At 275,665 acres, you could fit 29 Tracy Ridges in Boulders/White Clouds

And to me it’s not a very good idea to allow mountain biking now only to have it booted off the trails if Tracy Ridge becomes a Wilderness.  Tracy Ridge is the largest roadless area in the Allegheny National Forest, thereby, should seriously be considered for Wilderness Designation.  According it the Friends of the Allegheny Wilderness, only 2% of the Allegheny National Forest is Federal Wilderness compared to 11% in the rest of the Eastern Region of the National Forest Service.

Affects on Wildlife

"Issue #6 - How would the shared use trail proposal affect the wildlife, native plants and nonnative invasive plants in the area?"

This section mentions Bald Eagles, Bats and the Northern Goshawk, but doesn’t mention Bears.  According to Wildlife Biologist Brian Horejsi “The basic science solidly supports the general claim that bikers and bikes are displacing bears,…”  Since the proposed trails for mountain biking are in the middle of the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness, it will effectively cut the range for bears in half.  The article about mountain biking displacing bears which quotes Brian Horejsi is located here: http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2014/08/05/mountain-biking-impacts-on-bears-and-other-wildlife-by-brian-horesji/

A Black Bear at the Tracy Ridge Campground

The Tracy Ridge Campground

In the Opening Section called “1. Purpose and Need For Action,” the Environmental Assessment mentions that both the hiking trails and the Campground at Tracy Ridge are under used.  Here is the Quote:

“The two main legs of the system – the Tracy Ridge Trail and the Johnnycake Trail experience use but the connectors (trails built in the mid -1990s) are seldom used by the hiking public. Likewise, use of the campground is quite low – occupancy of the 100+ site campground is rarely above 10%.”

The Forest Service seems to think that adding mountain biking to the trail system at Tracy Ridge will also add users for the Campground.  This is probably not the case or marginal at best.
The reason the Tracy Ridge Campground is not doing very well is that there is a better Campground less than 5 miles away.  The Willow Bay Campground just north of the proposed Tracy Ridge Wilderness has dozens of amenities including showers and flush toilets.  After a hot day of mountain biking, the first thing the mountain bikers will want to do is take a shower, so they will be headed to Willow Bay, anyway. The Tracy Ridge Campground does have running water, but it also has pit toilets.   
 

an amenity comparison

Willow Bay is right on the Allegheny Reservoir with excellent views of the lake.  There are no views of the Reservoir at the Tracy Ridge Campground.  The Willow Bay Campground has several campsites right on the shore of the Reservoir.  This sounds much more appealing than camping in a dense woods.   

The Deer Grove Camping Area at Willow Bay has campsites right on the water.

Of course, campsites with all those amenities at Willow Bay cost more than the Primitive campsites at Tracy Ridge.  But, if you can afford to ride around on a $2000 bike, you can afford to pay a little more for a campsite with amenities.

Why are they proposing this project?

There is a section in the Environmental Review called. "Why are we proposing this project?"  The Forest Service writes that mountain biking is an "increasingly popular and accepted use.." 

Well, this is not the case.  Yes, mountain biking is an accepted use, but it is not an "increasingly popular" use.  In fact, mountain biking numbers have remained steady at just under 3% of the population.  These numbers are from the Outdoor Foundation's Participation Studies, which are the premiere source for outdoor participation information.  The Study Reports can be found here: 

http://www.outdoorfoundation.org/research.participation.html

In Conclusion
The people at the Friends of the Allegheny Wilderness have been putting forth a great effort in trying to get Tracy Ridge designated as a Federal Wilderness.  Let's do everything possible to help in this effort, and not approve uses for the area that are inconsistent with the Wilderness Act.

You can discuss this blog at the Preserving the PCT facebook page located here: https://www.facebook.com/preservingthepct/

To read the "Tracy Ridge Shared Use Trails and Forest Plan Ammendment Project Environmental Assessment" go here: http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai.com/11558/www/nepa/104642_FSPLT3_3910848.pdf

For instruction on how to comment on the project, go here: http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic.download.akamai.com/11558/www/nepa/104642_FSPLT3_3806246.pdf


In Part two: Ideas to get more people hiking at Tracy Ridge.

The Sustainable Trails Coalition: Just Making Up Stuff.

When you go over to the Sustainable Trails Coalition Website, the first thing you see is the following statement:  “When the President of the United States signed the Wilderness Act of 1964 he wasn’t banning bicycles, wheelbarrows and strollers.”  Really?  Do they go on to give some sort of quote from Lyndon Johnson to that affect? No they don’t.

Screen shot of STC's Website

Do they have any evidence that LBJ wanted to allow such items into Wilderness Areas?  No they don’t.  The original Wilderness Act has the following statement

"PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES
(c) Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area."

As you can plainly see the Act says "no other form of mechanical transport." And President Johnson signed it into law with that wording. Well, under STC's logic, the phrase means “no other form of motorized transport.” It's obvious that their logic is flawed. Bicycles are mechanical transport, period.

Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Wilderness Act

Also, Ted Stroll wrote an opinion piece in the High Country News on March 29. Called “It’s inevitable. There will be bikes in Wilderness.” Ted makes the following statement: 

“Congress never prohibited biking or pushing a baby carriage.”

Really, do Ted and the Sustainable Trails Coalition have one quote from one Congressman who supported the Wilderness Act at the time, that bikes and baby carraiges are to be allowed in Wilderness Areas? No they don’t. At this point, you’d have to agree that Ted Stroll and STC are just making up stuff.

Ted and the Sustainable Trails Coalition claim that a 1966 Forest Service definition proves that mountain bikes should be allowed in Wilderness Areas. Here is the definition:

"Mechanical transport, as herein used, shall include any contrivance which travels over ground, snow, or water on wheels, tracks, skids, or by floatation and is propelled by a non-living power source contained or carried on or within the device."

It’s clear that the Forest Service got the wording wrong. The Forest Service’s rule implies that there needs to be a motor being used in order for it to be Mechanical Transport. As you can see from the quote from the original Wilderness Act, there is no such limiting factor regarding mechanical transport. And the fact that the writers of the Act wrote "no other form of" also emphasizes that it means more than just "motorized transport.”

It should be noted that the Forest Service is only one of 4 agencies that manage Wilderness Areas. The Fish & Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service all got it right the first time by outright banning Mountain bikes in their Wilderness Areas. The Forest Service eventually specifically banned mountain bikes and hang gliders in a 1984 rule.

It also should be noted that the Forest Service was originally against the Wilderness Act.  They even testified before Congress against the Wilderness Act.  No wonder they started out with such a confusing rule.

And here is how the Forest Service defines Mechanical Transport today:

“Mechanical Transport. Any contrivance for moving people or material in or over land, water, or air, having moving parts, that provides a mechanical advantage to the user, and that is powered by a living or nonliving power source. This includes, but is not limited to, sailboats, hang gliders, parachutes, bicycles, game carriers, carts, and wagons. It does not include wheelchairs when used as necessary medical appliances. It also does not include skis, snowshoes, rafts, canoes, sleds, travois, or similar primitive devices without moving parts.”

As you can see, it is more in the spirit of the original Wilderness Act that says “no other form of mechanical transport.” And evidence is beginning to pile up that bicycles were never meant to be in Wilderness Areas.

In a May 2, 2016 opinion piece in the High Country News, Andy Wiessner wrote an account of a meeting between the Forest Service and Congressmen Mo Udall and John Seiberling, both Chairs of Committees in Congress regarding public lands.  At the meeting held in the early 1980s, both Congressmen confirmed that mountain bikes are not to be in Wilderness Areas.  Andy Wiessner is a very excellent witness to this event because he was a Legislative Counsel at the time.

Screen Shot of Andy Wiessner's Article

I’ve read much of the Testimony before Congress leading up to the passage of the Wilderness Act. It’s true that Congress was concerned about motorized uses in Wilderness Areas. The Interstate Highway System was being built at the time and several Congressmen were concerned about a flood of cars heading west while people were on vacation, etc. But to say that Congress was only worried about motorized uses is a misstatement. Congressman Compton White asked the following question during the hearings. “I am talking about the mechanical contraption with wheels that goes behind the horse. The buggy. Or spring wagon. This is considered-and this is not a mechanical device?” It’s obvious that Congressman White was concerned about more than just motorized uses. And after that hearing the Wilderness Act was changed to include the words “no other form of” in front of “mechanical transport.” And that’s the wording in the final version of the Act.

Ted Stroll and STC continue to be wrong time after time.  This has been happening for a long time now.  Way back in 2010, Ted wrote a New York Times opinion piece called “Ah, Wilderness” where he supported signs in Wilderness Areas.  Here is an excerpt from it  

“Every summer numerous backpackers, hikers and hunters get lost in the wilderness, with occasionally fatal results. In 2008, two experienced hikers along the Kekekabic Trail — the same Minnesota trail where the skier perished in 1970 — were lost for days and nearly ran out of food. The Forest Service listened to their complaints about the lack of signage but refused to act.” 

Screen Shot of Ted Stroll's Article

Well, as it turns out, the two hikers who got lost in 2008 didn’t really consider themselves lost.  They had lost their map, and were proceeding slowly. But they knew all they had to do is keep hiking east and they would come out onto the road called the Gunflint Trail.  When they were finally found they were 4 miles from the road.  

Here is an article about the two missing hikers on the Kekekabic Trail in 2008

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/content/duluth-hikers-didnt-consider-themselves-lost-friend-says

Screen Shot of an article about the two missing hikers in 2008

The incident happened in October of 2008 and I actually hiked the Kekekebic Trail in May of 2009.  Yes, the Kek was hard to follow in some places, but it’s easy enough to stay on track if you have a map.  So, much for Ted Stroll’s lack of signage theory.  Evidently, at that time Ted thought that revising the sign policy would be the first step to allowing mountain bikes in Wilderness Areas.

Articles mentioned

Andy Wiessner's  High Country News Opinion Piece "No Bikes in Wilderness, Period" can be found at:   http://www.hcn.org/issues/48.7/no-bikes-in-wilderness-period

Ted Stroll's High Country News Opinion piece "It's enevitable, there will be bikes in Wilderness can be found at:

http://www.hcn.org/articles/its-inevitable-there-will-be-bikes-in-wilderness

Ted Stroll's New York Times Opinion piece "Ah Wilderness" can be found at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/opinion/27stroll.html

Responding to John Fisch’s “Responses to 5 Arguments against The Human Powered Travel in Wilderness Areas Act"

You would have though John Fisch would have stopped when I schooled him on his “Responses to the 10 Most Common arguments against allowing mountain bikes in Wilderness Areas.” His article is here, and my response is here.

But now John has come up with 5 more Arguments supporting the Sustainable Trails Coalition’s Bill, the Human Powered Wildlands Travel Management Act. And again I will respond and show that John Fisch’s article is totally ridiculous.

1. We Shouldn’t Amend the Wilderness Act
You got that right, we really shouldn’t amend the Wilderness Act. You ever hear the phrase “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Well, our Wilderness Preservation System is not broke. Now there are 765 Wilderness Areas comprising 110 million acres. And the goal of preservation is being accomplished. And, unlike John Fisch would like you to believe, bicycles have always been banned in Wilderness Areas. The 1964 Act says “no other form of mechanical transport” which totally bans bicycles, period. All the 1984 regulation did was to clarify the original law. It was nothing new.




Orrin Hatch Environmental Score in 2015 is 0%


2. The New Legislation is Sponsored by Senators with Poor Records on the Environment.
Again, John got that exactly right. Both Lee and Hatch have absolutely terrible records on the Environment. And comparing them to Simpson and Risch is ridiculous. Again, Senators Lee And Hatch want to sell off Federal Lands. Mike Simpson is against selling off Public Land, and Risch hasn’t made a strong statement on the issue.

So, since Lee and Hatch want to sell off Federal Lands, I’ve asked John Fisch to name his favorite mountain biking trail on Federal land. I also asked Ted Stroll and Vernon Felton to name their favorite mountain biking trail on Federal land. Since these guys support Lee and Hatch so much, I thought we’d start making a list of lands for the Senators to sell off. But, Fisch, Stroll and Felton have never responded, so it sounds like they don’t want their favorite mountain biking trail to be sold. And since Big Oil is one of the Top 5 Contributors to Senators Lee and Hatch, perhaps they would be interested in the land.

I think it’s a telling sign when people start changing their minds on an issue. In June, Gunnar Waldman wrote an article supporting STC’s Bill which includes mountain bikes in Wilderness Areas for Teton Gravity Research. In July, once Gunnar found out who was sponsoring the Bill, he immediately wrote an article against the Bill. He points out that Hatch has said "I wouldn't want to see homosexuals teaching school anymore than I'd want to see members of the American Nazi Party teaching school” and Senator Lee was “The ONLY guy against sending aid to Flint, Michigan.” Gunnar also wrote “You’d be hard pressed to find senators MORE repugnant to me that those two.”


3 The Legislation is Too Aggressive.
John writes “The key complaint here is the verbiage in the bill, which give the USFS two years to assess their trails…” Yes, that would be a key complaint. In order to allow mountain biking in a specific Wilderness Area, an Environmental Impact Statement would have to be done for NEPA. And as I wrote in my previous blog:

“I sent an email to Aspen-Sopris District Ranger Karen Schoyer, the Forest Ranger who manages the Maroon Bells/Snowmass Wilderness. I asked her how much would a typical Environmental Review for a Wilderness Area would cost. She wrote back to me:

“I can tell you that an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) can cost tens of thousands of dollars and several years to complete currently and they are often completed by 3rd party contractors, under Forest Service specialist review, because we do not have the staffing to complete the work in a timely manner.””

So, allowing mountain biking in Forest Service Wilderness Areas is not going to be as easy as a flick of a pen as John Fisch is suggesting. Plus, John failed to mention that there would be three other Federal Agencies involved. Besides the Forest Service, the National Park Service, Fish & Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management all manage Wilderness Areas. All of these agencies are going to have land managers spending their time dealing with this legislation. In other words, they will not have as much time to be working on trails or training trail volunteers. So, our Nation’s Trail System will be much worse because of STC’s Bill.

4. This Legislation Antagonizes Fellow Environmentalists
John actually got the heading wrong. The heading should read “This Legislation Antagonizes Environmentalists.” If you are supporting STC’s Bill, you are not an Environmentalist, therefore, you have no “Fellow Environmentalists.” Again, I only have to refer you to Point 2 of this article, which shows that the Senators sponsoring this Bill are very Anti-Environment. John Fisch and the Sustainable Trails Coalition are in bed with people that want to sell off our precious public lands for extraction and development. Nobody should ever be calling people supporting this Bill “Environmentalists.”




The Wildlife News article about 116 Conservation groups sending a letter to every Member of Congress

John goes on to quote Ashley Korenblat and tries to pick apart her statement line by line.  But since John quoted Ashley, I decided I would quote one of John’s fellow Sustainable Trails Coalition Board Members, Jackson Radcliffe. Outside Online published an Article on July 16, 2016 called “Congressmen Introduce Bill to Allow Mountain Bikers in Wilderness Areas.” In the comments of the Article, Jackson Radcliffe writes

“However, some rural regions may like to have more tourism and allowing bikes to use the same trails that equestrians can use, may generate more tourism visitors and help their local economies. There are a number of areas that would love to see the growth that Downieville and Fruita have enjoyed."

The Outside Online article that Jackson Radcliffe commented on.

I replied to Jackson with the following

“And I'm laughing when you use Fruita as an example of a town that has enjoyed a boom in mountain biking. Well, Jackson, did you know that the 75000 acre Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness is right outside of Fruita? Yes, there is a Wilderness Area that doesn't allow bicycles RIGHT NEXT to the Bicycling Boomtown you mentioned. Evidently, there are other places nearby that mountain bikers can ride if Fruita is the envy of the Mountain Biking World. I think you are making my point for me.”

The fact is that mountain biking and Wilderness Areas can coexist right next to each other. There is no reason to allow Mountain Biking in Wilderness Areas when there are amble opportunities to mountain bike nearby.


5. Miscellaneous Lesser Arguments
John writes “Some are concerned about the “slippery slope,” that this may lead to motorized vehicles or other things we all agree are not Wilderness-like.” Well, yes, it may lead to other things into the Wilderness. First of all, the bill changes the definition of what is a “small hand-held appliance.” Previously, small hand-held appliances were devices such as electric razors and transistor radios. Now, STC wants Chainsaws to be considered a small hand-held device. And if Chainsaws are considered small hand held devices, who knows what other devices will also be included.

But to give John credit, he does say he holds a reservation about allowing chainsaws in Wilderness Areas. Well, John, that reservation should be enough for you to drop support of this Bill. Chainsaws are loud. They can be heard for over a mile. Chainsaws can be as loud as 120 decibels. They are not in the same classification as an electric razor that can be heard from no more than 1/8 of a mile.





A photo of volunteers using a crosscut saw from a Border Route Trail Trail Maintenance Outing that I participated in.

If the Sustainable Trails Coalition really wanted to improve the condition of trails in Wilderness Areas then they should be taking a different approach. They should be using the $130,000 that they have collected for promoting and having training sessions to teach people to be crosscut sawyers. Using crosscut saws is labor intensive, but it also is very quiet compared to using chainsaws. Also, crosscut saws are easier to carry into Wilderness Areas and don’t required gas. And if you’ve ever hiked gas into anyplace, you know it’s nasty

STC's Bill Heading

And if you read the Bill, the first thing it says is “To allow local Federal officials to determine the manner in which nonmotorized uses may be permitted in wilderness areas, …” So, Having chainsaws included in this Bill even goes against the stated purpose of the Bill.

If we want to remain true to the vision of the writers of the Wilderness Act, then excluding mountain bikes and chainsaws is the way to do it. The Wilderness Act says “no mechanical transport” which excludes mountain bikes, and “no motorized equipment” which excludes chainsaws. The Wilderness Act has been a rousing success so far, and there is no compelling reason to change it.

It’s inevitable the Sustainable Trails Coalition will get a Member of Congress to sponsor their bill, maybe.

Recently, Ted Stroll published an opinion piece in the High Country News called “It’s Inevitable. There will be bikes in the Wilderness.”  The article glows about the possibilities of mountain biking in Federally Designated Wildernesses, which have been banned until now. But, the article is getting mixed reviews with some people who question Ted’s tactics and logic.

“It’s Inevitable,” said Captain Jean Luc Picard “that sounds like the Borg when they said “resistance is futile,” and look what happened the Borg, we put them to sleep.”  Picard was briefly assimilated by the Borg, but he was also key to the Federation’s victory over the Borg.  “Bikes WILL be in the Wilderness, it all sounds very ominous to me.  Even Number 1 is shaking his head in disapproval about it.”

Dr. Ian Malcolm

But, the prospects of getting the Sustainable Trails Coalition Bill sponsored by a member of Congress are bright.  According to Mathematician Dr. Ian Malcolm, the prospects are quite good.  “The Human-Powered Wildland Travel Act of 2015 will definitely get a sponsor in 2016, or if not, in 2017,” Dr Malcolm said.  Malcolm is best known for his eccentric observations about the Dinosaur themed Jurassic Park. “Life finds a way” Dr Malcolm said, “and just like life, the Sustainable Trails Coalition will find a political hack willing to take up their cause.”

Wedge Antilles

Wedge Antilles also thinks that the Sustainable Trails Coalition will ultimately succeed.  “It’s obvious that mountain bikes are not mechanical transport” he said “there is no way an Ion Drive could be mounted on a bike, so I doubt whether they even qualify as a mechanical object.”  Antilles is best known for being Luke Skywalker’s Wingman in several battles. “The old ways are already on their way out” he said.

Captain Jean Luc Picard

But Picard counters the “Inevitable” statement with this. “The Wilderness Act is not just a set of rules; it is a philosophy ... and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous.”  He also added “Congress wanted a place without the influence of mechanization and I say “make it so””

Mathesar of Thermia

Mathesar from the planet Thermia agrees.  “I have examined all the historical documents and there is no evidence to suggest mountain bikes should be allowed in Wilderness Areas.”    Mathesar also has examined all the Galaxy Quest historical documents and credits Captain Jason Nesmith and the Crew of the starship Protector for saving all the Thermians from the evil Sarris.  “What mountain bikers need is a leader, not someone who uses bits and pieces of historical documents to misinform people,” Mathesar said.

As a mathematician, Dr Malcolm wonders why more efforts aren’t being done to build mountain biking trails systems closer to where people actually live. “The people of the Sustainable Trails Coalition were so preoccupied with whether they could get bikes in the Wilderness, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” He says that finding a sponsor should be relatively easy, because over 7000 bills are sponsored every year.  But, only 5% of the bills ever get passed by Congress, and STC’s Bill will have every environmental group coming out against it. So, Malcolm challenges the logic behind the Sustainable Trails Coalition approach. “Gee, the lack of humility before nature being displayed here staggers me.”