|   Fruita trails open to Motorcycles!? | Puzman
Dec 16, 2002 12:36 PM | | Don't know if this is old hat, but apparently BLM has decided to open certain trails in Fruita to motorcycles.
http://www.gj.net/%7Eedge/bmx.html
Also, see www.petefagerlin.com for more info.
Write to the BLM and tell them that this bone-head decision will cause damage to the trails and to wildlife habitat, not to mention the local economy, as vacationing mtn bikers go somewhere else to avoid breathing exhaust fumes, |
| Hasn't this been the case for years? | TNC
Dec 16, 2002 1:01 PM | | In fact I think many of the good trails in that part of Utah that we possessively now call "bike trails", were pioneered by geologists, then 4-wheelers, then motorcycles, and then us johnny-come-latelys. I kinda think most of the trails that I've seen around the country on federal land often limit our MTBs to trails shared by motor vehicles. Of course there are many exceptions where it's limited to bicycle use only. Are you sure the BLM is just now opening these trails you mention to motorcycles, or has this already been in place? All that aside, I love the righteous Us, Them, and The Others attitude that many take nowdays in land use issues. I've been sharing trails around Southern Utah with all kinds of users for over 20 years. I've done them on foot, on a motorcycle, on a bicycle, and in a 4-wheeler. It's all good when done responsibly. Learn to share. |
| agreed | shane
Dec 16, 2002 1:14 PM | | I agree with TNC. And as much as I like having the trail to myself, the fact is that the BLM and Forest Service are mandated to manage public lands as multiple use. This means that any use that has value to anybody should be considered and includes mt bikes, motorvehicles, and mineral extraction. Unless there's clear evidence that use by one group has seriously impacted another group everything is fine and you just have to share. They were there first. Keep in mind that the impacts that the original poster accused motorcycle users of causing are exactly the same as some folks blame on mtbers. |
| "They were there first."????? | Pete.
Dec 16, 2002 1:29 PM | | What is the basis of your claim?
"Unless there's clear evidence that use by one group has seriously impacted another group everything is fine and you just have to share."
Ok, and if there is clear evidence that motos have impacted another group, etc., what's the answer?
The folks that try to turn the Fruita situation into a "it's just like hiker vs. mtb conflicts" argument, or raise the hypocrisy flag, haven't taken the time to understand the issue or are unable to understand it.
Pete
Save Fruita Trails [click here] |
| Then why are we riding on "jeep trails"? | TNC
Dec 16, 2002 2:50 PM | | Sorry Pete, but I'm pretty much a multi-user trail person--for the most part. I understand your point, but this attempt to fracture off road uses into little pockets of ownership has and in the future will cause nothing but trouble. You have your horse people, ATV people, bicycle people, 4-wheelers, hikers, etc., etc. It never stops, and when enough noise is made about the issue, land managers tend to clamp down on the whole access issue rather than try to actually discern what's going on. Few bureaucrats actually want to have to deal with finite issues like these, so it's easier to deny access or limit it to such a great degree that access is nearly denied. I'm not saying that it's impossible to come to a good conclusion, but I think these types of squabbles tend to produce more negative results than good. |
| Um.... | screampint
Dec 16, 2002 2:55 PM | | The singletrack trails that I helped build are far from jeep trails. |
| Photo for proof... | screampint
Dec 16, 2002 2:58 PM | | Does it look like these mountain bikers are building a jeep trail? |
| The point of the "jeep trails" comment... | TNC
Dec 16, 2002 6:31 PM | | was not directed at "your" trail. It was to point out that most of the trails ridden in Southern Utah were pioneered and enjoyed by others in other types of conveyance and still are to this day. That fact doesn't give them the right to lay claim to those trails as theirs and shut out others. As a relatively close example, I believe the history of the Slickrock trail at Moab describes it as being layed out by off road motorcyclists many years ago. Does that mean no MTBs should be allowed there? It's just my opinion about general use of public land. Last I checked, we could still have opinions in this country. |
| Ummm... | Pete.
Dec 16, 2002 6:53 PM | | "Last I checked, we could still have opinions in this country."
WTF is that supposed to mean?
Your opinion about this particular situation isn't based in fact. It's apparently based upon your understanding of Jeep trails in Utah and the history of the Slickrock trail.
What you apparently fail to understand is the history of the trails that are in question in Fruita.
There are humerous trails in the adjacent BLM area that are open to motos. The trails in question were built by mountain bikers, for mounatain bikers, with the BLM's approval.
The nature of the trails (very narrow, soft soils) means that they are compatible for multiple use with equestrians and hikers.
Sharing these trails with motos would destroy them.
Is that difficult to understand?
Your "Learn to share" smarminess might work if folks are sharing jeep trails with ATV, four-wheelers and motos but sharing narrow singletrack with those users means the singletrack is gone.
Pete |
| Point taken, but... | screampint
Dec 16, 2002 7:51 PM | | it doesn't really apply here. Last time I checked, riding slickrock on a mountainbike did not destroy the trail for motorcycle use. Nor does the use of a mountain bike change the trail, diminishing the experience for the motorcyclist.
The motorcycles chew up the soil in the North Fruita Desert Area, that's a fact. I can post the same photo for you if you like.
The motorcyclists cut the corners that are too tight for motorcycles, thus straightening the trail. It might make the trail faster, but if I wanted to go fast in a straight line, I'd ride my road bike. Although even that is a fallacy, because the trail would be powder and thus much slower going. |
| Typical myopia. | Pete.
Dec 16, 2002 4:27 PM | | You're projecting trail conditions/access issues from your local area onto the Fruita situation.
In the proccess you're talking out of your @ss.
I would suggest you study the particular situation at hand before making any more conclusions. |
| Disagreeing now defined as "myopia"? | TNC
Dec 16, 2002 6:59 PM | | Well Pete, someone did bring this issue up on a public forum. I would guess they did it to bring public awareness to that issue. Don't be shocked when everyone's not in lock-step with your views. I looked at the link in the original post. My opinion still hasn't changed.
One of the places that a bunch of us ride is a 45,000 acre ranch with about 100 miles of trail. We share it with a very large number of motorcycles. Quite frankly, if the motorcycles weren't there, the place would become overgrown rather quickly. We co-exist just fine with the motorcyclists. There is mutual respect on the trail, and there has never been a crash or incident between the two. I think the "exhaust fumes" comment made earlier may be a little exaggerated.
This issue about motorcycles and MTBs sharing trails brings up a question. The picture posted above shows a spot where motors have widened the trail. So? Now I know some are going to blow a fuse over that one. I don't understand the fascination and dogma over the term "singletrack" having to be defined as some kind of buff 12" wide path. I kinda like a "rough and tumble" trail that keeps you on your toes. It's what I like about some of Moab's trails. They may be wide, but many of the times you use every inch.
Pete, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but if someone else wants to express theirs, let 'em--no matter what orifice they use. |
| Nope, and that's strike two. | Pete.
Dec 16, 2002 7:09 PM | | Taking your local conditions and applying them to a situation which you apparently know nothing about, that's myopia. Your "overgrown quite quickly" comments for example.
"Pete, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but if someone else wants to express theirs, let 'em--no matter what orifice they use."
Where have I told you, or anyone else, that they don't have right to express their opinion? You seem to expect to be able to post your opinion that is based upon assumptions and no facts, without anyone challenging it. That's weird.
"I don't understand the fascination and dogma over the term "singletrack" having to be defined as some kind of buff 12" wide path."
Two things:
Why do you assume that all of the trails in the affected area are that buff?
If you don't care about narrow singletrack being blown out by motos and ATVs then I don't see why you should send any letters of support.
Pete |
| It's a matter of facts and not opinion... | screampint
Dec 16, 2002 7:24 PM | | Our trails do not get over grown and are in very fragile soil. When the motorcycles ride the trails in the North Fruita Desert Area (I'm being very specific here) they turn the trail to powder, making it as unpleasant as riding in sand. Thus, the trail is ruined for "shared use." Most hikers would not enjoy hiking through 6"-12" of powder for miles. Mountain bikers certainly don't like to ride in those sorts of condition.
Another factor to sharing the trails is that the motorcyclists have way of straightening out the trails. They tend to cut corners when the turns are too tight, thus changing the trail. The trails were built with mtbs in mind and have tight corners. If the motos straighten all the turns, it would be a real shame.
Also, you have forgotten another aspect. The environmental impact is pretty big when you consider the increase in trail width. Erosion on a lot of the trails would become a huge factor, seeing as the buff trails (sustainable with water) would become loose and powdery (unsustainable with water). Even the BLM concedes this as they want sections of the Edge Loop rerouted to accomodate the motorcycles. The sections have been declared unsustainable for motos.
I think this photo demonstrates what happens to the soil with added horsepower. |
| They were not there first... | 2drtwhls
Dec 16, 2002 10:19 PM | | That's how our mountain bike trails look like here and there are no OHV's. |
| Your trails... | J.D.
Dec 17, 2002 9:34 AM | | must have a lot of irresponsible riders on them.
Fruita has a contingent of riders who care for the trails so idiots on bicycles don't destroy them. That's called trail maintenance and it sounds like your area needs some. If they allow motorcycles on the 18 Rd trails, I know that the contingent will cease to maintain everything out there, including what's still closed to motorized. |
| re: Fruita trails open to Motorcycles!? | GRider
Dec 16, 2002 3:41 PM | | TNC,
In many cases I would tend to agree with some of your points, but not here. There are several factors which I say that in this case there is sufficient cause to keep the motos out:
1. The economy of Fruita is very positively impacted by the thousands of mountain bikers that come there and spend money to ride narrow and unique singletrack. They will now avoid Fruita and go over the state line to Moab. There will not be a large moto crowd to make up the lost money.
2. A distinction should be made between mountain bikes which are not motorized vehicles and motorcyles which are. By calling both users "off road users" you have not properly highlighted the differences. Just as there are "hike only" trails on some parts of the BLM there can and should also be "non-motorized only" use.
3. The fragile nature of the 18 road area soil will mean that motorcycles will have the immediate negative impact of rutting out all the trails within a few days. Areas like Moab are less prone to this destruction because it is primarily solid rock and 4WD trails.
4. Motorcycles already have access to huge areas along the Book Cliffs. Just look to the north of the interstate when you pass through Grand Junction. In short, I don't believe there is a huge outcry by motorcyclists to have access to this area. It seems the BLM management just wants to prove a point to the mountain bikers; which is a poor reason to hurt Fruita's economy.
I sincerely wish the motorcyclists would recognize that this is a bad plan for the area and come out in support of voluntarily not riding in this one small region even if the BLM gives them access.
GR |
| proof.... | GregR
Dec 16, 2002 8:05 PM | | First week of April, heading out there with my bike and going to go ride the trails there (and Moab also). Going to drop a few of my Midwestern bucks at local extablishments, have a good time, take a few pictures.
Then when I am done, I am going to print up my pictures and do a writeup of my experience and send it to the BLM. Maybe they will rethink the situation.
And if it was open to moto's and torn up....well I would be heading someplace else.
How many folks take their MotoX bike across country to go ride? Sure I suppose one could rent a MotoX just as they would a Mt.Bike. But not me, it wouldnt be the same.
See you on the trails.
G |
| re: Fruita trails open to Motorcycles!? | mtbIdiots
Dec 16, 2002 10:33 PM | | What a bunch of hypocrites,
Poor mountain bikers having to share the trails with OHV's and look at all the damage they cause. Boo Hoo.
What about all the damage you do? You should see my HIKING TRAILS and what you all have done to them.
You are all a bunch of hypocritical **sses |
| |
