[paul]

I thought you'd like to know that I will be attending IMBA's 24 Hours of Washington, D.C. event April 6-7, 2005, representing MTBR and California mountain biking issues. The goal is simple: Raise awareness of access and recreation issues and convince congress that mountain biking deserves their support. IMBA staff will be preparing our group on Wednesday night with talking points, handouts and lobbying advice. The next morning, we'll hit the halls of Congress and lobby our elected representatives about key legislation and how it impacts mountain biking. I will be attending meetings with US Representatives Mike Thompson, Anna Eshoo, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Zoe Lofgren (CA) and US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (CA). This is my opportunity to give back to the world of mountain biking and to represent a half-million MTBR users concerning trail access and recreation issues. If you would like me to address a specific issue, reply to this thread here and I will do my best. I will provide a summary of what we accomplish.

- [email protected]

 

[Joe Steel]

Right On Paul!

That's great. I look forward to reading about your experience....

 

[radair]

Thanks for attending, Paul. I couldn't quite bring myself to the time off in the midst of a bug work crunch.

If you get this in time, please push for continued funding of TEA-21 (or whatever the latest moniker is), transportation enhancement money. This funds Recreation Trail Program (RTP) grants and is a key element for funding trails, bridges, etc.

I know the Federal budgets are tight, and the US Forest Service is hoping they can also make use of RTP funds to make up some of their budget problems.

 

[Dan'ger]

I thought you'd like to know that I will be attending IMBA's 24 Hours of Washington, D.C. event April 6-7, 2005, representing MTBR and California mountain biking issues. The goal is simple: Raise awareness of access and recreation issues and convince congress that mountain biking deserves their support. IMBA staff will be preparing our group on Wednesday night with talking points, handouts and lobbying advice. The next morning, we'll hit the halls of Congress and lobby our elected representatives about key legislation and how it impacts mountain biking. I will be attending meetings with US Representatives Mike Thompson, Anna Eshoo, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Zoe Lofgren (CA) and US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (CA). This is my opportunity to give back to the world of mountain biking and to represent a half-million MTBR users concerning trail access and recreation issues. If you would like me to address a specific issue, reply to this thread here and I will do my best. I will provide a summary of what we accomplish.

- [email protected]

Great to hear! One or more of the BTCEB/NorCAMBA board members will be there also.

 

[Melt]

give em hell paul!

 

[Pup]

I thought you'd like to know that I will be attending IMBA's 24 Hours of Washington, D.C. event April 6-7, 2005, representing MTBR and California mountain biking issues. The goal is simple: Raise awareness of access and recreation issues and convince congress that mountain biking deserves their support. IMBA staff will be preparing our group on Wednesday night with talking points, handouts and lobbying advice. The next morning, we'll hit the halls of Congress and lobby our elected representatives about key legislation and how it impacts mountain biking. I will be attending meetings with US Representatives Mike Thompson, Anna Eshoo, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Zoe Lofgren (CA) and US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein (CA). This is my opportunity to give back to the world of mountain biking and to represent a half-million MTBR users concerning trail access and recreation issues. If you would like me to address a specific issue, reply to this thread here and I will do my best. I will provide a summary of what we accomplish.

- [email protected]

Just please stress, stress, stress, stress stress the trail impact issue: that in all conditions, XC riders damage trails significantly less than horses or even large groups of hikers, especially groups with small children.

Thats the whole ball game. If a group of taxpayers does not harm the resource, then that group of taxpayers must be managed for on that resource.

*Dont* let them provoke you into defending against straw-man 'user conflicts'. ALL public recreation resources have user conflicts. Always. This has nothing to do with bikes per se, although the anti-riding contingents will insist that it does.

When they trot out the old 'scary kids in stormtrooper gear bombing down the trail' saw, firmly point out that by definition, downhill riders have no interest in hiking trails. Again, user conflicts are entirely in the eye of the conflicted. Horse riders hate hikers in flappy raincoats because they spook the horses into potentially dangerous reactions-- but we dont even consider banning brightly colored flappy raincoats.

Good luck and thanks
Pup

 

[paul]

Transportation Bill's RTP

Thanks for attending, Paul. I couldn't quite bring myself to the time off in the midst of a bug work crunch.

If you get this in time, please push for continued funding of TEA-21 (or whatever the latest moniker is), transportation enhancement money. This funds Recreation Trail Program (RTP) grants and is a key element for funding trails, bridges, etc.

I know the Federal budgets are tight, and the US Forest Service is hoping they can also make use of RTP funds to make up some of their budget problems.

I'll provide a full report soon, but to your question about RTP, we did lobby for the $500m in recreational trails program within the transportation bill, which has been passed by the house but the senate is proposing less than $300m. So, we asked the senate to bring the level up to $500m, and asked the house to hold the line if the senate kicks it back lower.

 

[paul]

duly noted

Just please stress, stress, stress, stress stress the trail impact issue: that in all conditions, XC riders damage trails significantly less than horses or even large groups of hikers, especially groups with small children.

Thats the whole ball game. If a group of taxpayers does not harm the resource, then that group of taxpayers must be managed for on that resource.

*Dont* let them provoke you into defending against straw-man 'user conflicts'. ALL public recreation resources have user conflicts. Always. This has nothing to do with bikes per se, although the anti-riding contingents will insist that it does.

When they trot out the old 'scary kids in stormtrooper gear bombing down the trail' saw, firmly point out that by definition, downhill riders have no interest in hiking trails. Again, user conflicts are entirely in the eye of the conflicted. Horse riders hate hikers in flappy raincoats because they spook the horses into potentially dangerous reactions-- but we dont even consider banning brightly colored flappy raincoats.

Good luck and thanks
Pup

I will provide a full report soon, but I did point out that we, the the 1st or 2nd most popular user group on the trails in question, impact the environment significantly less than the 3rd most popular user group, horses, who are obviously not excluded from initiatives like the wilderness bill. Congress staffers seemed to really appreciate this information.